***************************************************************** 08/07/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.201 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Abraham Boosts Nuke Power at International Meeting 2 10 questions that North Korea must answer 3 Analysis: N Korea's nuclear deal 4 N Korea warned over nuclear deal 5 Work begins on N. Korea nuclear reactors* 6 US: South Carolina Loses RequestTo Stop Influx Of Plutonium 7 US: Reactor Sales Are Said to Endanger Accident Payments 8 NK Urged to Comply With Nuclear Inspections NUCLEAR REACTORS 9 US: FERC to consider Yankee sale appeal 10 US: Kenneth Kolaczyk Named NRC Senior Resident Inspector at Ginna 11 US: Davis-Besse plant loses third overseer 12 Minatom Cools on Heated Iranian Reactor Plan 13 Three cases of violations in running nuclear power plants were 14 Expert group from US Department of Energy inspects nuclear 15 Team Launches N. Korea Reactor Project 16 N.Korea Marks Nuclear Reactor Phase 17 *UK nuclear risk study* 18 Ceremony Held to Mark Sart of DPRK Reactor Project 19 Nuclear power project in North Korea 'takes step forward' as 20 NKorean nuclear reactor project under way with US warning 21 North Korea one step closer to generating nuclear power NUCLEAR SAFETY 22 US: Residents of Limerick area have pill option* 23 US: KI pill meet at Hager City addresses nuclear plant concerns* 24 US: Town's emergency evacuation plan draws mixed reaction 25 Uzbeks block Central Asia's nuclear corridor 26 US: Senate Panel OKs Bill to Boost Nuclear Safety NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 27 AU: Premiers dump on waste site 28 New government agency to handle waste proposed 29 US: Nuclear Waste Could Be Moved Across Bay 30 AU: Woomera nuclear dump provides `opportunities' 31 US: yucca Editorial: Rule changes keep our heads spinning 32 US: Make Goshutes an Offer 33 US: Appeals court affirms ruling allowing plutonium shipments to 34 US: Overall Asks NRC Hearing On NFS?s Planned Expansion* 35 Erwin Group Hears The Case For Uranium Enrichment Plant * 36 Ex-nuclear official answers plant concerns 37 US: Mr. Bush Boosts Yucca Site NUCLEAR WEAPONS 38 Dropping the nuclear bombshell 39 A-bomb survivor publishes "tanka" collection in English 40 Japan maintains commitment to nonnuclear principles, stability 41 Nuclear submarine emergency in floating dock during decommissioning 42 August 6, 1945 Americans dropped atom bomb on Hiroshima US DEPT. OF ENERGY 43 Vit plant work goes live 44 DOE memo puts Ohio waste before cleanup 45 Hanford has high amount of toxic gas 46 Sideline DOE Meetings Last Week Sound Death Knell for MOX Program — 47 DOE inspector to visit site 48 Accelerated cleanup agreement signed 49 DOE agrees with cleanup need - 50 DOE, State of Tennessee, and the Environmental Protection Agency 51 DOE Statement On 4th Circuit Court of Appeals' Decision Affirming OTHER NUCLEAR ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Abraham Boosts Nuke Power at International Meeting LONDON, England, August 6, 2002 (ENS) - In a speech on Monday, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham argued that nuclear power is safer, more reliable and less expensive than ever, and should be part of the world's fuel choices. Speaking at the World Nuclear Association luncheon in London, Abraham emphasized that nuclear power plants, which now account for 20 percent of U.S. electricity generation, emit none of the pollutants associated with the burning of fossil fuels and provide an energy supply that is both abundant and affordable. "Plants are vastly more efficient than before. They are better run and better managed than in the past," Abraham said. "And the improved management practices standard at today's nuclear power plants not surprisingly have been accompanied by huge improvements in safety." Abraham noted that the Bush administration's national energy plan includes a mix of fuels including oil, natural gas, coal, renewable sources, and nuclear power. "Forcefully declaring that nuclear power should be part of the world's fuel mix took some people by surprise, but to us it was just common sense," Abraham said. "We studied the issue of nuclear energy carefully. We studied the industry, its history, its recent progress, its ongoing research, and its future promise - and we came to the undeniable conclusion that there are compelling arguments in favor of nuclear energy." Anti-nuclear activists are concerned about the risk of radiation escaping if a nuclear power plant malfunctions. They are also concerned about the safe storage of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel and the safe transport of this spent fuel over the nation's roads and rail lines to a planned permanent repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Abraham said the United States is investing heavily in advanced nuclear technology - which he said promises a new era of nuclear energy which will be marked by enhanced safety, improved waste reduction, better economic performance, and improved physical security and proliferation resistance. Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2002. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 2 10 questions that North Korea must answer Daily Yomiuri On-Line Thomas H. Snitch Special to The Daily Yomiuri U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell had a brief "15-minute chat" with North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun on July 31 in Brunei, where foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and their counterparts from other Asia-Pacific countries met for ASEAN Regional Forum meetings. The Powell-Paek meeting is the highest-level exchange between the United States and North Korea since then U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright visited Pyongyang in late 2000. North Korea has since stated that it would welcome the resumption of dialogue with both the United States and Japan. Since the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush has said on a number of occasions that it would be willing to talk to the North Koreans "at any time and any place," perhaps the Powell-Paek chat over coffee will be the start of a new round of serious discussions with Pyongyang. In anticipation of a possible future meeting, there are 10 issues that Powell and Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi need to raise with North Korea. The answers to these questions will provide the road map for future dealings with Pyongyang. Key to the success of these talks is the willingness and ability of Japan and the United States to remain focused on their own agenda and speak with one voice. The United States and Japan must be united in their approach so as to keep the North Koreans from playing one ally off against the other. To that end, the United States must agree that the very first point that North Korea must address is the issue of missing Japanese citizens. It is widely believed that North Korea has kidnapped and is still holding at least 11 Japanese, some of whom were allegedly abducted as long ago as 1977. In talks in Brunei with Kawaguchi, Paek said serious efforts would be made to solve various problems, including humanitarian issues. Clearly, this is a very simple question for the North Koreans to answer: Are you holding any of these Japanese citizens? Yes or no. If the answer is in the affirmative, Japanese authorities must be given prompt access to these individuals to ascertain whether they wish to remain in North Korea or return to Japan. If the answer is no, it will be incumbent upon North Korea to help to explain what may have happened to these people. A failure by North Korea to come clean on this important issue will cause the status quo to remain in place. There can be no progress on other fronts until the missing Japanese are accounted for. The other issues are just as important for the development of a more normal relationship between North Korea and the West. Not a single one of these 10 issues can be ignored or evaded by Pyongyang. If North Korea truly wishes to begin a series of earnest discussions with the United States and Japan, it must be willing to behave like a responsible international player. Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, involvement with illegal narcotics, counterfeiting and support of terrorism are not congruent with any type of normal international relationship between North Korea and the United States or Japan. Thus, with the following major topics in mind, here are the questions that Powell and Kawaguchi must get answers to before moving forward to fully normalize relations with North Korea. -- When will North Korea be willing to discuss the issue of the 11 kidnapped Japanese citizens with the Japanese government? -- Will North Korea abide by the 1994 Agreed Framework--an accord it concluded with the United States to freeze and ultimately dismantle its existing nuclear program--and allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to visit all nuclear-related facilities in the country? Will North Korea allow timely inspections of all facilities? Will North Korea reaffirm its commitment to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty? -- Will North Korea remain committed to its pledge to not test any long-range ballistic missiles? Is North Korea prepared to give assurances that it has halted, or is prepared to halt, all research and development activities on both theater missiles and long-range ones? -- Will North Korea get out of the proliferation business and halt the exports of nuclear and missile-related technology to nations in South Asia, the Middle East and North Africa? Will North Korea consider joining the missile technology control regime? -- Will North Korea make a blanket statement that it does not sponsor or support international terrorism? Is North Korea prepared to return four Red Army Faction hijackers, who have found refuge in the North for more than 30 years, to Japan, where they can face justice? -- Will North Korea be willing to begin discussions with the United States and South Korea about reductions of conventional military forces along the 38th Parallel? When will North Korea be ready to discuss confidence-building measures that will reduce tensions along the border? -- Will North Korea be willing to allow either the United Nations or a private relief organization, such as Oxfam, to supervise the distribution of Western food aid to the starving citizens of North Korea? What is North Korea's response to a recent statement to a Japanese Diet committee by a defector that the North Korea military continues to hoard Western food aid? -- When will North Korean leader Kim Jong Il make a reciprocal visit to Seoul following up on South Korean President Kim Dae Jung's visit to Pyongyang in 2000? -- Is North Korea prepared to halt the widespread production of stimulant drugs that are being sold on the world's drug markets? -- Is North Korea prepared to give assurances that it has stopped the counterfeiting of massive amounts of U.S., Japanese and other foreign currency? These are very simple questions that require only simple answers. If North Korea is prepared to respond to these 10 points truthfully, the Bush administration should signal a willingness to resume a genuine dialogue with Pyongyang. A first step would be to remove North Korea from the U.S. State Department's list of nations that support terrorism. Removal from this list would open the doors to a variety of types of assistance from both the U.S. government as well as the U.S. private sector. However, if the North Koreans are evasive or refuse to answer any of these questions, it will demonstrate that they are not really willing to engage the United States or Japan in wide-ranging discussions. Thus, the onus is on North Korea to come clean and forcefully state that they wish to become a regular member of the international community of nations. A failure to do so will simply doom the government and people of North Korea to continued hardships. There can be no middle ground. Critics of the Bush administration have said it is Washington's fault relations with Pyongyang remain frozen. These questions provide the kindling wood to start the fire that can begin to thaw the deep freeze. All North Korea has to do is provide the matches to start that fire, and these will be found in the form of truthful answers to these important questions. Snitch is president of Little Falls Associates Inc., a Washington consulting firm specializing in Asian security issues. He has been studying North Korea since 1975. Copyright 2002 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 3 Analysis: N Korea's nuclear deal BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Wednesday, 7 August, 2002, 10:05 GMT 11:05 UK Pyongyang frequently threatens to pull out of the deal The concrete pouring ceremony on North Korea's isolated north-eastern coast is a significant breakthrough in a major energy project for the impoverished state. It creates the foundations for a $5-billion international project to build two proliferation-proof nuclear reactors. Dogged by arguments between Kedo - the international consortium responsible for the construction of the plant - and North Korea over wages and costs, it should have been finished in 2003. But the delays appear a small price to pay for a plan which the international community believe is keeping North Korea's own nuclear programme at bay. Pulling back from the brink The project is part of an agreement reached in 1994, after the Korean peninsula came dangerously close to war over North Korea's consistent refusal to allow inspections of two facilities suspected of being used to produce nuclear material for a weapons programme. A visit in June of that year by former US President Carter paved the way for renewed North Korean talks with South Korea and the US, and a so-called Agreed Framework was signed between the US and North Korea in October 1994. Under the agreement, North Korea is to receive the light water reactors and 500,000 metric tonnes of fuel oil each year while the reactors are being built in exchange for a freeze on activities at its own nuclear reactors. North Korea is required to allow IAEA inspectors to ensure it has not hidden away any weapons-grade plutonium from the original reactors. Further delays? Under the terms of the Agreed Framework, the project at Kumho cannot take delivery of key nuclear components until the inspections are completed. But North Korea has dragged its feet over the inspections, justifying its refusals by pointing out that the reactors are way behind schedule. Given that they are currently expected to be completed by mid 2005, and the IAEA says the inspections will take three years to complete, it is likely that further stone-walling from North Korea will result in yet more delay. Another fragile aspect of the Agreed Framework is the fuel oil. Every year the US puts certain conditions regarding North Korea's behaviour on budgeting for the fuel aid, and this fiscal year it agreed to waive those conditions. If however it decided not to release the funding for the fuel one year, that also could put the entire Kedo project in jeopardy. The head of the Non-proliferation Policy Education Centre in Washington, a vocal critic of the Agreed Framework, has warned that even when the new reactors are completed they may not be tamper-proof. "These reactors are like all reactors, they have the potential to make weapons. So you might end up supplying the worst nuclear violator with the means to acquire the very weapons we're trying to prevent it acquiring," Henry Sokolski has said. But a Kedo official told BBC News Online: "It would be far more difficult to make illegal use of a light water reactor than of the other that North Korea used or had under construction." Yongbyon: Site includes a 5-MWe experimental nuclear power reactor and a partially completed plutonium extraction facility. The US believes the reactor and extraction plant have been used to produce plutonium - possibly enough for 1 or 2 nuclear weapons. Activities at site frozen under 1994 Agreed Framework Taechon: 200-MWe nuclear power reactor - construction halted under Agreed Framework Pyongyang: Laboratory-scale "hot cells" that may have been used to extract small quantities of plutonium Kumho: Site of two 1,000-MWe light water reactors under construction by Kedo ***************************************************************** 4 N Korea warned over nuclear deal BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Wednesday, 7 August, 2002, Two reactors are being built for the North under the deal The US has issued a stark warning to North Korea that it must allow inspections of its suspected nuclear weapons programme or risk delaying a major power deal. It is now time for us to see the same kind of tangible progress by (North Korea) in meeting its commitments Jack Pritchard, US delegate to Kedo Jack Pritchard, the most senior Washington official to visit North Korea since 2000, was speaking at a ceremony to mark the start of construction of two light-water nuclear reactors for the North. They are being built as a result of a 1994 agreement under which North Korea suspended its suspected nuclear weapons programme, averting a potential nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula. Under the deal, North Korea undertook to allow UN inspections of suspected nuclear sites before key components for the reactors could be delivered, but it has repeatedly stone-walled. Time to co-operate "It is now time for us to see the same kind of tangible progress by (North Korea) in meeting its commitments," said Mr Pritchard, US delegate to Kedo - the international organisation responsible for building the plant. 1994 Agreed Framework West to supply fuel oil and build 2 nuclear reactors N Korea to freeze suspected nuclear weapons programme N Korea still has to allow in UN weapons inspectors US fears N Korea had extracted plutonium for 2 nuclear bombs before 1994 The UN agency IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) estimates that it will take at least three years to complete inspections. If North Korea does not allow them soon, that will put back the 2005 scheduled completion. Mr Pritchard said: "(North Korea) must start meaningful cooperation now with the IAEA and must comply with all of its obligations under the Agreed Framework". The $4.6bn project is being constructed at the village of Kumho on North Korea's eastern coast. The 1,000-megawatt light-water reactors will produce less weapons-grade material than the North's mothballed graphite nuclear reactors. [Map of North Korea showing Kumho] Milestone Around 150 representatives from Kedo and journalists travelled to the North for the ceremony. Fireworks lit up the sky around the building site and a hopper of wet cement was ceremoniously lowered into the reactors' foundations. Kedo executive director Charles Kartman said the project was not simply about building nuclear reactors. "This project is about preserving peace and stability on the Korean peninsula," he said. The ceremony marks a milestone in a project which has been dogged by delays, including rows over wages for North Korean workers and it is already well behind its original target date of 2003. Some analysts in the US remain sceptical about the project and have called for it to be scrapped or halted until Pyongyang allows in inspectors. Nevertheless, the ceremony comes as the reclusive North has shown fresh signs of wanting to re-engage with the outside world including holding high-level talks with the United States and Japan. ***************************************************************** 5 Work begins on N. Korea nuclear reactors* United Press International From the International Desk Published 8/7/2002 6:29 AM SEOUL, South Korea, Aug. 7 (UPI) -- A concrete-pouring ceremony Wednesday marked the beginning of an international project to build two light-water nuclear reactors in North Korea. The U.S.-led international consortium pledged eight years ago to build a nuclear power plant with two 1,000-megawatt light-water reactors for North Korea in exchange for the county giving up its military nuclear program. The light-water reactors produce less weapons-grade nuclear material than other models, officials said. The $4.6 billion project is being constructed at the village of Kumho on North Korea's eastern coast. The 1994 U.S.-North Korean agreements said the two reactors would not be used for military purposes. The United States also pledged to supply North Korea with fuel until the new reactors are put into operation. Also, North Korea still has to allow U.N. weapons inspectors into the country to search for any evidence of its suspected atomic weapons program. The United States fears North Korea had before 1994 extracted enough plutonium for two nuclear bombs. If the construction proceeds according to schedule, the reactors can begin producing electricity in 2008. Originally, the reactors were expected to begin operations in 2003. Members of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, KEDO, the international organization responsible for building the plant, and journalists traveled to the north for the ceremony. Jack Pritchard, the U.S. envoy for Korean affairs and U.S. representative on the KEDO board, joined his counterparts from Japan, South Korea and the European Union at the ceremony. Pritchard said the consortium could complete a significant portion of the project by mid-2005, but North Korea must agree to inspections and comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. North Korea "must start meaningful cooperation now with the IAEA (the International Atomic Energy Agency) and must comply with all of its obligations under the Agreed Framework," he said. "It is now time for us to see the same kind of tangible progress by the DPRK (North Korea) in meeting its commitments under the (1994) Agreed Framework, to cooperate with the IAEA and to come into compliance with the NPT," Pritchard said. The light-water nuclear project has been delayed following North Korea's test-fire of a ballistic missile in 1998 over Japan, a main financial contributor to the project, and because of time-consuming coordination among the KEDO partners. Work so far has been limited to ground leveling and excavation. North Korea said the delay was causing an electricity shortage, demanding U.S. compensation for the delay. But Charles Kartman, KEDO's executive director, rejected Pyongyang's demand, saying the consortium has no reason to compensate, because the year 2003 specified in the deal is a target date, not a contracted date. South Korea hopes the landmark concrete-pouring ceremony would further heighten the prospect of a thaw in relations between North Korea and the United States, with inter-Korean relations back on track following a deadly naval clash in June. "The concrete pouring means that the construction can never be stopped from now on," KEDO's South Korean representative Chang Seung-sup said. "Thus, it is a very significant ceremony." Kim Hee Mun, who represents North Korea for the light-water reactor project, expressed hopes of an earlier completion of the long-delayed project when he met reporters. KEDO officials met in Seoul this week ahead of their trip to the North to discuss progress on the project, which is some five years behind schedule. Copyright © 2002 United Press International ***************************************************************** 6 South Carolina Loses RequestTo Stop Influx Of Plutonium The Salt Lake Tribune -- Wednesday, August 7, 2002 By AMY GEIER EDGAR THE ASSOCIATED PRESS COLUMBIA, S.C. -- A federal appeals court Tuesday rejected South Carolina's request to stop the federal government from shipping surplus plutonium into the state. Gov. Jim Hodges, who has fought with the Department of Energy over the shipments for more than a year, said he plans to appeal the ruling by the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. "Our final hope lies with the Supreme Court," Hodges said. Hodges once vowed to use state troopers to turn back the shipments at the border unless he was given legally enforceable assurances that his state would not permanently house the waste. The Energy Department is moving 6 tons of plutonium from Rocky Flats, a former weapons plant near Denver, to the Savannah River Site near the Georgia line. The department plans to eventually convert the material into commercial nuclear fuel. The appeals court rejected Hodges' contentions that federal officials needed more environmental studies and failed to fully consider the risks of long-term storage. The appeals court upheld a lower court decision allowing the shipments. Hodges was rebuked by a federal judge when he tried to ban shipments from the state after the earlier ruling. © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune ***************************************************************** 7 Reactor Sales Are Said to Endanger Accident Payments The New York Times *August 7, 2002* *By MATTHEW L. WALD* WASHINGTON, Aug. 6 ? The sale of about two dozen nuclear power reactors around the country to a small number of companies has undermined the system Congress devised to ensure compensation for people hurt by a severe nuclear accident, according to an analysis commissioned by two antinuclear groups in New York. Federal law requires reactor operators to buy $200 million in conventional insurance. It also provides for about $9.3 billion in additional coverage by requiring that after an accident, each plant pay $10 million a year, up to $88 million, to compensate victims. When the law, known as the Price-Anderson act, was approved by Congress, the idea was to spread the risk among all reactors. But as a result of recent mergers and purchases, four companies now own so many reactors that their liabilities would be more than half a billion dollars each in case of accidents. The study, which was commissioned by Riverkeeper, a Hudson River environmental group, and the STAR Foundation, a Long Island antinuclear group, points out that in many cases, the companies bought the reactors through limited liability subsidiaries that could declare bankruptcy and permit the parent corporations to walk away unscathed. It also says that the limited liability structure jeopardizes the money set aside for decommissioning the reactors at the end of their lives. "Price-Anderson only works if those companies are reachable in the event of an accident," said Alex Matthiessen, executive director of Riverkeeper. "These limited liability structures seem specifically designed to put them beyond reach." The report, prepared by Synapse Energy Economics and scheduled to be officially released on Wednesday by being posted on the World Wide Web at www.noradiation.org, details layer upon layer of corporate structures used in recent reactor purchases. Robert Alvarez, program director for the Star Foundation, said that most of the holding companies had no employees and were merely "shell corporations." He called them " Enron -style subsidiaries." Representatives for the nuclear industry scoffed at the idea that the changes in ownership threatened the insurance system. Having nuclear plants concentrated in the hands of companies that specialize in running reactors has safety benefits, they said, and may also create greater financial responsiveness. "If I'm a nuclear operator, I'm not going to undermine my core business to save $10 million a year," said Marvin S. Fertel, senior vice president at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group. Failure to pay the fee for one reactor could jeopardize the licenses of the others, he said. A typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear plant has fuel and operating expenses of $130 million to $140 million a year, he said, and a $10 million payment on top of that, in the unlikely event of a major accident, was a small increment. In an introduction to the report, Peter A. Bradford, a former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and a former head of the public service commissions in both New York State and Vermont, agreed that the consolidation of nuclear ownership might make for safer operation. But he said he thought it also "risks the shifting of accident and decommissioning costs from the plant owners to the general public because the relatively secure financial backing of substantial utilities companies has, in many cases, been replaced by a limited liability subsidiary whose only asset is an individual nuclear power plant." Price-Anderson, established in 1957 by Congress, expired on Aug. 1. Provisions remain in force for existing reactors but new ones would not be covered. But that point is moot, since no new reactors have been ordered since 1978. The insurance system established by the law could be crucial for people who live within a few miles of nuclear plants because commercial property insurance does not cover radiation accidents. In creating the program, Congress set a cap on how much would be paid to any victims of a nuclear accident. The cap is periodically adjusted for inflation; it is now about $9.5 billion, with the money coming from the $200 million in conventional insurance and the $9.3 billion that would be paid by the nuclear industry after an accident. Opponents say the cap is a subsidy to the nuclear industry; the industry asserts that the $9.5 billion is far more than would be available for a catastrophe at a chemical plant or some other industrial site. So far, they point out, payments have totaled only about $200 million. Whatever the merits of the arguments on both sides, the emerging structure of the industry has clearly changed the underlying assumptions behind the building of nuclear power plants. Critics agree that having a single company operate 15 or 20 reactors is probably good for safety, since plants within a company share expertise more readily than plants owned by scattered utilities. But they also say that the new owners may lack the deep pockets of the mammoth regulated utilities that built the reactors, making an insurance scheme more necessary. The new legal structure is radically different from what came before. For example, the Indian Point reactors, in a suburb of New York City along the Hudson River, were sold by Consolidated Edison and the New York Power Authority to Entergy , a utility that built five of its own plants and has bought six more. A spokesman for Entergy, Carl Crawford, said the structure had tax advantages. Asked if it also created a liability shield, he said, "It has that effect, too." But, he said, "anyone who thinks that a company that would spend a billion and a half of its own dollars is going to shirk a $10 million a year insurance payment, that's just not reasonable." Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company ***************************************************************** 8 NK Urged to Comply With Nuclear Inspections [KoreaTimes] By Sohn Suk-joo Staff Reporter A senior U.S. official yesterday called on North Korea to allow an international nuclear agency to inspect its suspected nuclear facilities at the earliest possible date. Jack Pritchard, Washington¡¯s point man on Pyongyang, made the remarks in a ceremony to celebrate international efforts to build two light-water nuclear reactors, which produce less weapons grade nuclear material, after the first concrete was poured into the foundations of a nuclear plant in Kumho on North Korea¡¯s east coast. The construction, that began in 1997, has been hampered by military and political tension, and funding problems. Work so far has been limited to ground leveling and excavation, but concrete was laid this week for a building that will house a reactor. Pritchard said that it would be impossible to complete the construction of safe nuclear reactors without the communist country¡¯s commitment to its agreement to freeze nuclear activities. ``It is now time for us to see the same kind of tangible progress by North Korea in meeting its commitments under the Agreed Framework, to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency and to come into compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty,¡¯¡¯ he said. In 1994, a nuclear crisis on the peninsula was averted when North Korea agreed with the United States to freeze its nuclear activities in return for the construction of the nuclear reactors and other benefits from South Korea, the United States and Japan. The Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), an international consortium, was set up to build a $4.6 billion nuclear power plant with two 1, 000-megawatt light-water reactors in North Korea to help ease its shortage of electricity. The KEDO¡¯s key members are South Korea, the U.S., Japan and the European Union (EU). The ceremony was attended by about 100 officials from KEDO and construction companies, among whom were Chang Sun-sup from South Korea, Katsunari Suzuki from Japan and Jean-Pierre Leng from the EU, all KEDO executive board members. Seventeen North Korean delegates were on hand, with 600 construction workers watching the event. Completion of the construction is not expected until 2008, as it has fallen six years behind schedule because of delays caused by inter-Korean tension and squabbling over nuclear inspections. The project has been plagued by numerous rows between KEDO and North Korea, notably over wages for North Korean workers and disputes among KEDO members over burden sharing. KEDO plans to deliver key components in mid-2005, but will not install them in the two nuclear reactors until inspections have been completed to verify North Korea¡¯s past nuclear activities. The IAEA believes that with North Korea¡¯s full cooperation, it will still take at least three or four years to verify the completeness and correctness of their nuclear declarations, Pritchard said. ``That means the DPRK must start meaningful cooperation with the IAEA now and must comply with all of its obligations under the Agreed Framework,'' he said. The concrete-pouring ceremony is expected to further heighten the prospect of a thaw in relations between North Korea and the U.S., with inter-Korean relations back on track following a deadly naval clash in late June. The U.S. decided to send its envoy to North Korea after the Stalinist country expressed regret over the naval skirmish, which South Korea and the U.S. say was a planned provocation by the North. Pritchard said he is expected to accompany U.S. Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly, when he visits Pyongyang in the near future. ``The kernel of the problem is how to solve North Korea¡¯s demand for compensation for the loss of electricity stemming from delayed work,¡¯¡¯ said Suh Dong-man, professor of Sangji University. ``Resumed U.S.-North Korea dialogue will dictate how the 1994 nuclear crisis will be solved after all.¡¯¡¯ ssj@koreatimes.co.kr ÀԷ½ð£ 2002/08/07 18:07 ***************************************************************** 9 FERC to consider Yankee sale appeal Brattleboro Reformer Wednesday, August 07, 2002 - 12:28:09 AM MST By EESHA WILLIAMS Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- Federal regulators have said they will consider whether the Vermont Public Service Board's recent approval of the sale of Vermont Yankee violated federal law. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission made the announcement Tuesday in response to a request from the Brattleboro-based New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution and the Citizens Awareness Network, citizens' groups that were parties in hearings on the $180 million sale to Entergy. The groups said a side agreement to the sale regarding the use of the $300 million fund earmarked for dismantling and cleaning up the Yankee site contradicted FERC's rules. Under the sale terms, Entergy would get to keep any leftover money that was paid into the cleanup fund by ratepayers in states other than Vermont when the plant was shut down. The coalition and CAN claim this amounted to unequal treatment of ratepayers based on which state they live in and should therefore be struck down. Entergy had threatened to withdraw its offer to purchase Yankee if it didn't get to keep the excess funds. "This means we are moving forward in front of FERC," said James Dumont, an attorney for the coalition. "We are asking them to enforce their own rule that says excess decommissioning funds must go back to the ratepayers." Utilities in Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Connecticut owned approximately 45 percent of Vermont Yankee prior to the sale. Entergy spokesman Rob Williams said his company would file comments about the case with the FERC. "It's a routine part of the FERC process," he said of Tuesday's announcement. FERC's announcement gave the public until Aug. 19 to protest its decision to hear the case, or intervene in the case. Dumont said it could be weeks or months before FERC issues a ruling in the case. The citizens' groups have also appealed the Public Service Board's decision to the Vermont Supreme Court. The court has not yet said if it will hear arguments in the case. ©1999-2002 by MediaNews Group, Inc. and NENI Newspapers ***************************************************************** 10 Kenneth Kolaczyk Named NRC Senior Resident Inspector at Ginna NRC: Press Release Region I - 2002 - 49 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov No. I-02-049 August 7, 2002 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in the Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa., have selected Kenneth Kolaczyk as the Senior Resident Inspector at the Robert E. Ginna nuclear power plant in Ontario, N.Y. He joins Resident Inspector Chris Welch. Kolaczyk replaces Ricardo Fernandes, who left the agency. Kolaczyk joined the NRC's Region I office in 1988. During his tenure, he has served as a Resident Inspector at Millstone Station in Waterford, Ct. He has also worked as a specialist inspector in the Region's Division of Reactor Safety, as a reactor engineer and licensed operator examiner. Prior to his NRC service, Kolaczyk worked as a nuclear shift test supervisor at Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth, Va. He is currently a lieutenant commander in the Naval Reserves and drills with a Military Sealift Command Unit in Syracuse, N.Y. Kolaczyk earned a bachelor's of engineering degree from the Massachusetts Maritime Academy, a master's of business administration from Pennsylvania State University and a master's of public administration from the University of Pennsylvania. He is attending the Naval War College in Newport, R.I., where he's pursuing a degree in military science. Kolaczyk, his wife and children reside in Victor, N.Y. Each U.S. commercial nuclear power plant has at least two NRC resident inspectors. They serve as the agency's eyes and ears at the facility, conducting regular inspections and monitoring significant work projects. The Ginna resident inspectors can be reached at 315/524-6935. ***************************************************************** 11 Davis-Besse plant loses third overseer The Plain Dealer 08/07/02 John Mangels and John Funk Plain Dealer Reporters Oak Harbor, Ohio - The FirstEnergy executive in charge of the formidable effort to restart the crippled Davis-Besse nuclear power plant has been replaced. Howard Bergendahl, who had been vice president in charge of Davis-Besse since February, "is exploring options within and outside the company," spokesman Todd Schneider said yesterday. Bergendahl had been the plant's manager the previous two years. Bergendahl's duties will be taken over by Lew Myers, the FirstEnergy nuclear division's chief operating officer. Myers has been at Davis-Besse since May. Schneider would not say why Bergendahl left his job or whether his situation is related to the corrosion problems that have idled the reactor near Toledo for nearly half a year and will cost FirstEnergy at least $200 million. But Bergendahl is the third top executive displaced after holding a key oversight position at the plant while the corrosion occurred or was discovered. John Wood, formerly vice president of the FirstEnergy nuclear division's engineering services group, left the company May 24. He had helped lead the effort to patch the large rust hole in Davis-Besse's reactor lid, a strategy the company abandoned under pressure from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in favor of buying a new lid. Guy Campbell, had been vice president for Davis-Besse from January 1999 to February 2002, a time during which workers found numerous clues that something inside the reactor building was heavily rusting but failed to trace its source. After a brief stint as vice president at FirstEnergy's Perry nuclear plant this spring, Campbell was transferred to the Three Mile Island nuclear plant near Harrisburg, Pa. Bergendahl had been responsible for coordinating the complicated and heavily scrutinized inspection and repair work at the plant. The scores of projects must be completed to the NRC's satisfaction before the reactor can be restarted. Throughout the summer, Bergendahl was part of a FirstEnergy management team that dealt directly with a special NRC panel overseeing Davis-Besse. Congress and the NRC are conducting six investigations concerning the reactor lid's corrosion. Bergendahl's departure will not affect FirstEnergy's plan to complete repairs by year's end, Schneider said. For complete coverage of Davis-Besse go to www.cleveland.com/davisbesse/. To reach these Plain Dealer reporters: jmangels@plaind.com, 216-999-4842 jfunk@plaind.com, 216-999-4138 © 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. ***************************************************************** 12 Minatom Cools on Heated Iranian Reactor Plan International Co-operation Section on Russia's nuclear industry international co-operation and exports of Russian nuclear technology. MOSCOW - After receiving the most pointed lambasting from US officials yet for cooperation with Iran, Russia's Nuclear Ministry, or Minatom, appears to have taken half a step backward from its plans to expand nuclear activities with the Middle Eastern country. A reactor vessel produced at Izhora plant, St Petersburg, is destined to Iranian nuclear power plant being built by Russia. www.aeronautics.ru Charles Digges, 2002-08-05 13:53 On Friday, Nuclear Minister Alexander Rumyantsev was to hold a joint press conference with US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, who on Thursday had publicly dressed down Russia's newly announced plans to build five more nuclear reactors in Iran. The press conference was abruptly cancelled. Abraham was in Moscow with US Undersecretary of State John Bolton until Sunday on a working visit. Speaking Thursday, Abraham became the highest ranking US official to publicly tie Russia's assistance in building a nuclear power plant in the Persian Gulf city of Bushehr to a veiled nuclear weapons programme, and implied that Russia's expanded plans were an extension of that programme. "[Iran is] aggressively pursuing nuclear weapons as well as weapons of mass destruction," said Abraham in his Thursday public comments. "We consistently urge Russia to cease all nuclear cooperation with Iran, including its assistance to the reactor in Bushehr," he said. In lieu of the cancelled Rumyantsev-Abraham press conference, the Minatom press office released later in the day a terse statement saying Russia's programme of cooperation with Iran was not engraved in stone. The statement said that the 10-year, $10-billion plan on expanded nuclear and economic cooperation in Iran — which was approved by Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov on June 24 and released two days later, literally hours before Abraham's arrival in Moscow — is "merely a list of existing technical possibilities." "Their implementation will depend on many factors, including political [factors]," the statement continued. In response to the US accusations that Russia's ties with Iran were helping advance its nuclear weapons programme, the ministry reaffirmed that the nuclear cooperation with Iran was limited to building the reactor in Bushehr. One US official familiar with the talks described the new Russian statement as "big progress." "We're very pleased," the official said. "That's a change from what they were saying early in the week," after the plan to build five more reactors in Iran was announced. Russian officials insist that the Bushehr reactors are for civilian energy use only and will not be used to develop fuel for nuclear weapons. They point out that they will be light-water reactors, with the same technology the United States is using in North Korea in an effort to rein in that country's nuclear programme. But the United States believes that Iran's purpose in acquiring the reactors isn't energy but the expertise and equipment it would gain along the way. As Abraham pointed out in his Thursday remarks, "[the United States has] long been concerned that Iran's only interest in nuclear civil power, given its vast domestic energy resources, is to support its nuclear weapons programme." There are also unresolved issues of what will happen to the spent nuclear fuel produced at the Bushehr reactor — which, if reprocessed, would yield plutonium. Despite Minister Rumyantsev's repeated assurances that the fuel would be repatriated to Russia, Minatom insiders have said that progress to forge that agreement with Iran has been slow. Russian nuclear experts suggested that the release of the new plan last week was a negotiating tactic. "There is a strong impression that is shared by many Russian experts that the United States and Russia have already reached a mutually acceptable agreement on Iran — everything is in the bag already," Anton Khlopkov, a nuclear expert with the PIR Centre, a Moscow think tank, told Bellona Web Friday. "Both sides seem to have an understanding that Russia will supply light-water reactors to Iran, but nothing besides such reactors." But Radzhab Safarov, director of Russia's Iranian Studies Centre, said that to convince Moscow to drop its programmes in Iran, the United States will have to put its money where its mouth is. "Iran is a solvent country that is quite capable of paying," Safarov told Bellona Web. "The West, however, confines its efforts to words alone: Do not do any business with Iran because it will affect global security. These are good words, but they are just words, nothing else. It is very unlikely that Russia will be convinced to change its priorities only with the help of words." For Russia, more hangs in the balance, namely the $20 billion in foreign aid that G8 nations have pledged to give Russia to bolster the security of its dilapidated nuclear infrastructure. As one US official, speaking with Bellona Web on the condition of anonymity, put it: "It would be a shame if the funding dried up over this Iran problem." Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 13 Three cases of violations in running nuclear power plants were registered in Russia in July, this year. Pravda.RU 16:58 2002-08-02 Three cases of violations in running nuclear power plants were registered in Russia in July, this year. The RIA Novosti correspondent was told about it on Friday in the press centre of the Russian State Nuclear Safety Inspectorate. Power-generating unit No. 1 at the Smolensk Nuclear Power Plant (the Central Federal District) was being discharged on July 1 with the use of a malfunctioning reserve pump. On power-generating unit No. 5 of the Novovoronezh Nuclear Power Plant (the Central Federal District) the emergency protection system tripped on July 17 because the oil pressure regulator in the turbogenerator went out of service. On power-generating unit No. 2 of the Bilibino Nuclear Power Plant (the Far Eastern Federal District) the emergency protection system tripped on July 18 because of malfunctions in the auxiliary equipment. In all these cases no harm was done to anyone, and radiation remained at the level not topping the background value, reported the State Nuclear Safety Inspectorate. © RIAN http://bbs.newsfromrussia.com/cgi/Ultimate.cgi] ***************************************************************** 14 Expert group from US Department of Energy inspects nuclear production plant near Krasnoyarsk Pravda.RU Aug, 06 2002 Another five experts from the US Department of Energy have started inspecting the mining and chemical plant located in the restricted town of Zheleznogorsk in the nearby Krasnoyarsk. Experts will inspect the plant's schemes to register, control and secure the nuclear materials stockpiled there. Pavel Morozov, the head of the facility's PR department, said on Tuesday that "this is a routine inspection," which would be held in compliance with a Russo-American intergovernmental agreement signed in October 1999 on the monitoring of weapons-grade plutonium production at the plant. The thing is that the Americans are no longer producing weapons-grade plutonium, while the Siberian facility cannot but produce it because the facility's reactor is simultaneously supplying heat and electricity to the 100,000-population town. Another two reactors were shut down in the 1990s, the last one will be closed in 2006, when an alternative power source for Zheleznogorsk is constructed. The Russian side in conjunction with the Americans, who will also cover part of the expenses, are creating a joint command centre, which will replace separate posts monitoring nuclear storage facilities. In addition, it has been decided to equip the plant with a special radio cable, which will improve communication within the plant whose facilities are located deep under ground, which hampers the use of regular radio communication systems. The Americans are expected to leave the Russian production plant on August 10th. © RIAN [http://bbs.newsfromrussia.com/cgi/Ultimate.cgi] ***************************************************************** 15 Team Launches N. Korea Reactor Project (washingtonpost.com) Reuters Wednesday, August 7, 2002; Page A14 KUMHO, North Korea, Aug 7 (Wednesday) -- The multinational team overseeing a key nonproliferation accord with North Korea poured the first concrete today for a landmark nuclear reactor project at a remote site on the isolated country's east coast. The ceremony here was attended by top officials of the internationally funded Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) and diplomats from countries contributing to the $4.6 billion project to build two reactors. The event was scheduled between two rounds of talks between North and South Korea and came during an unexpected flurry of diplomatic activity on the peninsula, which has been bitterly divided since the 1950-53 Korean War. KEDO, a consortium of the United States, South Korea and Japan, was set up to implement a $4.6 billion reactor project under a 1994 U.S.-North Korea deal that froze the North's suspected nuclear weapons program in exchange for annual supplies of fuel oil and two Western-built nuclear reactors. The project is several years behind schedule. Jack Pritchard, the U.S. negotiator on North Korea, attended the ceremony, but was not expected to hold separate talks with Pyongyang during his visit, State Department spokesman Philip Reeker said in Washington. © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 16 N.Korea Marks Nuclear Reactor Phase [http://www.ptd.net] Wednesday, 07-Aug-2002 1:20AM Story from AP / PAUL SHIN, Associated Press Writer Copyright 2002 by The Associated Press (via ClariNet) KUMHO, North Korea (AP) -- Amid fireworks and applause, North Korean officials and representatives of a U.S. government-led consortium marked a new phase in the construction of two nuclear reactors on Wednesday. But a senior U.S. official said the North wasn't complying with the deal's terms. Under a U.S.-North Korean agreement in 1994, the consortium was to build reactors to meet the communist country's desperate need for power. In exchange, the North said it would freeze its suspected nuclear weapons program and allow international scrutiny. The so-called Agreed Framework averted the threat of war on the Korean peninsula, but North Korea has yet to open its facilities to inspections by the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency. North Korea "must start meaningful cooperation now with the IAEA and must comply with all of its obligations under the Agreed Framework," said Jack Pritchard, a U.S. State Department official. The CIA suspects the North might have stockpiled enough plutonium to make one or two atomic bombs. North Korea denies it. Pritchard said the North's failure to allow inspections, which would take three to four years to complete, could undermine the $4.6 billion project. Political tension and funding problems have delayed the project by several years, prompting harsh criticism from North Korea. Pritchard spoke at a concrete-pouring ceremony at the reactor site in Kumho, a remote coastal region near the border with Russia's Far East. Attending were 100 government representatives from the United States, Japan, South Korea and the European Union, all members of the consortium. Workers clapped and fireworks crackled. North Korean officials did not make any speeches. Surrounded by low mountains, the area has been leveled to allow construction. It is isolated from the nearest city, Sinpo, which has 100,000 residents. Some 1,400 workers -- 700 South Koreans, 600 Uzbeks and 100 North Koreans -- are working at the site. A North Korean official who identified himself only by his surname, Ko, said less than 15 percent of the project had been completed. "All North Koreans in the area want to see the plant move ahead very quickly," he said. The ceremony came amid signs of a thaw in North Korea's tense relations with South Korea, the United States and Japan. Cabinet-level talks between North and South Korea are scheduled for next week in Seoul. In 1993, North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It reversed the decision the next year and froze its nuclear program in exchange for the two Western-developed, light-water reactors. The consortium, known as the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, originally promised to build the two reactors by 2003. North Korea was required to allow inspections of its homemade nuclear facilities before key components of the first reactor are delivered. The consortium wants to deliver its first key component -- the reactor vessel -- in 2005. Pritchard said it made no sense to complete a significant portion of the first reactor and then wait for years until North Korea allows inspections of its nuclear facilities. Visitors to North Korea report that many factories operate at less than 30 percent of their capacity mainly because of a lack of electricity. The country also relies on outside food aid. ***************************************************************** 17 *UK nuclear risk study* The Mirror WEDNESDAY 07/08/02 15:23:52 UK experts ruled there was no significant risk of radioactive contamination from the UK's two main Atomic Weapons Establishments,it emerged today. * * Experts from the University of Southampton examined the sites at Aldermaston and Burghfield in West Berkshire in a three-year environmental radioactivity project. The work carried out by the university`s Geosciences Advisory Unit, examined more than 600 soil and other samples from a wide variety of locations and environments. Doctor Ian Croudace, who led the study, said: ``Only minute quantities of uranium and plutonium have been transferred to the environment in spite of the plants having a history ranging from the early fifties, through the Cold War period to the present day. ``The minute quantities, found using highly sensitive methods, are not considered to pose a hazard to the public. ``The very small amounts of contamination are predominantly found within 2.5 kilometres of the main AWE site at Aldermaston and are mostly confined to woodland sites.`` The Atomic Weapons Establishments at Aldermaston and Burghfield in West Berkshire have been the centres of the UK nuclear weapons programme since the early 1950s. This latest study, commissioned by the AWE, was to assess the distribution and magnitude of any AWE-derived contamination of uranium and plutonium. The experts used a highly sensitive multi-collector plasma mass spectrometer to examine isotopic compositions in soil samples collected around the two nuclear sites to decide how much contamination there was and where it came from. Contamination of the environment around nuclear facilities by uranium and plutonium has potentially significant environmental and political consequences. Residents living near the sites have been concerned for years because of reports of leukaemia clusters near the centres. ***************************************************************** 18 Ceremony Held to Mark Sart of DPRK Reactor Project Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Thursday, August 08, 2002 A ceremony was held in Kumho, DPRK Wednesday to mark the start of construction work on a landmark reactor project. About 100 people, including officials of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), attended the concrete-pouring ceremony in Kumho, South Hamgyong Province. Among the attendants were KEDO Executive Director Charles Kartman, and KEDO board members Chang Sun Dup of South Korea, Katsunari Suzuki of Japan, and J.P. Leng of the European Union. U.S. special envoy for negotiations with DPRK, Jack Pritchard also attended. He is the first high-ranking official to visit DPRK since U.S. President George W. Bush took office in January last year. During the ceremony, Pritchard called on DPRK to accept inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) immediately. KEDO is in charge of building the two light-water reactors under a 1994 U.S.-DPRK agreement. The Agreed Framework specifies that DPRK will freeze its weaponry program in exchange for two light-water nuclear reactors to generate electricity that would replace the country's plutonium-producing reactors, whose fuel can be converted into weaponry. The reactor project is financed primarily by South Korea, Japan, the U.S. and the European Union. The event comes on the heels of fresh diplomatic developments among North and South Korea, Japan and the U.S. The construction of the two nuclear reactors was initially to be completed by 2003, but it has been delayed considerably. Completion of any reactors is now unlikely before 2008. DPRK Condemns U.S. for Delaying Nuclear Reactors Construction US-led Consortium Delegation in Pyongyang for Talks on Nuclear Reactors DPRK Delegation Visits S.Korea for Nuclear Reactor Program Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 19 Nuclear power project in North Korea 'takes step forward' as concrete pours Korea Herald!!_National http://www.koreaherald.com The first batch of concrete was poured yesterday at the nuclear power plant construction site in North Korea, which officials said signals that the project will proceed despite delays and occasional diplomatic tension. The Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) held the concrete-pouring ceremony in the North's eastern port of Sinpo, with about 150 delegates from the U.S.-led international consortium and Pyongyang on hand. "This ceremony declares to the world that the light-water reactor project has taken a step forward, dispelling doubts and skepticism about it," said Chang Sun-sup, the chief South Korean delegate to KEDO. The $4.6 billion project, launched under a 1994 deal between Pyongyang and Washington, has faced a number of setbacks, including political tension between the North and funding governments. Its target completion date of 2003 has been pushed back to around 2008. The United States has called on North Korea to allow inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as it promised in the 1994 Agreed Framework, under which the North froze its own nuclear program. The agreement says that Pyongyang will "come into full compliance" with the inspection "before delivery of key nuclear components." KEDO officials expect that delivery to take place around 2005. Jack Pritchard, the U.S. representative to the KEDO executive board, renewed his government's demand yesterday, noting that the inspection would take up to four years. "It is now time for us to see the same kind of tangible progress by North Korea in meeting its commitments under the Agreed Framework, to cooperate with the IAEA," said Pritchard, who also serves as Washington's point man on the North. Seoul officials and analysts expected the Sinpo ceremony would help lubricate North Korea's recent moves to improve relations with the South, the United States and Japan. Ending months of stalemate, the two Koreas will reopen high-level talks in Seoul next week. A high-level envoy from Washington is expected to visit Pyongyang in the near future, while the North and Japan are gearing up for negotiations to normalize their relationship. "It's true that the energy-starved North, even while rejecting the IAEA inspection, has feared that the reactor construction would hit a snag under the hard-line Bush administration," a senior Unification Ministry official said. "This ceremony, however, sent a clear message to the North that the project would remain on course," he added. Yet analysts pointed out that the U.S. government would not make a major diplomatic overture until the Stalinist regime submits to a full IAEA inspection and cooperates to resolve issues regarding its weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). "Despite the latest developments, the core problem still remains - North Korea is unwilling to accept the inspection," said Hong Kwan-hee, senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for National Unification. Hong noted that Washington does not want to see major progress in relations with Pyongyang, without corresponding progress in curbing the North's development of WMDs. (jihoho@koreaherald.co.kr) By Kim Ji-ho Staff reporter 2002.08.08 [http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/contact/contact.shtml] ***************************************************************** 20 NKorean nuclear reactor project under way with US warning Wednesday, 07-Aug-2002 5:50AM Story from AFP / Zeno Park Copyright 2002 by Agence France-Presse (via ClariNet) KUMHO, North Korea, Aug 7 (AFP) - A senior US official warned North Korea Wednesday it must come clean about its past nuclear program, as an international consortium began construction on a landmark nuclear reactor project in the Stalinist country. At a ceremony here the first concrete was poured into the foundations of a reactor being built under the so-called Agreed Framework signed by Pyongyang and Washington in 1994 to head off a nuclear crisis. Under the accord North Korea agreed to freeze its nuclear development program and the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) was set up to build a five-billion-dollar nuclear power plant. The plant was to contain two 1,000 megawatt light water reactors, which would produce significantly less weapons grade nuclear material than an old nuclear plant built during the Soviet era. The ceremony was led by Jack Pritchard, the US envoy for Korean affairs and US representative on the KEDO board, and his counterparts from Japan, South Korea and the European Union. Pritchard said the consortium would complete "a significant portion" of the project by delivering key components in mid-2005. But he warned North Korea must open controversial nuclear facilities for inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and comply with the Non-Proliferation Treaty. "It is now time for us to see the same kind of tangible progress by the DPRK (North Korea) in meeting its commitments under the Agreed Framwork, to cooperate with the IAEA and to come into compliance with the NPT," Pritchard said. The IAEA believes that with full cooperation from North Korea it will still take at least three or four years to verify the completeness and correctness of their nuclear declarations, he said. "That means the DPRK must start meaningful cooperation now with the IAEA and must comply with all of its obligations under the Agreed Framework," he said. He made the speech after the first concrete was poured, a stage that has been delayed by years by problems and bickering between KEDO and North Korea. "This project is not simply about building nuclear reactors," KEDO executive director Charles Kartman said. "This project is about preserving peace and stability on the Korean peninsula." Kartman said the optimism surrounding Wednesday's historic moment was in stark contrast to the tensions leading up to the 1994 accord that paved the way for the reactor to be built. He recalled the Korean peninsula was then on the brink of war with Washington strongly suspecting the North might have secured weapons-grade plutonium. Pyongyang angrily denied it had nuclear ambitions and responded by suddenly withdrawing from the US-led international Non-Proliferation Treaty. The potential crisis was headed off with the signing of the Agreed Framework in Geneva in 1994. But there have been constant doubts over the KEDO project because of international concerns over North Korea's secret nuclear and missle development programs. But Kartman insisted the 1994 accord was "a good deal." North Korean representative Kim Hi-Mun added after the ceremony: "I'm glad, but it should have been done earlier." Analysts said the event would further sweeten the atmosphere created by a flurry of diplomatic gestures from North Korea toward traditional enemies Japan, South Korea and the United States in recent weeks. Excavation for the foundations began in September 2001 only after KEDO took four years to level a hill containing 8.9 square kilometers (3.56 square miles) of earth. The project has been dogged by numerous rows especially over wages for North Korean workers. Complaining about the delays, North Korea has repeatedly demanded compensation to make up for power shortages caused by the freeze of its nuclear program. ***************************************************************** 21 North Korea one step closer to generating nuclear power Radio Australia News - "RADIO AUSTRALIA"> [http://abc.net.au/ra/] North Korea's nuclear power program has taken a major step forward with the first concrete poured in a landmark construction project. Our North Asia correspondent Mark Simkin reports the pour is part of a plan to build two light-water reactors on the remote east coast. The project is being funded by the United States, South Korea, Japan and the European Union. It is the result of a controversial 1994 deal under which Pyonyang agreed to freeze its nuclear weapons programme in exchange for annual supplies of oil and two western-built nuclear reactors. Today's development comes amid signs of a possible thaw in North and South Korean relations. Ministers from the two countries will hold crucial talks next week. 08/08/2002 02:17:59 | ABC Radio Australia News ***************************************************************** 22 Residents of Limerick area have pill option* By John Gentzel, Special to the Local News August 07, 2002 *HARRISBURG -- Individuals who live or work within 10 miles of Pennsylvania's five nuclear power plants -- including the one at Limerick -- will be able to pick up free anti-radiation pills starting Aug. 15, state health officials announced Monday.* People in the 10-mile emergency planning zone surrounding the Limerick Generating Station can pick up the potassium iodide tablets, commonly referred to by its chemical abbreviation KI, at three locations: Boyertown Junior High School West on South Madison Street, Boyertown; the Limerick Fire Station on West Ridge Pike, Limerick; and the Kimberton Fair Grounds on Route 113, Kimberton. The distribution centers will be open Aug. 15 to Aug. 21, from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. during weekdays and 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. during the weekend. Residents will be provided with an envelope containing two doses (one envelope per person) and instructions for storing the pills, when the pills should be taken and how they should be administered to children. Since accepting 2 million free KI pills from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to distribute to the 964,000 people in the five emergency zones, state officials have been dispelling rumors and untruths about the small, aspirin-sized tablets, said state Department of Health Secretary Robert S. Zimmerman Jr. By taking KI immediately after a radiation release, the potassium iodide fills the thyroid, blocking the harmful radioactive iodide from filling the gland, said Dr. John Bart, physician with the Health Department. KI, however, is not a panacea or a cure-all designed to protect individuals against all types of cancer, Zimmerman said. "In the unlikely event of a radioactive release, KI pills only provide temporary protection for the thyroid gland against cancer and hypothyroid conditions, not other types of health problems that may result from exposure to radiation," he added. Ultimately, the best method of protection during an emergency is evacuation, Zimmerman said. "KI only supplements evacuation." KI "gives (people) a head start when heading out of the (emergency planning) zone" during an evacuation, Zimmerman said. Along with residents of the 10-mile planning zone, companies, amusement parks, sports venues and other institutions boasting large temporary populations are also eligible to receive KI. Businesses within the emergency zones will be contacted by the state Health Department to arrange securing KI for their employees. Additionally, the 44 school districts located near Pennsylvania's nuclear facilities will be able to acquire KI. State officials encouraged the different school systems, like the Spring-Ford Area, Pottstown, Pottsgrove, Owen J. Roberts, Phoenixville Area, Boyertown, Upper Perkiomen, Methacton and Perkiomen Valley school districts locally, to devise policies for distributing the pills that might include obtaining advance permission from students' parents. This is all great news for people within the 10-mile zone, but what about residents living just outside the border? Are they safe from radiation exposure if there is an accident? Yes they are safe, according to Eric Conrad, deputy secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection. Using extensive modeling based on the individual reactor designs, we're "confident that beyond the 10-mile area we would be safe and not have to worry about additional evacuations," Conrad explained. If, however, residents outside the zone are not comfortable with that analysis, the state would listen to some requests, Zimmerman said, adding that while there isn't enough KI for every Pennsylvanian, pills can be purchased at any number of stores. Zimmerman added that no one is required to accept the KI, and that if there is a nuclear emergency, sufficient amounts of KI will be available at the reception centers outlined in local evacuation plans. Officials from the state will be available at the distribution centers to answer any questions, and additional information about KI can be found on the Web at www.health.state.pa.us or by calling 1-877-PA-HEALTH. The state has kept stockpiles of KI for years, and it's only because of the NRC's free offer that the distribution is occurring now. Citizens should know that our nuclear power plants "are safe, secure and are highly maintained facilities," said Pennsylvania Homeland Security Director Earl Freilino. Just because we're handing out KI doesn't mean we're going to be "less diligent in how we train (our security personnel) and protect these facilities." Providing KI "is an option ..wanted to give our citizens so they could make their own choices about emergency preparedness," Zimmerman said. /©Daily Local News 2002/ *Reader Opinions* Post your opinion and share your thoughts with other readers! *Name: Dave Willmott * *Date: Aug, 07 2002 * We Americans are a peculiar people. We enjoyed a history of rugged individualism up until about the middle of the last century. Then we entered the era of the nanny state. The government?s distribution of potassium iodide is an excellent example of our decline. I?ve seen news footage showing long lines of people waiting to get their two ?free? KI tablets. These tablets are readily available, over-the-counter products that can be purchased in drug stores and over the Internet. They are also very inexpensive. A quick web search reveals that a bottle of 200 can be purchased for $24.95. This includes priority shipping. This translates into 25 cents for two tablets. One can only wonder how much it is costing taxpayers for this pill distribution. With the government?s history of buying at the highest price and the bureaucratic system we have in place I presume it?s costing more than it should. Standing in long lines to save 25 cents? How dependent have we Americans become? ./ Copyright © 1995 - 2002 PowerOne Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 KI pill meet at Hager City addresses nuclear plant concerns* ***************************************************************** 27 AU: Premiers dump on waste site NEWS.com.au | (August 07, 2002) From The Australian STATE premiers yesterday began lining up to block the establishment of a medium-level waste dump within their borders, effectively sabotaging a federal government national site search before it has begun. The six states and two territories yesterday declared they would oppose being host to the dump, making the selection of a site an almost impossible task. The federal Government is on the verge of awarding a contract for a private consultant to identify up to 20 possible sites for the dump. It would take waste from Sydney's Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, and be in operation for up to 50 years. Western Australia and South Australia, the two states most likely to be targeted for a dump site, are the most vocal in their refusal to accept the repository. West Australian Premier Geoff Gallop said yesterday his state had a clean and green reputation and he wanted to keep it that way. "Our message to John Howard is quite simple. The nuclear waste that is created in other states and at Lucas Heights is not welcome in Western Australia," Dr Gallop said. The South Australian Government has already established what it calls its "ultimate nuclear deterrent". It has committed to a state referendum on the issue if federal authorities choose a location in South Australia, and says it will conduct the vote one week ahead of the next federal election. At least three states – Western Australia, South Australia and NSW – have legislated against hosting the dump, although the federal Government may have the power to override those laws. Federal Science Minister Peter McGauran yesterday warned the states not to create a political issue. "The fact is we have to locate it somewhere, it has to be a national facility and we are doing it on the basis of scientific advice." Mr McGauran said he would prefer to negotiate with the states over an appropriate site, despite the federal Government having the constitutional power to choose where it is built. "Surely it is obvious we have to find a place for this waste." Mr McGauran accused Dr Gallop of putting at risk life-saving nuclear medical research by refusing to accept that its waste had to be stored somewhere. ***************************************************************** 28 New government agency to handle waste proposed The Taipei Times Online: 2002-08-07 Wednesday, August 7th, 2002 RADIOACTIVE WASTE: The AEC has proposed a new agency to take over the management of the dangerous material from Taipower, but some are opposed to the idea By Chiu Yu-tzu STAFF REPORTER The establishment of a new government unit in charge of radioactive waste management might be a good idea to overcome the procrastination of building final repositories for existing radioactive waste in Taiwan, officials of the Atomic Energy Council (AEC) said yesterday. "Many European countries, whose sizes are similar to Taiwan's, have established professional agencies governed by public authorities to design and implement appropriate systems for managing radioactive waste generated," Ray Wu (§d·ç³ó), director of the AEC's department of planning, told the Taipei Times. Wu said the agencies -- such as France's National Radioactive Waste Agency (ANDRA), Switzerland's National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (NAGRA) and Sweden's Nuclear Power Inspectorate (SKI) -- are co-funded by the government and utilities and are highly efficient in handling high-level and low-level radioactive waste. AEC officials believe that the delay in relocating 98,000 barrels of low-level radioactive waste stored at a interim repository on Orchid Island could be attributed to Taiwan Power Co's (Taipower) lax efforts in managing radioactive waste, because the nation's only electricity supplier focuses more on power generation. If a government agency was established, AEC officials said, professional and sufficient staff would process radioactive waste management-related affairs more efficiently than Taipower. In the draft of the Radioactive Waste Final Disposal Act recently revised by the AEC in June, the idea of forming a government agency to handle radioactive waste professionally was added. In order to transfer the Cabinet's finalized Radioactive Waste Final Disposal Act to the Legislative Yuan in the next session beginning on Sept. 1, AEC officials said, the draft will be handed into the Cabinet for further finalization within weeks. The inclusion of the idea to establish a government agency to manage radioactive waste into the draft, however, drew opposition from some high-ranking officials, including Minister Without Portfolio Yeh Jiunn-rong (¸­«Tºa), who is also executive director of a Cabinet committee to help slash the number of Cabinet administrative entities from 35 to 23. Lin Ming-hsiung (ªL©ú¶¯), director of Taipower's Nuclear Backend Management Department, told the Taipei Times yesterday that a new agency at a higher level might have more flexible ways to employ sufficient staff than Taipower does. Currently, Lin said, about 60 staff members at the department handle affairs relating to both radioactive waste management and the decommissioning of nuclear plants. "However, we still are looking for an ideal site to build a final repository for radioactive waste," Lin said. "The project to build one in Wuchiu (¯QËú) township, Kinmen County, has not been abandoned." Lin said that the future of the project would depend on the results of the environmental impact assessment by the Environmental Protection Administration and the feasibility assessment by the Commission of National Corporations under the Ministry of Economic Affairs. But Lin said two groups formed by the Cabinet in May, the Orchid Island Nuclear Waste Relocation Promotion Committee and the Orchid Island Community Development Committee, had sped up processes to fulfill the government's promise made to people of Orchid Island: setting an acceptable timeframe to relocate radioactive waste. This story has been viewed 139 times. Copyright © 1999-2002 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 29 Nuclear Waste Could Be Moved Across Bay Wednesday, August 07, 2002 Channel 10 News has learned that tons of radioactive nuclear waste could be sailing across one of South Florida's greatest natural resources. Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant has been accumulating waste for some time now. Government officials say that they want to move the waste by barge to a nuclear facility in Nevada. Moving the waste would mean a trip across Biscayne National Park, a one-of-a-kind underwater wildlife sanctuary. Environmentalists say that they fear a nuclear accident, or even worse, that an act of terrorism could destroy the park's beauty. John Coequyt of the Environmental Working Group said, "We know for sure if a Stinger missile, for example is shot at them, it's likely to go through it, although we are not entirely sure how that will be with the final cask." The final decision on how the spent fuel will be moved is still a ways off. But the first shipments to Yucca Mountain are expected to begin in five years. Copyright © 2002 WPLG Click10.com. ***************************************************************** 30 AU: Woomera nuclear dump provides `opportunities' BY JIM GREEN On July 26, the federal government released a draft environmental impact statement about the planned national radioactive waste dump near Woomera in South Australia — and a fine farce the EIS is, too. The government claims that the approval and licensing process for the dump is both “comprehensive and rigorous”. However, the government itself will “review” and then rubber-stamp the EIS. It is nothing more than an expensive, bureaucratic whitewash. The EIS begins with: “No warranty or guarantee, whether expressed or implied, is made with respect to the information reported or to the findings, observations or conclusions expressed in this EIS.” In other words, don't believe a word of it. The report skates over the alleged “need” for a national dump, stating that: “A national repository is required to dispose of Australia's accumulated and expected future low level and short-lived intermediate level radioactive waste. Without a national repository, radioactive waste would continue to be stored in over 100 sites around Australia, largely in facilities that were not purpose built. This poses potential public health and safety risks, including possible theft or misuse by terrorists.” That rationale ignores numerous points. Even with a national dump, most of these 100 sites — comprising hospitals, research institutions, and industry and government stores — will remain as radioactive-waste storage sites (even if only for interim storage pending transfer to the dump). So inadequate storage arrangements ought to be improved whether or not the Woomera dump proceeds. In some cases, waste is being more or less adequately managed and the advantages of moving it to a centralised dump are outweighed by the risks associated with moving it. Waste is usually best managed at the site it is produced because that minimises transport risks. It also encourages less radioactive waste production. The EIS does not justify the proposal for an underground dump as opposed to above-ground storage. Advantages of above-ground storage can include easier monitoring and problem fixing. The EIS invokes the threat of nuclear terrorism — and specifically mentions the September 11 attacks in the United States — to justify a centralised dump. However, terrorists would have no interest in the relatively small radioactive inventories stored at more than 100 sites around Australia (nor is a dump at Woomera likely to pose a terrorist target). The EIS provides nothing more than an “indicative design” and “preliminary design layout” of the planned dump, along with an “indicative borehole design”. While identifying “operational hazards” associated with the dump, it dismisses them with the assertion, “Appropriate procedures would be developed to address these issues”. For some years the government has tried to deny that, once the dump is established, more waste than is currently proposed could be stored there by asserting that a “total radionuclide inventory” will be established. However, the EIS does not specify the limit, stating only that it will be established by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). The EIS attempts to justify the dump with vague references to the “national interest” and tenuous, inaccurate attempts to link the dump to the production of medical radioisotopes. The EIS says that the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) estimates that “in 2000-01 there were about 525,000 people in Australia who underwent a nuclear medicine procedure for the treatment of medical conditions such as cancer”. The real figure is 50-100 times lower. The EIS reveals that more than three quarters of the waste to be trucked to Woomera — including dismantled nuclear reactors — will come from ANSTO's reactor plant in the southern Sydney suburb of Lucas Heights. Woomera residents might take some comfort if, as the government claims, the region was found to be the safest site for a dump on scientific criteria. But it was not. The government's own siting study found equally suitable geology in the Olary region of western New South Wales. The Olary region also has the advantage of being closer than Woomera to the main waste source — ANSTO's reactor plant. The dump proposal could not possibly survive a risk-benefit analysis because the project will provide no benefits whatsoever to Woomera. Radioactive racism The EIS says: “The siting phase has involved consultation with Aboriginal groups on heritage, and the engagement of relevant individuals and advisers to report on the heritage values of possible sites. Further opportunities for the involvement of Aboriginal people may be available during the construction stage, including involvement in fencing or other works, or through site visits.” Aboriginal groups are overwhelmingly — perhaps unanimously — opposed to the dump. The federal government has attempted a number of manoeuvres to override Aboriginal opposition to the dump. One ploy in the late 1990s was to negotiate with some Aboriginal groups but not others, but widespread opposition nullified that manoeuvre. Another ploy — this one more successful — was to threaten to compulsorily acquire the land short-listed for the dump. Aboriginal groups gave permission for test drilling on short-listed sites in the late 1990s, but only because they were between “a rock and a hard place” according to Stewart Motha from the Aboriginal Legal Rights Movement. “If Aboriginal groups do get involved in clearances [for test drilling] they face the possibility that the government will point to that involvement as an indication of consent for the project. If they refuse to participate, who will protect Aboriginal heritage, dreaming and sacred sites?” Missiles The preferred site for the dump is in the Woomera Prohibited Area owned by the federal defence department, which is just three kilometres from the Range E target. The EIS states that the risk of missiles inadvertently striking the dump is “medium” using a US Department of Defense methodology. The EIS says that “larger or higher velocity weapons may strike with sufficient kinetic energy to penetrate the five metre soil cover of the waste”. These risks were highlighted by a failed rocket test on July 14 at Woomera. In October 2001, an experimental supersonic scramjet launched at Woomera veered off course and crashed. The EIS says that the defence department “advises that there are on average 60 weapons firings per year that could potentially strike the repository”. According to state Labor MP Lyn Breuer, whose electorate covers Woomera, defence personnel have privately expressed concern about the potential impact of storing radioactive waste near the rocket range. The staging of an automatic landing flight experiment at Woomera by the Japanese government in 1996 was delayed due to concerns about nuclear waste stored near Woomera. One of the many problems with the latest “clean-up” of the Maralinga nuclear weapons testing site in north-western South Australia was the failure to establish “waste acceptance criteria” before vitrifying contaminated debris. The EIS justifying the Woomera dump defines waste acceptance criteria as “the set of requirements that must be met before radioactive waste can be accepted for disposal”, but it fails to specify the criteria, merely asserting that they “would be developed for the facility before operations begin”. Nuclear engineer Alan Parkinson, who was involved in the Maralinga “clean-up” until his criticisms of the project saw him removed from it in December 1997, has drawn a parallel to the planned dump. “The disposal of radioactive waste in Australia is ill-considered and irresponsible”, Parkinson wrote in the August edition of Australasian Science. “Whether it is short-lived waste from Commonwealth facilities, long-lived plutonium waste from an atomic-bomb test site on Aboriginal land, or reactor waste from Lucas Heights. The government applies double standards to suit its own agenda; there is no consistency, and little evidence of logic.” Many of the individuals and organisations involved in the Maralinga “clean-up” are also involved in the planned Woomera dump. These include federal government bureaucrats, construction company GHD, and the puppet regulator ARPANSA: lBureaucrats: Parkinson wrote in the February 2002 Medicine and Global Survival: “The public servants responsible for the last years of the [Maralinga] project had no background in radiation or project management, as is illustrated by several statements they made on the public record, asking, for example, what was meant by alpha radiation, or how to convert a milliSievert (a unit of radiation dose) to a picoCurie (a unit of radioactivity), or claiming that soda ash is neutralized by limestone.” lGHD: Construction company GHD played a major role in the botched Maralinga “clean-up” and has also won a contract with the federal government as private project manager and community consultation manager for the planned radioactive waste dump. GHD's role as “community consultation manager” is particularly ironic given that it refused media requests to respond to criticisms of the Maralinga “clean-up” and has threatened a critic of the “clean-up” with a defamation suit for putting Alan Parkinson's critique of the company's work on a website. lARPANSA: ARPANSA is described as the “Commonwealth's independent regulator” in the EIS, but it is not independent and has not shown itself much inclined to regulate. ARPANSA is too close to government — it is effectively a government agency. It is also too close to ANSTO, with six former ANSTO staff working for ARPANSA and ANSTO having a direct role in the selection of the chief executive of ARPANSA. Public comments on the draft EIS will be accepted until September 20. The EIS is on the internet at <http://www.dest.gov.au/radwaste/DraftEIS> [http://www.dest.gov.au/radwaste/DraftEIS] . Hard copies can be purchased for $50 from Australian government bookshops (phone 132 447). A summary can be purchased for $2.50. From Green Left Weekly, August 7, 2002. Visit the Green Left Weekly home page. [http://www.greenleft.org.au/] ***************************************************************** 31 yucca Editorial: Rule changes keep our heads spinning Las Vegas SUN Today: August 07, 2002 at 8:55:18 PDT The federal government will do anything -- including changing the rules of the game -- to bury nuclear waste in Nevada. For example, the Energy Department altered the rules on Yucca Mountain so that they rely heavily on metal containers isolating the nuclear waste from the outside world instead of relying primarily on the mountain's rock as was originally planned. That dramatic departure led to a state of Nevada lawsuit last year that is trying to block the change. Meanwhile, the ink had barely dried from President Bush's signature of legislation giving the green light to the Yucca Mountain project when two key senators hinted that another rule may change as well. Two weeks ago The Washington Post printed a letter from Sens. Frank Murkowski of Alaska and Larry Craig of Idaho in which the Republican duo suggested that Congress could amend existing law so that Yucca Mountain could hold 130,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste, not the 77,000 tons allowed under current law. Nearly doubling the dump's capacity -- and the amount that would need to be shipped cross-country to Nevada -- would be a sweeping change and something that supporters of Yucca Mountain obviously didn't want to play up during the Senate's debate over the legislation. Acknowledging that specter could have created more defections to Nevada's camp by senators who already were worried about the transportation dangers posed by thousands of shipments from 77,000 tons alone. The unrelenting attempts by Congress and the Energy Department to make a square peg fit into a round hole, no matter how dangerous it is, show that they have no shame in making Nevada the nation's nuclear waste dumping ground. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 32 Make Goshutes an Offer The Salt Lake Tribune -- Utah's Statewide Newspaper Wednesday, August 07, 2002 Private Fuel Storage and the Skull Valley Goshutes didn't just win their case against Utah's scheme to regulate the proposed parking lot for spent nuclear fuel. They hammered the state in federal district court. The lesson is that Utah should abandon this line of defense and concentrate its fire elsewhere. One strategy the state has not explored is offering the Goshutes an economic alternative to the nuclear fuel dump. If gambling isn't the answer -- try getting that one through the Utah Legislature -- then maybe some other enterprise is. There already are members of the tribe who oppose the nuclear waste project. But the state's alternative has to be serious, something that will put real money into Goshute pockets. The PFS project would store 44,000 million tons of spent nuclear fuel in huge casks parked on a concrete pad on the Goshute reservation, 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. It is supposed to be temporary, until the federal government opens a permanent repository, most likely at Yucca Mountain, Nev. In this case, however, temporary means up to 40 years. Utah is fighting this plan with every tactic its leaders can dream up, and rightly so. This state should not become a dumping ground for highly radioactive spent fuel from every electric utility's reactor in the nation. In the case Utah lost, PFS (a consortium of public utilities that operate reactors) and the Goshutes attacked a series of laws the Utah Legislature passed two years ago that set up a state scheme to regulate the storage and transportation of spent nuclear fuel. That plan would have created huge financial and regulatory barriers to the project. Unfortunately for the state, Congress long ago claimed exclusive authority to oversee nuclear safety in the United States through the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and under the Constitution, federal law is supreme to state law. As a result, the Utah regulatory scheme is forbidden by the federal one. Judge Tena Campbell's ruling shows that the law is clear. Gov. Mike Leavitt says the state will appeal Campbell's decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on the ground that Congress never intended the NRC to decide on a private waste storage site. Perhaps. But Judge Campbell dismissed that contention as irrelevant. The state regulatory scheme was a long shot. Given the stakes, it was worth playing. However, the state's defeat was overwhelming. As Judge Campbell noted, the real test likely will come in the 10th Circuit Court in a different case, where the state can challenge the NRC's license of the Skull Valley facility if it grants one. But the NRC has not made that decision yet. It is expected in December. Utah ought to save its money for an attack on that decision rather than wasting it on a further defense of the state regulatory scheme. In the meantime, it should develop an economic offer so good that the Goshutes will abandon the PFS plan. © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on Utah OnLine is ***************************************************************** 33 Appeals court affirms ruling allowing plutonium shipments to South Carolina The Oak Ridger Online -- State News -- Wednesday, August 7, 2002 By AMY GEIER EDGAR Associated Press Writer COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) -- South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges says he plans to appeal a court ruling rejecting his request to stop the federal government from shipping surplus plutonium into the state. "The weapons-grade plutonium is a threat to the health and safety of our state," Hodges said after Tuesday's decision by the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. "Our final hope lies with the Supreme Court." Hodges has fought with the Department of Energy over the shipments for more than a year. He once vowed to use state troopers to turn back the shipments at the border unless he was given legally enforceable assurances that his state would not permanently house the waste. The Energy Department is moving six tons of plutonium from Rocky Flats, a former weapons plant near Denver, to the Savannah River Site near the Georgia line. The department plans to eventually convert the material into commercial nuclear fuel. The appeals court rejected Hodges' contentions that federal officials needed more environmental studies and failed to fully consider the risks of long-term storage. The appeals court upheld a lower court decision allowing the shipments. Hodges was rebuked by a federal judge when he tried to ban shipments from the state after the earlier ruling. On Friday, Energy Department officials told Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., that the department had begun shipping the plutonium from Colorado to the site near Aiken, said Allard's spokesman Sean Conway. DOE spokesman Joe Davis would not confirm the status of the shipments. [http://www.oakridger.com] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 34 Overall Asks NRC Hearing On NFS?s Planned Expansion* *125 West Summer Street - Greeneville, TN - (423) 798-0545* *August 8, 2002* By: /By BILL JONES/Staff Writer/ Source:/ The Greeneville Sun / 08-06-2002 Actress Park Overall, a Greeneville native who owns a farm in eastern Greene County near the Nolichucky River, is asking the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to hold a hearing on Nuclear Fuel Services Inc.?s request to amend its ?materials license? to enable the Erwin-based firm to begin a new nuclear operation. NFS had announced earlier this year that it wishes to begin the ?down-blending? of highly enriched uranium for subsequent processing into fuel for Tennessee Valley Authority nuclear-power reactors. A notice published in the July 9 edition of The Federal Register indicated that the NRC did not plan to hold a hearing on a request from NFS to amend its ?materials license? to enable the firm to erect new buildings and increase the amount of uranium that may be stored at the company?s plant in Erwin. The Federal Register notice indicated, however, that interested parties could ask that a hearing (or hearings) be held by following a rigorous process. The deadline for requesting a hearing was 30 days from the date of the July 9 publication of the Federal Register notice. An undated document distributed during a Monday evening meeting of Citizens for the Preservation of the Valley Beautiful ? a group that opposes location of an unrelated uranium enrichment plant in the town of Unicoi ? indicated that Overall had engaged a law firm to file, on her behalf, a request that the NRC hold a hearing. ?I have decided to intervene in this license amendment proceeding as a private individual in order to advocate for adequate environmental protection for the Nolichucky River and the community,? stated the document bearing Overall?s signature. ?My concerns are expressed in more detail in the hearing request that I am submitting today,? she said. The document, titled ?Declaration of Park Overall,? states that Overall owns a 15-acre farm ?on the banks of the Nolichucky River,? some 40 to 50 miles downstream from the NFS plant in Erwin. ?I am concerned that if I am ever able to swim or fish in the Nolichucky River again, my health will be affected by chemical and radioactive effluents from the Erwin plant,? Overall states in her declaration. ?I am also concerned about the effects of increased pollution on the quality of my drinking water .... Finally, I am concerned about the effects of an increase in the NFS plant?s effluent to the Nolichucky River on my property values.? © 2002 East Tennessee Network - R.A.I.D. (Regionalized Access Internet ***************************************************************** 35 Erwin Group Hears The Case For Uranium Enrichment Plant * *125 West Summer Street - Greeneville, TN - (423) 798-0545* *August 8, 2002* By: /By BILL JONES/Staff Writer / Source:/ The Greeneville Sun / 08-06-2002 UNICOI ? Jim Long, a retired nuclear industry executive and current member of the Unicoi County Economic Development Board, on Monday evening presented the positive side of the debate over possible location of a uranium enrichment plant in Unicoi. Long spoke for two hours to about 75 members of Citizens for the Preservation of the Valley Beautiful ? a group opposed to location of a uranium-enrichment plant in Unicoi. He said the uranium enrichment plant, which is being proposed for location somewhere in the U.S. by an international nuclear industry consortium called Louisiana Energy Services (LES), would be safe and would involve a $1.1 billion investment in the community. Economic Windfall? Long said that, should a 100-acre site off Tinker Road in Unicoi, which has been proposed as a possible location for the uranium enrichment plant, be selected by the LES consortium, the result would be an economic windfall for financially strapped Unicoi County. Taxes collected from the plant, he said, would ?underwrite? Unicoi County?s ?overhead? for years to come, boosting the amount of local funding for schools and other county operations. In response to a question from the audience, Long said the positive economic impact would be provided even if the plant failed to produce the 250 jobs promised by promoters of the proposed facility. ?The ($1 billion) investment would swamp the total prior industrial investment in Unicoi County, and more than triple the current tax base,? he said. Long also stressed that the plant would occupy only 100 acres of land, leaving plenty of space for other industries and tourist-related businesses favored by the anti-nuclear group. Long had authored a lengthy opinion piece in the Sunday edition of the Johnson City Press supporting efforts to locate the LES plant in Unicoi and attacking ?misinformation? allegedly spread by the press about the project. He repeated many of his comments from that piece during Monday evening?s meeting. ?Such is the suspicion of government and things nuclear, the press, prematurely in the Economic Development Board?s eyes, lit a cauldron of public misinformation that is now likely to totally consume the opportunity, irrespective of the favorable economic effects for Unicoi County and its citizens,? Long had written, in part. While speaking to the anti-nuclear group, Long outlined the production process used at similar plants operated in England, Germany and the Netherlands by Urenco, the European firm whose technology would be used in the proposed new American uranium enrichment plant. Plant?s Safety Stressed The plant, he maintained, will be safe and will have no smokestacks, lagoons or ponds. It will emit only air that has passed through chemical ?scrubbers,? he said. Long also said that both the building, and the lines carrying uranium products within the building, would operate at negative pressures. As a result, he said, in the event of a leak, air from outside would be drawn in, rather than leaving the lines of the building. Shutting down the plant in the event of an emergency, he said, could be as simple as ?unplugging the heaters? that heat solid uranium hexaflouride to about 200 degrees to convert it to a gaseous state for processing in banks of high-speed centrifuges. Long said the plant, if located in Unicoi, would be no more esthetically displeasing than a ?strip mall.? Long is a former vice president and general manager of Nuclear Fuel Services Inc., in Erwin. He was asked at one point if NFS had an interest in the proposed new uranium enrichment plant. Long said that he now has no direct connection to NFS, ?besides a retirement check,? but did not think there was any connection between NFS and the LES consortium. He noted that LES officials earlier had contacted NFS about the possibility of locating the new uranium enrichment plant at the already-licensed NFS site in Erwin, but had been told the site is too small. The Unicoi County Economic Development Board proposed the 100-acre Tinker Road site in Unicoi as an alternative, he indicated. During the Monday evening meeting at the Farmhouse Gallery and Gardens, Long said earlier claims by ?Citizens for Preservation of the Valley Beautiful? that the Tinker Road site lies in a 100-year flood plain were incorrect. Only 2 percent of the property at the northern end of the tract is in the flood plain, he said, adding that the remainder of the property is not. ?It?s (the flood plain) on the other side of the highway (U.S. 19/23),? he said. Long engaged in several pointed exchanges with audience members during the meeting, but restraint was observed on both sides, and several audience members thanked him for attending and addressing the group?s concerns. David Hawk, who will become the new 5th District state representative, attended the meeting, but did not speak. Comments about our site © 2002 East Tennessee Network - R.A.I.D. (Regionalized Access Internet ***************************************************************** 36 Ex-nuclear official answers plant concerns Story published in the Johnson City Press: 8/6/2002. Jim Long answers questions at the citizens meeting on Monday (Staff Photo by Angela Jones) By Chris Garland Erwin Bureau ERWIN ? Unicoi County Economic Development Board member Jim Long stood before the Citizens for the Preservation of the Valley Beautiful Monday evening to explain his knowledge of nuclear enrichment and the Louisiana Energy Services consortium ? particularly Urenco. LES has expressed a desire to develop a $1.1 billion plant in the United States to enrich uranium in one of six processes to make nuclear fuel for power plants. A spokesman for Urenco in the United Kingdom said Monday a short list of possible sites in the U.S. is not expected until the middle of August. Long, who is an Erwin native, worked in the nuclear industry for about 25 years. He told the group he was retired from Nuclear Fuel Services, where he held the titles of vice president and general manager. In last week?s meeting of the citizens group, Long came to listen and hear about the concerns and possible tourism loss. Afterward, Long asked Johnny Lynch, who hosts the meetings at Farmhouse Gallery and Gardens, if he could address the group. Long began Monday by saying he agrees there is a need for more tourism in the county. ?More can be done, such as in the area of the Red Fork Falls,? he said. According to Long, the EDB has for many years helped develop local tourism. As to uranium and what processes, handling and procedures are used in its manufacturing, Long said steps to complete the process include mining, milling, conversion, enrichment and fabrication before it can be used in a reactor as fuel. Long told the group in reference to the proposed Unicoi plant, ?We would only have a role in vaporizing it to gas, separating it out, and shipping it. There are no lagoons, no ponds, no smokestacks and, if there is a rupture in a line, gas does not get out ? air would be sucked in.? When asked if NFS has an interest in the plant, Long responded by saying NFS was contacted by the consortium when they were first looking at areas that already had nuclear permits. Long said NFS told them it was not interested, it did not have the acreage needed. Long was asked about the claims of jobs and the economic indicators or multipliers used to predict what the economy would do as opposed to what a professor at East Tennessee State University claims. Long said the EDB used numbers from the Northeast Tennessee Economic Development Associates and others. A plant such as this would start up slowly or in increments and would get to full power, then decline in increments, Long said. However, the economic boost from the plant itself sitting idle would be major tax money for this area, he said. As to the possible site being located in an area where flooding occurs, Long said out of the 100 plus acres only 2 percent was in the 100-year flood plain. ?No one can build if it is in a flood plain,? he said. One woman told Long she knew of an area in the proposed acreage that had seen water waist deep. Long asked her where it was located and if it was in the 2-percent area of the acreage. Long told the woman the flood plain was on the other side of the roadway. Other questions asked by the group included concerns about mistrust in the company and whether a market exists for the fuel or if it is a dying industry. /(Contact Chris Garland at cgarland@johnsoncitypress.com )./ © 2001-02 Johnson City Press and Associated Press All Rights Reserved This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten ***************************************************************** 37 Mr. Bush Boosts Yucca Site EDITORIALS August 7, 2002 President Bush's signature late last month on a bill approving Yucca Mountain in Nevada as the nation's central nuclear waste repository was one more step in the long, politically fraught battle to responsibly dispose of the high-level radioactive detritus now temporarily stored at 131 power plants and defense sites across the nation. Yet even after more than 20 years of research and planning and the expenditure of $4 billion, Mr. Bush's signature is hardly the last act. Government officials don't expect the facility, some 90 miles from Las Vegas, to be ready to accept shipments of nuclear waste until 2010. And that's only if the promised court challenges by the state of Nevada and environmentalists don't postpone the opening. By 2010, the federal government must prepare a detailed transportation plan that will minimize the risk of accident or terrorist attack on the shipments by truck and rail. But what alternative is there? Opponents of the Yucca Mountain site don't have a plan to safely store nuclear garbage. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, who voted on the losing side when the Senate approved Yucca Mountain, said he would put his trust in future technological advances. That's like putting most of your stake on a long shot. Some anti-nuclear environmentalists have a not-so-hidden agenda: stopping the nuclear-powered generation of electricity by making storage of spent fuel impractical. That's not responsible, either. Mr. Bush and Congress did the right thing in approving Yucca Mountain as a central storage site. UTILITIES ***************************************************************** 51 DOE Statement On 4th Circuit Court of Appeals' Decision Affirming Federal District Court's Ruling on South Carolina Plutonium Case energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: August 6, 2002 Washington, D.C. - The following statement was issued by the Department of Energy today: "We are pleased that the court (4th Circuit Court of Appeals) affirmed the lower court's ruling today which said that DOE's decision-making and actions on this matter complied with the law. This Administration is committed to ensuring America's national security and the security of the people of South Carolina are maintained by proceeding with a program to dispose of weapons grade plutonium in a safe and responsible manner. As for further legal action, it would be inappropriate for us to speculate on what action the Supreme Court may or may not take on this issue," said Joe Davis, DOE spokesperson. Media Contact: Joe Davis, 202-586-4940 Release No. PRN-02-073 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************