***************************************************************** 06/10/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.146 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 A Question of Answers: All nuclear powers are irresponsible NUCLEAR REACTORS 2 Legislator rings nuclear alarm bell 3 *Temelin enters final testing stage * 4 Temelin enters final testing stage NUCLEAR SAFETY 5 US moves Gulf War hearing to London ! 6 Ottawa company called a `terror target' 7 US moves Gulf war hearing to London 8 Radioactive fallout would be appalling, experts say 9 US: N-plant's neighbors line up for pills to avert cancer after 10 JAPANESE SECURITY FOR NUCLEAR TRANSPORTS FATALLY INCONSISTENT 11 Horseback hunt for nuclear generators 12 Ottawa company called a `terror target' 13 Uranium cache a terror target? 14 US: NRC Advisory Committees on Medical Uses of Isotopes to Meet June NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 15 US: Nelson has a lot at stake in radioactive-waste trial 16 US: DOE trying to comply with law on nuke waste 17 US: Archaic Senate protocol only hope to stop Dump Clock 18 US: Waste disposal facility 19 Greenpeace protests over nuclear cargo heading for Britain 20 US: Strickland opposes Yucca Mountain site NUCLEAR WEAPONS 21 BTL Q&A: India and Pakistan on Brink of Nuclear Conflict 22 US: U.S. Arrests Man Accused of Planning Radioactive Bomb Attack 23 Japan plays down comments by top official suggesting shift in nuclea 24 Defusing South Asia's nuclear threat 25 Fences for Nuclear Safety Seem Insurmountable 26 Japan plays down comments by top official suggesting shift in 27 Looking Back on One Hell of a Summit US DEPT. OF ENERGY 28 Hanford board sets terms for accelerated cleanup plan 29 Thyroid disease research nears end 30 DOE: Hastings' good advice 31 Flats deadline absurd 32 Two to address state, future of Y-12 complex 33 HAB mulls cleanup proposal ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 A Question of Answers: All nuclear powers are irresponsible <#> * Dubai:Monday, June 10, 2002* New Delhi |By Parsa Venkateshwar Rao Jr | 10-06-2002 * Print friendly format* | *Email to Friend Achin Vanaik. © Gulf News The anti-nuclear lobby is small, strong and articulate in India. Though outnumbered by the pro-nuclear, hawkish lobby in the government and in the think-tank circuit, members of the anti-nuclear lobby have held their ground. Scholar and writer Achin Vanaik in particular has emerged through the 1990s as one of the major voices of this group. Vanaik has formidable intellectual credentials, strengthened since he wrote his first book, The Painful Transition: Bourgeois Democracy in India in 1990 followed by India in a Changing World: Problems, Limits and Success of its Foreign Policy in 1995 and Global Stakes in CTBT and Nuclear Test Ban in 1996. A Marxist in his orientation, he was an assistant editor with The Times of India in Mumbai in the 1980s before he turned author, and is now a Visiting Professor at the Academy of Third World Studies in Jamia Millia University. He has been awarded along with Praful Bidwai, the Sean McBride Peace Prize in 2000. In an exclusive interview with Gulf News, Vanaik pinpoints the follies of India's nuclear policy, and squarely blames the rightwing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for turning South Asia into a dangerous region. Excerpts from the interview: *Parsa:* /Are you surprised that talk about nuclear strikes and counter-strikes had come too early in the crisis? / *Vanaik:* It was not a surprise. It was simply a confirmation of the objections we had in 1998 when India conducted the nuclear tests. We were making the point that there was a continuous hot cold war between India and Pakistan, and you are adding a new dimension of tension. Our objections were also based on our scepticism of deterrence. The Kargil conflict came a year after the nuclear tests. During that period, nuclear threats were exchanged. Another reason for not being surprised is connected to the rise of Hindutva. In both countries, there has been the rise of religious extremism. From Pakistan's point of view, the fundamentalist rebels have been losing ground in Jammu and Kashmir. And since September 11, they want to destabilise the Musharraf regime because it is identified with the United States, and the fundamentalists want to hit back at the US presence in Pakistan. For them, it is the best of retaining their losing political ground. On all three counts, it suits them to unleash a war. On the Indian side, you cannot separate the issue of communalism from that of India-Pakistan relations and that of the bomb. The BJP realises that if it has to come back to power, it has to play the Pakistan card. It holds Muslims in India as a fifth column. In the mind of the BJP leaders anti-Islam and anti-Pakistan are connected. /Is there a military compulsion for India going nuclear?/ We have been saying since the mid-80s that among the three nuclear threshold countries ? India, Pakistan and Israel ? it is only India where the military compulsion was the least. In the case of Israel and Pakistan the nuclear weapon compulsion was Arab-specific and India-specific respectively. That is why, both countries have spelt out a coherent doctrine. Pakistan had always argued that it would give up the nuclear option if India were to do so. In the Indian case it is different. The Indian desire to have a nuclear bomb has to do with the desire for status, and it is not based on strategic advantage. India wants to be seen as a rising power, and believes that the bomb is necessary to enhance its status. There are two reasons why countries want to go nuclear. First, it is threat perception. Second, it is elite self-perception. If we observe the nuclear club we will see that the US decision to go nuclear was not based on a threat perception. Towards the end of the Second World War, it was clear that the Germans were nowhere near making the bomb. And that Japanese were losing the war. There was no need to use the bomb. The Americans used it to declare their status as a world power. In the case of the Soviet Union, it was based on the threat perception vis-a-vis the US. Even the Chinese decision to go nuclear was based on the threat perception. It was not only the US that the Chinese were wary of, it was also the Russians. At the beginning of the 1960s, Sino-Soviet relations were bad. /Does the nuclear belligerence of India and Pakistan confirm Western criticism that Third World countries possessing nuclear weapons cannot be expected to behave responsibly?/ All nuclear powers, whether they belong to the West or to the Third World, are irresponsible. How else can you explain the stockpiling of nuclear weapons by the US and the Soviet Union during the Cold War? It was sheer madness because they did not make hundreds of nuclear warheads for deterrence. They had the capacity to destroy not only each other but the whole world many times over. It was sheer irresponsibility. /Do you think that people at large are aware of the implications of a nuclear holocaust?/ Although, there were three wars between the two countries, they never threatened the population centres. Many of them do not have awareness about nuclear bombs. They are burdened by the problems of everyday life. And there is also a sense of resignation. There is a sense of helplessness. 'How can we influence those making the decisions', they feel. ***************************************************************** 2 Legislator rings nuclear alarm bell The Taipei Times Online: 2002-06-10 CONSTRUCTION DEFECT: The KMT's Bill Sun says a crack in a piece of equipment for the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant raises questions about how safe the facility will be By Chiu Yu-Tzu STAFF REPORTER Construction defects recently dis-covered at the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant have angered legislators and residents in Kungliao township, Taipei County, where the plant resides. A hairline crack in a reactor pedestal at the plant's construction site in the township was exposed yesterday after KMT Legislator Bill Sun (®]°êµØ) paid a visit to the site on Saturday. Sun confirmed that one of the construction defects was a hairline crack on a supporting plate that is part of the lowest layer of the pedestal. "The crack is no big deal. We can scrape the crack ... and redo the welding." Lee Ziin-tyan, Taipower vice president "If the pedestal's ability to resist earthquakes is weakened by defects, nuclear safety at the plant would become a big concern," Sun said. Sun said that the crack was about 50cm long and 0.3cm deep and could weaken the pedestal's ability to support the reactor's pressure vessel. According to the legislator, the lowest layer of the pedestal, whose diameter is 14m, is 12.7m high and weighs 464 tonnes. When the pedestal's five layers are assembled, the unit, with a weight of 938 tonnes, should be able to sustain 2,885 tonnes of pressure. Taipower officials, however, insisted that the public needn't worry about safety at the plant. "The crack is no big deal. We can scrape the crack, which is only 0.2cm to 0.3cm deep, and redo the welding," Taipower Vice President Lee Ziin-tyan (§õÀA¥Ð) said at a press conference yesterday. Lee said the hairline crack was discovered by Taipower on May 6, when a mandatory on-site investigation was conducted in the wake an engineer's claim that inferior materials were being used to build the pedestal. The engineer's report, filed on April 24, alleged the secret use of inferior materials in the construction of the second to the fifth layers of the pedestal. The discovery prompted the Atomic Energy Council (AEC) to order Taipower to have its sub-contractors rebuild the four layers. Taipower submitted a non-conformance report last month to the AEC, the country's nuclear regulator, reporting the discovery of the hairline crack. The AEC said yesterday that Taipower is discussing what factors caused the crack with the plant's designer, General Electric (GE). "When we receive a verification report from Taipower, a council task force composed of experts will check and validate the report," AEC Vice Chairman Chiou Syh-tsong (ªô½çÁo) said. Taipower's attitude toward the construction defects, however, irritated Sun, a US-trained energy expert who served US-based GE as a technical leader between 1972 and 1977. Sun was also a program manager of the Electric Power Research Institute between 1977 and 1993. "The hairline crack can be fixed, but Taipower's inability to implement the construction design deserves severe criticism," said Sun, who has also served as a consultant to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency prior to 1993. Activists with the Kungliao-based Yenliao Anti-Nuclear Self-Help Association told the Taipei Times yesterday that all construction pertaining to the plant should be stopped. "Wouldn't it be sad for Tai-wanese people if we were to delay demanding the controversial plant's closure until it caused a serious nuclear accident?" association spokesman Wu Wen-tung (§d¤å³q) said. Wu called for the quick establishment of an independent task force to review Taipower's implementation of the project. This story has been viewed 546 times. URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2002/06/10/story/0000139705] Copyright © 1999-2002 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 *Temelin enters final testing stage * /Mon Jun 10, 4:26 AM ET/ PRAGUE, Czech Republic - The disputed Temelin nuclear plant received authorization from the state on Monday to start the last stage of tests before commercial operation planned for next year. "We got the permission from the State Institute for Nuclear Safety to start final testing. We will do so later today," spokesman Milan Nebesar said. The plant is now running at full speed, supplying 1,000 megawatts into the grid and should be ready for commercial use in about 18 months, Nebesar said. Located just 60 kilometers (35 miles) north of the Austrian border, the Temelin plant has been a source of friction between the Czech Republic and Austria. While Prague insists the plant is safe, Austrian government officials and anti-nuclear activists demand that it be shut down. Tests on the first unit of the 2,000-megawatt plant ? based on Russian design and upgraded with U.S. technology ? started in November 2000. But testing has been plagued by frequent non-nuclear malfunctions. Initial tests on the plant's second 1,000-megawatt unit scheduled for commercial use in 2004 were started May 31. (oh/gj) Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 4 Temelin enters final testing stage AP World - General News Mon Jun 10, 4:26 AM ET PRAGUE, Czech Republic - The disputed Temelin nuclear plant received authorization from the state on Monday to start the last stage of tests before commercial operation planned for next year. "We got the permission from the State Institute for Nuclear Safety to start final testing. We will do so later today," spokesman Milan Nebesar said. The plant is now running at full speed, supplying 1,000 megawatts into the grid and should be ready for commercial use in about 18 months, Nebesar said. Located just 60 kilometers (35 miles) north of the Austrian border, the Temelin plant has been a source of friction between the Czech Republic and Austria. While Prague insists the plant is safe, Austrian government officials and anti-nuclear activists demand that it be shut down. Tests on the first unit of the 2,000-megawatt plant — based on Russian design and upgraded with U.S. technology — started in November 2000. But testing has been plagued by frequent non-nuclear malfunctions. Initial tests on the plant's second 1,000-megawatt unit scheduled for commercial use in 2004 were started May 31. (oh/gj) Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 US moves Gulf War hearing to London ! Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:27:43 -0500 (CDT) http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4430273,00.html US moves Gulf war hearing to London Health inquiry to be held as Bush prepares to renew Iraq conflict David Hencke, Westminster correspondent Monday June 10, 2002 The Guardian The US Congress is to hold an unprecedented hearing in Westminster next week to take evidence from British sufferers of Gulf war syndrome, as President Bush prepares for the possibility of renewing the war against Iraq. The congressional subcommittee on national security, veterans' affairs and international relations is to hold an all-day hearing in parliament's new building, Portcullis House, as part of a renewed investigation into undiagnosed illnesses which have affected 5,000 of 52,000 British troops sent to the Gulf in 1990. It is said to be the first time a congressional committee has held a hearing in parliament. The committee, chaired by the Republican, Christopher Shays, has spoken out about the failure of the US defence department to listen to war veterans, provide them with proper protection from toxic substances, keep proper medical records, or provide adequate compensation. A report by the committee refused to accept claims by the military that the outbreak of diseases was due to stress and psychological problems. The hearing has been welcomed by the Royal British Legion, which helped to organise the trip, as a new way to put pressure on the Ministry of Defence, particularly as British troops might again be asked to join the Americans in the Gulf. Fourteen witnesses will give evidence in Westminster, including Samantha Thompson, widow of the Gulf veteran Nigel Thompson, who died of motor neurone disease in January, and John Nichol, the navigator shot down during the Gulf war. Both have demanded - along with the Royal British Legion and the National Gulf Veterans and Families Association - a public inquiry into Gulf war syndrome. The MoD has commissioned research which will be reported on next year. The US, unlike Britain, has already recognised motor neurone disease among former troops as a war-related illness. The committee has also asked Lord McColl of Dulwich, Gulf war consultant to John Major, prime minister at the time of the conflict, and Patrick Allen, the lawyer leading the campaign for for compensation payments for veterans, to give evidence. There will be two sessions to discuss medical findings about the use of multiple vaccines, exposure to depleted uranium and organophosphates in pesticides, and epidemiological studies on Gulf war illnesses. The congressional hearing is to be followed by an address to 150 peers and MPs by the former presidential candidate Ross Perot, who has financed US Gulf veterans' medical treatment and compensation and is critical of current US research into Gulf war syndrome. He is expected to criticise the choice of scientists by the US defence department to investigate the problem. The hearing has been organised by Lord Morris of Manchester and Bruce George, Labour chairman of the Commons defence committee, who have both attended congressional hearings in Washington. Lord Morris said: "British and US troops fought side by side to liberate Kuwait and now British parliamentarians and American congressmen are working together to help those who have become ill after fighting... This committee is a terrier for the truth and its combative nature might be a surprise to Westminster." Guardian Unlimited ) Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ----- FAIR USE NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material. ***************************************************************** 6 Ottawa company called a `terror target' Thestar.com Mon Jun 10, 2002 - Updated at 09:55 PM Uranium stockpiles enough for nuclear bomb: U.S. watchdog Ian McLeod CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA ? An Ottawa firm is creating a tempting target for nuclear terrorists by unnecessarily stockpiling enough highly enriched uranium to build at least one nuclear bomb, says a respected U.S nuclear watchdog group. The Ottawa Citizen reported yesterday that MDS Nordion, the leading world supplier of radioisotopes for medical treatment and diagnosis, has 45.2 kilograms of highly enriched uranium ? a two-year supply ? waiting for the company's long-delayed MAPLE nuclear reactors to go into service at Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.'s Chalk River laboratories, northwest of Ottawa. A senior Nordion executive says about 22 kilograms of highly enriched uranium will likely be imported from the U.S. this year and added to the Chalk River stockpile, ending a temporary Nordion moratorium on uranium shipments because of the MAPLE startup delays. The company has an option to bring in another 22.6 kilograms next year under its U.S. export licence. If so, Nordion and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) will be sitting on a total of 90.4 kilograms of highly enriched uranium earmarked for the idle MAPLE isotope reactors by the time the export licence expires next year. Commercial operation of the primary MAPLE 1 reactor, delayed by technical problems for almost three years, won't start until next spring or summer, at the earliest. The situation is sending a post-Sept. 11 chill through nuclear and environmental policy groups in Canada and the U.S: experts say a nuclear bomb can be built with less than 25 kilograms of highly enriched uranium and a high-school knowledge of physics. "There is already enough highly enriched uranium for one or more nuclear bombs sitting in eastern Ontario," says Alan Kuperman, a senior policy analyst with the Nuclear Control Institute in Washington, D.C. "This is a terrorist target just sitting there. It doesn't mean (terrorists) could use the bomb in Ontario. But it certainly makes it a target of these sorts of groups, a very logical target, someone coming along and trying to steal this stuff. For better or worse, some (terrorists) who have come into the U.S. infiltrated into Canada first. "The question is ... how exactly is this material guarded and is it guarded as nuclear weapons material?" Nordion says the institute is exaggerating the potential threat. "It would be the first time that I've ever heard that Canada is a proliferation threat," says Grant Malkoske, Nordion's vice-president of engineering and technology. He also suggests that any prolonged halt of Nordion's supply of U.S. uranium would threaten the benefits nuclear medicine offers to millions of sick and suffering individuals. "If we didn't have highly enriched uranium here to produce medical isotopes, the world would be in difficult shape." The Nuclear Control Institute isn't swayed. It recently renewed a formal request, first made last year, to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reject any new uranium requests from Nordion/AECL until commercial production actually begins at MAPLE. The institute also is a leading advocate for getting all civilian research and isotope reactors in Canada, Europe and elsewhere to use non-weapons-grade uranium, or low-enriched uranium. But Kuperman and Energy Probe, the Canadian nuclear watchdog group, accuse Nordion of dragging its feet on conversion to low-enriched uranium. The result, they say, is a dangerous proliferation of weapons-grade uranium in the Ottawa Valley. *Search TheStar.com* ***************************************************************** 7 US moves Gulf war hearing to London Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Health inquiry to be held as Bush prepares to renew Iraq conflict David Hencke, Westminster correspondent Monday June 10, 2002 [http://www.guardian.co.uk] The US Congress is to hold an unprecedented hearing in Westminster next week to take evidence from British sufferers of Gulf war syndrome, as President Bush prepares for the possibility of renewing the war against Iraq. The congressional subcommittee on national security, veterans' affairs and international relations is to hold an all-day hearing in parliament's new building, Portcullis House, as part of a renewed investigation into undiagnosed illnesses which have affected 5,000 of 52,000 British troops sent to the Gulf in 1990. It is said to be the first time a congressional committee has held a hearing in parliament. The committee, chaired by the Republican, Christopher Shays, has spoken out about the failure of the US defence department to listen to war veterans, provide them with proper protection from toxic substances, keep proper medical records, or provide adequate compensation. A report by the committee refused to accept claims by the military that the outbreak of diseases was due to stress and psychological problems. The hearing has been welcomed by the Royal British Legion, which helped to organise the trip, as a new way to put pressure on the Ministry of Defence, particularly as British troops might again be asked to join the Americans in the Gulf. Fourteen witnesses will give evidence in Westminster, including Samantha Thompson, widow of the Gulf veteran Nigel Thompson, who died of motor neurone disease in January, and John Nichol, the navigator shot down during the Gulf war. Both have demanded - along with the Royal British Legion and the National Gulf Veterans and Families Association - a public inquiry into Gulf war syndrome. The MoD has commissioned research which will be reported on next year. The US, unlike Britain, has already recognised motor neurone disease among former troops as a war-related illness. The committee has also asked Lord McColl of Dulwich, Gulf war consultant to John Major, prime minister at the time of the conflict, and Patrick Allen, the lawyer leading the campaign for for compensation payments for veterans, to give evidence. There will be two sessions to discuss medical findings about the use of multiple vaccines, exposure to depleted uranium and organophosphates in pesticides, and epidemiological studies on Gulf war illnesses. The congressional hearing is to be followed by an address to 150 peers and MPs by the former presidential candidate Ross Perot, who has financed US Gulf veterans' medical treatment and compensation and is critical of current US research into Gulf war syndrome. He is expected to criticise the choice of scientists by the US defence department to investigate the problem. The hearing has been organised by Lord Morris of Manchester and Bruce George, Labour chairman of the Commons defence committee, who have both attended congressional hearings in Washington. Lord Morris said: "British and US troops fought side by side to liberate Kuwait and now British parliamentarians and American congressmen are working together to help those who have become ill after fighting... This committee is a terrier for the truth and its combative nature might be a a surprise to Westminster." [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 8 Radioactive fallout would be appalling, experts say KnoxNews: World By MICHAEL WOODS June 9, 2002 Radioactive fallout from a nuclear war between India and Pakistan probably would not threaten the United States but could drift over U.S. troops in neighboring Afghanistan, experts say. Deadly levels of fallout also would drift across southern Asia including Bangladesh, Nepal and China. Depending on weather conditions and other factors, the fallout could cause thousands of deaths for years. The experts, who have studied the consequences of nuclear war in South Asia, foresee a devastating impact in India and Pakistan. Studies predict that millions of people could be killed immediately in both countries from the blast, radiation burns and firestorms sweeping through crowded cities. Major cities could be reduced to rubble. Millions more likely would die in the weeks after a nuclear exchange from starvation, riots, epidemics and radiation illness. Radiation would continue to claim a toll for generations, increasing deaths from cancer, birth defects and other health problems. Both countries would face years of famine, economic chaos and social upheaval. "The use of weapons of mass destruction is the very worst way for nations to solve international disputes," said Dr. Nicholas Wilson. "Nuclear war involving India and Pakistan would have catastrophic impacts on these countries that rival the previous worst disasters they have experienced. These include the 1876-1877 famine in India that affected 20 million and killed 3.5 million." Wilson is a public-health physician in Wellington, New Zealand, who wrote a 1999 study on potential effects of nuclear war involving India and Pakistan. "The immense scale of these effects should make it clear that possible use of such weapons would lead to a major catastrophe," added Dr. Mani Ramana of Princeton University. Ramana wrote another 1999 study, and that predicted the effects of a single nuclear bomb or missile warhead on Bombay, home to an estimated 18 million people. A "small" 15-kiloton weapon (about the same destructive power as the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945) would kill 160,000 to 866,000 people, he concluded. A larger 150-kiloton weapon could kill up to 8.6 million. "These estimates do not include the long-term effects like cancers," he noted. Ramana and his associates also calculated the possible overall effects of a "limited" nuclear war between India and Pakistan. They assumed that each country would use one-tenth of its stockpile of nuclear weapons. The weapons, they assumed, would target the 10 largest cities in both countries. In that scenario, 2.6 million people would die or be critically injured in India and 1.8 million in Pakistan. Estimates from the Institute for Science and International Security here indicate that India has about 65 nuclear bombs and missile warheads and Pakistan about 40. Their explosive power, or yield, is a key factor in projecting possible radiation effects in the United States and other areas outside India and Pakistan. When a nuclear weapon explodes at low altitude, it sucks dirt and other surface material aloft, forming the signature mushroom cloud. The material becomes highly radioactive. It eventually drops back to the ground in the form of radioactive fallout. About 50 percent to 70 percent of the material usually falls out within one day near ground zero, said Ramana. Some, however, may stay aloft for months or years, and drift great distances on high-level winds. Weather conditions are one factor that decides where fallout will land. Rain, for instance, quickly could wash more material out of the air and deposit it locally. The annual monsoon rains are now settling over India and Pakistan. In addition to increasing localized fallout, they could give India a strategic edge in a nuclear exchange, experts say. Before the monsoons, prevailing winds are from the northwest, and could blow fallout from nuclear blasts in Kashmir or Pakistan back over India. During the monsoons, they generally blow from the south and southwest and could carry fallout across Pakistan and into Afghanistan and China. Wilson said everyone assumes, based on monitoring of Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests, that the weapons are relatively small - around 15 kilotons. Such a weapon has the power of 15,000 tons of conventional explosive. Both countries have claimed more powerful weapons, in the 50-kiloton range. Dr. Terry Wallace, of the University of Arizona at Tucson, has used earthquake-monitoring technology to study India's and Pakistan's nuclear-weapons test explosions. Like other experts, he suspects that official statements from both countries have exaggerated the power of their nuclear weapons. Pakistan, for instance, claimed that one weapon tested in 1998 was 45 kilotons. Wallace calculated the actual yield at 9-12 kilotons. While India claimed a yield of 43 kilotons from one of its tests, Wallace believes it really was 10-15 kilotons. "I imagine there would be no significant health consequences in the United States from fallout," Ramana said. The United States exploded 90 similar-size weapons in the atmosphere at the Nevada Test Site during the 1950s. A 1997 National Center Institute study found that everyone in the country was exposed to radioactive fallout for about two months after each test. The health consequences, if any, are still unclear. (Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, http://www.shns.com.) ***************************************************************** 9 N-plant's neighbors line up for pills to avert cancer after radiation leaks Buffalo News - JIM FITZGERALD Associated Press 6/9/2002 YORKTOWN HEIGHTS - Hundreds of suburbanites took a few minutes Saturday to pick up a pill that could save them from cancer in case of a nuclear catastrophe. Westchester County began handing out 130-milligram doses of potassium iodide to those living within 10 miles of the Indian Point nuclear power station. The tablet is meant to be taken if there is a major release of radiation, a possibility that has been taken more seriously since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "Before Sept. 11, I felt safe," Jalery Arce said. "I moved here from the Bronx with my son to be safe. Now I'm getting medicine in case there's a nuclear disaster. I don't feel that safe anymore." County spokeswoman Victoria Hochman said 2,617 people had obtained 10,533 pills by the end of the day. During the pill distribution outside Yorktown High School, people signed their names on a clipboard, read information sheets and came away with a foil packet of medicine. Children in soccer gear accompanied parents in golf visors, and neighbors gossiped in small groups, even as demonstrators urged them not to be satisfied with potassium iodide, also known by its chemical symbol, KI. "The only real solution is to close the plant if you want to protect yourself and your children," said Gary Shaw of Croton, who carried a sign that read, "KI is not an answer." In general, the crowd was skeptical about whether the jobs, taxes and electricity generated by Indian Point were worth the risk. Many spoke of the hijacked jetliner that flew over Indian Point, in Buchanan, before crashing into the World Trade Center 35 miles down the Hudson River, or of President Bush's statement that terrorists in Afghanistan had information about U.S. nuclear plants. "We shouldn't be doing this," said Rose-Marie Menes, a dance teacher from Yorktown. "We are standing in line hoping to save our children's lives and our lives, when what should happen is the plant should be closed." But Thelma DeJoseph of Yorktown said she thinks Indian Point is safe, and she picked up her pills "just as a precaution." "If people shut this plant, they won't realize what they've done until they start screaming about the price of running their air conditioners," she said. Potassium iodide combats thyroid cancer, a common result of radiation exposure, by flooding the thyroid gland with harmless iodine, blocking the absorption of radioactive iodine. Studies have shown that KI was effective in preventing thyroid cancer, especially in children, after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. It does not protect against any other radiation effect and is not meant as a substitute for evacuation, officials said. Since Sept. 11, the pills have been a hot local item. Thousands have been sold over the Internet to those unwilling to wait for free tablets, and the county recently arranged for dozens of pharmacies to carry them, at about $1 a pill. After the attacks, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission offered the states free potassium iodide for anyone within 10 miles of a nuclear plant. Thirteen states have accepted, requesting 8 million pills, and on Saturday, New York became the third to distribute them. Vermont and Maryland began giving them out in April. Copyright © 1999 - 2002 The Buffalo NewsTM ***************************************************************** 10 JAPANESE SECURITY FOR NUCLEAR TRANSPORTS FATALLY INCONSISTENT DURING WORLD CUP 7 June 2002 Tokyo - Kansai Electric Power Company has announced that an imminent shipment of unsafe plutonium will not receive any additional security measures despite warnings that the shipment poses a major terrorist risk. Moreover, the Japanese utility is considering loading the plutonium onto the ships only sixty miles from the nearest soccer venue during the latter stages of the 2002 FIFA World Cup (1). In contrast to this approach of Kansai Electric, Japan Nuclear Fuels Limited (JNFL) recently announced that due to the additional security demands of the World Cup, they have suspended all nuclear waste transports to the Rokkasho-mura complex in Aomori Prefecture, northern Japan until after the World Cup final on June 30th. JNFL made the decision after discovering that police from Aomori would be relocated to provide support to soccer matches (2). In April 2002 Greenpeace warned the Japan World Cup Organizing Committee in Tokyo and FIFA officials in Zurich that the plutonium mixed oxide (MOX) shipment posed a major security risk (3). The two armed British-flagged vessels, the Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal, are expected to arrive in Japan within the next week, and could depart as early as one week before the World Cup final on June 30th. "If domestic nuclear waste shipments have been suspended because of World Cup security demands on local police, it is incredible that the British and Japanese nuclear industries are still planning to make a shipment of dangerous plutonium during the competition. They are showing absolute disregard for the security and safety of people in Japan and Korea, including hundreds of thousands of World Cup soccer fans," said Shaun Burnie of Greenpeace International. In recent weeks there have been demands by U.S. politicians to suspend plutonium transports inside the U.S. due to warnings from the Bush Administration that renewed attacks by Al Queda were possible (4). "The schedule for this shipment is being determined by the commercial considerations of British Nuclear Fuels and the Japanese nuclear industry not security or safety criteria. They want it out of Japan as soon as possible so they can resume plans for their defunct program - in the process they are prepared to ignore real security issues with potentially horrific consequences," Burnie added. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: Shaun Burnie - Greenpeace International Nuclear Campaigner in Japan -+81 90 2253 7306 Mhairi Dunlop - Greenpeace International Nuclear Press Co-ordinator in Amsterdam +31 20 523 6608 A map recently produced by Greenpeace highlights the proximity of soccer World Cup stadiums in Japan and South Korea to nuclear facilities storing plutonium and the likely route for the MOX shipment. For this and further information please visit www.greenpeace.org/~nuclear/bnfl [http://www.greenpeace.org/~nuclear/bnfl] ----------------------------------------------------------------- Notes to editors: (1) Kansai stated that no further security measures would be applied to the shipment at a meeting between Kansai Electric Energy Public Relations and NGOs Green Action and Mihama-no Kai held on June 4th, at Kansai Electric headquarters, Osaka. At a prior meeting on April 11th Kansai refused to rule out departure of the shipment during World Cup. (2) Daily Tohoku May 31st 2002 (3) Greenpeace sent letters to Mr. Yasuhiko Endoh, General Secretary of JAWOC, (Japan Organizing Committee for the FIFA World Cup), Joseph S. Blatter President of FIFA and Lennart Johansson as chairman of the World Cup Organising Committee, as well as Akira Odajima, Public Relations Director FIFA World Cup Korea/Japan Organizing Committee. Fifa replied to Greenpeace on April 22nd stating that the MOX transport issue was being considered by the Director for Stadiums and Security, Walter Gregg. (4) See Greenville News, May 20, 2002 "Hodges, citing terror warning, urges delay on bomb material shipments", James T. Hammond. Governor Jim Hodges of South Carolina warned the U.S. Government that the latest terrorist warnings by Vice President Dick Cheney and FBI Director Robert Mueller are reason enough to delay shipping weapons-grade plutonium to South Carolina from Colorado. ***************************************************************** 11 Horseback hunt for nuclear generators BBC News | EUROPE | 10 June, 2002, [Radioactive analysts in protective suits] The IAEA is trying to deal with radioactive legacy An international hunt for radioactive generators has been launched in Georgia. Dozens of experts - some on horseback - are scouring an area in the west of the former Soviet republic. The search for the two Strontium 90 generators is expected to last up to two weeks. Some of the area to be searched is remote and inaccessible, forcing the teams to travel on foot as well as on horseback and by car. Radiation burns Around 80 people are taking part in the operation, being co-ordinated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Most of the team members are from Georgia, but experts from India, France, Turkey and the US are also present, as well as IAEA officials. The area being searched is 550 square kilometres (200 square miles). The new search comes four months after two forestry workers suffered severe radiation sickness and burns when they found other Strontium 90 sources abandoned in woodland. The men are still being treated in France and Russia for the injuries they suffered. The generators would have been used to power communication stations in remote areas. Six have already been recovered, but two more are still believed to be missing. The IAEA describes them as "highly radioactive". The situation in Georgia may just be an indication of the serious safety and security implications orphaned sources may have elsewhere in the world Abel Gonzalez IAEA spokesman More than 280 other radioactive sources have already been recovered from Georgia since the mid-1990s. Some were from abandoned Soviet military bases. The IAEA has been working with the Georgian authorities since 1997 to try to recover missing material, and to upgrade safety, but officials say it is not the only country where abandoned, or "orphaned", radioactive sources could present a major hazard. "The situation in Georgia may just be an indication of the serious safety and security implications orphaned sources may have elsewhere in the world," said Abel Gonzalez, the agency's director of radiation and waste safety. "The IAEA's work in Georgia is part of a comprehensive plan that includes Agency assistance to States to help them regain control of such orphan sources." A second phase of the operation will involve carrying out an aerial and road survey in September, with the eventual aim of finding other material still at large. ***************************************************************** 12 Ottawa company called a `terror target' [Thestar.com] Mon Jun 10, 2002 - Updated at 09:55 PM Uranium stockpiles enough for nuclear bomb: U.S. watchdog Ian McLeod CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA — An Ottawa firm is creating a tempting target for nuclear terrorists by unnecessarily stockpiling enough highly enriched uranium to build at least one nuclear bomb, says a respected U.S nuclear watchdog group. The Ottawa Citizen reported yesterday that MDS Nordion, the leading world supplier of radioisotopes for medical treatment and diagnosis, has 45.2 kilograms of highly enriched uranium — a two-year supply — waiting for the company's long-delayed MAPLE nuclear reactors to go into service at Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.'s Chalk River laboratories, northwest of Ottawa. A senior Nordion executive says about 22 kilograms of highly enriched uranium will likely be imported from the U.S. this year and added to the Chalk River stockpile, ending a temporary Nordion moratorium on uranium shipments because of the MAPLE startup delays. The company has an option to bring in another 22.6 kilograms next year under its U.S. export licence. If so, Nordion and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) will be sitting on a total of 90.4 kilograms of highly enriched uranium earmarked for the idle MAPLE isotope reactors by the time the export licence expires next year. Commercial operation of the primary MAPLE 1 reactor, delayed by technical problems for almost three years, won't start until next spring or summer, at the earliest. The situation is sending a post-Sept. 11 chill through nuclear and environmental policy groups in Canada and the U.S: experts say a nuclear bomb can be built with less than 25 kilograms of highly enriched uranium and a high-school knowledge of physics. "There is already enough highly enriched uranium for one or more nuclear bombs sitting in eastern Ontario," says Alan Kuperman, a senior policy analyst with the Nuclear Control Institute in Washington, D.C. "This is a terrorist target just sitting there. It doesn't mean (terrorists) could use the bomb in Ontario. But it certainly makes it a target of these sorts of groups, a very logical target, someone coming along and trying to steal this stuff. For better or worse, some (terrorists) who have come into the U.S. infiltrated into Canada first. "The question is ... how exactly is this material guarded and is it guarded as nuclear weapons material?" Nordion says the institute is exaggerating the potential threat. "It would be the first time that I've ever heard that Canada is a proliferation threat," says Grant Malkoske, Nordion's vice-president of engineering and technology. He also suggests that any prolonged halt of Nordion's supply of U.S. uranium would threaten the benefits nuclear medicine offers to millions of sick and suffering individuals. "If we didn't have highly enriched uranium here to produce medical isotopes, the world would be in difficult shape." The Nuclear Control Institute isn't swayed. It recently renewed a formal request, first made last year, to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reject any new uranium requests from Nordion/AECL until commercial production actually begins at MAPLE. The institute also is a leading advocate for getting all civilian research and isotope reactors in Canada, Europe and elsewhere to use non-weapons-grade uranium, or low-enriched uranium. But Kuperman and Energy Probe, the Canadian nuclear watchdog group, accuse Nordion of dragging its feet on conversion to low-enriched uranium. The result, they say, is a dangerous proliferation of weapons-grade uranium in the Ottawa Valley. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. ***************************************************************** 13 Uranium cache a terror target? [http://www.torontosun.com/] Monday, June 10, 2002 Company's stockpile enough to build nuke: Watchdog By CP OTTAWA -- An Ottawa company has created a tempting target for nuclear terrorists by unnecessarily stockpiling enough highly enriched uranium to build at least one nuclear bomb, says a respected U.S. nuclear watchdog group. MDS Nordion, the world's leading supplier of radioisotopes for medical treatment and diagnosis, has 45.2 kilos of highly enriched uranium waiting for its Maple nuclear reactors to go into service at Atomic Energy of Canada's Chalk River laboratories, an Ottawa newspaper reported yesterday. 90 KILOS IN TOTAL A Nordion executive said about 22 kilos of enriched uranium will likely be imported from the U.S. this year and added to the stockpile. The company has an option to bring in another 22.6 kilos next year under its U.S. export licence. If so, Nordion and AECL will be sitting on 90.4 kilos of highly enriched uranium earmarked for the idle Maple isotope reactors by the time the export licence expires next year. Commercial operation of the primary Maple 1 reactor, delayed by technical problems for almost three years, won't start until next spring or summer, at the earliest. The situation is sending a post 9/11 chill through nuclear policy groups in Canada and the U.S. Experts say a nuclear bomb can be built with less than 25 kilos of highly enriched uranium and a high school knowledge of physics. "There is already enough HEU for one or more nuclear bombs sitting in eastern Ontario," says Alan Kuperman, an analyst with the Nuclear Control Institute in Washington, D.C. "This is a terrorist target just sitting there. It doesn't mean (terrorists) could use the bomb in Ontario. But it certainly makes it a target of these sorts of groups, a very logical target, someone coming along and trying to steal this stuff. For better or worse, some (terrorists) who have come into the U.S. infiltrated into Canada first. "The question is ... how exactly is this material guarded and is it guarded as nuclear weapons material?" Nordion vice-president of engineering and technology, Grant Malkoske, said the institute is exaggerating the potential threat. "It would be the first time that I've ever heard that Canada is a proliferation threat," he said. INSTITUTE WANTS BAN He suggested any prolonged halt of Nordion's supply of U.S. uranium would threaten the benefits offered by nuclear medicine to millions of ill individuals. "If we didn't have HEU here to produce medical isotopes, the world would be in difficult shape." The Nuclear Control Institute isn't swayed. It recently renewed a formal request, first made last year, to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reject any new uranium requests from Nordion/AECL until commercial Maple production actually begins. CANOE network. ***************************************************************** 14 NRC Advisory Committees on Medical Uses of Isotopes to Meet June 21, July 8 NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 72 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] No. 02-072 June 7, 2002 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI) subcommittee on training and experience requirements will meet on June 21 in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss and develop recommendations to address concerns on the revised requirements for licensees authorized to use nuclear materials for medical purposes. The subcommittee will provide recommendations resulting from the June 21 meeting to the full ACMUI during a telephone conference on July 8. The final ACMUI recommendations will be provided thereafter to the NRC for further consideration. The June 21 subcommittee meeting will be held from 8 a.m. until 12 p.m. at NRC headquarters in room T- 2B3, located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville. The July 8 full ACMUI meeting will be held by telephone conference from 1 p.m. until 5 p.m. The NRC auditorium, also located at Two White Flint North, will be available for public participation. Questions from members of the public will be permitted during the meetings at the discretion of the meeting chairmen. The meeting transcripts and submitted comments will be available for inspection on NRC's web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acmui/tr/ and at the NRC Public Document Room, located at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. weekdays, on or about July 8 for the June 21 meeting and on or about July 23 for the July 8 meeting. Minutes for the June 21 and July 8 meetings will be available on or about August 18 and September 9, respectively. A copy of the revisions to NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Part 35 may be examined at the NRC PDR. A copy is also available electronically through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System. For help in using ADAMS, contact the Public Document Room staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . Persons can submit written statements pertaining to the June 21 subcommittee and July 8 full committee meetings, postmarked by June 14 and June 21, respectively, to Ms. Linda Psyk, T-8F5, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, or by email at lmp1@nrc.gov [lmp1@nrc.gov] . For more information about the meetings, contact Ms. Linda M. Psyk at 301- 415-0215. ***************************************************************** 15 Nelson has a lot at stake in radioactive-waste trial Omaha.com June 9, 2002 *BY ROBYNN TYSVER* WORLD-HERALD BUREAU Ben Nelson The political fallout from the low-level radioactive waste trial could stick to the former governor, a Democrat, for years to come. Or so his political foes hope. "If people get hit hard for $100 million to $200 million to pay for a debacle in Boyd County, and the judge says it happened on Ben Nelson's watch, it may be very hard for Nelson to get re-elected," said Chuck Sigerson, an Omaha city councilman and former chairman of the Nebraska Republican Party. In a rare moment, a sitting U.S. senator will take the witness stand. Nelson will be asked to defend his conduct as governor in the 1990s. A five-state compact alleges that Nelson orchestrated the denial of a state license for a controversial waste facility in Boyd County. Nebraska was chosen by the compact as the host state for a regional repository. The compact says Nelson campaigned against the facility in 1990 and, once elected governor, ensured that it would never get a state license. After a week of testimony, the senator is looking forward to telling his side of the story, said David DiMartino, spokesman for Nelson. "The process of approving the license wasn't political in nature and the rhetoric surrounding the case shouldn't be either," DiMartino said. "The developer chose a poor location for the nuclear waste dump, and the science supporting the decision and the merits of the case will show that the decision was reached fairly." Witnesses so far have included Kim Robak, who as Nelson's chief of staff sought to withdraw a legal opinion favorable to the site. Robak, however, said she did not know the content of the opinion at the time she made the request. She also testified that she never heard Nelson order anyone to deny a license for the facility. The other key witness last week was Kate Allen, a former policy researcher for Nelson who specialized in radioactive waste issues. Dubbed "waste woman" by another Nelson aide, Allen took home 19 boxes of files on low-level radioactive waste after she was fired. The files, which came to light last year, included hundreds of politically sensitive e-mails and memoranda from 1991 and 1992. Nelson probably will be asked about several meetings he held with waste-site opponents after his election and whether he helped develop strategy opposing the facility. He may be asked whether he encouraged his political appointees to adopt regulatory interpretations unfavorable to the waste site. He also may get a chance to comment on an unusual remark that was attributed to him by Allen. In 1991 notes taken by Allen, Nelson allegedly told site opponents that he would adopt the pose of a "deranged governor" in his fight against the site. Specifically, Nelson is supposed to have said "never underestimate fatigue factor or deranged governor." The compact believes that statement shows Nelson's intention to fight the facility to the bitter end and to drag the process out as long as possible. No matter how U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf rules, the case probably will be appealed for years. The worst scenario for Nelson might be if the state lost and the bill came due around the time he was seeking re-election in 2006. In a predominantly Republican state, Nelson narrowly won the office in 2000. "Nelson doesn't have much cushion electorally," said John Hibbing, a political scientist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Sigerson said timing is everything. "In politics, people have very short memories," he said. "Whether or not they're going to feel the pain in the pocketbook long enough to make a difference, that's the question." One politician who has stayed out of the fray is Republican Gov. Mike Johanns. Johanns, who has been mentioned as a possible challenger to Nelson in 2006, declined to comment when asked if he thought his predecessor had acted in bad faith on the waste facility. "That's what the trial is for," Johanns said. "The case is in trial and it will be before a judge. That's where the results will be determined." He said he has no contingency plan in place should the state lose the lawsuit. Johanns said if he did, that would send the wrong message about the state's effort to defend itself. *World-Herald staff writer Leslie Reed contributed to this report*. ©2002 Omaha World-Herald. All rights reserved. Copyright ***************************************************************** 16 DOE trying to comply with law on nuke waste June 10, 2002 [online@rgj.com] Saw your June 3 article suggesting there were other places to store nuclear waste besides Yucca Mountain. Well, that is the status quo, isn’t it? That was “the problem” that Congress set out in 1982 to solve. So, some want to have come full circle, while the government charged the utilities and ratepayers $17 billion for the trip. Some deal. The article misses some key points about the so-called “PECO alternative” to building a permanent repository. I take issue with the statement of Bob Loux, in your article, that the “Energy Department does not want to highlight this option to Congress or public because the department wants to build Yucca Mountain.” What DOE has been attempting to do for the past 20 years is follow the direction of Congress in the law that sets this country’s nuclear waste policy. If Loux and others want to change that policy, they should try to change the law. That hasn’t happened, so DOE is doing what Congress directed. As I am sure Loux knows, the 1987 amendment directed DOE not to consider other alternatives or sites. The PECO settlement is a 10-year stopgap measure that is predicated on the waste eventually going to a suitable waste repository. Brian O’Connell, director Nuclear Waste Program Office National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Washington, D.C. Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 17 Archaic Senate protocol only hope to stop Dump Clock June 10, 2002 Jon Ralston [online@rgj.com] Remember those cool clocks they were selling in 1999 that counted down the days, hours and minutes to the turn of the millennium? Seemed like the day would never come and then suddenly it arrived, as the Millennium Clock ran out of ticks and the 21st century arrived. The same has been true since that Dump Clock started ticking 20 years ago, counting down the days until the final approval of the nuclear waste dump. No one ever thought that day would come, either. But if last week’s Senate panel vote is any harbinger, that timepiece, too, is about to become a relic. By a count of 13 to 10, the Senate Energy Committee sent the override of Gov. Kenny Guinn’s Yucca Mountain veto to the floor, starting the Dump Clock ticking toward eternal burial of nuclear waste in Nevada. On its face, the vote is misleading -- 13 to 10 sounds pretty close, maybe there is hope. But look beyond those numbers. Only one Republican, -- count him -- Ben Nighthorse Campbell -- voted for Nevada. Every other Republican sided with President Bush. And at least one Democrat (Delaware’s Tom Carper), -- and my guess is there are more -- said he voted with Nevada only out of deference to Majority Whip Harry Reid, but planned to change his vote on the floor. So after all the hopes raised and all the money spent on ads, it seems clear that Harry Ensign can’t get the votes to block the dump on the floor later this month or early in July -- and they acknowledged as much last week to several news outlets. Reid and John Ensign said the only hope is to rely on their colleagues’ support for the tradition of allowing the majority leader to control the agenda and Tom Daschle’s refusal to bring up the bill. So what it comes down to now is Harry Ensign exploiting The Club of 100’s longstanding practice of deferring to one another, of treating each other like lords, of allowing one senator (at times) to control the agenda. That is, if Harry Ensign can persuade their colleagues that their hoity-toity rules and precedents are more important than getting this issue off the table after two decades, Nevada still has a chance. Anyone optimistic? When the lords and ladies of the U.S. Senate take this up, you can be sure that Harry Ensign will argue vehemently not to allow the measure to be brought to the floor because Daschle has not brought it up. But won’t the proponents just argue this is different than anything in the past -- a governor overriding a president? As Bush the Elder might have said, the attitude of the senators surely will be: This will not stand. Add in the eleventh-hour lobbying by a White House determined to move along Yucca Mountain and how can this be stopped? Wait a second. What’s the sound I hear? Ah, yes, it’s that Dump Clock ticking. Jon Ralston, who publishes The Ralston Report, works for Greenspun Media Group. He welcomes comments and questions. Write him at ralston@vegas.com. Or call (702) 870-7997. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 18 Waste disposal facility 06/10/02 The Oak Ridger Online -- Feature: Business -- After about a year's worth of construction, the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge waste disposal facility is up and running. Located in Bear Creek Valley just west of the Y-12 National Security Complex, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility will initially hold up to 400,000 cubic yards of waste, including low-level radioactive, mixed, hazardous and polychlorinated-biphenyl-contaminated materials from cleanup efforts on the Oak Ridge Reservation. The facility was built by Duratek Federal Services under a subcontract to Bechtel Jacobs Co. Pictured from left are Jim Kutzman, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Gerald Boyd, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations; Mark Frei, DOE headquarters; Michael Holland, DOE ORO; U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp; Justin Wilson, governor's office; Joe Nemec, Bechtel Jacobs Co.; and Tom Dabrowski, Duratek Federal Services. [http://www.oakridger.com/dailydouble] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 19 Greenpeace protests over nuclear cargo heading for Britain Ananova - Greenpeace is threatening legal action to stop a cargo of plutonium from arriving in Cumbria. The load, which is expected to leave Japan this week, is large enough to make 50 nuclear bombs. Greenpeace believes the growing threat of international terrorism since September 11 makes the convoy vulnerable to attack. The Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal are due to arrive in the Irish Sea in August, bound for the Sellafield plant. Greenpeace believes the transport is unlawful. A spokesman said: "We have written to BNFL and the Environment Agency to tell them so, and we are prepared to take legal action to prevent it." The vessels left Britain five weeks ago and it is thought they will enter the North-West Pacific Basin this week. The nuclear fuel was shipped to Japan three years ago but after staff at BNFL admitted falsifying safety records, Britain was ordered to take back the cargo. Environmental groups say the Government's nuclear policies are flawed and it is wrong to press ahead with the global trade in reprocessed plutonium and uranium, known as MOX fuel. A BNFL spokesman said: "We gave an undertaking to our customers that we would bring the fuel back in 2002 and that is what we are going to do. "These are among the safest ships that sail the oceans. They have a number of safety features and are double hulled and reinforced to withstand collisions. All the safety systems are duplicated." Story filed: 12:32 Monday 10th June 2002 CHECK FOR MORE ON: Greenpeace Environment Japan Nuclear power UK Copyright © 2002 Ananova Ltd ***************************************************************** 20 Strickland opposes Yucca Mountain site Glenwood Springs Post-Independent June 9, 2002 By Donna Daniels The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository could be a done deal within weeks. If it gets a green light from the Senate, highly radioactive waste could come through Colorado along Interstate 70 and through Glenwood Springs, said Senate hopeful Tom Strickland, who spoke to a group of citizens and elected officials Friday at the county courthouse. Strickland, a Democrat, is challenging incumbent Republican Wayne Allard for the Senate seat. ?It?s down to the last point in the approval process,? Strickland said. If Yucca Mountain is approved, the Department of Energy will operate the site in southern Nevada and decide what route nuclear waste from over 100 nuclear power plants and research facilities will travel. Both Interstate 70 and 80 are under consideration. ?Until we know the answer to (the transportation route), we can?t give the Department of Energy a blank check to do what they want,? he said. Strickland said 77,000 tons of spent fuel rods and other highly radioactive waste would be transported to the Yucca Mountain repository. That would amount to 10,000 rail shipments or 50,000 truck shipments and would take about 25 years to complete. ?This (material) is so hot it has to be put in cooling ponds for five years before it can be handled,? Strickland said. ?It?s probably safe to say it?s the most dangerous material ever created.? The trucks or railroad cars carrying the waste would be ripe targets for terrorists who could use the material to make ?dirty? bombs. Both trucks and trains are prone to accidents, Strickland said. ?Anyone who has ever driven through the Rockies on I-70 or on the northern stretch of I-25, where traffic deaths skyrocketed last year to the highest ever recorded, knows how dangerous these roads can be,? he said. ?People have said nuclear waste has been shipped for years without accident, but folks, before 9/11 no one would have ever thought you could destroy a 100-story building,? Strickland said. Nor has the FBI properly assessed the security risk of transporting such material, he added. ?This is a risk we cannot take until law enforcement has done a thorough security risk assessment,? he said. Garfield County Sheriff Tom Dalessandri, a fellow Democrat, agreed. ?The issue has not come up in domestic preparedness meetings,? said Dalessandri, who has been involved at a national level in domestic terrorism preparedness planning. Even more disturbing is the fact that local law enforcement is not notified when hazardous materials are being shipped by the government through the area. ?They never tell us when it?s coming through. On any given day there is poison gas and contaminants? being shipped, Dalessandri said. ?The level of security is very minimal for transportation in general.? The feds ?believe in a low profile,? and don?t secure the areas hazardous materials are passing through, he said. Although Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn vetoed Yucca Mountain earlier this year, the U.S. House or Senate has 90 days to override it, Strickland said. The Senate is expected to cast the final vote on the site in early July. Among Colorado?s congressional delegation, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell is opposed to the measure, but Allard ?has supported it since day one,? Strickland said. Rather than creating 50,000 targets for terrorist attacks, it is better to keep spent nuclear fuel at the sites where it was used, he said. ?In the United States there are 130 sites dealing with (spent fuel) for 30 to 45 years,? he said. And it?s easier to guard those 130 sites than 50,000 truck shipments. Strickland urged his audience to lobby Allard to vote no on Yucca Mountain. ?There?s no urgency in this. A ?no? vote will not kill the plan,? he said. /Copyright Glenwood Springs Post Independent. Materials contained ***************************************************************** 21 BTL Q&A: India and Pakistan on Brink of Nuclear Conflict Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 13:42:56 -0500 (CDT) To: radred@ix.netcom.com From: Between The Lines Subject: BTL Q&A: India and Pakistan on Brink of Nuclear Conflict Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:17:02 -0700 Reply-To: betweenthelines@snet.net Between the Lines Q&A A weekly column featuring progressive viewpoints on national and international issues under-reported in mainstream media for release June 10, 2002 ANNOUNCEMENTS: We are currently undergoing some changes in our listserv provider -- please bear with us. India and Pakistan on the Brink of Nuclear Conflict War on terrorism and U.S. nuclear weapons doctrine contributes to the crisis Click here to listen! (In RealAudio, needs RealPlayer) Interview by Scott Harris Nearly a million soldiers from India and Pakistan have massed on the border of the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, raising tensions between the two nuclear powers for the second time in six months. The latest incident which sparked new fears of war occurred on May 14, when three Islamic militants infiltrated the Indian-held sector of Kashmir and killed 30 people, many of whom were the wives and children of Indian troops. This clash and a string of attacks, including a December attack on the Indian parliament, have led the nationalist government of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee to threaten a military response unless Pakistani leader General Pervez Musharraf halts all cross border terrorist incursions into India. Alarm at the prospect of nuclear war between these two south Asian rivals has triggered a round of diplomatic activity by the U.S. Britain and Russia in an 11th hour effort to reduce the prospect of a border conflict that could easily spin out of control. U.S. military planners estimate that if India and Pakistan were to engage in nuclear war, 3 million to 12 million people would be killed. Between The Lines' Scott Harris spoke with Bill Hartung of the World Policy Institute, who assesses the danger of war between India and Pakistan, the fallout from America's war on terrorism and the negative role U.S. nuclear weapons doctrine plays in influencing how other nuclear powers wield their weapons of mass destruction. Bill Hartung: Well, this is the second time that (India and Pakistan) have had a conflict over Kashmir since their nuclear weapons tests in 1998. The last time in 1999, some Pakistani supported forces went into a mountainous area across the line of control -- the disputed border of Kashmir -- and India responded with aircraft and artillery and basically drove them out of there. But, during that war we are now told that there were at least six different times when one or the other side threatened to use nuclear weapons. In fact, when the Pakistani president was in the United States, he was informed by President Clinton that his armed forces had armed some of their ballistic missiles with nuclear weapons, something which the president of Pakistan had not authorized, and was surprised to learn. So, I think there's danger partly because this conflict really goes back to the partition that separated India and Pakistan back in the 1940's. And in both countries, there are strong nationalist desires to control the entirety of that territory. In recent years, Pakistan has stepped up its support for Kashmiri forces who have been trying to use various attacks on civilians and Indian-supported institutions to win not independence, but basically get the portion controlled by India back in Pakistani control. I think because of the depth of the conflict, the fact (is) you've got countries that are kind of new at this awful game of nuclear deterrence that don't necessarily have clear lines of communications. They have nothing like a hot line like was developed during the Cold War. They've also got the issue that since they're bordering countries, a nuclear missile launched with a nuclear weapon on it, could take six to eight minutes to reach its target. So there's very little time for either side to decide, "Am I being attacked by a conventional weapon or a nuclear weapon?" And of course neither side has really, during this current conflict, renounced the possibility of using nuclear weapons. I think for all those reasons, it's a very dangerous situation. About the most dangerous kind of situation you can imagine involving nuclear weapons since you've got these bordering countries with this long standing conflict -- so there's not a lot of time to let cooler heads prevail if it started escalating. Between The Lines: What are some of the miscalculations that you fear may be made that could lead to the start of a nuclear conflict there? Bill Hartung: One thing that's happening on the Indian side, is the Indian government is downplaying the relevance and power of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, saying it's not really to be feared all that much -- that they should be able to prosecute, what they describe as a limited war against Pakistan, without facing nuclear retaliation. And then on the Pakistani side I think the Musharraf government is in a difficult position because over this last, less than a year, since he became part of the U.S.-led coalition fighting the war in Afghanistan, he has had to buck public opinion in his own country to a considerable degree. There was strong support for the Taliban in Pakistan. Pakistani intelligence helped set up the Taliban government, which was very supportive. Also Pakistani intelligence had helped to arm and train some of the groups that have been going into Kashmir and causing some of these disturbances, bombings and so forth. So both sides have allowed the nationalism to run fairly free as a way to garner support. Between The Lines: In your view, has the United States stepped up to its role as the world's remaining super power to try and intervene here and intercede to make sure this doesn't develop into a full blown conflict or a nuclear conflict? Bill Hartung: I think they've been slow to deal with this. There were concerns raised even in the wake of Sept. 11th when the United States developed this alliance of convenience with the Musharraf regime to fight the war in Afghanistan, that there were going to be serious problems in the India-Pakistan relationship that would flow from that. So it seems like the (Bush administration's) focus on the war on terrorism, as they see it -- building alliances for that purpose -- has kind of blinded them that there are other important priorities in the world. Likewise on the nuclear front, the United States released a new nuclear posture (review) this spring, which reserved the right to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons and which mentioned six or seven target countries against which they might be used, including countries that didn't have nuclear weapons. They talked about developing a low- yield (nuclear weapons system) that could be used to hit underground bunkers. So, likewise on that score to tell Pakistan, "You shouldn't be brandishing and threatening to use nuclear weapons," when the United States is basically doing that in its own policy, of course, and has a much larger nuclear arsenal. There's sort of no moral basis to argue this. It becomes just power politics, "Do it because we say you should do it and there'll be consequences if you don't listen to us." So I think for all those reasons: the focus on terrorism as the enemy; the right of retaliation against nations that harbor terrorists' the notion that threatening to use nuclear weapons is an acceptable practice for the world's sole remaining super power -- I think all those things have contributed to this current difficult situation that we have in South Asia. Contact the World Policy Institute by calling (212) 229-5808 or visit their Web site at www.worldpolicy.org See related links and listen to an excerpt of this interview in a RealAudio segment or in MP3 on our Web site at www.btlonline.org for week ending June 14, 2002. ============================= Scott Harris is the executive producer of Between The Lines. This interview excerpt was featured on the award-winning, syndicated weekly radio newsmagazine, Between The Lines, for the week ending June 14, 2002. ============================= PRINT INFORMATION: For reprint permission, please email betweenthelines@snet.net. To subscribe to Between The Lines Q&A, e-mail btlqa-subscribe@topica.email-publisher.com ***************************************************************** 22 U.S. Arrests Man Accused of Planning Radioactive Bomb Attack The New York Times *June 10, 2002* *By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS* *Filed at 10:49 p.m. ET* WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government on Monday announced the arrest of an American accused of plotting with al-Qaida terrorists to detonate a ``dirty bomb'' to spread radioactive material, possibly targeting Washington. Authorities said the alleged scheme, involving a former gang member from Chicago who was raised Catholic but converted to Islam, went only as far as the planning stages. Undersecretary of State John Bolton indicated the man was carrying plans for the attack when he was picked up in Chicago. Jose Padilla, 31, also known as Abdullah al Muhajir, was arrested on May 8 as he flew from Pakistan via Zurich, Switzerland, to O'Hare International Airport. Officials said the CIA and FBI had helped foil the alleged plan, and FBI agents were waiting for Padilla as his plane arrived at the gate. Authorities said they believed he had returned to conduct reconnaissance for al-Qaida. President Bush said, ``We have a man detained who is a threat to the country and that thanks to the vigilance of our intelligence gathering and law enforcement he is now off the streets, where he should be.'' A government source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Padilla and at least two others who may have been involved in the alleged plot were detained in Pakistan on immigration violations before May 8. But Padilla was allowed to board his international flight and tricked into believing he had escaped -- with U.S. agents sitting on the plane quietly watching his every move. A ``dirty bomb'' -- traditional explosives combined with radioactive material -- would not result in a nuclear explosion, but a powerful device could release small amounts of radioactive material over dozens of city blocks. Experts believe the most devastating effect would be the panic caused and the difficulty sending rescue workers into the contaminated area. For that reason, it has been called an ideal terrorist weapon. In an unusual legal twist, the Justice Department handed the Brooklyn-born Padilla to the Pentagon for indefinite imprisonment as an ``enemy combatant.'' Government lawyers cited a 1942 Supreme Court ruling permitting such a transfer. Padilla had been held quietly for weeks in New York, then was flown Monday aboard a military C-130 plane to a Navy brig in Charleston, S.C. Attorney General John Ashcroft said al-Qaida apparently believed Padilla would be permitted to travel freely within the United States because of his citizenship and his U.S. passport. ``We have acted with legal authority both under the laws of war and clear Supreme Court precedent, which establish that the military may detain a United States citizen who has joined the enemy and has entered our country to carry out hostile acts,'' Ashcroft said. A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the apparent target was Washington. Speaking at a news conference, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said the scheme was ``still in the initial planning stage,'' and that Padilla ``had indicated some knowledge of the Washington, D.C., area.'' Another U.S. official said Washington was believed one possible target because of its prominence as the seat of government, not because of any firm evidence from al-Qaida. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said investigators do not believe al-Qaida has acquired enough radioactive material to build such a weapon. In a statement attributed to al-Qaida spokesman Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, the group said: ``We have the right to fight (Americans) by chemical and biological weapons so that they catch the fatal and unusual diseases that Muslims have caught due to their chemical and biological weapons.'' Ashcroft, who first disclosed the arrest in a television announcement from Moscow, said Padilla ``trained with the enemy,'' studying how to wire explosives and researching radiological weapons. Ashcroft said Padilla met several times in 2001 with senior al-Qaida officials in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where he traveled after he served one year's probation on state weapons and assault charges in Sunrise, Fla. Information leading to Padilla's arrest came in part from U.S. questioning of captured al-Qaida leader Abu Zubaydah, one of Osama bin Laden's top lieutenants, said two U.S. officials. Ashcroft said information about the plot came from ``multiple independent and corroborating sources.'' Padilla first met Zubaydah in Afghanistan in late 2001 after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, then went to Lahore, Pakistan, to research dirty bomb techniques with an unidentified associate, officials said. At Abu Zubaydah's request, Padilla traveled to Karachi, Pakistan, in March to meet several senior al-Qaida officials and discuss bombings of U.S. gas stations and hotels, officials said. Bolton, the State Department undersecretary, referred to ``the arrest of the terrorist and the plans that he was captured carrying.'' Bolton declined to elaborate on his remarks. Padilla was described by one former neighbor in Chicago as ``so quiet, so nice,'' nicknamed ``Pucho'' as a teen-ager and who enjoyed basketball and video games with his friends. ``He doesn't look like a person who would do something like that,'' said Nelly Ojeda, 64, who lived in the same three-story flat as Padilla. But Padilla's criminal history in the United States dates even to those days growing up in Chicago, where his family moved when he was 4. He was convicted at 15 as a juvenile of aggravated battery, armed robbery and attempted armed robbery. A law enforcement official said Padilla was in custody there between November 1985 and May 1988. In Florida, he was convicted in 1991 in Sunrise on charges of aggravated assault and discharging a firearm, court records show. Padilla, who identified himself as Catholic when he was booked on those charges, served one year of supervised release, until Aug. 4, 1993. A Justice official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Padilla converted to Islam after his 1993 release. Police said Padilla -- who has ``Jose'' tattooed on his right arm -- brandished a .38 revolver at another driver during a traffic encounter. When the other driver followed him to a gas station, Padilla fired one shot from his vehicle at the other car. No one was hurt. Police traced his license tag and arrested Padilla at home, where they found him with the handgun in his waistband. While in the Broward County jail, Padilla was accused of battery on a jail officer and resisting without violence in January 1992. He pleaded guilty and spent 10 months behind bars. Court records also show Padilla with speeding convictions in 1993 and 1997, and his driver's license was suspended in 1996. Padilla also completed a traffic law substance-abuse course in 1992, but it was unclear whether that stemmed from an arrest. Padilla was assigned a lawyer in New York immediately after his May 8 arrest, but his access to his lawyer probably will be severely restricted now that he is in military custody, said Lt. Col. Rivers Johnson, a Pentagon spokesman. Officials said there were no plans to organize a military tribunal or otherwise pursue criminal charges against Padilla, in part because tribunals are reserved for accused terrorists who are not U.S. citizens. Padilla becomes the third U.S. citizen detained since the Sept. 11 attacks. John Walker Lindh, 21, who was arrested in Afghanistan, faces charges in U.S. court in Virginia of conspiring to murder Americans and providing services to the Taliban and al-Qaida. The other is Yasser Essam Hamdi, 22, an American-born prisoner who was transferred from Guantanamo to a prison at Norfolk Naval Station in Virginia. ***************************************************************** 23 Japan plays down comments by top official suggesting shift in nuclear stance * /Mon Jun 10, 1:42 AM ET/ /By JOJI SAKURAI, Associated Press Writer/ TOKYO - Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and one of his top aides assured Parliament on Monday that, despite reports hinting otherwise, Japan is not planning to change its longstanding policy banning the possession, construction or transport of nuclear weapons on its soil. Koizumi has repeatedly tried to quell a fracas over Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda's recent remark that Japan is not legally prohibited from having nuclear arms ? an assertion interpreted by some as a shift in Japan's long-standing anti-nuclear policy. "Our nation has been aggressively pursuing a diplomacy to promote nuclear non-proliferation and end nuclear tests," Koizumi said. "We are working hard to create a world where nuclear weapons don't exist." Fukuda's comments during a regular press conference two weeks ago ? and the way in which the domestic media trumpeted them as a sudden swing in government policy ? caused alarm in South Korea ( news , China and Russia. They also came at a tense moment in the region, with nuclear-armed India and Pakistan exchanging war threats and beefing up their military presence in the hotly contested region of Kashmir. Fukuda insisted his comments were taken out of context. "It was reported that I hinted at a change in policy," Fukuda said before the Parliament session. "This is absolutely different from what my beliefs are." The atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki have given Japanese a deep aversion to nuclear weapons, and Tokyo has adhered to strict non-nuclear principles since the end of the war. The timing of the controversy was particularly bad because it broke just as Koizumi arrived in South Korea for the opening ceremony of the soccer World Cup ? a key chance for the neighbors to bury animosity over Japan's colonization of the Korean Peninsula. In Seoul, Koizumi immediately denied any change in government policy when questioned about Fukuda's remarks. On Monday, Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi said she assured counterparts around the world that Japan is still committed to its non-nuclear principles. "We explained the meaning of the comments and received their understanding," Kawaguchi said. "There has been no diplomatic fall-out." Opposition parties have been aggressively playing up the Fukuda ruckus, even calling for his resignation, in an attempt to do more damage to Koizumi's wobbly administration. Fukuda's comments were in response to questions about a statement last month by Vice Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe that it might be acceptable for Japan to possess nuclear weapons "as long as they are small." Though Koizumi has strongly denied any desire for Japan to go nuclear, his administration is often seen as having a hawkish stance and has championed legislation that would allow Japan's military a wider role. In defending bills to give the government new military powers, Koizumi told Parliament this month that Japan has no choice but to be prepared for foreign attack. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 24 Defusing South Asia's nuclear threat Opinion LEE H. HAMILTON June 10, 2002 While the United States has been focused on rooting out terrorists in Afghanistan and western Pakistan, another extremely dangerous situation has been developing in South Asia over the past six months: nuclear-armed India and Pakistan have been moving closer to a potentially horrific war over the contested state of Kashmir. This is the world's most dangerous nuclear flashpoint, and it demands sustained diplomatic involvement by the United States. Kashmir is a majority Muslim, mountainous region lodged between India and Pakistan, and claimed by both nations. It is divided into an area occupied by India and one occupied by Pakistan, which are separated by a Line of Control. Following terrorist attacks in India's capital and in the Indian-occupied portion of Kashmir, India has deployed many thousands of troops along the Line of Control and threatened to engage in a decisive strike against Pakistan. Pakistan has responded with its own military deployment, rhetoric on both sides has escalated, and many people in both countries are itching for a fight. The United States has a major interest in preventing war between these bitter rivals. An India-Pakistan clash could undermine U.S. efforts in the war against terrorism by distracting Pakistan and other nations from the pursuit of al-Qaida and other terrorists. If India or Pakistan uses nuclear weapons, the consequences could be even worse, with millions killed and the possibility of a radical Islamist takeover of Pakistan. The dispute over Kashmir dates back more than five decades, but the U.S. has until now only focused on the issue sporadically. The American position on Kashmir has generally been that India and Pakistan should work out the problem themselves. But the great U.S. interests in the region now call for deeper American involvement. The U.S. should begin a sustained diplomatic effort to establish a South Asia peace process. There are limits to what America can do to ease tensions between India and Pakistan. For instance, the United States is not prepared to send peacekeeping troops to the area, and direct American mediation would not be agreeable to both nations. But prudent U.S. diplomacy, advanced in cooperation with Europe, Russia and the United Nations, can help to calm tensions and avert war. American officials must counsel restraint by India and Pakistan, urge them to pull back their forces and lay the groundwork for peace negotiations. In order to convince India to refrain from military action, the U.S. must place heavy pressure on Pakistan to crack down once and for all on Kashmiri and Pakistani extremist groups. Earlier this year, Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf vowed to end support for militant groups, but he has not demonstrated a clear commitment to stop them from infiltrating into Kashmir and carrying out attacks. The U.S. must ask him to choose between a continued partnership with America and acquiescence in terrorism. Pakistan must stop militant infiltration and close down terrorist training camps and staging areas. U.S. should try to convince India to give Pakistan some time to implement that crackdown and should help India monitor whether Pakistan is meeting its pledges. Once it becomes clear that Pakistan is working to shut down infiltration into Kashmir, India should begin a phased demobilization of its troops in Kashmir and move to the negotiating table. And the U.S. should urge India to hold genuinely free elections in Kashmir later this year. At the same time, the U.S. should urge India and Pakistan to deal more seriously with the risk of nuclear war. Currently, India and Pakistan have inadequate arrangements to maintain lines of communication and prevent an unwanted military escalation that leads to a nuclear exchange. The U.S. should aim to improve communication between the two countries and to put more nuclear safeguards in place. The ultimate goal of a South Asia peace process should be to establish a political solution to the Kashmir problem. This task will be difficult, and will take time, but there may be a way to bridge the gap that divides India and Pakistan. While neither country could support a decision to concede Kashmir to the other, they both might eventually agree to one of the following solutions: 1. a permanent partition of the state along the current Line of Control; or 2. the establishment of a largely autonomous Kashmir with soft borders that allow for free transit into and out of India and Pakistan. South Asia has not been a primary concern of the United States in the past, but it must be today. With American and world security at stake, the U.S. should make an all-out effort to reduce tensions between India and Pakistan and initiate serious peace talks. Hamilton is the director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., and director of the Center on Congress at Indiana University. He served as a U.S. representative from Indiana from 1965 to 1999. Copyright 2002 The Indianapolis Star | Questions, comments? AP materials © 2002 Associated Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 25 Fences for Nuclear Safety Seem Insurmountable MOSCOW - In Russia, crate loads full of fences, sophisticated surveillance equipment, motion detectors and other security devices purchased by the US government to help improve the security of nearly 123 Russian nuclear warhead storage facilities are sitting, unopened, collecting dust. The US has funded security upgrade at nuclear powered icebreakers base Atomflot in Murmansk. photo: Aleksandr Raube Charles Digges, 2002-06-10 11:35 These security supplies were furnished under Nunn-Lugar act — also known as the Cooperative Threat Reduction act (CTR) — which has spent approximately $5 billion the past decade of its existence to upgrade security around a third of Russia's weapons grade plutonium and uranium. It has also dismantled or destroyed more than 5,000 Soviet warheads, along with hundreds of ballistic missiles, bombers, submarines and silos. Specifically, these stranded protection devices were paid for by the Materials, Protection, Cooperation and Accounting (MPC) program — one of many non-proliferation programs run by the US Department of Energy (DOE). The MPC, in particular, is the United States' flagship effort to secure, control and account for weapons-usable nuclear material in the former Soviet Union. For fiscal year 2003, the Bush administration has requested a total of $233 million for the MPC program — a figure that would have been considerably lower had it not been for September 11, according to a recent report on the US administration's non-proliferation budget published by the Russian American Nuclear Security Advisory Council (RANSAC), a private organization that advises the two governments. Indeed, the Bush White House only requested $173 million for the programme in 2002, but when Congress passed a supplemental funding package that gave MPC another $120 million in September 11's aftermath. Protection vs. paperwork MPC also has quietly become something of a political battlefield among warring hard line bureaucracies in Russia and the United States, and the fences and security equipment for Russian warhead sites are the spoils. The fences and security equipment lay untouched because of joint bureaucratic ineptitude on the part of the Pentagon and Moscow which both have their own abstruse, pedantic points to make about future non-proliferation activities in Russia, analysts suggest. The Pentagon says it would be happy to help put the fences up, but its hands are tied by a US federal Law — the Federal Acquisitions and Regulations act (FAR), which prevents the US government from paying for work it can't inspect. There is also no shortage of Pentagon hardliners — many of whom who would torpedo CTR over a long held view that subsidizing weapons destruction in Russia frees up money the Kremlin can divert to weapons development programmes. On the other side, Russia says it can't pay workers to install the equipment. Plus, the Russians don't want inspection teams from the Pentagon run CTR at the top-secret facilities where the security packages were headed. A source at Russia's Federal Security Service — the government counterintelligence service known as the FSB — told Bellona Web that the shipments could be packed with spy equipment. To cut through this red tape, there were even discussions of simply allowing a Polaroid photograph of someone to stand in front of a newly installed fence holding a current newspaper to suffice as proof for the Pentagon that the equipment had been installed, former and current CTR and DOE officials told Bellona Web. The problem of the unopened crates was confirmed by these same officials, as well as by a US Government Acquisitions Office report, and it must be noted that such snags are an exception. Approximately a third of Russia's weapons-grade and plutonium security has been upgraded thanks to Nunn-Lugar. But there's still enough weapons-grade uranium and plutonium, in more than 100 buildings Nunn-Lugar experts have never made security upgrades to, to make thousands of nuclear weapons. Indeed, former Senator Sam Nunn and Nunn-Lugar other-author, said at a gathering of arms specialists in Moscow last week that CTR has avoided such bureaucratic standoffs in 90 percent to 95 percent of the cases. Despite the program's successes, much remained to be done, said Sen. Richard Lugar, the other author of Nunn-Lugar act, at the Moscow gathering: Only 40 percent of Russia's nuclear storage sites have received US assistance to upgrade security, and new security systems had been installed in only 20 percent. In the face of such figures, the crated fence problem is absurd, but it highlights the mindless roadblocks that are also a part of Nunn-Lugar, which show no signs of abating even after September 11. ''That's an example of bureaucratic obstacles we have in this program,'' former Senator Sam Nunn said in reference to the fence hold-up at the Moscow gathering, which was arranged by the non-governmental Nuclear Threat Initiative, or NTI, which was founded by Nunn and media mogul Ted Turner, who pledged $250 the endeavour million over the next five years — the most money a private citizen has ever invested in non-proliferation. Nunn said he could not give any more details about the location US and Russian lawmakers of the stranded sh Editor's Note: This is the second article in a periodic series examining the Bush Administration's budget request for non-proliferation projects in the FSU. US White House Schizophrenia jeopardizes inspections What so frustrates RANSAC's Kenneth Luongo about the fence hold-up goes back to the Bush Administration's decision in March to not certify the Nunn-Lugar programmes — which derailed any opportunities in the foreseeable future — to get those fences up. By US law, CTR must be reviewed by the Pentagon annually to determine that Russia is 'committed' to its CTR obligations. This spring, the programme was not certified over questions of Russia's openness about chemical and biological stockpiles and over the Kremlin's refusal to share information about certain Soviet strains of bio-engineered Anthrax. This has led not only to a six to eight month lag time while congress develops a waiver granting the president the right to forgo certification, but also may have scratched for good an invitation from the Kremlin to CTR officials — an invitation US officials had tries to solicit for years — to inspect eight sensitive sites that would have received some of those dusty security crates. According to Luongo, there is no firm knowledge that US inspections teams actually visited the sites. But he did say that the Russians had quietly offered an invitation, which was quashed as soon as the Bush administration ground CTR activities to a halt by deciding against certification. "After six, seven, eight years, finally it's coming to fruition, and these guys pull the plug to make an ideological point," said Luongo in a telephone interview. "You know, where are we? It's the triumph of politics or polemics over practicality. Okay, you've made you political and rhetorical point about the Russians not making accurate declaration about CW and BW, so lets try to work on this problem — but in the meantime you've got this problem of warhead security which is being impeded." Luongo added that there have always been questions about the accuracy of Russia's reporting on it CW and BW stockpiles, but "we have been willing to work with them on this side in order to keep the main thrust of the CTR programme moving forward." The invitation to inspect the sites was hard-won and may never come up again. Even if the Russians were to re-extend it within the next weeks — while Congress debates what sort of waiver to grant the president — Luongo said the American defence bureaucracy wouldn't allow inspection teams to go. In short, nothing can happen until a waiver is approved. Bush antagonism of CTR Luongo added that the Bush Administration's antagonism of Nunn-Lugar began as soon as he took office with budget slashing plans in hand. After Sept. 11, though, Congress reversed the cut, freeing up $135 million in supplemental funding for the for the US-Russian proliferation programme. "Then the Bush administration makes an announcement right after the supplemental was passed saying ‘sorry this wasn't on our screen so next year we're going to pay more attention to it and increase the budget,'" said Luongo. " "So, this year they put together a decent budget and then they sabotaged themselves by doing this certification." Luongo said that there is "tension" within the administration about these non-proliferation programmes — tension which is brought out in bold relief whenever Bush takes the podium, as he did at the may summit, to speak of "eliminating the legacy of the cold war." "It is absurd on it s face to make a statement like that and then turn around and then not do anything to break this programme free from the current constraints that its under, "Luogo said incredulously. "Liquidating the legacy of the cold war IS what the CTR program IS all about." The waivers As to the question of the waiver, a House of Representatives bill has passed through to the Senate that would grant the president the right to pass a waiver for certification this year only. The Senate is also considering its own two versions of the bill, both of which would make the waiver permanent. But why certification was declined to begin with — thus setting in motion several months worth of US Government machinery to churn out the waiver — is a question that points most analysts to Pentagon hard line elements that have President Bush's ear. "I believe the request [to see information pertaining to Russia's bio- and chemical weapons programs] was made, in part, because they knew the Russians would refuse," Jon Wolfsthal, a former DOE official now at the Carnegie Endowment told Bellona Web. "What you've got is a bunch of ideologues saying the Russians owe us this information," said Luongo. "They're being pushed on by the intelligence agencies who have some kid of axe to grind on this question, I assume, and they decided not to certify." But the final point, in Luongo's view, is being made with the pedantry only pencil pushers can appreciate. "The politics of this waiver are not comprehendible," he said. [They're] putting at risk real security improvements for the sake of paper documentation, which you're never going to be able to verify to 100 percent anyway." 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 ***************************************************************** 26 Japan plays down comments by top official suggesting shift in nuclear stance Mon Jun 10, 1:42 AM ET By JOJI SAKURAI, Associated Press Writer TOKYO - Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and one of his top aides assured Parliament on Monday that, despite reports hinting otherwise, Japan is not planning to change its longstanding policy banning the possession, construction or transport of nuclear weapons on its soil. Koizumi has repeatedly tried to quell a fracas over Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda's recent remark that Japan is not legally prohibited from having nuclear arms — an assertion interpreted by some as a shift in Japan's long-standing anti-nuclear policy. "Our nation has been aggressively pursuing a diplomacy to promote nuclear non-proliferation and end nuclear tests," Koizumi said. "We are working hard to create a world where nuclear weapons don't exist." Fukuda's comments during a regular press conference two weeks ago — and the way in which the domestic media trumpeted them as a sudden swing in government policy — caused alarm in South Korea, China and Russia. They also came at a tense moment in the region, with nuclear-armed India and Pakistan exchanging war threats and beefing up their military presence in the hotly contested region of Kashmir. Fukuda insisted his comments were taken out of context. "It was reported that I hinted at a change in policy," Fukuda said before the Parliament session. "This is absolutely different from what my beliefs are." The atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki have given Japanese a deep aversion to nuclear weapons, and Tokyo has adhered to strict non-nuclear principles since the end of the war. The timing of the controversy was particularly bad because it broke just as Koizumi arrived in South Korea for the opening ceremony of the soccer World Cup — a key chance for the neighbors to bury animosity over Japan's colonization of the Korean Peninsula. In Seoul, Koizumi immediately denied any change in government policy when questioned about Fukuda's remarks. On Monday, Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi said she assured counterparts around the world that Japan is still committed to its non-nuclear principles. "We explained the meaning of the comments and received their understanding," Kawaguchi said. "There has been no diplomatic fall-out." Opposition parties have been aggressively playing up the Fukuda ruckus, even calling for his resignation, in an attempt to do more damage to Koizumi's wobbly administration. Fukuda's comments were in response to questions about a statement last month by Vice Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe that it might be acceptable for Japan to possess nuclear weapons "as long as they are small." Though Koizumi has strongly denied any desire for Japan to go nuclear, his administration is often seen as having a hawkish stance and has championed legislation that would allow Japan's military a wider role. In defending bills to give the government new military powers, Koizumi told Parliament this month that Japan has no choice but to be prepared for foreign attack. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 27 Looking Back on One Hell of a Summit Opinion / Moscow on the Potomac [http://www.moscowtimes.ru Monday, Jun. 10, 2002. Page 10 By Matt Bivens WASHINGTON -- Isn't it a huge improvement that we've agreed to take about 7,000 nuclear warheads off ballistic missiles? Because soon we'll have just 4,400 warheads aimed at each other, which is a completely different story. Before, we could each destroy about 5,500 targets in the other's country. But in about 10 years we'll each only be able to destroy at most 2,200 targets. Phew, what a relief! Has something you've read here startled you? Are you angry, excited, puzzled or pleased? Do you have ideas to improve our coverage? Then please write to us. All we ask is that you include your full name, the name of the city from which you are writing and a contact telephone number in case we need to get in touch. We look forward to hearing from you. So for Russia, a nuclear exchange will soon mean at most losing Moscow, St. Petersburg, Murmansk, Vladivostok, Omsk, Tomsk, Perm, Yekaterinburg, Vladikavkaz, Oryol, Ryazan, Pyatigorsk, Magnitogorsk, Lipetsk, Arkhangelsk and about 2,185 other targets. And the worst America can expect going toe-to-toe with the Russkies will be to lose New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, Houston, San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Denver, Dallas, Des Moines, Cleveland, Juneau, Philadelphia, and about 2,185 more targets. Granted, no one is planning to go toe-to-toe with anyone. And even if one did, there are few scenarios in which one launches all one's missiles, because those sneaky Chinese are still out there, so some nukes would be held back. Others might fail, or hit targets at sea. Then again, even if a few dozen of our 4,400 nukes were exchanged, it would be enough to cause unprecedented panic and death across vast swathes of our national territories. So thank goodness for the summit. True, not much was done about hundreds of missiles left on hair-trigger alert. Should early-warning systems report an incoming attack, the U.S. government allows itself a healthy 22 minutes to decide whether to nuke the enemy. The Russian government allows itself six minutes. There was that time in 1995 when Norway launched a scientific rocket and President Boris Yeltsin was warned the United States might be attacking. But that turned out all right in the end. As did the fire last May that cut Russia off from four of its military satellites. And then there are those, ahem, other warheads, the ones not loaded on missiles, like those "suitcase nukes" once described by the late General Alexander Lebed as "missing." We didn't hear much about them at the summit, but all told they come to another 23,000 or so. (No one knows for sure: The Cold War practice was to count and admit to missiles, not warheads.) Had our leaders put our collective arsenals on the table, they could have discussed a total of 33,500 nuclear weapons -- 11,000 of them American and 22,500 or so of them Russian, according to the Washington-based Arms Control Association. (To put it into perspective, runner-up China has about 400 nukes, 250 of them loaded on missiles, according to the Center for Defense Information.) Reducing this collective 33,000-plus warhead arsenal would have been smart and responsible. Few insist we need such a stockpile and many military experts argue we could do with far less. A Brookings Institution study three years ago asserted the United States could get by with just 200 nukes. (Russians eager to go toe-to-toe against that arsenal would need the stomach to risk Moscow, St. Petersburg, Murmansk, Vladivostok, Omsk, Tomsk, Perm, Yekaterinburg, Vladikavkaz, Oryol, Ryazan, Pyatigorsk, Magnitogorsk, Lipetsk, Arkhangelsk, and about 185 more targets.) But still, what a summit that was. And the good thing about any summit is that we're all still talking, still at the table, still "working together." Because if the summit had collapsed in acrimony, or under the weight of public ridicule, then ... then ... why, we'd have had to hold another summit. Matt Bivens, a former editor of The Moscow Times, is a Washington-based fellow of The Nation Institute [www.thenation.com [http://www.thenation.com] ]. ***************************************************************** 28 Hanford board sets terms for accelerated cleanup plan This story was published Sat, Jun 8, 2002 By John Stang Herald staff writer HOOD RIVER, Ore. -- The Hanford Advisory Board has declared its terms for accepting a Department of Energy proposal to speed up Hanford's cleanup. Some of the board's concerns include DOE improving plans for dealing with contaminated ground water, meeting existing legal obligations and dealing with barrels of transuranic wastes now stuck in bureaucratic limbo. In Hood River on Friday, the board finished writing a memo outlining its concerns about a DOE draft proposal on accelerating cleanup to the state and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. DOE hopes to work out an agreement on that plan with its regulators by Aug. 1. DOE proposes accelerating the following Hanford projects: Glassifying tank wastes, removing sludge from the K Basins, cleaning and demolishing the Plutonium Finishing Plant, rivershore cleanup, disposing of barrels of radioactive and chemical wastes, and tackling other programs. The board likes those goals. But it also frets that DOE might take legal shortcuts in speeding cleanup. But DOE and EPA officials said Thursday that it appears that the acceleration proposal won't jeopardize current Tri-Party Agreement standards, although the EPA cautioned this depends on DOE's annual budget requests to Congress. The state is still pondering this issue and is reserving comment. The board wrote Friday: "For the board to support implementation of the initiatives outlined in the plan, they must be shown to result in a quality cleanup that is fiscally and technically responsible." And the board opposes any proposal that does not meet the Tri-Party Agreement, which is the legal pact that governs Hanford's cleanup. The board said DOE's plan leaves out some Hanford matters, and those issues should be addressed. They include developing better plans for dealing with Hanford's contaminated ground water. The board also wants DOE's plan to tackle the barrels of potentially highly radioactive transuranic wastes that were stored before 1970. The definition "transuranic wastes" did not exist prior to 1970, which leaves numerous old barrels of Hanford wastes in a type of bureaucratic limbo. And the board said if DOE imports radioactive wastes from other sites to Hanford, it must ensure enough extra money is provided so the new wastes won't handicap Hanford's cleanup. Other stances named in the board's memo include: -- Tank waste glassification, the K Basins and the PFP should remain the site's top priorities. Exploring potential new ways to deal with the tank wastes should not slow down those projects. -- Exploring new ways to tackle the tank wastes and the environmental consequences of those ideas should be studied as soon as possible. -- A definition of "closing" a tank should be nailed down and should meet current legal environmental standards. -- South Carolina and Nevada are squaring off against DOE on sending plutonium to Savannah River and on building a permanent storage site for spent nuclear fuel and glassified high-level wastes at Yucca Mountain. The board believes DOE needs to have a backup plan for long-term storage of Hanford's plutonium, spent fuel and glassified high-level wastes in case the South Carolina and Nevada battles drag out for years. -- The board believes that the accelerated plan will cost extra money on an annual basis. And it worries about that money actually materializing. -- The board noted that this memo is its first chance to formally comment on DOE's proposal, and it believes it does not have adequate information to say it wholeheartedly supports or opposes the plan. Therefore, the board wants more future chances for the public to say what it thinks about the proposal. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 29 Thyroid disease research nears end This story was published Sun, Jun 9, 2002 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer Twelve years of research on whether radioactive releases from Hanford increased the risk of thyroid disease will conclude June 21 with a final report on the Hanford Thyroid Disease Study. No evidence was found that any kind of thyroid disease increased as a result of exposure to airborne releases of radioactive iodine from Hanford during the 1940s and 1950s, researchers announced in January of 1999. That finding was controversial among those who lived downwind of Hanford and believed their families' health was damaged by radiation exposure. At the time, $18 million had been spent on the study. The Centers for Disease Control contracted with the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center to complete the work. The Seattle cancer clinic studied a group of 3,440 people who were children when the largest amounts of radioactive material were released from Hanford. The study was mandated by Congress in 1988 after the Department of Energy released previously classified document showing large amounts of radioactive iodine had been released from Hanford. The radioactive iodine was carried by the wind to the northeast and fell to the ground, where it may have been consumed by people eating fruits and vegetables or drinking milk from cows that grazed on radioactive grass. Radioactive iodine is known to concentrate in the thyroid gland, posing a particular risk to the thyroids of young children. The Hanford Thyroid Disease Study relied on the Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction project, a comprehensive attempt to estimate the amount and type of radiation releases people were exposed to in areas downwind of Hanford. Then the thyroid study estimated the radiation doses for each participant, in part by interviewing them and their mothers about childhood activities. Scientists hypothesized that if radioactive iodine from Hanford caused increased disease, the percentage of damaged thyroids should increase with higher radiation doses. However, the draft study results said researchers found no increased thyroid cancer or other disease among those estimated to have the largest exposure to radioactive iodine as children. About a year after those draft findings were released, the National Research Council of the National Academies concluded that while researchers may have overstated the conclusiveness of their findings, their research was basically sound. Because of the difficulty of reconstructing exposures from a half century ago, some data may have been overestimated or underestimated, the review found. However, it concluded there was no large risk of thyroid cancer or other thyroid diseases associated with the Hanford fallout, although the study probably could not rule out a small risk or possibly a risk among some subgroups of especially susceptible people. Since then, Hutchinson researchers have continued to work with the data it collected, using National Academies recommendations to do different and additional analyses. The CDC has been reviewing results with the researchers. Final findings of the study will be announced at a public meeting 6 to 8:30 p.m. June 21 at the Red Lion Hanford House, 802 George Washington Way, Richland. Information also will be posted at www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation on the Internet. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 30 DOE: Hastings' good advice Published June 10, 2002 Last month, U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings came as close as we remember to giving the Tri-Cities a wake-up call about its dependence on Hanford. Hastings, in his speech at a Tri-City Industrial Development Council luncheon, urged those present to remember that the whole point of Hanford cleanup is for the federal government to work itself out of a job there - perhaps as soon as 2030. He reminded the crowd that the Tri-Cities needs to stop thinking of Hanford driving the economy and start focusing on how else the community can grow. Hanford has been a great economic engine that has brought talented people to the area and helped build a vibrant community with many of the benefits of a bigger city. But the Tri-Cities must find ways to continue to be attractive to potential newcomers long after Hanford. Hastings stopped short of saying the "C" word - consolidation - but his concern that our cities and counties need to cooperate was unmistakable. "We have to find a way to lower the barriers," he said. His words pertained directly to the levees that now wall off much of the Columbia River frontage in the Tri-Cities and should be lowered to allow this community to take better advantage of one of its greatest assets. But his advice applies just as well to any collaborative effort that can move this community further from the dependence our economy and public life have on Hanford. What's your opinon? Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 31 Flats deadline absurd Rocky Mountain News: Opinion Letters to the Editor, June 10 June 10, 2002 South Carolina has refused to accept plutonium from Rocky Flats, and this is being called a setback for environmentalists. Hogwash. Ever since the U.S. Department of Energy decided not to resume production at Rocky Flats, environmentalists have been urging them to build a safe, secure vault for plutonium. We knew nobody would take it. For 13 years environmentalists have demanded that the Rocky Flats site be cleaned to average background level for Colorado -- however long that took. For 40 years the government employed people there to make genocidal weapons. They can certainly employ many of the same people for the 20 or more years needed to redeem the land. The absurd 2006 deadline benefits land developers and frees DOE to build their new bomb-making "campus," probably at Los Alamos. To meet the deadline, the land must be called "clean" as it is. The wildlife refuge scam is to that purpose. Remember, the Rocky Mountain Arsenal has been called a wildlife refuge since the 1980s. Gary Erb Boulder ARCHIVES PHOTO REPRINTS FAQ 2002 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 32 Two to address state, future of Y-12 complex The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- 06/10/02 Bill Brumley, manager at the Y-12 site office for the National Nuclear Security Administration, and John Mitchell, president and general manager for BWXT Y-12, will present the "State and Future of the Y-12 National Security Complex" at 7 tonight in the main auditorium of the American Museum of Science and Energy. A reception will follow the presentation. This is the fifth year for the Community Lectures, which Friends of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory sponsors with support from UT-Battelle, Bechtel Jacobs, the American Museum of Science and Energy, BWXT Y-12, the Society of Mechanical Engineers and The Oak Ridger. [http://www.oakridger.com/contact/index.html] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 33 HAB mulls cleanup proposal This story was published Fri, Jun 7, 2002 By John Stang Herald staff writer HOOD RIVER, Ore. -- Lots of X factors exist in the Department of Energy's equations to mesh a proposed Hanford accelerated cleanup plan with the site's potential budgets for fiscal 2003 and 2004. And it could take weeks or months before some solid numbers can be plugged into those budget calculations. Thursday in Hood River, the Hanford Advisory Board chewed over some of those factors, as it prepared to tell DOE today what it thinks of the federal agency's proposal to speed up Hanford's cleanup. Several months ago, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham announced DOE's plan to speed nuclear cleanup nationwide. The acceleration proposal is tied directly to DOE's national nuclear cleanup budget requests from 2003 to 2008. DOE's master plan is to shrink its basic cleanup budget request from the 2002 level of $6.7 billion to $5.9 billion in 2003. But the 2003 budget request also sets aside another $800 million that will be divided among DOE sites that come up with accelerated cleanup plans that meet the approval of their regulators and DOE's Washington, D.C., headquarters. If $800 million is not enough, DOE said it will ask Congress for another $300 million to bump this fund up to $1.1 billion. Hanford has been the first DOE site to line up an acceleration plan to discuss with its regulators, although parts are not as detailed as all parties would like. In return, DOE promised to seek $433 million for Hanford from the $800 million to $1.1 billion request for set-aside acceleration money. DOE has set an Aug. 1 deadline to complete those talks with the state and Environmental Protection Agency. Hanford's 2002 budget is $1.723 billion. DOE originally requested $1.46 billion for Hanford in 2003. With the extra $433 million, Hanford's 2003 budget would be $1.893 billion. HAB member Gerald Pollet, representing Heart of America Northwest, warned against painting the proposed budget increase as $433 million, noting the real increase is $170 million, from $1.723 billion to $1.893 billion. And Pollet said that extra $170 million includes money to research alternatives to glassifying tank wastes, figure out how to close up tanks ahead of schedule and absorb some proposed extra glassification costs. Consequently, Pollet argued, the extra money to speed Hanford's cleanup is much less than it is publicly portrayed. DOE's acceleration proposal calls for speeding up glassifying the site's tank wastes, closing tanks early, exploring cheaper and quicker alternatives to glassifying some tank wastes, drastically accelerating cleanup along the Columbia River shore, cleaning up and demolishing the Plutonium Finishing plant years ahead of schedule, and accelerating disposal of radioactive and chemical wastes stored in barrels. Those goals have been universally praised in the Northwest. But those goals also have prompted universal concerns whether those objectives are feasible. And DOE's proposal also has sparked widespread concern in Hanford circles that the agency might take legal shortcuts in tackling accelerated cleanup On Thursday, Wade Ballard, DOE's assistant manager for planning and integration at Hanford, and Steve Wiegman, senior technical adviser for DOE's Office of River Protection, said DOE's acceleration plans will meet the current standards of the Tri-Party Agreement, which is the legal pact governing Hanford's cleanup. Mike Gearheard, the EPA's Northwest regional director, said his staff so far has not found any indications that DOE's proposal calls for any legal shortcuts. Mike Wilson, the state Department of Ecology's nuclear program manager, said the state is not ready to comment on DOE's plan. But he said the state won't let DOE slack off on meeting the Tri-Party Agreement's requirements. Gearheard said: "We are supportive and nervous and watching for the budget." Here are some of the X factors that fog up the acceleration and budget picture: -- DOE has promised $757 million so far out of the $800 million incentive fund to Washington, Nevada, Idaho, Tennessee and New Mexico. Remaining states with major DOE cleanup projects include South Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Kentucky. And South Carolina's Savannah River site's cleanup is almost on the same scale as Hanford's. Consequently, it appears likely DOE will have to seek the extra $300 million in acceleration money from Congress. -- DOE still is crunching its preliminary 2004 budget figures. The 2004 budget is the jump-off point for the 2005 through 2008 budget requests that DOE said it will try to lock in this year in return for the regulators signing off on its acceleration plans. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************