***************************************************************** 07/21/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.185 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY NUCLEAR REACTORS 1 Belarus: Health Risks Uncertain As Wildfires Burn In Chornobyl Zones 2 Rostov's security services take heed of The Guardian's report on 3 US: TVA to vote on $68.4M steam generator replacement NUCLEAR SAFETY 4 *France opens probe into Gulf War syndrome* 5 US: Lab workers get help for work-related illnesses 6 US: Radiation response criticized NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 7 US: Where to truck nuclear waste? 8 Nuclear Load Close to Australia 9 US: NUCLEAR WASTE: Making deal on Yucca gains favor 10 Russia Could Earn up to USD 20 Billion a Year by Storing Nuclear 11 US: Plug pulled on tainted water plans 12 US: Don't Fear Nuclear Waste 13 Fijian leader says nuclear waste transports through Pacific must be 14 US: Berkeley lab's tritium deemed not dangerous 15 US: Ely on route for Test Site nuclear dump - 16 US: Opinions:Yucca fight not over 17 Flotilla ready to stop nuclear ships 18 Nuclear ships in stand-off with protest in Tasman sea 19 Greenpeace continues Pacific protest 20 US: Activists concerned about seismic impacts on spent fuel at Diabl NUCLEAR WEAPONS 21 OPINION > Use of nuclear weapons and ‘a state’s existence’: 22 India's new president says nuclear arsenal secure 23 US: "Nuclear Offensive Arms Reductions Past and Present," US DEPT. OF ENERGY 24 Energy Department may leave more waste at Hanford 25 Compensation available to SRS workers 26 Judge halts Barnwell chemical plant shutdown 27 Flats officials focus on pipes OTHER NUCLEAR 28 Accelerator research facility brings Middle East scientists together ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Belarus: Health Risks Uncertain As Wildfires Burn In Chornobyl Zones By Valentinas Mite Dry weather and human carelessness have resulted in dozens of wildfires in the region of Belarus most affected by the 1986 Chornobyl nuclear disaster. The Belarusian Emergency Situations Ministry admitted the fires have elevated radiation levels in the area, but have not said what threat, if any, the rise poses to residents in the region. Prague, 19 July 2002 (RFE/RL) -- Hundreds of hectares of forestland and peat bogs are burning in the Belarusian regions of Homel, Brest, and Mahileu. In 1986, all three of these regions absorbed much of the radioactive fallout of the Chornobyl nuclear disaster. A 1,700-square-kilometer plot of land in Homel remains fenced off to this day, and a number of villages in Brest and Mahileu have been permanently evacuated. Scientists in Belarus say the country received 70 percent of the nuclear fallout from the accident. Much of the radiation accumulated in Belarusian forestland, and ecologists warn that wildfires can raise the radiation levels. State authorities, however, say the region has experienced far worse fires in recent years, and that the current wildfires pose no serious risk. Anatol Hatoushys is a local free-lance journalist based in Homel. He said there are severe wildfires burning in the Yelchinskii and Stolinskii raions located between the Homel and Brest regions. He said that more than 1,000 hectares of forestland and peat bogs were burning this week. Some 4,000 people are working to try to put out the fires. "Half of Yelchinskii Raion is covered with smoke and it is bad for people. The people are very afraid," Hatoushys said. A monthlong drought and high temperatures have created the possibility for even more fires to break out in coming days. Hatoushys said people fear radiation levels are rising but that there is no credible information coming from the state on the affect of the fires on the radiation zones. In some areas, uncertainty is so great that many people have opted to stay indoors as much as possible, their windows tightly sealed against the smoke. Hatoushys said there have been fires in Homel's evacuated safety zone. "There were fires in the zone. In the beginning of the summer there was a fire in a part of the zone near Choiniki, when the village of Kazuchki burned down," Hatoushys said. Ilona Ivanova is a free-lance journalist based in Mahileu, another region affected by the fires. Ivanova said there are many areas in Mahileu that were evacuated in 1986 because of high radiation. In Karsnopolskii, the most contaminated of Mahileu's districts, dozens of hectares of grassland and forests have already been devastated by the wildfires. Ivanova said local authorities say firefighters in the region have already extinguished more than 500 fires. Despite warnings from officials to avoid high-radiation forests hit by this summer's fires, many Mahileu residents continue to go to the forests to pick berries and mushrooms. She said people living in the Mahileu region understand the dangers of radioactivity but are tired of being afraid. "You see, during those years after the Chornobyl disaster, people living in the contaminated regions got used to it and now they don't pay any attention to it," Ivanova said. State authorities say everything is being done to stop the spread of the fires. Kiril Danilov is a senior inspector in the department of propaganda and training in the Emergency Situations Ministry. He told RFE/RL there has been no increase in radiation levels in the towns near the wildfires, and that a number of the larger fires in the Homel region have been put out in the past several days. He added that this year's fires are not as serious as a series of wildfires that broke out in the region two years ago, when the smell of smoke reached as far away as the capital Minsk, some 400 kilometers from Homel. Ecologists admit the fires are not as severe as those two years ago but say they are dangerous nonetheless. Vladimir Chuprov of the Russian branch of the Greenpeace environmental group told RFE/RL that every wildfire in the contaminated areas poses a threat. "It is dangerous. The forests absorbed the radioactive elements released during the Chornobyl accident. These include the most dangerous ones: cesium and strontium. [The trees] absorb radioactive elements, and any wildfire will release these radioactive elements," Chuprov said. Chuprov said the firefighters face the biggest danger because strontium and cesium are both easily inhaled. He said the wind can carry radioactive elements distances of 40 or 50 kilometers and put even people living far from the fires at risk. © 1995-2001 Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, Inc., All Rights Reserved. http://www.rferl.org ***************************************************************** 2 Rostov's security services take heed of The Guardian's report on theft at Rostov nuclear power plant Pravda.RU ¹ Jul, 19 2002 Rostov security agencies have taken heed of a report published in The Guardian which claims radioactive substances have been stolen from a nuclear power plant near Rostov, Aleksander Turinsky, in charge of the press service of the Federal Security Service, or FSB, Rostov region department, told in a RIA Novosti interview. The Guardian, referring to US authorities, wrote that Chechen militants may now possess radioactive materials stolen from a nuclear power plant located near Rostov. Mr Turinsky qualified the article as part of the information and psychological war being waged by terrorists, fighters and their accomplices. The security agency will certainly make a relevant inquiry since the report is too serious to be disregarded, said Mr Turinsky. Yet, he pointed to facts cited in the article which question the trustworthiness of the information. Besides, the fact that the British newspaper was provided with this sort of information by US officials proves that the latter are still pursuing the policy of double standards towards terrorists, noted the FSB officer. © RIAN ***************************************************************** 3 TVA to vote on $68.4M steam generator replacement By The Associated Press July 21, 2002 CHATTANOOGA - The Tennessee Valley Authority is preparing to spend $68.4 million to replace the steam generators at its newest nuclear station, barely six years into the plant's 40- to 60-year operating life. TVA directors are scheduled to vote during a board meeting Tuesday in Hickory, Ky., on the Westinghouse Electric Co. contract for the Watts Bar nuclear plant near Spring City, about 50 miles north of Chattanooga. "There was an industry-identified vibration problem in these steam generators that has caused some tube degradation," TVA spokesman John Moulton said. "By replacing the steam generators, we will reduce our future maintenance costs and help assure more reliable operation of our nuclear units." The tubes carry heat from the reactor to boil water that drives the turbines that generate electricity. The more tubes plugged by vibration problems, the less power the plant generates. The new steam generators, which will be installed in 2006, are similar to generators being added next year to TVA's Sequoyah nuclear plant near Soddy-Daisy. In 1986, TVA settled a claim against Westinghouse over steam generator problems and obtained an extended warranty on the equipment until 1994. But Watts Bar, which took 24 years to build and get licensed, didn't begin operation until 1996. Both Sequoyah and Watts Bar are Westinghouse-designed pressurized water reactors. TVA's other operating nuclear plant, the Browns Ferry plant in Athens, Ala., is a boiling water reactor and won't require the replacement of such steam generators. However, TVA directors are expected to vote Tuesday on a six-year, $820-million contract to Stone &Webster Engineering Corp. for maintenance and repairs at Browns Ferry. The contract includes $450 million toward recovering the Unit 1 reactor, which has been idle 22 years. The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 *France opens probe into Gulf War syndrome* *Tuesday, July 23, 2002* Bahrain Local Time PARIS: More than 10 years after the end of the Gulf War, the French courts are for the first time looking at whether French veterans suffering from so-called ÔGulf War syndromeÕ were victims of negligence. Paris prosecutors opened a judicial investigation for Òmanslaughter and unintentional injuriesÓ in mid-June, handing it over to examining magistrate Marie-Odile Bertella Geffroy, an expert on health issues, court sources said. Civil complaints on behalf of a dozen French veterans Ð two of whom have died Ð have been filed, prompting prosecutors to launch the inquiry, the sources said. Gulf War syndrome is a term popularly applied to a vast range of symptoms among veterans of the 1990-91 conflict with Iraq, from memory loss, chronic fatigue and dizziness to swollen joints, depression and lack of concentration. About 100,000 US troops as well as thousands of British, Canadian and French troops who took part in the operation against Baghdad have reported one or more of these problems. Several explanations for the syndrome, ranging from exposure to depleted uranium in artillery shells to vaccines and poison gas antidotes, have been put forward. A French association for Gulf War victims, Avigolfe, says that eight of its members have died from Gulf War illnesses and that around 30 deaths have been recorded nationwide. ÒSeveral hundred say they have shown symptoms that could be the result of exposure of toxic materials,Ó said Christine Abdelkrim-Delanne, a consultant to Avigolfe. Roger Salamon, a director at the National Institute for Health and Medical Research (INSERM) who conducted a study on the syndrome, said Gulf War veterans had shown characteristic symptoms at an above-average rate. A report from the countryÕs National Assembly on health dangers posed to soldiers serving in the Gulf concluded that those in command may have been unprepared but had not made any outright mistakes in treating at-risk troops. Ð AFP ***************************************************************** 5 Lab workers get help for work-related illnesses Albuquerque Tribune Online TAGS BETWEEN PARAGRAPHS AS SHOWN --> By Thomas Weiler [tweiler@abqtrib.com] Tribune Reporter Harold Ide never saw the enemy, never fired a shot, yet he fought for his country until the day he died. "He was a sick boy, I'll tell you," said Rose Ann Ide as she reminisces about the final days of her husband's life. Now, Ide, and many others in a similar situation, are trying to take advantage of a compensation program designed to help federal employees in the Department of Energy stricken with work-related illnesses. The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, which began in July 2001, is striving to make sure that these old soldiers don't just fade away. The program awards $150,000 in lump sum compensation, in addition to related medical expenses, to all workers determined to have contracted certain diseases while working for the Department of Energy. Sparked by the Cold War, New Mexico's two national laboratories, under the direction of the Department of Energy, blossomed into busy nuclear research centers. Pacing the arms race, employees at Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories worked on many defense projects with potentially harmful toxic and radioactive materials. "We have quite a number of people who have been exposed to that nature of work," said Floyd Archuleta, site manager of the Energy Employees Compensation Resource Center in Espanola. Archuleta helps coordinate different outreach programs across the state where local energy employees, who think they have gotten sick from their toxic travails, can seek compensation. Last week, Archuleta was overseeing claims in Albuquerque, and plans are being made to hold a similar outreach event for employees in Carlsbad. Almost all diseases covered are those that result from exposure to beryllium, silica, or radiation. Archuleta said that, because of the nature of these factors, "most of our claims have been for cancer." Harold Ide falls into this category. His myeloma, a lung disease caused by radiation, was first detected in 1996. It may have been as a result of his work as a biochemist at Los Alamos National Laboratory in the 1980s. "It seems to fit the description," said Ide, who is preparing her claim with the help of a longtime friend and neighbor, Frank Zinn. But proving that his illness was caused by working at the labs is a difficult task. There could have been many possible causes for Ide's cancer, and unless his records can prove that his cancer was highly likely to have been work-related, then his family will get no financial help. Whether Ide did get sick from working at the lab, it doesn't change the struggle he and his loved ones endured. "He sure had a lot of medical bills," said Zinn who worked alongside Ide at Los Alamos. These bills and Ide's devastating cancer made life hard for both Ide and his wife up until his death in May 1998. "I really had my hands full because I had to keep running back and forth to the doctor," said Rose Ann Ide. Now she is busy again, wading through the proper channels to earn compensation for her late husband's illness. Archuleta said, "No compensation's worth can make up for a person's health," but, "we want to make sure that people know of this opportunity." Paul Gallegos, aware of the opportunity, is another retired employee of the department of energy who is trying to collect a piece of the pie, as well as some peace of mind. An employee of Sandia National Laboratories for slightly more than 30 years, Gallegos now suffers from an unidentified lung problem. He says he started out as a custodian for the labs, but, during his career, spent time working in the mailroom and the archives department. "I've been in every room in the lab," says Gallegos, who steadily climbed the ranks at Sandia before retiring in 1997. He and his wife Mary Gallegos, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, say that life has been harder since Gallegos fell ill, and the compensation would help them pay off old bills. "We can't do what we used to," said Paul Gallegos, who is being treated with oxygen and inhalers. For now, Gallegos waits and hopes that his claim is accepted. In New Mexico, as of July 9, more than a third of the 2,193 claims have been rejected. This high refusal rate means that the only cases that make it through are those where it can be proven overwhelmingly likely that the workplace was the cause of the employee's illness. Archuleta said the likelihood of the illness being work-caused must be proven, "at least as likely as not related to the covered employment." This means that the chance that the disease is work-related must be as likely as all other factors combined. A panel at the program's regional office shoulders this task and scrutinizes each applicant's medical records. Using this information, panel members attempt "dose reconstruction", an exercise in determining whether the "dose" of toxic material employees may have experienced was the cause of their illness. Ultimately, the burden of proof falls on the claimant, and this often means rejection. Even though their claims have yet to be judged, both Ide and Gallegos are pleased with the program and the chance it offers. Gallegos said for him and his fellow workers, "It's a good program." Archuleta said that all sick employees, both currently employed and retired, can apply for the compensation, but it is especially important for those retired workers on a fixed income. Even though the Cold War is over, its casualties keep growing. Archuleta said employees like Gallegos and Ide "were soldiers of the Cold War in their own right." There's no parade for these soldiers, no memorial, but with the help of the compensation program, there is a chance for help. A FEDERAL CHALLENGE The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, which began in July 2001, offers employees a chance to collect $150,000 for work-related ilnness, mainly cancer. But getting the money is challenging, program records show. As of July 9, 2,193 claims have been filed by energy employees in New Mexico. Accepted: 685 Rejected: 1,508 © The Albuquerque Tribune. ***************************************************************** 6 Radiation response criticized Asbury Park Press | Story   July 21, 2002 The Jersey Shore's News Source   Published in the Asbury Park Press 7/21/02 By JOSEPH PICARD STAFF WRITER The civil-defense plan being put in place in case of a radiation release in New Jersey drew sharp criticism from two fronts last week. An expert in radiology from Weill Medical College of Cornell University in New York, the manufacturer of the radiation-blocking pill being distributed by the state both said New Jersey is endangering its residents with a flawed plan. The state, however, defends its measures which include distribution of the pills and evacuation of residents as sufficient in the event of an accident or attack at one of the state's four nuclear power plants. One of those is the Oyster Creek plant in Lacey. On July 13, the state Department of Health and Senior Services began distributing doses of potassium iodide to people who live or work within 10 miles of a nuclear reactor, in an area called an emergency planning zone. Critics say the zone should be expanded to at least 50 miles. Potassium iodide protects the thyroid gland from the intrusion of radioactive iodide, which could cause thyroid cancer. The pills do not protect the body from other radiation-related injuries, the state health commissioner has said. According to the World Health Organization, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other public health and emergency-preparedness organizations, however, thyroid cancer and other thyroid ailments were the only illnesses that showed significant long-term increases in the areas of Eastern Europe contaminated from the radioactive release from Chernobyl in 1986. That was the only major accidental release from a nuclear power plant in history and, therefore, a main subject of research. "Evacuation and the use of potassium iodide pills would have significantly reduced the incidence of thyroid cancer," said NRC Commissioner Nils J. Diaz regarding Chernobyl, in a speech last month. The federal Food and Drug Administration says that a 130-milligram dose of potassium iodide will protect an adult's thyroid from radioactive iodide for at least 24 hours. Half that dose will sufficiently protect children, the FDA says. People with iodine sensitivity may have allergic reactions to the pills. Following the attacks of Sept. 11, the NRC began to make potassium iodide pills freely available to the 33 states where nuclear reactors are located. New Jersey accepted the offer and, in April, received 722,000 130-milligram doses. The NRC, upon whose model the state fashioned its 10-mile-radius emergency planning zones, recommended each inhabitant of such a zone receive two doses. One such zone surrounds the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey, and includes people from Barnegat, Barnegat Light, Beachwood, Berkeley, Dover Township, Harvey Cedars, Island Heights, Lacey, Long Beach Township, Pine Beach, Waretown, Ocean Gate, Seaside Park, Ship Bottom, South Toms River, Stafford and Surf City. The state's other emergency planning zone encircles the state's three other nuclear plants Salem I, Salem II and Hope Creek in Lower Alloways Creek in Salem County. The state decided to give each person in the planning zones one dose of potassium iodide and to stockpile the remainder of the pills, to be distributed as needed in an emergency. Dr. Clifton R. Lacy, New Jersey's health commissioner, said the state considered potassium iodide distribution as one component of its larger $25 million emergency-response plan. "Evacuation and sheltering are still the primary modes of protection in a radiological emergency," Lacy said. He explained that, if an incident occurs, people within the 10-mile radius would be instructed to take their potassium iodide pill and follow instructions for evacuation from the zone. The state expects to have all exposed people relocated to emergency centers before the one-day dosage wears off. But critics say both the 10-mile radius and the offered dosage are too small. "In an area as congested as New Jersey, chances for successful evacuation are minuscule," said David Becker, professor of medicine and radiology at Weill Cornell Medical School in New York, and an expert on radiation and thyroid cancer. "That is why the American Thyroid Association recommends an emergency zone of at least a 50-mile radius and at least two doses per person of potassium iodide." The American Thyroid Association, of which Becker is a member, also recommends additional stockpiling of potassium iodide in households within the 50-mile zone, as well as stockpiles in public facilities within a 200-mile radius. Alan Morris, owner of Anbex.com, a Branchville-based manufacturer of potassium iodide pills, called the state's plan to evacuate "ridiculous" and said, therefore, that one or two doses of potassium iodide "will not guarantee anyone's safety." "In a situation where evacuation is impossible, an individual needs at least 14 doses of KI to ensure safety from thyroid poisoning," Morris said. KI is the chemical symbol for potassium iodide. "The evidence from Chernobyl shows that radioactive iodide traveled 300 miles from the plant. If you're going to evacuate, you have to evacuate an area larger than the entire state. You can't evacuate, so you need more pills." The state, however, defended its plan. "In the unlikely event of an actual emergency, the state police are prepared to put their reverse-lane strategy into action to facilitate evacuation," Lacy said. For example, all or most of the eastbound lanes of Route 72 between Long Beach Island and the mainland would be converted by police to westbound lanes, officials said. "A second pool of KI pills will be waiting at reception centers" outside the emergency planning zone, Lacy said. "And a third pool of KI in mobile units will also be available wherever needed." Patricia Milligan, emergency preparedness specialist at the NRC, said New Jersey should feel confident with the 10-mile radius the commission developed. "We arrived at the 10-mile zone through studying a long series of worst-case scenarios," Milligan said, adding that almost all the most dangerous agents released from Chernobyl entered the stratosphere or fell to the ground within the first 10 miles of dispersion. "The cases of thyroid cancer found hundreds of miles from Chernobyl were not caused by inhalation, but through ingesting contaminated food and milk," Milligan said. "Authorities in those areas were slow to remove contaminated food supplies. That would not happen in the U.S." Morris countered that, in order to contaminate food supplies, the radioactivity had to be airborne for great distances. "And rather than distribute the necessary pills, the government is going to embargo food supplies for thousands of square miles?" Morris asked. "Does that make sense?'' The NRC is buying 9 million po-tassium iodide pills from Anbex.com for about $1.6 million which comes out to $2.50 per every 14 pills for free distribution to the states. A 14-pack of Anbex potassium iodide pills sells to the public for $10. Milligan called the businessman's motives into question, saying that if the zone were expanded as Morris wanted, he could sell more pills. Morris denied that was why he wanted the zone expanded, and pointed out that the American Thyroid Association was calling for a larger radius. "The nuclear industry would rather revile me than face this serious issue," Morris said. Commissioner Lacy said other companies as well as Anbex.com sell the pills on the Internet, and they are available in some pharmacies. Those interested can ask their druggist or physician. ***************************************************************** 7 Where to truck nuclear waste? DallasNews.com | Dallas-Fort Worth | Texas/Southwest Oklahoma highways may be part of route to Yucca Mountain 07/21/2002 Associated Press TULSA, Okla.  Oklahoma's position between nuclear facilities in the South and a planned underground storage site in the Nevada desert means waste shipments will likely pass through the state. The routes for the 3,200 tons of waste a year from the 130 storage facilities across the country to Yucca Mountain in Nevada haven't been chosen. But if current guidelines are used, Oklahoma would see its share even though it doesn't store any radioactive waste or have any nuclear power plants, the U.S. Department of Energy says. Shipments won't begin until 2010 at the earliest, and nuclear waste has passed through Oklahoma before almost unnoticed. The possibility of shipments has become part of the governor's race. Former Gov. David Walters, who is seeking the Democratic nomination to challenge Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., has proposed changing transportation regulations to keep the waste from moving through Oklahoma. Governor from 1991-1995, Mr. Walters has run radio ads criticizing Mr. Inhofe for his support of the Yucca Mountain repository and highlighting potential dangers if a waste-hauling truck crashes in Oklahoma. "We need a senator who'll stand up for Oklahoma," Mr. Walters says in the commercial. "The politicians in Washington may not like it, but if I'm your next senator, they'll be looking for a different route for their nuclear waste." Potential paths Mr. Walters has distributed the Energy Department's map of potential routes through Oklahoma, which include Interstates 40 and 35, and data by the Environmental Working Group that 254,000 Oklahomans live within a mile of those routes. "We know there are terrorists out there that want to do us harm, and their Number one target is nuclear," Mr. Walters said. "For goodness sakes, don't put it out on trunks and barges and put it out there for terrorists to blow up." The commercials have roused Mr. Inhofe, who had chosen to publicly ignore Mr. Walters until after the Aug. 27 primary. The Republican has said that the mapped routes are not final and that Mr. Walters' "scare tactics" have led concerned residents to call his office. Mr. Inhofe distributed a background sheet on Yucca Mountain "that was prompted by his [Mr. Walters'] campaign, by the fact that he was scaring older people," the senator said. "We want to inform them that they are safe." Mr. Inhofe said that the government has transported nuclear material for 35 years without a hazardous accident and that storing the waste in one underground site is safer than keeping it in 130 sites around the country. "Anyone that tells you there's a danger in transporting this waste is just not telling you the truth," he said, adding that the information about shipments is being disseminated by groups that oppose nuclear power. Remaining roadblocks Congress approved the Yucca Mountain repository, about 90 miles north of Las Vegas, on July 9. However, the approval didn't end the debate. Nevada filed five lawsuits to block the site's use, and the Energy Department still needs a building permit from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Energy Department uses several guidelines in choosing its routes, which must finally be approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said department spokesman Joe Davis. Officials talk with governors of states along a proposed route and mayors of affected cities, he said. Safety and security, road conditions and the shortest distance between departure and destination points are also factored in. "Under current regulations, Oklahoma does have possible routes that would be a direct route to Yucca Mountain," Mr. Davis said. "But regulations change. Ten years from now, it could be entirely different." Oklahoma is between Yucca Mountain and both the Savannah River Site in South Carolina and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. DallasNews.com ***************************************************************** 8 Nuclear Load Close to Australia Las Vegas SUN: July 21, 2002 CANBERRA, Australia- A shipment of nuclear fuel is close to Australia and will try to pass through a fleet of protest ships off its east coast on Sunday, opponents said. British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. is moving about 500 pounds of plutonium from Japan to Britain via the South Pacific on two ships. The environmental group Greenpeace said Sunday that 11 ships have formed an anti-nuclear flotilla, positioning themselves between Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Island, where the ships carrying the plutonium are expected to travel. Lord Howe Island is a rocky outcrop 200 miles northeast of Sydney with a permanent population of about 280 people. Norfolk Island is east of Lord Howe with traditional shipping lanes passing between the two islands. Greenpeace nuclear campaigner James Courtney said the two ships had slowed in the past 24 hours and were preparing for a nighttime run through the anti-nuclear fleet. The protesters contend the shipment poses a threat to the environment. The armed cargo vessels set off from Japan on July 4 for a two-month journey to take rejected radioactive material back to its maker in Britain. Japan's Kansai Electric Power Co. imported the fuel in 1999 for an experimental nuclear power program. But British Nuclear Fuels, the fuel's maker, later admitted it had falsified quality records and agreed to ship the fuel back to Britain. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 9 NUCLEAR WASTE: Making deal on Yucca gains favor Sunday, July 21, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Percentage who feel state should fight project in court drops sharply after Senate vote By KEITH ROGERS © 2002 LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL Let's make a deal. That's what an increasing number of Nevadans believe the state should do for hosting the nation's nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, according to a poll taken after the Senate decided July 9 to go forward with the project. A telephone survey of 625 registered Nevada voters conducted a few days after the Senate voted 60-39 to approve the project shows Nevadans now are almost split on the question of making a deal for money or benefits. But after Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham recommended the site, six months before the Senate vote, only one-third of the respondents in a similar poll agreed that state leaders should make a deal. Nearly two-thirds of the respondents in that poll said Nevada leaders should not attempt to get as much federal money as possible in exchange for hosting a nuclear waste repository. "I was real intrigued what the answer was going to be compared to what it was back in February when the sentiment was anti-Yucca. It's interesting how people react once they've lost," said Brad Coker, managing director of Mason-Dixon Polling &Research Inc. in Washington, D.C., which conducted the poll. In a 1990 Review-Journal poll, an overwhelming number of Nevadans, 70 percent, opposed making a deal for monetary benefits; only 23 percent favored seeking compen- sation. Coker said the most recent survey indicates Nevadans view the repository as inevitable "and maybe they ought to get what they can." In the survey, conducted July 12 through July 15 for reviewjournal.com and the Review-Journal, Coker's firm found that 43 percent of the respondents favor making a deal while 49 percent would rather continue to fight the decision in court. Eight percent were not sure about what to do. Coker said the 8 percent who "are sitting on the fence tells me they might be persuadable to take a settlement. The state is more or less split down the middle on what to do next," he said. The poll carries a margin of error of not more than plus or minus four percentage points. More Nevadans seem to be thinking about economic benefits even though they opposed the project because, Coker said, "If you're going to have bad news, you might as well get something sweet with it." Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency and one of the most vocal opponents of the project the past 20 years, suggested the most recent numbers are a result of "post-vote blues." Loux said he wasn't surprised that the poll showed more Nevadans want to negotiate. But, he said, "I don't think those numbers will hold up. "It reflects disappointment that most Nevadans feel generally in what happened and not much more than that," he said Friday. Former Nevada Gov. Robert List, now a consultant for the Nuclear Energy Institute, said the latest poll results are "consistent with what I'm hearing from people." "They are saying inevitability is coming into focus, and we think it is a mistake to waste our tax dollars by giving the money to attorneys. Let's get real," said List, who advocates reaping economic benefits and protections for the state. He said the poll results are not an indication Nevadans approve of the project. Instead, "They're saying the time has come to be practical. Our state has tremendous needs. This is a massive project that could mean thousands of good jobs and put hundreds of millions of dollars into our economy. We're crazy if we get all of the bad and none of the good," List said. "They're not mad at the elected officials," he said. "They thought they fought a good fight. But they are increasingly saying we need to reposition ourselves." Immediately after the Senate vote, List said the opening figure for negotiations should be $100 million a year, and "we ought to do better than that." Also immediately after the vote, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said, "There is no deal to be made now, nor will there be a deal to be made in the future." Nevada currently has six lawsuits pending against the project. A breakdown of the respondents shows differences in how men and women feel about striking a deal. Similar differences were shown in political party affiliations. For example, only 39 percent of male respondents favored fighting the project in courts, while 54 percent supported making a deal. Conversely, 59 percent of female respondents want to keep fighting, and only 32 percent want to negotiate for benefits. Most Democrats, 59 percent, want to continue to fight the project, while only 31 percent favor a deal. Of Republicans polled, only 39 percent want to battle the project in courts, and 54 percent lean toward making a deal. Coker, a 19-year veteran of the polling business, said though he's not a psychologist, the gender split is an indication that women tend to be more pro-environmental on some issues, and men view the situation from a business perspective. "Women are maybe more concerned about the safety of their kids and their neighborhoods," he said. His observation is the gender split parallels party lines, in that more women are registered as Democrats, while more men are Republicans. "Women see this as (President) Bush trying to ram this down their throats," Coker said. "Men don't want to turn this into a bigger issue. They are saying, `Let's get some money and move on.' " Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 10 Russia Could Earn up to USD 20 Billion a Year by Storing Nuclear Waste Pravda.RU Jul, 19 2002 Russia could earn up to USD 20 billion a year by storing nuclear waste, according to an announcement made on Friday on Radio-1 by Maxim Yakovenko, the Russian Deputy Minister for Natural Resources and the head of the State Environmental Protection Service. 'It is a colossal business,' he explained. 'Judge for yourselves: it costs USD two thousand to store just one kilogram of waste'. According to the deputy minister, there is currently fierce competition between South-East Asian countries for this business. Bulgaria has also recently joined the fight. Yakovenko pointed out that most developed countries are currently increasing the proportion of electricity they receive from nuclear power stations. According to his figures, the US is planning to generate 60% of its electricity from nuclear power, and Japan intends to produce 100% of its electricity by this means. In a reply to a question about the dangers involved in this business, Yakovenko declared that 'the Russian Ministry for Atomic Energy is the most important ministry in terms of technological development. Everything connected with nuclear energy in our country has traditionally had a very high level of safety precautions'. © RosBalt Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU [http://www.pravda.ru/] ". When reproducing ***************************************************************** 11 Plug pulled on tainted water plans Philadelphia Inquirer | 07/20/2002 | [http://www.philly.com] CCMUA officials decided that radioactivity must be treated before reaching sewer lines. By Elisa Ung Inquirer Staff Writer Responding to public outcry against a plan to use the sewer system to treat water tainted with low levels of radioactivity, Camden County utilities commissioners have decided that all discharges into the system must meet drinking-water standards. The GEMS Landfill Trust planned to send about 200,000 gallons a day of contaminated water from under the Gloucester Township landfill and Superfund site through sewer mains in Gloucester Township, Runnemede, Bellmawr, Mount Ephraim and Gloucester City to the county treatment plant in Camden. The radium- and uranium-tainted water, diluted by millions of gallons of effluent, would then be flushed into the Delaware. Officials had said the plan posed no health risks. But environmentalists questioned its safety, and an outpouring of public concern led Camden County to seek a delay, though a U.S. District Court judge rejected the bid. The new Camden County Municipal Utilities Authority policy means that GEMS must treat water at the plant before it can be discharged. "We decided that it was the right thing to do scientifically, as well - to minimize the risk as much as possible," said Andrew Kricun, deputy executive director of the authority. "There may be future Superfund sites coming to us; there are others in Camden and Gloucester City that have begun talking about discharges," Kricun said. "We needed a consistent standard across the board for all these situations." The GEMS trust represents about 300 firms that dumped asbestos, solvents and heavy metals into the 60-acre site from the 1950s until the early 1980s. Federal and state environmental agencies had asked the CCMUA to start treating the radium- and uranium-tainted water from the site this summer. A temporary discharge from the pre-treatment plant into a local stream had been under way for about three months. Last week the agencies extended that for six months so officials could study the groundwater and possible treatment methods. Contact Elisa Ung at 856-779-3997 or [eung@phillynews.com] . ***************************************************************** 12 Don't Fear Nuclear Waste The Salt Lake Tribune -- Sunday, July 21, 2002 BY STEVEN C. BARROWES The opinion piece by David Yurth in The Salt Lake Tribune (June 30) contained some startling pieces of "information" which he uses to call the Yucca Mountain project "insane." Actually it is his bold revelations that might be called insane, considering his lack of accurate information. Let's consider his major points. He says neutron embrittlement, or hardening, is a concern on aging reactors because after 30 or 40 years, parts of the water coolant plumbing could fail if parts become too brittle, causing an emergency shutdown. But tests are done and parts replaced (if necessary) before they get their 20-year license extension. Because in canisters of used nuclear fuel (UNF) the neutron flux is thousands of times less, the canister materials would tend to keep their ductility thousands of times longer. Further, the canisters are under little stress, so cracks are unlikely to develop. Yurth claims that zirconium is selected for the fuel rod cladding because of its transparency to neutrons, which is partly true. Stainless steel cladding is less transparent, but both have been used because the fuel rods must not corrode in the water of the reactor or the UNF storage pool. However, there is no loss of neutron transparency over time. The fuel rods are removed for only two reasons: (1) The fissionable fuel, U235, becomes mostly used up; and (2) Neutron poisons or neutron-absorbing atoms are accumulated as part of the fission waste, i.e. from the splitting of U235 atoms. The leftover atoms include some neutron absorbers. He complains that after the zirconium loses its transparency (which it doesn't), the "rods become very unstable and dangerous" with the "danger of uncontrollable fission." He should reprimand whoever told him this because the used fuel pellets in the rods, with or without the zirconium cladding, are not capable of uncontrolled fission because they are both low on fuel and packed with added boron, which absorbs neutrons and stops any chain reaction. He notes with alarm that press releases from DOE and NRC "almost always focus on the shortest half-life" materials. To understand why this is correct, think of each radioactive element in UNF as a string of 1,000 little firecrackers waiting to go off. Those with a short half-life, say a month or less, will essentially all be exploded before the UNF has been in the storage pool five years, so they are all gone. Those with a billion-year half-life wait about a million years between pops, so they are hardly a threat. It is the shortest half-life elements still present that make the most pops per year, and thus the biggest chance of cancer in an exposed person. Thus the gamma rays from UNF come mostly from cesium 137 and strontium 90, both of which have about 30-year half-lives. They do not have 1.5 billion-year half-lives, as reported by Yurth; if they did they would hardly be hazardous to humans. We could safely hold a piece of uranium metal in our hands for a long time, but not a lump of cesium 137. Yurth says, "It has been estimated that the best of the current containers may last between 50 and 100 years." Estimated by whom, I wonder? I'm sure that even the state's paid experts would not tell such a stretcher. I support approval of Yucca Mountain because it can be relied on as a repository for UNF and because it would allow our electric utilities to go forward building more power plants that emit no air pollution or greenhouse gases, and produce power at a very competitive price. Our economy can then remain strong even as our air becomes cleaner, as old coal-fired plants are retired. With approval of Yucca Mountain we can then focus on better alternatives for waste disposal, including reprocessing UNF and 300-year storage of only the fission wastes, which are vitrified (melted into glass). Except for weapons-production wastes, we may not need space for 10,000-year storage. All wastes stored in Yucca Mountain will be solid, all liquids being first vitrified. A leak of old fuel pellets (uranium oxide ceramic) or dirty glass through an eventual crack is hard to imagine at all, let alone as catastrophic. Before it can hurt any creature the pellets or glass must partially dissolve into groundwater, percolate down to an aquifer, and be pumped up in someone's well water. Yurth's alarmist screed seems to be a desperate, last-minute attack ad in the anti-nuke campaign, designed to take unfair advantage of the science challenged. It is both reckless with the facts and reckless with our needs for a clean environment and strong economy. Steven C. Barrowes, Ph.D., is a member of Scientists for Secure Waste Storage. He lives in Salt Lake City. © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on Utah OnLine is ***************************************************************** 13 Fijian leader says nuclear waste transports through Pacific must be opposed - 7/19/2002 - ENN.com Friday, July 19, 2002 By Associated Press NADI, Fiji — Fiji called on a group including most of the world's poorest and smallest states to join it in opposing shipments of radioactive nuclear fuel traveling through the Pacific Ocean between Japan and Britain. "We will be asking you to join with us in expressing our outrage and opposition to those who are so willing to put the Pacific and our peoples at risk," Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase said Thursday in a speech to a summit of the 78-nation African, Caribbean, and Pacific group meeting in this Fijian resort town. His call came as the environmental group Greenpeace accused two ships carrying the fuel from Japan to Britain of breaching the 320 kilometer (200 mile) sea zones of four small Pacific states. The British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. ships, carrying 255 kilograms (560 pounds) of a rejected mixture of plutonium and uranium known as MOX, had disregarded the wishes of Pacific states to avoid their exclusive sea zones, said Greenpeace Pacific nuclear campaigner Ange Heffernan. The shipment has been heavily opposed by environmentalists who fear a leak of radioactive material, accident, or terrorist attack. Qarase said the Pacific Ocean had defined the region's peoples, shaped their cultures, created their myths and traditions, and fed them. "This relationship with the ocean will make it easy for you to understand why we are so adamantly opposed to any actions which expose it to threats of pollution, hazardous waste, and the destructive effects of nuclear and missile tests," he said. The two ships are expected to pass through the Tasman Sea between Australia and New Zealand this weekend, where an antinuclear flotilla of a dozen yachts is waiting for them. The armed cargo vessels set off from Japan on July 4 for the two-month journey to take the rejected radioactive material back to its maker in Britain. Japan's Kansai Electric Power Co. imported the fuel in 1999 for an experimental nuclear power program. But British Nuclear Fuels, the fuel's maker, later admitted it had falsified quality records and agreed to ship the fuel back to Britain. Copyright 2002, Associated Press Copyright © 2001 Environmental News Network Inc. ***************************************************************** 14 Berkeley lab's tritium deemed not dangerous [http://sfgate.com] [chronfeedback@sfchronicle.com] Friday, July 19, 2002 --> The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has decided that radioactive tritium at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory doesn't pose a health threat to neighbors or workers. The EPA's announcement Thursday that the site falls well within federal health standards for air and soil means that the agency won't initiate any further action under the nation's hazardous waste cleanup Superfund program. For 19 years, the Berkeley lab has used tritium, a radioactive hydrogen, to mark compounds in chemical reactions, and discharged small amounts out of its stacks next to the Lawrence Hall of Science. That activity ceased in December. Neighbors were concerned about a lack of monitoring and drew attention to possible problems for nearby areas and workers. ©2002 San Francisco Chronicle.   Page A - 27 ***************************************************************** 15 Ely on route for Test Site nuclear dump - By Kent Harper "Ely Daily Times" [http://www.elynews.com] By KENT HARPER -- Ely Times Editor Nuclear waste is being shipped through Ely now. But this has nothing to do with Yucca Mountain or spent nuclear power plant fuel rods. And it's been going on for 25 years. Low level nuclear waste, generated by weapons production and research at sites across the nation during the Cold War, is being transported by private companies to the Nevada Test Site, where it is buried in the already contaminated earth. Frank Di Sanza, Division Director at the Nevada Operations Office for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration, updated the White Pine County Commission this week on the program. Di Sanza reminded the commissioners that the DOE doesn't set the rules for shipping the low-level, but hazardous wastes. That's all done by the U.S. Department of Transportation. Private carriers are used for the shipments and the carriers are responsible for selecting their routes to the Nevada Test Site. But since 1995, those routes have been limited, Kevin Rohrer, program spokesman, told the Ely Times yesterday. Rohrer attended the commission meeting along with Di Sanza. Rohrer said in 1995 the DOE began a major effort to include local governments in selecting routes for the shipments. "We're trying to come up with alternative routes that will be acceptable..." Rohrer said, while acknowledging there are no routes that are acceptable to everyone. For now, however, there are three routes approved by the state. There are two routes into the Nevada Test Site in Southern Nevada and one route in Northern Nevada. There are waste sites in Southern California and Northern California and another in Idaho, but most of the 22 sites shipping waste to the Nevada Test Site are east of the Mississippi River, with a half dozen in Colorado, New Mexico and the Texas Panhandle. From January through March of this year, 304 shipments of the low level waste came to Nevada -- only four of those shipments took the northern route - I-80 to U.S. 93, through Ely to U.S. 6 to U.S. 95 in Tonopah and then south to Mercury at the Test Site. Those four shipments came from the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab in New Jersey. The lab sent a total of 25 shipments to Nevada during the first quarter, but the other 21 loads came through the southern route. Those routes use U.S. 40 through Kingman, Ariz., and Needles, Calif., before entering Nevada. The route passes through Searchlight before weaving back into California where it breaks into two separate routes at Nipton, Calif., on Interstate 15. One of those routes takes I-15 toward Las Vegas, but turns north at the junction with the highway to Pahrump and through that community to Mercury. The other route continues west on I-15 from Nipton to Baker, where it turns north through Shoshone and back into Nevada at Amargosa Valley before turning off to Mercury. Those routes satisfy the state's major worries about the population center in Las Vegas. No shipments can ever travel across Hoover Dam. Nor can they pass through the "Spaghetti Bowl" interchange of I-15, U.S. 93 and U.S. 95 in downtown Las Vegas. The DOE agreement with Nevada also includes "no intermodal" transfers within Nevada. "Intermodal" transfers are switching from truck to train, either moving cargo from one mode to the other, or sending truck trailers piggy back on rail cars. Despite the existent routes, County Commissioner Kevin Kirkeby told the visiting DOE officials about his concerns if waste ever were shipped into Nevada along the U.S. 50 corridor. He explained the effort to establish the National Heritage Route link between White Pine County and Millard County, Utah. Waste shipments along U.S. 50 could jeopardize the tourism effort and worry visitors to Great Basin National Park. Di Sanza also was grilled about the possibility on an accident on U.S. 6 near Murry Springs. Di Sansa said the agency is aware of the tourism concerns, and the types of shipments traveling along U.S. 6 are usually solid pieces of metal that would take a long time to contaminate a water source in the event of an accident. He was asked about the safety of the shipments. He explained that in the last year, two drivers had reported seeing leaks from their containers (one in Wendover, the other in Arizona). The solid waste, itself, can't leak, but humidity can build up in the containers and leaked on those two occasions. He said the DOE was pleased with the response of the drivers and local emergency management agencies. That's a big part of the program, is helping communities along the routes to be prepared in case of leaks or accidents. Under the DOE grant assistance program, White Pine County received $200,043 from the DOE last fiscal year. The county is to receive $177,902 in grants this fall and, according to Rohrer, more before the end of the fiscal year, likely totalling more than last year's amount. Di Sanza broke down the budget for the $177,902. The vast majority -- $107,525 -- is earmarked for equipment; training, supplies, travel, planning and salaries make up the remainder. The equipment budget includes $45,000 for a 4X4 pickup truck, $21,375 for 45 pagers, $12,000 for four computers, $9,500 for personal protection equipment, $9,100 for a hospital base station, $5,100 for three cutter saws, $4,200 for more training equipment and $1,250 for five electronic dosimeter badges to detect radiation exposure. The waste shipments will continue to be sent to Nevada as the DOE cleans up sites used for nuclear weapons development and research. Rohrer said by 2010 most of that waste should have been sent to Nevada, although some labs will continue to generate it. The shipments arrive in Mercury at the Nevada Test Site and then are taken to blast craters or other areas already contaminated by weapons testing. There they are buried. But it's not a dumping ground. Everything is controlled and monitored, according to Rohrer. "This is one of the best facilities of its kind in the world," he said. Copyright Daily Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 16 Opinions:Yucca fight not over Augusta Georgia: Web posted Sunday, July 21, 2002 Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff After decades of scientific studies and heavy-duty politicking, Congress finally gave the green light earlier this month for nuclear reactor sites around the nation to send their deadliest nuclear wastes to the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada. This should allay worries by Gov. Jim Hodges and other South Carolinians that the dangerous N-wastes the Department of Energy plans to ship from Rocky Flats, Colo., won't be permanently stored at the Savannah River Site. Hodges' fear is that the wastes won't ever leave SRS if the multimillion dollar program to convert the wastes into fuel for nuclear reactors falls through - either because Congress fails to fund it in the years ahead or DOE changes its mind. There are other potential pitfalls ahead as well, notwithstanding that Aiken is expected to be one of the very first sites to move its wastes to Nevada. That plan is not as reassuring as it should be because, though the congressional fight is over, the court battles and contentious licensing procedures are just getting underway. DOE officials say it could be late in 2004 before the department completes the application for permanent Yucca Mountain storage. Then the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could take up to four years to consider approval of the project, with numerous public meetings along the way; you can be sure the anti-nuke crowd will be at every one of them. There also will be an endless string of lawsuits filed against Yucca Mountain. Five are already in the pipeline. Nevada's governor is just as determined as South Carolina's governor to keep the N-waste out of his state. Environmental foes also will be busy with their court challenges. In many cases, the lawsuits will be designed not only to win, but failing that, to tie the Yucca Mountain project up in court indefinitely. Yet if everything goes DOE's way - that is, the agency gets the NRC license on schedule and wins every round in court - the soonest SRS could begin its shipments to Nevada would be 2010. It will take that long to get the underground storage tunnel ready to receive the wastes. So although Congress' long-awaited vote of approval is welcome - the process couldn't move forward without it - it is still just one step in a much longer journey that is just getting underway. There are still many miles to travel. [http://augusta.com] . ***************************************************************** 17 Flotilla ready to stop nuclear ships NZOOM - ONE News - National [http://nzoom.com] A nuclear-free flotilla, which left Auckland last week, has arrived at its protest location in the Tasman Sea where it will await two ships transporting radioactive cargoes from Japan to Britain. The 11 protest boats from New Zealand, Australia, Vanuatu and France will remain 600 nautical miles north-east of New Zealand until they sight the ships, possibly some time on Sunday. Richard Allan, who is aboard the SV Ranui, one of three New Zealand registered boats in the flotilla, says they are waiting in international waters between Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands. He says the flotilla is spread across 52 nautical miles to ensure the ships cannot pass through. Published on Jul 20, 2002 ***************************************************************** 18 Nuclear ships in stand-off with protest in Tasman sea Radio Australia News - Two British freighters transporting nuclear waste material have been stopped by a protest flotilla in the Tasman Sea. The environmental organisation Greenpeace says the ships have drastically reduced their speed for the first time since leaving Japan. The eleven protest yachts of the Nuclear Free Seas Flotilla have been in position between Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands in the Tasman Sea for the past two days. More than 50 people from 10 different countries are participating in the protest flotilla. Pacific Island nations have also opposed the nuclear shipment through their waters. 21/07/2002 19:00:07 | ABC Radio Australia News ***************************************************************** 19 Greenpeace continues Pacific protest Radio Australia News - The environmental group Greenpeace says it's not planning to intercept or impede the passage of a British ship carrying nuclear material, which is expected to meet up with a flotilla of protest yachts this morning. Nuclear campaigner James Courtney says the yachts are gathering at a spot off Lord Howe Island near where the British freighter and its escort are passing through on their way back to Britain. The nuclear shipment was rejected by Japan and the Greenpeace flotilla of 11 yachts is protesting against the ship's passage through the Pacific. James Courtney says it will be a peaceful protest against the nuclear waste. We don't want to do anything to impede the passage of this ship, its already a dangerous enough transport,we're essentially there to bear witness, we just want British nuclear fuels to know this shipment isn't occuring unnoticed, that the eyes of australia and new zealand and many people in the south pacific are on it and they're outraged at the arrogance of british nuclear fuels. 21/07/2002 12:13:14 | ABC Radio Australia News ***************************************************************** 20 Activists concerned about seismic impacts on spent fuel at Diablo Briefs from California's central coast Friday, July 19, 2002 (07-19) 16:31 PDT SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (AP) -- A coalition of activists says it is concerned about earthquakes and terrorism if the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant wins a license to store spent fuel there. Plant owner Pacific Gas &Electric Co. wants to build a facility to store spent fuel in 138 concrete and steel cylinders. Used-up fuel currently is kept in special pools but space will run out in 2006. The Avila Valley Advisory Council and the anti-nuclear group San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace cited their concerns Thursday. They and nine other environmental groups have asked to be official participants in the licensing of the spent fuel facility. The issues are all the more pressing because the plant may intend to seek a renewal of its operating license, allowing it to remain open u9ntil 2050 instead of the current 2025, said Seamus Slattery, chairman of the Avila Valley Advisory Council. The plant's owners have not decided whether to seek such a renewal, plant spokesman Jeff Lewis said. The San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 21 OPINION > Use of nuclear weapons and ‘a state’s existence’: Dangerous loophole? II The Manila Times Internet Edition | Sunday, July 21, 2002 By Myint Zan tc "By By Myint Zan " How does one determine the fact that the “very” existence of a State is threatened? Would, say, Kuwait — if it had nuclear weapons — have use them against invading Iraqi troops in August 1990? Would Israel have been justified — under the “terms” of the July 1996 advisory opinion — to use nuclear weapons in the 1973 Yom Kippur war if the tide of the war had not changed and Egyptian and Syrian troops continue to make further advances to recover occupied Arab lands? Under the terms of the ICJ advisory opinion would the United States have been justified in using nuclear weapons against Cuba in the October 1962 “Cuban Missile Crisis” if the Soviet Union did not withdraw its missiles from Cuba? Luckily in all these past historical instances the question was “academic” in that no nuclear weapons were used. Still, at least in the 1962 Cuban crisis there was at least an implicit threat that they might have been used if the Soviet Union did not accede to the late President Kennedy’s demands that the Soviet Union immediately remove its missiles from Cuba. tc "How does one determine the fact that the “very” existence of a State is threatened? Would, say, Kuwait — if it had nuclear weapons — have use them against invading Iraqi troops in August 1990? Would Israel have been justified — under the “terms” of the July 1996 advisory opinion — to use nuclear weapons in the 1973 Yom Kippur war if the tide of the war had not changed and Egyptian and Syrian troops continue to make further advances to recover occupied Arab lands? Under the terms of the ICJ advisory opinion would the United States have been justified in using nuclear weapons against Cuba in the October 1962 “Cuban Missile Crisis” if the Soviet Union did not withdraw its missiles from Cuba? Luckily in all these past historical instances the question was “academic” in that no nuclear weapons were used. Still, at least in the 1962 Cuban crisis there was at least an implicit threat that they might have been used if the Soviet Union did not accede to the late President Kennedy’s demands that the Soviet Union immediately remove its missiles from Cuba. " The “stand-off” between India and Pakistan over Kashmir and the (remotely) possible use or threat of nuclear weapons has eased considerably. One could say, though, that they have not entirely dissipated. From a legalist rather than from an entirely power politics-based perspective, what can be done to reduce — if possible eliminate — the chances of nuclear weapons being used on the Indian sub-continent? One option would be to seek an undertaking — in the form of a bilateral treaty — for the governments of both countries to pledge that they would never be the first to use nuclear weapons. But even if such a treaty can be negotiated — an unlikely event in the first place — can either or both countries “derogate” from the provisions of a treaty when the very “existence” of (either) State (as determined unilaterally by that State) is “threatened?” As far as the possible use of nuclear weapons is concerned this could be a conundrum on the theoretical level. It must be fervently hoped that this conundrum remains theoretical. A more pessimistic, perhaps alarmist, view is to claim that the ICJ in its advisory opinion has provided a potentially dangerous loophole for States to justify the threat, if not the actual use of, nuclear weapons. tc "The “stand-off” between India and Pakistan over Kashmir and the (remotely) possible use or threat of nuclear weapons has eased considerably. One could say, though, that they have not entirely dissipated. From a legalist rather than from an entirely power politics-based perspective, what can be done to reduce — if possible eliminate — the chances of nuclear weapons being used on the Indian sub-continent? One option would be to seek an undertaking — in the form of a bilateral treaty — for the governments of both countries to pledge that they would never be the first to use nuclear weapons. But even if such a treaty can be negotiated — an unlikely event in the first place — can either or both countries “derogate” from the provisions of a treaty when the very “existence” of (either) State (as determined unilaterally by that State) is “threatened?” As far as the possible use of nuclear weapons is concerned this could be a conundrum on the theoretical level. It must be fervently hoped that this conundrum remains theoretical. A more pessimistic, perhaps alarmist, view is to claim that the ICJ in its advisory opinion has provided a potentially dangerous loophole for States to justify the threat, if not the actual use of, nuclear weapons. " If a bilateral (by the leaders of both India and Pakistan) and unilateral (by the leader of either country) undertaking is given that either or both country would never be the first to use nuclear weapons then (theoretically, legalistically) it should bind them. In July 1974 the ICJ decided that it did not need to consider the application brought against France by Australia and New Zealand that France violated international law when it tested nuclear weapons in the South Pacific. The ICJ in effect stated that the issue was “moot” since the French Foreign Minister had made a verbal statement that France would not conduct nuclear tests any more. The ICJ decided in the Nuclear Tests Case that this undertaking “binds” France. Likewise it could be argued that if either or both countries’ leaders explicitly stated that they would not be the first to use nuclear weapons then it could also “bind” them. Still, it is (again) cold comfort or “hot trouble” if either or both countries (hypothetically) broke their (hypothetical) “undertaking” not to use nuclear weapons.tc "If a bilateral (by the leaders of both India and Pakistan) and unilateral (by the leader of either country) undertaking is given that either or both country would never be the first to use nuclear weapons then (theoretically, legalistically) it should bind them. In July 1974 the ICJ decided that it did not need to consider the application brought against France by Australia and New Zealand that France violated international law when it tested nuclear weapons in the South Pacific. The ICJ in effect stated that the issue was “moot” since the French Foreign Minister had made a verbal statement that France would not conduct nuclear tests any more. The ICJ decided in the Nuclear Tests Case that this undertaking “binds” France. Likewise it could be argued that if either or both countries’ leaders explicitly stated that they would not be the first to use nuclear weapons then it could also “bind” them. Still, it is (again) cold comfort or “hot trouble” if either or both countries (hypothetically) broke their (hypothetical) “undertaking” not to use nuclear weapons." The 57th anniversary of the use of nuclear weapons on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 is almost upon us. And the sixth anniversary of the ICJ advisory opinion on the subject of nuclear weapons has passed generally unnoticed. Some have argued that the (so-called) peace lobby which about a decade ago initiated the moves in the General Assembly to make the ICJ “answer” — legalistically — about the use of nuclear weapons might have received more than they bargained for. After all, the ICJ equivocated in that it did not unreservedly declare that the use of nuclear weapons under all circumstances is illegal in contemporary international law. tc "The 57th anniversary of the use of nuclear weapons on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 is almost upon us. And the sixth anniversary of the ICJ advisory opinion on the subject of nuclear weapons has passed generally unnoticed. Some have argued that the (so-called) peace lobby which about a decade ago initiated the moves in the General Assembly to make the ICJ “answer” — legalistically — about the use of nuclear weapons might have received more than they bargained for. After all, the ICJ equivocated in that it did not unreservedly declare that the use of nuclear weapons under all circumstances is illegal in contemporary international law. " All persons who care for the welfare of fellow humans must fervently hope that the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons would always remain (merely) as a theoretical conundrum. And those governments and persons in positions of power must also do all they can to see to it that the “issue” of the use of nuclear weapons continues to remain theoretical.tc "All persons who care for the welfare of fellow humans must fervently hope that the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons would always remain (merely) as a theoretical conundrum. And those governments and persons in positions of power must also do all they can to see to it that the “issue” of the use of nuclear weapons continues to remain theoretical." The author is a lecturer at the School of Law of the University of the South Pacific, Emalus Campus, Port Vila, Vanuatu. Copyright (c) 2001 The Manila Times | Terms of Service ***************************************************************** 22 India's new president says nuclear arsenal secure Fri Jul 19, 9:46 AM ET NEW DELHI, India - India's president-elect on Friday reiterated India's nuclear policy of no first use and said its nuclear arsenal was secure. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam was elected Thursday in a landslide vote by national and state legislators to be India's 12th president. The post is largely ceremonial, but after his inauguration on July 25, Kalam will technically become the commander in chief of the Indian armed forces, though he will not have any authority over the use of the nuclear arsenal. "Necessary safety procedures and protocols are in place," Kalam said in written answers to questions by The Asian Wall Street Journal. "With India's nuclear weapons policy of 'no first use,' India is strong in both." His comments appeared aimed at playing down fears of a nuclear conflict between India and Pakistan and the possibility of nuclear mishaps. Both countries are thought to have nuclear weapons that number in the low dozens and that can be delivered by missile or plane. A six-month-long military standoff between the two neighbors following a Dec. 13 attack on the Indian Parliament by suspected Pakistan-based Islamic militants raised fears of war last month before international diplomatic pressure eased tension. Kalam, a 70-year-old aeronautical engineer, is viewed as the father of India's missile program and played a central role in pushing for the country's tests of five atomic devices in 1998. The tests brought criticism and sanctions from other countries, but turned Kalam into a cultural icon in India. He said India's nuclear weapons tests were a milestone for the country. India, he said, would use technology and education to combat what he said were economic restrictions placed on the developing world by Western countries. "Developed countries want to maintain 'developed' status at the cost of developing countries," Kalam said. "Smart countries like India have to succeed, to become a developed country with knowledge power." Kalam was nominated for the presidency by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, which heads a coalition government. The main opposition Congress party also supported him, and his only opponent was Lakshmi Sehgal, a woman Indian freedom fighter proposed by leftist parties. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 23 "Nuclear Offensive Arms Reductions Past and Present," by Richard A. Davis News from the Washington File 19 July 2002 (State Official describes history of nuclear arms accords) (2110) (The following article by Richard A. Davis, Director of the Office of Strategic Negotiations and Implementation in the State Department's Bureau of Arms Control, appeared in the latest issue of "U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda" devoted to the topic "Weapons of Mass Destruction: The New Strategic Framework." This article and the rest of the electronic journal, which was published on July 18, may be viewed on the Web at: http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/0702/ijpe/ijpe0702.htm. There are no republication restrictions.) (The Moscow Treaty, under which the United States will reduce its strategic nuclear warheads by nearly two-thirds, "is not just a new treaty, but a new kind of treaty," says Richard A. Davis, Director of the Office of Strategic Negotiations and Implementation in the State Department's Bureau of Arms Control. It reflects the mutual trust and cooperation in the new U.S.-Russian strategic relationship by affording "a great deal of flexibility to each Party to meet unforeseen future contingencies.") Early Efforts Since the beginning of the atomic age, experts have debated the question of whether and how nuclear arms would be subject to international controls. During the 1950s, these debates were largely theoretical, as the United States and Soviet Union sought to develop and deploy arsenals they thought necessary to satisfy their military and political requirements. In the 1960s, increasing public concern over both the nuclear arms race and the effects of nuclear testing led to major international agreements, including the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty, the Threshold Test Ban Treaty, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. However, while these agreements had some effect on limiting the scope of both the arms race and nuclear testing, they did not preclude the two superpowers from continuing to build up their strategic nuclear arsenals. Efforts to limit the superpower arms race through the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) in the 1970s kept a dialogue going between the United States and the former Soviet Union, but did little to slow the development and production of more powerful and accurate nuclear weapons. Political controversy over the SALT II agreement in 1979, coupled with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan late that year, curtailed immediate prospects for halting the arms race. Real Reductions In the period from 1985 to 1991, the United States and the Soviet Union took a series of dramatic initiatives to reduce the threat of nuclear war. A major foreign policy objective of the Reagan administration was to negotiate a new kind of treaty, one that would do more than merely limit the growth in the number of strategic weapons in the arsenals of the two superpowers, but rather would actually require a significant reduction. The 1986 Reagan-Gorbachev Summit in Reykjavik marked the beginning of the process that stretched the envelope of what was achievable beyond anything negotiated before, and set the stage for the arms reduction treaties to follow. This process spanned the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, and the results -- the INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) and START (Strategic Arms Reduction) treaties -- were groundbreaking in many ways. As a result of the 1987 INF Treaty, for the first time an entire class of nuclear weapons (all intermediate- and shorter-range missiles possessed by the United States and the Soviet Union) were eliminated. Under the 1991 START Treaty, each side's strategic offensive arms were reduced by over 40 percent. INF and START also broke new ground in providing for extensive and intrusive verification regimes -- including a host of on-site inspections -- to verify reductions and declarations under the treaties. The collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s made clear that the need to deter a general war between East and West in Europe was greatly diminished. However, despite the success of START and INF in dealing with strategic and theater-level nuclear weapons, thousands of so-called "tactical" nuclear weapons remained in the arsenals of NATO and the Russian Federation -- from gravity bombs designed to be carried by small aircraft to nuclear landmines, torpedoes, and depth charges. As an important initial step to address this situation, President Bush and Soviet President Gorbachev took parallel actions in September 1991 to remove most non-strategic nuclear weapons from deployment. These actions, taken without benefit of formal negotiated agreement, resulted in all Soviet short-range nuclear weapons being relocated to sites within the Russian Federation itself by June 1992 and the removal to storage of all nuclear weapons from U.S. and Russian surface ships and attack submarines. Additionally, to reduce tensions further and to encourage Russia -- in the wake of the attempted coup in Moscow in 1991 -- to lower its nuclear alert status, President Bush announced sweeping unilateral measures regarding strategic systems. These included removing strategic bombers from an alert posture, accelerating the deactivation of those missiles that were to be eliminated under START, and terminating the development of road- and rail-mobile ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) systems. Russia took similar steps. With these initiatives, the foundation was laid for prompt ratification of the START Treaty. Implementing Treaties in the Real World The process of implementing arms control agreements that reduce nuclear arms has been complicated, especially with the backdrop of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of the new states that took its place. Future historians will debate whether the increased openness regarding the implementation of both START and INF contributed to a more general easing of relations between the United States and the former Soviet Union. The implementation commissions established under INF and START have played a continuing role in ensuring that the treaties are implemented effectively. The START Treaty, in particular, contains hundreds of pages of painstakingly detailed provisions for implementing everything from what kind of equipment inspectors can use during inspections, to how missile telemetry broadcast during flight tests must be formatted for exchange with the other side. Treaty inspections -- once virtually the only contact that the U.S. and Soviet/Russian military had with each other -- are now part of a host of other activities, from reciprocal military exchange visits and joint training exercises to a joint U.S.-Russian center being established near Moscow to share early warning data on missile launches. Ironically, the millions of dollars in aid that the United States has provided to states of the former Soviet Union in order to help dismantle their aging strategic arsenals often means that at some Russian facilities, American contractors are busy disassembling the same items that U.S. inspectors are there to count. To regard ongoing treaty inspections and other monitoring activities as a relic of the past would be a mistake, however. Every aspect of the new openness between our countries makes its own unique contribution, and inspectors are allowed to go places and verify data that would still otherwise be closed to our eyes. They are only part of the new relationship, but still an important part. Unfinished Business The verification mechanisms of the START Treaty are still a useful and productive tool for both sides. However, the nuclear weapons inventory left over from the Cold War remains large -- larger than needed to ensure for U.S. national security today. START has reduced strategic nuclear weapons by approximately 40 percent from the highest levels achieved during the Cold War, but the remaining forces are just under 6,000 warheads deployed on each side. Neither the United States nor Russia requires such a large inventory of weapons. However, a combination of congressional restrictions, the need to secure predictability in an uncertain future, and the difficulty in keeping up with the dynamic political world, left each side with larger inventories of nuclear weapons than they needed or desired. As President George W. Bush assumed office, his administration faced a paradox on the strategic weapons front. Although the numbers of nuclear weapons were clearly higher than the United States and Russia needed for their legitimate security concerns, during the 1990s neither side had felt it could reduce unneeded weapons in the absence of a formal agreement. START inspections were working relatively smoothly, providing valuable insight into each other's forces, but carried with them a small mountain of rules resulting from detailed procedures written for the Cold War relationship. Clearly something needed to be done. Negotiating a whole new treaty equal in scope and detail to START was not the answer. Not only had the antagonism and mutual suspicion of the Cold War receded, but also the START regime itself was still in place, and did not need to be duplicated. Moreover, any addition or expansion to that regime would have been lengthy and complicated to negotiate. Cold War fears may have vanished, but writing the rules for inspecting the facilities where each side manufactured, stored, or disassembled nuclear weapons would have required additional painstaking negotiations and ever more formal and complex rules. Visiting an airfield to count bombers is one thing; getting inside a nuclear weapon factory is another. In a major foreign policy address at the National Defense University on May 1, 2001, President Bush said the United States "must move beyond the constraints of the 30-year-old Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty" and replace it with a "new framework." Although the president did not elaborate what the new strategic framework would look like, he reaffirmed his intention to deploy ballistic missile defenses as well as to cut further the U.S. nuclear arsenal. "My goal is to move quickly to reduce nuclear forces," Bush declared. In keeping with his pledge to reduce the overall level of deployed strategic nuclear warheads to one consistent with the U.S. need to safeguard its interests, President Bush decided to seek a new solution. He announced at a summit meeting with President Putin in Crawford, Texas, in November 2001, that the United States intended to reduce its operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads to a level of 1,700-to-2,200 over the next decade. Shortly thereafter, President Putin announced a similar goal for Russia, and the two presidents later agreed to work on recording their plans in a legally binding document. Less than six months later, Presidents Bush and Putin signed the Moscow Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions. Under this treaty, the United States and Russia will reduce their strategic nuclear warheads to a level of 1,700-2,200 by December 31, 2012, a reduction of nearly two-thirds below current levels. This new, legally binding treaty codifies the deep reductions announced by Presidents Bush and Putin. The New Way The Moscow Treaty is not just a new treaty, but a new kind of treaty. Reflecting the mutual trust and cooperation in the new U.S.-Russian strategic relationship, the Moscow Treaty affords a great deal of flexibility to each Party to meet unforeseen future contingencies. It is simple -- just five articles and 485 words, barely two pages long, with no annexes or protocols, as opposed to the 47 pages and 19 articles of START, with its hundreds of pages of annexes and protocols. It gives each side the flexibility to carry out reductions, for example, by removing warheads from bomber bases and missiles, or by removing missiles, launchers, and bombers from operational service. In contrast, START mandated precise "counting rules" that force -- sometimes unrealistically -- over- and under-counting of actual weapons in the name of strict parity and unambiguous accounting. The flexibility provided by the new treaty allows each side to determine how to make its own reductions. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced that the United States plans to deactivate all 50 of its 10-warhead Peacekeeper ICBMs and convert four Trident submarines from strategic to conventional service. Additional steps to reduce the number of U.S. operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads to the 1,700-2,200 level will be decided subsequently. Some of the warheads that are removed from deployment will be used as spares, some will be stored, and some will be destroyed. Russia, too, may choose its own means of reducing its warheads. This new treaty is only one part of a new strategic framework that will redefine U.S.-Russian relations in the years to come. Like its predecessors, it both defines and benefits from the prevailing attitude of its time. Like its predecessors, it will enhance stability and reduce the threat of nuclear war, and is responsive to the Parties' obligation under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ultimately to agree on nuclear disarmament. Unlike its predecessors, it is an arrangement between friends to foster predictability and openness at the beginning of a new era of warmer relations. (Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov) This site is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State's Office of International Information Programs (usinfo.state.gov). Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein. U.S. Department of State [http://www.state.gov] ***************************************************************** 24 Energy Department may leave more waste at Hanford Tribnet.com - News/Nation &World The News Tribune - Tacoma, WA [Tribnet.com] The Associated Press WASHINGTON - The Bush administration's plan to accelerate the cleanup of former nuclear weapons and production plants, including Hanford in Washington state, may leave more waste at the sites than had been expected, said a report released Friday at a House hearing. The Energy Department announced earlier this year a strategy to speed cleanup efforts and refocus attention on eliminating waste that poses the biggest threats to the environment. The agency also hopes to cut cleanup costs by improving efficiency. To meet the goals, Energy is considering relaxing requirements on transporting some waste offsite, the General Accounting Office report said. It said this was under consideration at the Hanford reservation. Additionally, the report said the agency is considering reclassifying some high-level waste at its facilities as low-level waste, to allow more flexibility in its disposal. The Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, is suing the agency over the plan. (Published 12:30AM, July 20th, 2002) Tacoma News, Inc. 1950 South State Street, Tacoma, Washington 98405 253-597-8742 Fax Machines: Newsroom, 253-597-8274 Advertising, 253-597-8764 Send comments to the [webmaster@tribnet.com] at [webmaster@tribnet.com] . ***************************************************************** 25 Compensation available to SRS workers The Beaufort Gazette: Gazette staff writer Millions of dollars could be available to past employees of the many nuclear facilities throughout the country who suffer from illness as a result of their employment. Included in those who could receive a lifetime payment of their medical expenses are retirees from the Savannah River Site. According to James Kirr, site manager for the Energy Employees Compensation Resource Center in North Augusta, more than 2,000 former employees of the SRS have filed for money under the federal program. "Over the last 50 years, there are a couple of 100,000 people that have probably worked there," he said. "Our problem is getting all this information out to the people." The compensation program is made available by the U.S. Departments of Energy and Labor. Employees, or survivors, whose claims are approved will receive a lump-sum payment of $150,000 and medical benefits for their illness from the time their claim is approved. If the employee and their spouse is deceased, children and grandchildren are then able to claim the $150,000 payment. "There's a fairly long line of succession," Kirr said. The compensation program took effect in July 2001 after Congress passed The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. As of June 27, more than 30,000 claims have been filed, 4,000 of which have already been approved. The government has already paid out more than $261 million as part of the lump-sum compensation and close to $2 million in medical expenses. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. contracted with the federal government in 1950 to build and operate the plutonium production plant on the Savannah River near Aiken. At the height of the Cold War more than 30,000 people worked at the site. That number is now down to about 14,000 employees. Details about the program are available via a toll free number: 866-666-4606. Hours at the North Augusta compensation center are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. Ian Leslie can be reached at 986-5529 or ILeslie@beaufortgazette.com [ILeslie@beaufortgazette.com] . Copyright © 2002 The Beaufort Gazette • Use of this site ***************************************************************** 26 Judge halts Barnwell chemical plant shutdown Augusta Georgia: Metro: Web posted Saturday, July 20, 2002 Associated Press COLUMBIA - An administrative law judge Friday rescinded the emergency shutdown order issued by the state's health and environmental agency on a Barnwell chemical plant. The Department of Health and Environmental Control on June 25 had issued an emergency order to shut down Starmet CMI Inc. Judge Marvin Kittrell ruled Friday that the department did not successfully justify the emergency order. "The Department simply failed to show any discharge or action at the facility which creates an immediate risk of harm to the citizens in the community or the employees at the plant," Judge Kittrell wrote. "The emergency order consists only of a general conclusion that such a risk exists. It gives no specific history of any discharges or pollution, nor was such evidence produced at the hearing." DHEC argued that security was lax at the plant. DHEC officials said the facility, which processes radioactive material including uranium, has material that can be used to make a "dirty bomb." Starmet attorney John Hodge argued there was no specific terrorist threat. Although Starmet's license does not require security guards at the facility, Judge Kittrell ruled that there is justification for them to be hired by the company. The department also said the groundwater at the site has been contaminated and the facility's overall maintenance and management was poor. But groundwater contamination was not of great concern to the agency until April or May, Judge Kittrell wrote. DHEC then took several samples. [http://augusta.com] . ***************************************************************** 27 Flats officials focus on pipes The Daily Camera: Boulder County Cleanup plan may leave some underground By Katy Human, Camera Staff Writer July 21, 2002 Nearly seven miles of metal, clay, plastic and glass piping snakes through the dirt below buildings at Rocky Flats. During production years at the former nuclear weapons plant, toxic solvents and uranium- and plutonium-laced liquids flowed through the underground pipes. On occasion, they leaked. Now, officials involved in the Rocky Flats cleanup and people who live near the site are trying to figure out what to do with the old pipes, long empty but some still radioactively contaminated, and the below-ground dirt tainted by past leaks and other events. To pull out all seven miles of pipe and test every foot of dirt in the site's industrial area would be prohibitively expensive, Rocky Flats officials say. Even at a lower standard for reducing contamination, such underground work could pull money from dozens of other crucial cleanup projects. So in the last 12 months, officials have been asking citizen groups, the state health department and the Environmental Protection Agency for help making decisions about how to proceed with underground cleanup. By early September, officials hope to have a draft plan ready to present for citizen comment, said spokesmen for Kaiser-Hill, the company contracted to clean up Rocky Flats. Rocky Flats will become a wildlife refuge after it is cleaned up. So far, the draft plan involves removing all pipes less than 3 feet from the surface, cleaning up the soil around the 26 known leaky spots and checking out areas with suspected leaks, said Jeremy Karpatkin, spokesman for the Department of Energy, which owns Rocky Flats. Eventually, the plan will also detail "triggers" for further cleanup, he said. A small patch of slightly contaminated soil at 5 feet may not require cleanup, for example, if officials calculate that it's extremely unlikely to ever affect human health. "I'm feeling pretty good about this. It's coming together as a pretty good cleanup plan," said Steve Gunderson, Rocky Flats manager with the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment. "It's a much better than the plan we had a year ago." Pipe 'pretty bad' Victor Holm, a member of the Citizens Advisory Board that keeps an eye on Rocky Flats activities, took a look Wednesday at one of the old pipes, as a member of a small group that toured the site. "The one we saw looked pretty bad," he said. "It's been there since the 1950s, and it was rusted and caked with mud." "If there was infinite money available, I would like to see them just dig them all out," Holm said. But he said he approves of the new cleanup strategy, which has evolved as a tradeoff between surface and subsurface cleanup. Given limited cleanup money, the surface is most important, he said. "That's something we know is a hazard," he said. "The subsurface stuff may be a hazard." The Department of Energy, which owns Rocky Flats, and the agencies regulating site cleanup agreed in 1996 to clean up surface radioactive spills only if they contained more than 651 picocuries of radiation per gram of soil. That number triggered a furious response from people who lived in communities downwind of Rocky Flats, because it was significantly more lenient than those at other nuclear cleanup sites around the world. After independent review and hundreds of meetings and reports, the agencies are discussing a much lower number — 50 picocuries per gram. That cleanup level is far more strict than currently required, said the health department's Gunderson. "Legally, the site could clean it up to something like 780 (picocuries per gram)," he said. Karpatkin said the stricter surface cleanup now being discussed can happen only if some underground contamination is left in place. "Our money is limited," he said. "It is sufficient to have safe and compliant cleanup. We have enough resources to do more than the regulatory minimum, but not an unlimited amount more." Prairie dog risk Department of Energy officials are still working out the details of the tradeoff plan with their regulators, the EPA and the state health department. One question, for example, is how to include prairie dogs in risk calculations, Gunderson said. Unlike some other chemicals contaminating Rocky Flats, the toxic and radioactive metal plutonium doesn't move around in groundwater, according to scientific studies. So plutonium could only harm human health if it got to the surface. Prairie dogs haven't lived at Rocky Flats for many years, but early aerial photos show they've been there, he said. "We're looking into what they dig up, how much," Gunderson said. "It looks like it would take quite a bit of contamination at depth to cause a problem." By late August, he said, he hopes to have an agreement with Rocky Flats officials about what levels and volumes of contamination should trigger cleanup. "We're hoping to get something out in public domain by September," Gunderson said, and then people will have 60 days to comment on the plan. The agencies will read the comments to see if they should be incorporated into a final plan. "I would love to be done with this thing so I don't have to think about it over Christmas," Gunderson said. The Citizens Advisory Board's Holm said he's eager to have a look at a detailed plan. "I would like to see a flow chart ... something on paper," he said. "Instead, the impression I get so far is that well, we'll kind of take it on a case-by-case basis." One of his key concerns is the depth at which Rocky Flats workers will remove pipes and contamination without question. In the draft plan, that depth is 3 feet. "I'd like to see 6 feet, personally," Holm said. Prairie dogs do dig deeper than that, but rarely, and although it's easy to imagine a person digging 3 feet — to put in a fence post, for example — it would be unusual for someone to dig to 6 feet without some planning. "You'd need an excavator," Hole said, "and at that point, someone might say, 'Hold it.'" Contact Katy Human at (303) 473-1364 or humank@dailycamera.com. [http://www.scripps.com] Copyright 2002, The Daily Camera and the E.W. ***************************************************************** 28 Accelerator research facility brings Middle East scientists together Physicists from all over the region, including Israel and Iran, meet to discuss establishment of jointly-run center Tuesday, July 23, 2002 Av 14, 5762 Israel Time: 09:29 (GMT+3) By Tamara Traubman Despite the hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians and the increasing tensions in the region, scientists and politicians from several Middle Eastern states, including Israel, the Palestinian Authority and Iran, met last week with the aim of setting up a synchrotron research facility that will be operated jointly by scientists from the region. A synchrotron is an exceedingly powerful source of light. Bunches of charged particles - electrons - circulate for several hours inside a long ring-shaped, tube under a vacuum. Due to the action of special magnet systems, the electrons emit "synchrotron light," whose wavelength can range from infrared radiation to x-rays. The emitted light is collected by many different "beamlines" connected to the ring and conveyed to experimental chambers. The applications span from pharmaceutical research and development to microchemical analysis for medical, environmental and archaeological studies, and from the industrial production of micromechanical parts to powerful radiological techniques. The project is called Synchrotron-light for Experimental Science and Applications in the Middle East (SESAME) and although all the necessary funding has yet to be raised, the partners in the project are optimistic and the accelerator has already arrived in Jordan, where the project will be based. The idea of setting up a synchrotron accelerator was first raised at a meeting of Middle East physicists in Torino, Italy in 1997. Germany was about to end work on its BESSY-1 synchrotron project and suggested donating the accelerator to a Middle East peace project. "At that time the situation was already volatile and Netanyahu was in power. That's why we met in Torino and not in the Middle East," says Professor Eliezer Rabinovici, a Hebrew University physicist who attended the Torino meeting and now sits on the international board of SESAME. However, Rabinovici says, despite the ups and downs in relations between Israel and its neighbors, "at meetings we managed to talk about physics and to promote the project. Delays in the project were caused mainly by economic factors rather than political ones. "It's like being in a parallel universe," says Rabinovici of the scientists' last meeting, which was held in Paris. "As a physicist I always dreamt of parallel universes, but here it's materializing," he added. The cornerstone laying ceremony for the project is scheduled for December in Jordan. The accelerator is to be upgraded and will double its energy source. The project is under the auspices of UNESCO, the United Nations, Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. The SESAME council members are: Bahrain, Egypt, Greece, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, the Palestinian Authority, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. Observer countries include Armenia, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Russia, Sweden, Sudan, the UK, and the United States, and several other countries have expressed interest in joining. The dream of SESAME's president Prof. Herwig Schopper is to repeat the success of CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research, which he used to head. CERN was founded 48 years ago out of the ashes of World War II with the aim of renewing scientific research between European nations. Germans, Italians, French and English, who only a few years earlier had fought each other, cooperated on a scientific project. Today CERN is a leading particle physics research center and its resident scientists are busy working on building the most powerful particle accelerator ever. A meeting of the SESAME council ruled that members should immediately transfer $50,000 to the project in order to become official members and commit themselves to paying an annual sum to be set by the council in the future. Iran has already paid its dues, but Israel, which transferred $25,000 to the council two years ago, wants to pay the remainder in the form of scientific or technical work. According to the president of the Israeli Academy of Sciences, Prof. Ya'akov Ziv, the Israeli position is that it is very interested in the project and sees great importance in using science as a bridge for peace, but it is already partner in a more advanced European synchrotron project in France, for which it pays annual dues of $1 million. Israel, Ziv says, cannot afford to pay a similar amount for membership in SESAME and, in any event, there is no need for it to do so. However, some Israeli scientists, in particular biologists, say they intend to work with the project. Upgrading of the synchrotron, they claim, will make it a "worthwhile" apparatus and its relative proximity - the synchrotron is due to be located some 30 kilometers from the Allenby crossing - give it an advantage as it will be possible to take students on frequent visits. © Copyright 2002 Ha`aretz. All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************