***************************************************************** 03/22/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.73 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 UK: British Energy losing money on nuclear 2 BC: Nuclear generator warns of California-style power crisis 3 Russia: Call for Nuclear Plant 4 US: Federal Web Sites Remove Info 5 US: Senate OKs Renewable Energy Measure 6 US: Report Criticizes Radioactive Policy 7 N Korea 'may end' nuclear pact 8 US: Senate Defeats GOP Effort to Kill Alternative Power Clause 9 US: USEC bill dies on uranium tax exemption 10 US: Support sought for obtaining energy meeting information NUCLEAR REACTORS 11 France: Closure of nuclear power station is delayed 12 US: NRC to Meet with Entergy to Discuss Pilgrim Plant Performance 13 Russia to supply India with equipment to build nuclear plant in 14 US: NRC Amends Licensing, Inspection and Annual Fees Rule 15 US: Meeting on Indian Point's Fate Draws Overflow Crowd From Both Si NUCLEAR SAFETY 16 Russian nuclear research centre in dire straits - TV report 17 US: Radiation-exposed workers get help NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 18 British to make decision on Sellafield nuclear plant 19 Sellafield is more than 'minimalist' risk, says Government 20 Norway fears on Sellafield raised NEWS DIGEST 21 German nuclear shipment reaches French border 22 US: Daschle says 'whoops!" 23 US: Praxair (of Secret) cleanup raises specter of deadly toxins 24 US: Nevadans are fighting for all Americans 25 US: Nuke dump is coming; why not get paid for it? 26 US: A small victory in waste dump fight 27 US: House panel expected to conduct Yucca hearings 28 US: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Guinn seeks backing for special session 29 US: Ensign will keep heat on Daschle 30 US: Experts shrug off leftover questions 31 UK to address Sellafield concerns 32 Sellafield hits Norwegian raw nerve 33 US: Nuclear waste repository is radioactive issue 34 Radioactive Discharges Confound North Sea Ministers 35 US: Lobbyist says Daschle, Ensign spat hurts fight 36 US: Hearings set on risks of shipping waste 37 US: Campaign to include TV ad blitz 38 US: State could tap 'rainy day' fund 39 US: Report criticizes agency's policy regarding release of radioacti 40 US: Study says TVA is one of nation's worst polluters 41 US: Landfill monitor rips state officials / Not told of new rules 42 US: Nuclear war at Yucca Mountain: Bush must fight for Nevada dump 43 US: PACRO enables fluorine cells' cleanup 44 US: Research Council Withholds Seal of Approval of Radioactive Recyc NUCLEAR WEAPONS 45 Nuclear Weapons Pact Nears Approval 46 Islam expert warns of nuke terror 47 Nuclear deal with N Korea shows signs of a meltdown: An agreement 48 Hoon's nuclear threat opens way for Star Wars 49 Crisis looming between U.S., Russia 50 U.N. Inspector Tells Council Work in Iraq Could Be Fast 51 US: House Discusses Nuclear Testing 52 US: Nuclear Weapons Talk on the Rise 53 US: What We Don't Know 54 France displays Cold War relics - 55 US: Nuke fears bring more U.S. agents US DEPT. OF ENERGY 56 PNNL honored for new technology uses 57 Report blasts inconsistent radioactive metals' decisions 58 LOC plans emergency forum for April 2 59 City appealing for clean bill of health on Parcel 412 60 Margaret Chu Sworn-In as Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive 61 EPA declares state's INEEL oversight soundNews ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 UK: British Energy losing money on nuclear Financial Times; Mar 22, 2002 By DAVID BUCHAN British Energy said yesterday it was losing money on its UK nuclear generation business and announced a Pounds 430m write-off on electricity contracts and its only non-nuclear plant. The company said it would write down Pounds 300m of the value of its Eggborough coal-fired power station, which it bought at a time of higher electricity prices a couple of years ago. The company described UK trading conditions as "very challenging". Electricity prices for summer consumption are lower than production costs, reflecting "an unsustainable structural problem in the UK wholesale market". At the same time, it announced a Pounds 200m increase in provisions for electricity it had contracted to buy before the New Electricity Trading Arrangements (Neta) last spring. Designed by the government to create greater competition, Neta has pushed power prices lower. British Energy faces "a really grim picture" in the UK, said Raimundo Fernandez-Cuesta, UK utilities analyst at UBS Warburg. Electricity demand in the UK is growing more slowly than the general economy while overcapacity is at 30 per cent, he said. With no net income from UK operations, it would probably have to forgo a dividend when it unveils full-year results in May. The only brighter note in the company's trading statement was its claim that its North American operations - Bruce Power in Canada and AmerGen in the US - were "performing well". The company said it expected full-year pre-tax profits for the year to March 31 to be "broadly in line" with market consensus forecasts made by analysts on the basis of figures provided this month by the company. The company said the consensus ranges from Pounds 2m to Pounds 67m, a spread that analysts partly attributed to such variables as nuclear decommissioning costs. Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-2002 ***************************************************************** 2 Nuclear generator warns of California-style power crisis Independent News © 2002 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd By Michael Harrison, Business Editor 22 March 2002 British Energy warned yesterday that the UK could be heading for a California-style power crisis after it was forced to announce a £430m write-off because of falling electricity prices. The nuclear power producer complained there was an "unsustainable structural problem" in the UK wholesale electricity market which could result in the country running short of capacity unless prices are allowed to rise. British Energy is writing down the value of its Eggborough coal-fired station, bought from National Power two years ago for £600m, by a half. It is making a further provision of £200m to cover loss-making trading contracts taken out with other producers including Teesside Power and Elf. The write-down and provisions totalling £500m will be offset by a £70m reduction in the company's tax liability. A spokesman said British Energy was not complaining about the new electricity trading arrangements (Neta), which took effect last year, but the unsustainably low prices. Unless some mechanism was introduced to encourage generators to invest in new power stations on the back of long-term contracts, then the UK would run short of capacity at some point. "Prices have to rise to give people the confidence to build new capacity or refurbish existing stations otherwise we could find ourselves in a Californian scenario," a spokesman said. "The industry can sustain low prices at the moment because there is surplus capacity in the system but if we lose that spare capacity then prices could rise and frighteningly so." British Energy said that for the financial year just ending, its average prices had fallen by 9 per cent to £20.40 a megawatt hour. But it said that in recent weeks, forward baseload prices had fallen to £16 a megawatt hour and prices for this summer were below the cost of producing electricity. Despite the loss the group will make in the UK this year, British Energy indicated that it would record an overall profit of about £30m-£35m – in the middle of the range of analysts' forecasts. The company's nuclear plants in the US and Canada are performing better than expected and will generate profits of £75m this year, at least £110m next year and £180m in 2003-04. Cost reductions in the UK are expected to reach £50m this year in addition to the £63m saving achieved last year. ***************************************************************** 3 Russia: Call for Nuclear Plant [http://www.moscowtimes.ru Friday, Mar. 22, 2002. Page 4 MOSCOW (Reuters) -- North Korea, branded part of an "axis of evil" by U.S. President George W. Bush, has asked Moscow to build a nuclear power station, but Russian officials said Thursday no deal has been struck. An Industry, Science and Technology Ministry spokesman said a high-ranking North Korean delegation, visiting Moscow earlier this week, had "expressed a desire for Russia to build a nuclear power station in North Korea." But he said the meeting had been only an exchange of opinions and no formal documents had been signed. Pyongyang also asked Russia for help in upgrading infrastructure and energy plants built with Moscow's assistance in the Soviet era. [http://www.moscowtimes.ru ***************************************************************** 4 Federal Web Sites Remove Info Las Vegas SUN March 21, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House has ordered government agencies to remove from Web sites and public documents any sensitive information, such as locations of nuclear materials, that might help terrorists. White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card sent a memo to the heads of all agencies and executive departments on Wednesday directing them to immediately safeguard any government records that could help terrorists. Card also ordered them to take a look at all public documents and report back to the Office of Homeland Security within 90 days. "This is very serious business," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. "People inadvertently had information pre-September 11 that should be viewed in a different context in the post-September 11 era." Card's memo, first reported by The Washington Times, told officials to protect information on weapons of mass destruction "including information about the current locations of stockpiles of nuclear materials that could be exploited for use in such weapons." "You and your department or agency have an obligation to safeguard government records," Card wrote. The information in question includes non-classified information available to the public for years. Steven Aftergood, who directs a government secrecy project at the Federation of American Scientists, said one "potentially troublesome feature" of the order is that the material to be reviewed includes "Sensitive But Unclassified Information." "The need to protect such sensitive information from inappropriate disclosure should be carefully considered, on a case-by-case basis, together with the benefits that result from the open and efficient exchange of scientific, technical, and like information," according to a more-detailed memo about the directive written by the administration's Information Security Oversight Office. But no detailed criteria for conducting such case-by-case consideration was provided, leaving this category seemingly open-ended, Aftergood said. Fleischer acknowledged that the changes would make things more difficult for people who want the information for legitimate purposes, but said the seriousness of the threat requires caution. "Our enemies are people who have shown an ability and a desire to use our technology against ourselves," Fleischer said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 5 Senate OKs Renewable Energy Measure Las Vegas SUN March 21, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) - Investor-owned utilities would have to produce at least 10 percent of their power from renewable energy such as solar, wind or wood and agricultural scraps under a provision included in a broad energy bill. The requirement would be phased in so utilities would have until 2020 to reach the 10 percent level. The Senate on Thursday rejected, by a 58-40 vote, an attempt by Sen. Jon Kyl to strip the measure from the legislation. Kyl, R-Ariz., said states should make their own decisions about the issue - a position endorsed by the White House. Already, 11 states require that some power comes from renewable sources, and 10 other states either have set goals or are considering a mandate for renewable use. An amendment that would have allowed these states to escape the national standard was turned back by a 57-39 vote. Sen. Jeff Bingaman said the states could go beyond a national requirement, but allowing them to skirt the federal standards "totally guts the effect of the law." To gain broader support, Bingaman, D-N.M., offered to exempt municipal power companies and electric cooperatives, which together produce nearly 20 percent of the nation's electricity. Environmentalists said that in the end, the amount of renewable use may come to less than 5 percent of total electricity generated by 2020. That may be about what utilities might do anyway without a federal requirement, said Catherine Morrison of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, a grass-roots environmental advocacy group. Today, less than 2 percent of electricity is comes from renewable sources: solar panels, wind turbines, geothermal sources or biomass such as wood waste, grasses or agricultural residues. About 70 percent of electricity is generated from coal or natural gas, and an additional 20 percent comes from nuclear power plants. Much of the rest is produced from hydroelectric dams, which are not considered a renewable source under the Senate legislation. "That's too much concentration. That's not smart," Bingaman said. The Senate last week rejected a more ambitious proposal that would have required one-fifth of the nation's electricity come from renewable sources by 2020. "It's hard to understand why we would not want to have cleaner energy," said Sen. James Jeffords, I-Vt., sponsor of that proposal. Kyl said a renewable energy requirement was "basically an energy tax" because it would make electricity more expensive. Jeffords disagreed. He cited an Energy Department study that said power costs for some utilities might rise, but that they probably would not pass the increase on to customers. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 6 Report Criticizes Radioactive Policy Las Vegas SUN March 21, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) - The federal government inconsistently decides whether slightly radioactive materials should be recycled, put in a landfill or securely stored, says a report released Thursday. There's no evidence public health has been jeopardized, said Richard Magee, an environmental engineer and lead author of the National Research Council report. But he said it is bad public policy to have haphazard decision-making. "We ought to agree as a country how we want to manage this stuff, and it ought to be uniform," Magee said. At issue are the tons of materials that are thrown out at existing commercial nuclear facilities or sites being decommissioned. These slightly radioactive items can include piping, tools, cabinets and building structures. The licensees that operate the facilities say it is cost effective to recycle the scrap into everyday items or release it into landfills. But environmentalists say they want it stored in a secure, isolated facility as nuclear waste. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission makes the decisions. The study found the NRC doesn't always use the same criteria to judge similar materials. For example, a slightly radioactive piece of metal from a nuclear plant is treated differently from metal with the same level of radioactivity that was taken from a hospital. In addition, the NRC relies on standards when considering releasing materials that have radiation on their surface, but it has none for materials contaminated throughout. Instead the agency decides on a case-by-case basis whether to release those materials, according to the report. The NRC asked the research council to examine its policies governing the release of slightly radioactive materials from the commercial facilities it licenses. NRC spokeswoman Rosetta Virgilio said the council was asked to recommend changes to the decision-making process. She declined to comment on the report, saying the agency needed time to review it. In the past, the NRC has tried to set standards that would allow an increase in the amount of slightly radioactive material released, but has been thwarted by Congress. The steel industry, against having its product stigmatized as potentially radioactive, is among the groups that have lobbied against the commission's proposals. The NRC asked the council to consider the science behind the issue, but Magee said the panel opted not to take an opinion on what level of contamination is safe for release. Instead, the report recommends the agency involve all interested parties in its decisions. "Our idea is if we're going to move forward it's got to come out of a process where all stakeholders are involved," Magee said. Among the options the report recommended the agency consider are freely releasing slightly radioactive materials from NRC sites, releasing them for restricted use or banning their release altogether. The Energy Department has had a ban on recycling scrap metal from its nuclear facilities in place for about two years. The Bush administration is reviewing that policy. On the Net: Nuclear Regulatory Commission: http://www.nrc.gov/ [http://www.nrc.gov/] National Academy of Sciences: http://www4.nationalacademies.org/nas/nashome.nsf [http://www4.nationalacademies.org/nas/nashome.nsf] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 7 N Korea 'may end' nuclear pact BBC News | ASIA-PACIFIC | 22 March, 2002, 14:23 [US Marines' amphibious vehicles in South Korea ] Pyongyang is already furious about US war games North Korea has repeated its threat to ditch a nuclear power agreement with the US after the White House said it was unable to certify that Pyongyang was keeping its side of the bargain. If the United States breaks the promises made to the DPRK, the latter will be free to go its own way Official N Korean newspaper Under the 1994 pact North Korea agreed to scrap its own nuclear power programme - which the US suspected was being misused to create weapons of mass destruction - in exchange for two proliferation-proof nuclear reactors and fuel oil to use while the reactors were being built. Pyongyang's threat comes amid renewed tension on the Korean peninsula. The US and South Korea launched joint military exercises on Thursday, in a move condemned by North Korea - already infuriated by President Bush's inclusion in his "axis of evil" - as a declaration of war. Last week North Korea said it would withdraw from the 1994 deal in response to reports that Washington is drawing up plans for the possible use of nuclear weapons against Pyongyang. Brinkmanship North Korea also claims the US is trying to scrap the agreement, despite assurances from US officials that the delivery of 500,000 tons of oil promised to North Korea every year until the delayed reactors are completed will go ahead. US-South Korean war games 18,000 US soldiers based in S Korea taking part 315,000 South Koreans Exercises designed to "defend" South Korea North Korea has 1.1m troops "It is a blatant challenge and dastardly betrayal to the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) which has made efforts for the world peace and stability, while suffering an enormous loss of electricity," said the official Minju Joson newspaper. "If the United States breaks the promises made to the DPRK, the latter will be free to go its own way," it added. The US-South Korea military exercises this week have already angered North Korea, even though the participants stress they are purely defensive. Thousands of troops are involved in the drills, which will simulate a conflict with the Communist North. Pyongyang said he drills were preparations to launch a "nuclear holocaust" on the Korean peninsula. The Communist country has filed more than 100 complaints against the exercises through its officials media over the past few weeks, according to the South Korean Yonhap news agency - a key monitor of North Korean media. The drills, which will continue until 27 March, involve 18,000 US troops based in South Korea and a small number of troops from bases in Japan, Guam and the US. About 315,000 South Korean soldiers are taking part. The exercise merges two annual drills that used to be held separately. It combines a computerised war game with the annual field exercises. The troops are undergoing a range of training, including counter-infiltration exercises and other tests to evaluate the operational mobility of forces. Talks deadlock Despite the current tension, South Korea is anxious to see dialogue between the US and North Korea get back on track. On Wednesday, President Kim Dae-jung said North Korea had "no other choice" but to resume talks with the US. North Korea has so far rejected a US offer for unconditional talks, believing too many strings will be attached to aid and other help. The two Koreas remain technically at war, as their three-year conflict ended in 1953 in an armistice that has never been replaced with a permanent peace treaty. © MMII | News Sources | Privacy ***************************************************************** 8 Senate Defeats GOP Effort to Kill Alternative Power Clause (washingtonpost.com) By Helen Dewar Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, March 22, 2002; Page A05 Senate Democrats yesterday beat back a Republican effort to scuttle a provision of their energy bill that would require utilities to produce significantly more electricity from wind, solar, geothermal and other renewable sources of power. The 58 to 40 vote came as Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) expressed frustration at the slow pace of action on the bill, echoing charges that Republicans had made about him before he brought the bill to the floor a month ago. Later in the day, Daschle tried to force a showdown soon over whether to permit drilling for oil and gas in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but he was blocked by Republicans. Democratic leaders plan to invoke Senate rules under which Republicans and several pro-drilling Democrats would have to produce 60 votes to force the controversial issue to a final vote. Those who favor drilling in the refuge do not appear to have 60 votes. In his request to the Senate last night, Daschle proposed that it vote on refuge drilling issue April 9, after Congress returns from its two-week spring break, and then move on to other issues in the energy bill if drilling advocates do not get 60 votes. Republicans object to the 60-vote test and want the issue decided by a simple majority. Although several other proposals dealing with renewable energy are pending, yesterday's vote was a significant victory for Democrats, who last week suffered a defeat on another of their high-priority proposals. Republicans and auto-state Democrats killed a provision in the bill that would have forced a big increase in fuel efficiency standards for cars, pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles. So Democrats have lost one major fight and Republicans appear likely to lose another, elevating the importance of issues such as renewable energy in determining the political balance of the bill. In yesterday's action, nine Republicans joined all but two Democrats in turning back a move by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) to strip from the Democratic-drafted bill a requirement that investor-owned utilities generate at least 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. But municipal utilities and electric cooperatives would be exempt, lowering overall energy savings. About 2 percent of electricity comes from renewable sources, according to Senate figures. The Senate earlier rejected a proposal from Sen. James M. Jeffords (I-Vt.) to require a 20 percent renewable component by 2020. In arguing that electricity sources should be left up to states, Kyl said the proposal runs counter to the movement toward electric power deregulation and contended that it would cost $88 billion over 15 years and $12 billion a year thereafter. He also argued that wind and solar power are not as reliable as coal, gas and nuclear energy. Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and other supporters of the proposal contended it would spur economic development and create jobs while diversifying sources for electricity generation and reducing reliance on any one source. Last night the Senate also defeated, 57 to 39, a proposal by Sen. Frank H. Murkowski (R-Alaska) to exempt states that have renewable energy programs. © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 9 USEC bill dies on uranium tax exemption The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky Friday, March 22, 2002 Portsmouth union opposition and northern Kentucky lawmakers caused Rep. Frank Rasche to kill the bill for now. Portsmouth union opposition and northern Kentucky lawmakers caused Rep. Frank Rasche to kill the bill for now. By Bill Bartleman bbartleman@paducahsun.com--270.575.8650 FRANKFORT, Ky.--The bill to exempt enriched uranium produced at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant from the state sales tax appears to be dead for the session, apparently because of a battle between the plant operator, USEC Inc., and union workers at its Portsmouth, Ohio, facility. "I'm not sure about everything that happened to kill the bill, but I just gave up on it," said Rep. Frank Rasche, D-Paducah, who sponsored the measure. "I just told the majority floor leader to go ahead and kill it. I didn't want to fight it anymore." Majority Leader Greg Stumbo said the bill had some opposition from lawmakers who represent districts along the Ohio border near Portsmouth, but its decisive opposition came from the AFL-CIO. "I don't understand what all of the issues are, but there was considerable opposition," Stumbo said. "We kept it alive in an effort to work them out, but the sponsor, Rep. Rasche, told me yesterday (Tuesday) to let it die." The bill was sent to the House Appropriations and Revenue Committee and won't be reconsidered. Rasche said he believed members of the Paper, Allied-Industrial Chemical &Energy Workers Union at the Portsmouth plant wanted the bill defeated so they could use it as a bargaining chip in its negotiation for severance packages for its laid-off members. USEC has closed its enrichment plant in Portsmouth and announced in February that it was moving its final shipping operation from Portsmouth to Paducah, which would eliminate about 440 jobs. Enriched uranium shipped from Portsmouth to USEC customers was exempt from the Ohio sales tax, and USEC asked for a similar exemption in Kentucky, which would save it and its customers about $6 million a year. Rasche said the proposal will be raised again "next year when all the issues surrounding this are resolved." USEC, however, isn't ready to give up. "We are aware of the action the House took, and at this point we are still exploring our options," USEC spokeswoman Elizabeth Stuckle said by phone from Bethesda, Md. She would not comment on the union opposition or discuss what "options" were being considered. She said it didn't involve reversing the decision to move the shipping operation to Paducah. Sen. Bob Leeper, R-Paducah, said he might try to revive the issue in the Senate but wasn't ready to make a firm commitment. He said he'd talk with Rasche and others to determine whether an effort should be made to add the exemption to another bill or wait until next year. The shipping operation is expected to be moved by this summer, after alterations are completed at the Paducah plant. It will create 35 to 50 jobs. ***************************************************************** 10 Support sought for obtaining energy meeting information - By Geoff Dornan [http://www.nevadaappeal.com] Friday, March 22, 2002 BY GEOFF DORNAN Appeal Capital Bureau Nevada Democrats want their colleagues to join in a letter asking Vice President Dick Cheney to release documents involving meetings with energy company executives. The call came from Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins and Assembly Majority Leader Barbara Buckley. They said they were concerned about what may have happened in closed door meetings between Cheney and officials of the nuclear power industry. "The release of these documents could be very important as our state pursues legal action and continues efforts to educate leaders and citizens in other states about the dangers of transporting nuclear waste to Nevada," they said in a joint statement. They said they hope to send the letter with the attached signatures of a bipartisan group of Nevada lawmakers by April l. ***************************************************************** 11 Closure of nuclear power station is delayed (Yves Cochet retarde la fermeture d'une usine nucleaire dangereuse) Le Monde - France; Mar 22, 2002 The French nuclear safety agency ASN has ruled that the nuclear power station in Cadarache belonging to French group Cogema must close by the beginning of 2003 at the latest. The agency believes that the plant poses a risk in the event of an earthquake. Cogema has agreed to close the plant on condition that it is allowed to transfer production to another site. Abstracted from Le Monde ***************************************************************** 12 NRC to Meet with Entergy to Discuss Pilgrim Plant Performance NRC: Press Release Region I - 2002 - 21 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov No. I-02-021 March 21, 2002 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Entergy Nuclear Generation Company on Thursday, March 28, to discuss the results of the agency's annual assessment of safety performance at the Pilgrim nuclear power plant. The facility is located in Plymouth, Mass., and operated by Entergy. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. in the Governor Carver Meeting Room at the John Carver Inn, 25 Summer Street, Plymouth. Before the session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the safety performance of the Pilgrim plant, as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe plant operation. The performance period to be discussed is April 1, 2001, to December 31, 2001. In addition, NRC staff will provide an overview of the agency's Reactor Oversight Process. A letter sent from the NRC Region I office to Entergy addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/pilg_2001q4.pdf Current performance information for the Pilgrim plant is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/PILG/pilg_chart.html ***************************************************************** 13 Russia to supply India with equipment to build nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 21, 2002 New Delhi, 21 March: Russia and India have signed a contract for delivery of major equipment for construction of the Kudankulam nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu (southern Indian state), New Delhi said Thursday [21 March]. "The agreement is for supply of equipment for the 2x1000 MW nuclear power project," Junior [Minister] for Atomic Energy Vasundhara Raje said in a written reply in Rajya Sabha (upper house of Indian parliament). The targetted dates for completion of the project are December 2007 for Unit-1 and December 2008 for Unit-2, she said. "For the present, construction of only two units of 1000 MW each are approved by the government of India. Infrastructural works at site for these units are nearing completion," Raje said... Source: PTI news agency, New Delhi, in English 1236 gmt 21 Mar 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 14 NRC Amends Licensing, Inspection and Annual Fees Rule NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 32 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] www.nrc.gov No. 02-032 March 22, 2002 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is amending its regulations for the licensing, inspection and annual fees it charges to applicants and licensees for fiscal year (FY) 2002. The agency is required to collect nearly all of its annual appropriated budget through two types of fees. One type is for NRC services such as licensing and inspection activities. The other is an annual fee paid by all licensees, which recovers generic regulatory expenses and other costs not recovered through fees for specific services. These fees are contained in Commission regulations 10 CFR Part 170 (licensing and inspection services) and 10 CFR Part 171 (annual fees). By law, the NRC must recover $479.5 million, or about 96 percent of its budget, for FY 2002 (October 1, 2001 - September 30, 2002). This does not include $23.7 million appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund for high-level waste activities. Neither does it include $36 million appropriated for NRC's activities related to homeland security. Funding for these activities is excluded from license fee revenues by law. The total amount to be recovered is about $26.2 million more than last year. There is a $6 increase over FY 2001 in the hourly labor rate proposed for NRC services performed in the reactor program, and an $8 increase for services performed in the nuclear materials program. The proposed hourly rates are $156 for the reactor program activities and $152 for the nuclear material program activities. The annual fees proposed by the NRC have been determined under the "re-baselining" method. The Commission decided to re-baseline annual fees this year based on the changes in the magnitude of the budget to be recovered through fees. Re-baselined annual fees would result in increased annual fees for a majority of licensees, including power reactors, fuel facility licensees, and radiography and broad-scope medical licensees. Annual fees would decrease for other categories of licensees, including non-power research reactors. The proposed FY 2002 annual fees for some licensees are as follows: Categories of Licensees FY 2001 Annual Fee FY 2002 Annual Fee Operating Power Reactors (including spent fuel storage/ reactor decommissioning annual fee) $2,753,000 $2,869,000 High-enriched Uranium Fuel Facility $3,545,000 $4,073,000 Low-enriched Uranium Fuel Facility $1,146,000 $1,366,000 Uranium Recovery (Conventional Mills) 94,300 77,700 Radiographers 12,500 13,700 Broad Scope Medical 24,200 26,200 Distribution of Radiopharmaceuticals 3,900 4,500 The NRC is also proposing to clarify the Part 170 fee waiver provision for topical reports and certain other documents submitted to the NRC for review and approval; to clarify that a Part 171 annual fee exemption provision for reactors applies only to reactors licensed to operate; and to revise Part 171 to specifically authorize the assessment of annual fees to holders of Part 52 combined licenses after the Commission has authorized operation of the reactors. Written comments on the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Parts 170 and 171 of the Commission's regulations should be received within 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. They should be addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications staff. Comments also may be faxed to 301-415-1101, or submitted via the NRC's electronic rulemaking Web site, at http://www.nrc.gov. Select "rulemaking" from the tool bar and then "rulemaking forum." ***************************************************************** 15 Meeting on Indian Point's Fate Draws Overflow Crowd From Both Sides March 22, 2002 By WINNIE HU Suzanne DeChillo/The New York Times Protesters outside a meeting in White Plains on the Indian Point nuclear complex, where neither side seemed to have the upper hand. WHITE PLAINS, March 21 — In a sign of the growing frustration here, more than 700 people jammed into the Westchester County Center tonight for a public meeting on whether the Indian Point nuclear complex should remain open after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. So many turned out that the meeting room was packed, and the overflow crowd of about 200 was relegated to the lobby downstairs. They clapped and chanted to be let in. The crowd upstairs was generally orderly, but broke into loud boos at times to drown out speakers who took the microphone. Many residents and environmentalists pointed to safety lapses at Indian Point and demanded that it be shut down, while many plant workers and others defended the nuclear operations and rattled off their economic benefits. "I want to show support for my livelihood, and for a plant that is vital to the economic vitality of this state," said Stephen McGuire, 39, an engineer at the Indian Point 3 unit. But Maura Costello, 36, a mother of three in Yorktown, said she had grave concerns not only about the safety of Indian Point but also about whether families could be safely evacuated in case of a disaster. "I don't sleep at night thinking about what could happen," she said. The meeting was the latest in a series of public events that have been held around the county in recent months to address widespread concerns about the two active nuclear plants (a third is currently not in operation) in Buchanan, about 35 miles north of Midtown Manhattan. But unlike some earlier events, tonight's meeting seemed to be roughly divided between supporters and opponents, with neither side seeming to have the upper hand. Two committees of the Westchester County Board of Legislators held the meeting to discuss two proposed resolutions. One called for closing and decommissioning Indian Point and, if possible, converting it to natural gas or alternative fuel operation. The other urged an evaluation of Indian Point's emergency plan by an independent group outside the government. The resolutions are expected to be voted on in the next month. But even if county legislators adopt the more forceful resolution calling for the closing of Indian Point, it would be largely symbolic. Though it would be a first for Westchester, the Rockland County Legislature and many towns and villages in both counties have passed similar resolutions, with little effect. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency that oversees Indian Point, has approved its operations, though the commission has also given it the highest scrutiny of any nuclear plant in the country because of recent mishaps there. Michael B. Kaplowitz, the county legislator who proposed the Westchester resolution, said he hoped tonight's hearing would increase pressure on federal officials and others to close the nuclear operations and convert the site to something safer. "When a little snowball starts down the side of a mountain, once it has momentum, it gets bigger and bigger," he said. "I think this is a mainstream, soccer-mom issue now." The Entergy Corporation, which owns Indian Point, has maintained that its operations are safe, and plant workers and others have increasingly mobilized to counter what they call "misinformation" that has alarmed the public. Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy who attended the hearing, said that shutting down the nuclear operations would displace 1,500 plant workers; cut off a source of 2,000 megawatts of electricity, or enough power for two million homes; and result in a sharp rise in electric rates. He said that converting the site to alternative sources of energy like natural gas would be difficult, costly and impractical. "The support for this resolution comes from people who've always wanted to shut down the plant, and they see Sept. 11 as a way to finally accomplish that," he said. Mr. Steets added that he did not object to the resolution calling for an independent evaluation of the emergency plan for Indian Point. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 16 Russian nuclear research centre in dire straits - TV report BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 22, 2002 Text of report by Russian Public TV on 20 March [Presenter] Financial difficulties are the main obstacle to developing Russian science. The problem of the scientific centre in Troitsk, Moscow Region is a typical example. It is characteristic of the bulk of Russian research institutes. Nikolay Kudryashov reports from Troitsk. [Correspondent] The Institute for Nuclear Research [of the Russian Academy of Sciences] in Moscow Region's Troitsk [some 40 km southwest of Moscow] may be called a typical scientific establishment in modern Russia. It shows the contrast between the well-off Soviet past and the modest present. The institute deals in research into elementary particles and cosmic rays. These kinds of studies are hardly applicable to everyday life. However, further applied developments are impossible without such studies. The largest proton accelerator in Eurasia is the local scientists' pride. Inside a row of buildings half a kilometre long runs a pipe enmeshed by sophisticated wires and instruments. It was being built for 20 years and cost some 300m dollars. However, it was never completed. As a result, the accelerator now provides less than a half of its design capacity. It is practically impossible to stage the experiments for which it has been built. Moreover, this unique and expensive facility may stop for good soon. [Aleksandr Feshchenko, captioned as head of accelerator department] The accelerator itself and its infrastructure were made in Soviet times. Now, unfortunately, we are using up what had been accumulated then. The accelerator has actually reached its critical point. If no radical efforts are taken, there will be no accelerator in two years. [Correspondent] The obsolescent equipment is not the only trouble of the institute. Its staff is getting older as well. An average scientist's age here is 54, and many are over 70 years old. In a few years there may be no people left who know how to use this equipment. [Sergey Yesin, captioned as chief research scientist of the accelerator department] There is no new blood now. We all are old people, but for a few rare exceptions. And even these old people will soon say goodbye to the institute. In the last 10 years, only some four university graduates came here. And these four or five, they were quitting in a year or two. [Correspondent] Many went to the West, where instead of R3,000-R4,000 [a month] they are making roughly the same amount in dollars. The institute is trying hard to earn some cash, maybe to the prejudice of experiments sometimes. A laser blood-test device is an example of the commercially successful application of scientific research. Just one push of the button - and the laser beam takes the sample without any pain. The invention is very popular in Japan, the USA and Switzerland already. However, this kind of revenue can hardly finance the fundamental scientific centre. Scientists say that 100 years ago, when nuclear physics studies were just starting, they were very dear. At that time, it was impossible even to imagine that the atom can generate electricity and considerable profits. They still do not believe in the profitability of fundamental science in Troitsk. Still they want to believe that the state will restart investing in this very science and, as a result, make a profit from the practical implementation of research results. Source: Russian Public TV (ORT), Moscow, in Russian 0600 gmt 20 Mar 00 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 17 Radiation-exposed workers get help Tri-Valley Herald Friday, March 22, 2002 - 3:10:41 AM MST By Glenn Roberts Jr. STAFF WRITER Friday, March 22, 2002 - -->PLEASANTON -- Workers exposed to harmful amounts of radiation, beryllium or silica while performing work for the Energy Department can visit a Labor Department traveling resource center that will open at 8:30 a.m. Tuesday in Pleasanton. Workers and the family members of deceased workers can receive assistance at the resource center in applying for benefits through a federal compensation program. The resource center will remain open from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Tuesday through Thursday, March 26-28, at Four Points Hotel, 5115 Hopyard Road, Pleasanton, between Owens and Gibraltar drives. The hotel phone number is (925) 460-8800. Workers can schedule appointments at the resource center by calling (866) 697-0841, though it is not necessary to make an appointment before visiting the temporary center. A compensation program for workers and their family members -- the Federal Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program -- provides for payment up to $150,000 and coverage of medical expenses for employees who suffer illnesses caused by specific toxins. Family members of workers who died from exposure to the toxins also are eligible for compensation. Cancers caused by radiation exposure, and beryllium-related diseases and chronic silicosis are covered in the compensation program. Among the Bay Area facilities that perform or performed nuclear weapons work for the Energy Department: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories in Livermore, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory and the University of California, Berkeley, the General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear Center in the Sunol area, and California Research Corp. and Stauffer Metals Inc. in Richmond. The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in Palo Alto, Dow Chemical Co. in Pittsburg, Arthur D. Little Co. in San Francisco, and the Laboratory of Radiobiology and Environmental Health in San Francisco. Other California facilities that performed weapons work are located in Davis, Santa Ana, Pasadena, Canoga Park, La Jolla, Riverside, Los Angeles, and Imperial County, states a Labor Department announcement. Information about the compensation program is available online at http://www.dol.gov/dol/esa/public/regs/compliance/owcp/eeoicp/main.htm [HTTP://www.dol.gov/dol/esa/public/regs/compliance/owcp/eeoicp/main.htm] ©1999-2001 by MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers ***************************************************************** 18 British to make decision on Sellafield nuclear plant soon, conference told Irish Newspapers - BRITISH Environment Minister Michael Meacher said yesterday the UK government was preparing "shortly to take a decision" on the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant. Speaking at the end of an International Conference on the Protection of the North Sea held in the Norwegian city of Bergen, he refused to hint at what that decision would be. Radioactive technetium 99 has been detected in shellfish on the Norwegian coast, more than 500 miles away from the Sellafield plant in Cumbria. Mr Meacher told a joint news conference that Norwegian concerns had been made very clear during the meetings. Researchers say the levels are too low to be a threat to health, but they worry about the long-term impact on marine life. Nations around the North Sea declared the need to manage territorial waters as a single ecosystem, reduce threats from radioactive and other waste and promote alternative energy. Norwegian Environment Minister Boerge Brende, who chaired the meetings, said he saw key points in the concluding 30-page declaration as a decision to manage the North Sea with a broad view of the entire ecosystem and an agreement to take urgent steps to protect the sea from foreign organisms, often brought in the bilge water from ships. He also mentioned agreement by all the countries, except France, to review agreements to process spent nuclear fuels after current contracts expire. That was an important point because of ongoing complaints by Norway and its neighbours that radiation from Sellafield reached their waters. The meeting was also attended by Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands 26 international agencies and non-governmental groups. The ministers also committed themselves to developing alternate forms of power including wind and wave power. That drew a rare compliment from environmental activists. Three Greenpeace activists scaled a building across from the meeting's waterfront hotel to unfurl a huge banner that said "Good decision on wind. Now blow us away with action." © Copyright Unison ***************************************************************** 19 Sellafield is more than 'minimalist' risk, says Government online.ie : The Irish Examiner 22 Mar 2002 By Gavin Cordon THE Government has lashed out at the claim yesterday by British Environment Minister Michael Meacher that Sellafield discharges posed just a minimalist risk to health. "It poses a very serious and real threat to the health of Irish people and it should be shut down," said a spokesperson for Minister of State for Public Enterprise Joe Jacobs. "It is pouring what is effectively poison into the environment and the Irish sea," the spokesperson added. Mr Meacher, attending a conference in Bergen, Norway, of countries bordering the North Sea, insisted that the risk to human health from the Sellafield discharges was minimalist. He accepted there was a "perception of harm" which was damaging the important fishing industry in countries like Norway. He said that although radioactive discharges from Sellafield into the Irish Sea had been reduced by 99% over the past 25 years, ministers were now looking at ways of further cutting the discharges. "I think they are right to be concerned about this problem," Mr Meacher said. "The Norwegian concern is that fish might be radioactively contaminated, even though our scientific advice is that the risk to human health is minimalist. "There is perception of harm, however inaccurate, which may affect the markets for their fishing industry." His comments came against a background of warnings by the Norwegian government that it was prepared to take international legal action to halt all discharges from the Sellafield plant. Mr Meacher said that the problem was a particular radioactive nuclide called technetium 99 which, although having a "very low" level of radioactive toxicity, had a long radioactive half-life. He said the Environment Agency was currently looking at a chemical process which would remove the technetium 99 from the water before it is discharged from the plant, although he said there had been some difficulties with the process. "We are looking at that very seriously, but there are health and safety standards for workers at Sellafield," he said. "As you concentrate this particular radioactive nuclide, the risks to those on site increase. "I am not saying it cannot be done. I am saying we have to meet the highest standards and we will do what we can to meet their concerns." ***************************************************************** 20 Norway fears on Sellafield raised NEWS DIGEST Financial Times; Mar 22, 2002 By JOHN MASON Michael Meacher yesterday tried to assuage Scandinavian fears about radioactive discharges into the North Sea from the Sellafield nuclear re-processing plant. Attending a conference in Bergen, Norway, the environment minister insisted that the risk from any discharges was slight. "The Norwegian concern is that fish might be radioactively contaminated, even though our scientific advice is that the risk to human health is minimal. There is a perception of harm, however inaccurate, which may affect the markets for their fishing industry," he told BBC radio. The Norwegian government has said it is prepared to take legal action to halt all discharges from the Sellafield plant. John Mason Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-2002 ***************************************************************** 21 German nuclear shipment reaches French border BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 22, 2002 Text of report by German news agency ddp on 21 March Saarbruecken: A nuclear shipment that crossed Palatinate and Saarland has reached the French border without major incidents. The three containers from Neckarwestheim were transported via Heidelberg and Kaiserslautern to Neunkirchen in Saarland. According to the police in Saarbruecken, the shipment was attached to a train consisting of six containers from the Kruemmel, Brokdorf, and Grohnde nuclear power plants in northern Germany and crossed the border with France near Saarbruecken at 2050 hours. The spent fuel rods from Brokdorf and Grohnde will be reprocessed in La Hague, the other ones in Sellafield in Great Britain. Source: ddp news agency, Berlin, in German 1959 gmt 21 Mar 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 22 Daschle says 'whoops!" Nevada Appeal By Nevada Appeal editorial board It's so hard to know who to trust any more. For Nevada Republicans opposed to storage of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, their trust in President George Bush evaporated when he approved the site in February. For Nevada Democrats counting on Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, their trust went up in smoke this week when he said -- whoops! -- he can't block legislation from coming to the Senate floor, after all. We guess we'll just have to fend for ourselves, which means relying on Sens. Harry Reid, a Democrat, and John Ensign, a Republican, to muster the votes to stop the nuclear-waste plan. At least Bush never promised he would stop the Yucca Mountain project. He only promised to make his decision based on "sound science," and well-intentioned people can argue until the next Ice Age how much of decades of research inside the remote Southern Nevada mountain was sound or science. On the other hand, Daschle, the Senate majority leader, flat-out declared the project "dead" as long as Democrats were in control. It turns out "dead" is a relative term. He said this week he doesn't actually have the power to keep Yucca Mountain legislation off the Senate floor. It can be fast-tracked onto the floor by any senator who so chooses. At that point, it's going to be Reid's and Ensign's jobs to come up with 51 votes. So far, the count isn't very promising. Meanwhile, Nevada's politicians and business associations keep plugging away at their campaign to change the political winds by lobbying and stumping. The war chest has topped the $6 million mark, and a couple of political heavyweights -- have been hired to spread the word. Unfortunately, there are reports the nuclear industry has its own pro-Yucca fund with something like $30 million. In a shootout, Nevada has fewer bullets. All the name-calling by Reid of Bush for being a "liar" now seems even more petty and political than when it was uttered. It would be fitting for Ensign to call a press conference overlooking Lake Tahoe for the express purpose of calling Daschle "dumb." But, please don't. Grandstanding isn't doing Nevada any good. Get in the trenches and get the votes. We really don't want this stuff for the next 10,000 years. Copyright Nevada Appeal. Materials contained within this site may ***************************************************************** 23 Praxair (of Secret) cleanup raises specter of deadly toxins Buffalo News - MICHAEL GROLL/Buffalo News The remnants of a secret government project were still visible at the Linde Air Plant in the Town of Tonawanda when Tony Cioppi and John Lauer worked at the facility in the 1950s. Several buildings of the Linde Ceramics Plant were cordoned off. Workers weren't allowed to go near them. Cioppi and Lauer, like most of their co-workers, knew very little of the "Manhattan Project" or the uranium ore processed there for the nation's first atomic bomb, and never was there mention of the potential for safety risks. Plant officials today still insist Linde workers never have been in danger - not those involved in developing the atomic bomb during the 1940s, not those like Cioppi and Lauer who worked there in subsequent decades when radioactive material remained on site, and not those today at the plant, now known as Praxair, as a cleanup takes place. But in light of a recent state Department of Health study that found higher-than-normal cancer rates in the residential neighborhoods surrounding the plant, former employees are wondering about the thousands of people who worked close to the radioactive material. "They always said it was safe," Lauer said of the Linde managers. "But every year, they came in and took samples and drilled in the ground." In fact, The Buffalo News reviewed dozens of government documents, held secret for half a century before being declassified a few years ago. They indicate the federal government was concerned about health risks to Linde workers who helped build the atomic bomb: • A weeklong survey conducted at the Linde plant in 1948 by the New York Operations Office of the Manhattan Engineering District found 18 of 138 employees surveyed had been exposed to "above preferred levels" of radioactive particles. Fifteen of the 18 were exposed to concentrations 32 times above acceptable workplace levels at that time. • Some low-level radioactive materials that workers were exposed to "may produce toxic effects on the body from a chemical standpoint," according to the Manhattan Project's in-house medical volume published in 1947. • The medical team believed it could be years before some of the ill effects of exposure surfaced: ". . . the results of overexposure might not become apparent for long periods after such exposure," the medical report states. In 2000, the federal government set up a pool of money to compensate workers directly involved in the atomic bomb development project. Now, there's a move to study the effect radioactive material had on sites such as Linde in the decades following the government's atomic energy projects. Representatives of U.S. Rep. John J. LaFalce's office said they hope the study will help workers such as Cioppi and Lauer to one day share in the compensation pool the federal government set up two years ago for employees directly involved in the atomic energy project at Linde between 1943 and 1949. One hitch, however, is that very little of the money has been paid so far to even people who worked directly on the atomic project. Critics say the government has set up a bureaucratic quagmire making it all but impossible to prove a direct link between a person's cancer and their job exposure. "It's a dog-and-pony show," said Ralph Krieger, a former union president who worked at the plant for 30 years before retiring in 1998. "Why would they have to keep studying a site that they already know is contaminated while they keep taking contaminated materials from the site?" Manhattan Project Dennis Conroy, site manager for Praxair, which now owns the Linde site, said the company was unaware of the specific testing referred to in the secret government documents. The company was not privy to very much about the Manhattan Project because of the government's desire for "speed and secrecy," he said. "The Corps of Engineers took over one-quarter of this property. They were engaged in the first step of uranium ore processing. Did Praxair (or its predecessor Linde) know what they were doing? My goodness, no. "Nobody knew what they were doing." Speed and absolute secrecy were hallmarks of the government project, he said. Nonetheless, Conroy said there's nothing to establish a direct link between the low-level radiation at the Linde/Praxair site and worker illness either during the 1940s or later decades. Repeated studies done by the company as well as the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration support that finding, he said. In 1954, Conroy said, the site was declared "clean" by the standards at the time. In 1974, based on new standards, the federal government reported for the first time that low-level radiation did exist at Linde, Conroy said. A government-ordered cleanup of the site - which is now 80 percent complete - began in 1995. But the levels, he said, are such that there's more radiation at a cocktail party where four people are smoking than in the buildings. "People do not understand radiation. We are very concerned about our employees and our neighbors but there have been four scientific studies that show no statistically significant excesses of disease," Conroy said. "We do not believe there is a health risk." Workers complain For a while, Lauer, Cioppi and other Linde workers said they believed it when company officials said the plant was safe. But then co-workers began to get sick. Cioppi, 69, started at Linde in 1951 sweeping floors at age 18 before working his way up to the carpenter shop and as a lab mechanic. He spent much of his time at the plant in buildings 14 and 30, both suspected to be radioactively contaminated, according to former workers. Building 30 has since been torn down. "When I started there, the buildings that were used (by the Manhattan Project) were taped off and signs said "Do Not Enter,' " Cioppi said. "No one to my knowledge ever said anything about radiation. It's just a shame if they did know about it that they allowed it to happen." Cioppi had a prostate problem in his 50s and is now undergoing chemotherapy for bladder cancer. Lauer, 68, of Cheektowaga, worked at Linde from 1952 to 1991 in the machine shop and in quality control. He says he and others worked in all the known "hot spots" on the property. Lauer has been through bladder cancer twice. Joseph Cinelli, 68, of Grand Island, started at Linde in maintenance in 1952, and worked at the plant in a variety of jobs until retiring in 1994. Cinelli was diagnosed with cancer three times in 11 years. Three weeks ago, he finished seven months of rigorous chemotherapy and antibody treatment for lymphoma. He had prostate cancer in 1999 and lung cancer in 1991. Just Monday, Cinelli, with his hair growing back, learned his third cancer had also gone into remission. "Early detection is important," he insists. Skeptical over the years Beyond the diseases, the former Linde workers said they became more skeptical over the years as they heard talk of the government removing buildings and soil from the grounds they worked on. "When I first realized they were having problems, I sent a memorandum to the safety guys at the plant and asked if there was any dangerous material there, where it was located, and if it was hazardous to the workers," recalled Charlie Spencer, 71, of North Buffalo. He worked at the plant from 1956 to 1991, first as a timekeeper who visited every building on the site distributing time cards and then in the company's bookkeeping department. "The safety director called me over to his office and he said, "In reply to your memorandum,' then he pointed to these 50 books up on the shelf and said, "There's your answer.' But, nobody came right out and told me anything." Russ Gaiser said the safety director told him everything was fine. "They (director of safety) just told me the radiation there was as much as you had in the dial of your watch," Gaiser said. "That's what they always said." Gaiser, 68, worked at Linde from 1952 to 1993 in a variety of jobs that put him in known contaminated areas. To this day Gaiser is healthy. "Building 14 was one of the hottest spots in the whole area. I would work in there. I ate lunch in there," said Gaiser. "I'm still healthy, I've never had any problem." "I believe it could have hurt people, but then again I look at myself and I worked in a lot of those places and in a lot of those buildings (believed contaminated). Am I just lucky?" he said. "But, let's just put it this way: it didn't help us." A connection to work In fact, Shirley Albicocco, 66, of Palm Beach County, Fla., said her late husband was convinced his workplace was responsible for his fatal disease. Donald A. Kreuter worked at Linde from 1952 to 1976 as a chemical operator before joining the staff of the union who represented the company's workers. In April 1982, he was diagnosed with cancer, which accelerated rapidly through his lymph nodes and lungs. He died that August at 50. He left his 45-year-old widow, Shirley, and their two children. "He always felt his sickness was connected to his work," Albicocco said. "The doctor himself admitted it was highly suspicious he died of that cancer with his work environment. "Our children always felt they were denied their father. We were a close family." Despite Kreuter's longevity, Albicocco receives just $30.22 per month from the company, she said. He did not qualify for a death benefit. Albicocco said she's been fighting with the government for two decades to get compensation for her late husband. It's a fight many of Kreuter's former colleagues support. Thomas M. Murphy, who worked at Linde from 1953 to 1991 and lives about a mile and a half from the plant, puts it this way: "If there's no contamination and there's nothing wrong then why are they hauling all the stuff out to Utah?" Conroy said there's a simple answer to that question. "This stuff," he said, "does not belong here." e-mail: tpignataro@buffnews.com [http://www.buffalonews.com/email/email_form.asp?author_dept_id=50] Copyright © 1999 - 2002 The Buffalo NewsTM ***************************************************************** 24 Nevadans are fighting for all Americans SPECIAL TO THE RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 3/19/2002 10:59 pm Reno is still a small town. It is a city of three major roads, a heavily used railroad corridor, and a river, which supplies all of the city’s water. Think how often you cross or go under those railroad tracks. Reno residents are intimately connected to the transportation corridor that is the community. Soon, however, the milk trucks and Amtrak passenger trains that pass through town day and night may be joined by a new kind of visitor. The visitor is nuclear waste, and, although it may not stay in town long, it would have an impact on all of us. Surely there will be armed security for our new visitor, but we may have no idea that this new visitor is even in town, since we may not even be told when it is coming. Monday milk truck, Tuesday nuclear waste. Communities outside of Nevada should also be concerned about the shipment of nuclear waste to our state. Looking at a map of the likely routes for shipment is like looking at a web crisscrossing our nation and putting the health and safety of more than just Nevadans at risk. Looking at that map, you’ll see that the storage of 70,000 tons of nuclear waste inside Yucca Mountain would require the shipment of that waste on 100,000 trucks or 20,000 rail cars through 43 states. My question is: What about the friends and family members we all have around the country living near these potential nuclear waste transportation routes? I personally think of my close friends with small children living near Interstate 70 in Denver, my sister living near Interstate 94 near downtown Minneapolis, my uncle living in Dallas near the Union Pacific Railroad, and my in-laws living just outside of our nation’s capital. These places are all included in that web of likely transportation routes for nuclear waste destined for Nevada. Nevadans are fighting for all Americans who may be affected by nuclear waste coming through their communities some day. Sen. Harry Reid has been a bold leader for Nevada in fighting the Yucca Mountain project, garnering 34 votes in the 106th Congress to uphold the Clinton administration’s veto. With President Bush’s recommendation to bring America’s nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, the senator now has the awesome task of representing all of the potential victims along nuclear waste transportation routes. With his national leadership role, the responsibility lies with Sen. Reid to garner 51 votes in the Senate to uphold a certain veto of the project by Gov. Guinn. This is going to be an uphill battle. The last thing Sen. Reid needs is for Nevadans to back down from this challenge. The last thing Nevada needs is what has been suggested recently in these pages: for our congressional representatives to cut a deal and negotiate financial compensation. As long as Sen. Reid remains defiant of President Bush on this issue, we have a chance to win. I know he will employ every tactic at his disposal to stop this project in its tracks. I am certain that his steadfast opposition can inspire others to fight harder, and I am hopeful that the close working relationship between Sens. Reid and Ensign can make the numbers add up. It is up to all of us to support them so that our children and their children will not live in fear of the next train whistle. Erika Van Wie lives in Reno. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a [http://www.gannett.com] Newspaper. Use ***************************************************************** 25 Nuke dump is coming; why not get paid for it? Are Nevada residents aware that every Alaska resident receives money, upwards of $5,000 annually, from the federal government because of the Alaskan pipeline? If it is inevitable that Nevada is to be the nuclear waste dump for this country, is it not reasonable to expect some sort of compensation? The state needs to charge rent for the use of Yucca Mountain. We not only need to collect from other states’ governments for their trash but also from the big heads in Washington who have decided that our beautiful Nevada is their wasteland. Furthermore, if waste is transported through the north, then the north should be paid more than the south. They should be paid for the risk and the increase in train or truck traffic, for upkeep on our roads and rail. Use the money for schools that are suffering enormous cutbacks, and teachers who are paid so poorly. No more bond issues for our residents to debate; let them pay us to store their waste. Listen, this is inevitable, no matter how hard we argue; we might as well look at the glass half full and make it our state’s financial windfall. Don’t let them get it for free. Katie Mendelsohn, Sparks (via e-mail) The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage facility will generate a lot of capital all the way up here in Reno and will be totally safe. For you liberals out there, it will also be wiser environmentally to keep the waste all in one place, rather than dumping it all over the country, and what better to do with an old, ugly mineshaft? It’s safer, more logical and more affordable than the only other thing you can do with a dead mine, which is implode it. The transport units have been tested to make sure they are safe. Do you really think that the government would deliberately expose us to an unsafe condition? Gov. Guinn needs to get his head out of his rear and not try to fight it. Instead, suggest to President Bush that Nevadans receive a payoff for the facility, much in the way Alaskans get a payoff from the government just to live there. Then there would be even more money sitting right here to go to decent, logical programs like keeping our streets safe and free of the “Gotta dollar, man?” people. Kevin Borowski Reno (via e-mail) I was disappointed that the RGJ published the letter “Yucca Mountain may be everyone’s problem” (March 10). Why? The title contains the word “may” and the text contains the words “I think.” I am a licensed nuclear engineer. My nuclear industry experience is: seven years at Fernald (FMPC); 12 years at Hanford with GE; four years with Babcock and Wilcox (Lynchburg); five years with Nuclear Services (San Jose), and 13 years with GE Nuclear (San Jose). Is Mr. Hansen credible? No! One can not create a nuclear weapon by “exploding” the materials that will be stored in Yucca. In addition, nowhere in the materials to be stored in Yucca will there be a “nugget” of fissionable material of either mass or purity that could become a bomb under any circumstances. Mr. Hansen provides no background on his “weapons” experience, and I sincerely hope he will retract his letter. Arthur E. Guay Reno (via e-mail) © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 26 A small victory in waste dump fight RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 3/21/2002 09:41 pm It’s a small victory in Nevada’s fight against Yucca Mountain, but a victory nonetheless as the state with the least federal representation battles the strong-armed will of Congress. A House subcommittee that oversees nuclear issues had scheduled a hearing for Thursday to review President Bush’s recommendation that Yucca Mountain become the permanent home of the nation’s thousands of tons of high-level radioactive waste. That’s right: Congress was going to have hearings on the project before it was even official that Bush’s plans for the dump would move forward. While Nevadans have felt that Yucca Mountain has been shoved down the state’s throat since it was first approved in 1987, this latest move is blatant proof that, to many in Washington, D.C., the dump is a done deal. Holding the hearing would have violated Congress’ own protocol for the dump approval, which calls for the Department of Energy to make a recommendation and the president to approve or reject it. Nevada’s then has the veto option, and only then, according to the law, can Congress weigh in on the issue. As it stands now, the subcommittee backed off and this week moved the hearing to April 25, about two weeks after Gov. Kenny Guinn is expected to issue his veto. Still, the fact that so many in Congress are moving forward under the assumption that Nevada will lose is concerning, though not surprising. Nevadans first put their trust in Bush who promised Yucca Mountain decision’s would be based on sound science, but have since watched him ignore warnings from scientists about flaws in the plan. Then it was Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle who — at the urging of second-in-command Sen. Harry Reid — promised to stop a vote on the Senate floor. Now that promise, too, looks to be corruptible as Daschle said this week he cannot stop a senator from calling for a floor vote. By postponing the subcommittee hearing, Nevada was able to force Congress to at least give the perception that the Yucca Mountain vote will be a fair and deliberative process, though it is common knowledge that most members have made up their minds. And despite the best efforts of Nevada’s leaders, the chances of Congress sustaining the veto are slim to none in the Senate and zilch in the House. The next victory on the Yucca Mountain issue in Congress may actually lie with a man few people may have ever heard of, and someone who has made no promises, former Senate parliamentarian Robert Dove. Nevada leaders are looking to him for parliamentary magic tricks to either prevent a congressional vote, or even better, kill the project altogether. We look to Dove now to help Nevada beat Congress at its own game, using its own rules. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a [http://www.gannett.com] Newspaper. Use ***************************************************************** 27 House panel expected to conduct Yucca hearings Friday, March 22, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By TONY BATT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is expected to announce today in Las Vegas plans to conduct hearings on shipping nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, sources said Thursday. Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, has questioned whether nuclear waste can be safely transported across 43 states to the proposed repository, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Nevada officials have acknowledged they cannot win a majority vote in the House to keep nuclear waste out of Yucca Mountain, but congressional hearings could help stall a final vote. "It is our understanding (Young) will make a statement that there will be hearings," said Robert Uithoven, legislative director for Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev. Mike Slanker, campaign manager for state Sen. Jon Porter, confirmed that Young will meet with reporters in Las Vegas, "but I'm not sure what kind of commitment he is going to make." Young spokeswoman Amy Inaba said she did not know the chairman's plans. Jim Hagan, director of legal programs for the Nuclear Energy Institute, said he anticipates Young will schedule hearings. "We feel the hearings will allow us to dispel a lot of the disinformation that is out there," Hagen said. The House Resources Committee also is considering hearings on Yucca Mountain, said committee spokeswoman Marnie Funk. With Nevada concentrating its resources in the Senate to sustain an anticipated veto by Gov. Kenny Guinn against a nuclear waste repository, Gibbons and Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., have been left to their own devices in recruiting votes in the House. "I would be gratefully appreciative if I got a little of the help that our senators are receiving," Gibbons said. Gibbons was referring to the recent hiring of former White House chiefs of staff Kenneth Duberstein and John Podesta to lobby the Senate for votes against Yucca Mountain. So far, Nevada has raised more than $8 million from the Legislature and the casino industry to fight the Feb. 15 decision by President Bush designating Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository. Berkley said she understands the decision to focus on the Senate. "I think no matter how we do, there is little expectation of prevailing in the House," she said. Nevertheless, Berkley and Gibbons said they continue to lobby their colleagues in hopes of gaining a respectable vote that will add momentum for Nevada in the Senate. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 28 YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Guinn seeks backing for special session Friday, March 22, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Governor hopes for public relations battle By ED VOGEL REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- Gov. Kenny Guinn said Thursday he is considering convening a special session of the Legislature to seek more money to fight federal moves to put a nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain, but won't do so until he has legislative support. Guinn wants $10 million in emergency funds to run television advertisements in 35 to 40 states to persuade residents there to oppose efforts by the Bush administration to send nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. He hopes these residents will urge their U.S. senators to vote against the repository. "Nothing is complete yet," Guinn said. "Ten million dollars is a great deal of money for us. I am taking a look at it." Securing legislative approval of using state "rainy day" funds will be difficult for the governor since a key member of his own party objects to a special session. Sen. Ray Rawson, R-Las Vegas, who does not support a special session, said Thursday that it would take a lot of convincing by Guinn to win his backing. He chairs the Senate Human Resources Committee that oversees Yucca Mountain matters. "It would be money down a rathole," Rawson said. "It would be just a waste of money. We are $30 million to $60 million short on Medicaid, and have lots of other problems. How much are we willing to spend on this (Yucca Mountain) when we don't have the money to spend?" Rawson fears if Nevada spends too much time and money trying to convince residents of other states of the potential hazards of transporting to and storing nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain, that the move could backfire and convince potential tourists that Nevada is an undesirable place to visit. "There would be huge negative publicity for Nevada and Las Vegas," he said. "We could be doing a disservice to Nevada." Guinn said he has talked to Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, about the special session and will discuss his plans soon with Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins, D-Henderson. Raggio has not yet given his consent, Guinn added. The governor said it may be Monday before he knows whether the Legislature would support his plan. In the next 10 days to 15 days, Guinn said he will veto President Bush's move to put the repository in Yucca Mountain. That veto can be overridden by a simple majority vote of both houses of Congress. Guinn said Nevada cannot stop the House from overriding his veto, but it has a chance in the Senate. "Our fight is on the Senate floor and our senators (Democrat Harry Reid and Republican John Ensign) have asked us to try to get funds for it," he said. While the Legislature appropriated $5 million last year for a Yucca Mountain fight, Guinn press secretary Greg Bortolin said repository supporters will spend at least $30 million. Guinn was asked Wednesday by Reid and Ensign to convene a special session to secure more money for the repository battle. On that same day, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said he could not stop a vote in the Senate on Yucca Mountain. Money for the Yucca Mountain fight would come from the state's fund to stabilize operations of state government, commonly called the rainy day fund. This fund now has more than $136 million. Budget Director Perry Comeaux said the governor needs a finding from the Legislature that a fiscal emergency exists before he can take any rainy day money. The Legislature is not scheduled to go into session until Feb. 3. Guinn, however, said a television ad campaign against Yucca Mountain needs to begin in the next 30 to 35 days. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 29 Ensign will keep heat on Daschle Friday, March 22, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Senate majority leader continues to insist he cannot stop Yucca vote By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Debate among Nevadans over Majority Leader Tom Daschle's role in upcoming Senate action on Yucca Mountain simmered another day on Thursday as Congress adjourned for a two-week recess. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., issued a call for Daschle, D-S.D., "to stop Yucca Mountain," echoing comments earlier this week by fellow Republican, Sen. John Ensign, that the majority leader should be held to a promise made in Las Vegas last year. "I don't want to be put in the position of calling Senator Daschle a liar," Gibbons said. For the third consecutive day, Daschle answered questions about his Yucca Mountain position and commitment to get it stopped in the Senate. He said he opposes the proposed nuclear waste repository but maintained he does not have the ability to block votes under a fast-track process Congress put in place for nuclear waste in 1982. Daschle said he was unaware of that process when he said before a May 31 fund-raiser that Yucca Mountain would be "dead" when he and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., ran the Senate. "There's only one way we can beat this legislation, only one, and that is with 51 votes," he said Thursday. The focus on Daschle came during a week when Nevada lawmakers took stock of their efforts to defeat President Bush's recommendation of Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, for storage of 77,000 tons of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. The issue is expected to come to a head in Congress this summer, after Gov. Kenny Guinn issues an expected state veto and the House and Senate position themselves for votes. Former White House chief of staff John Podesta, who has been hired to advise Reid, said Thursday he believes 35 or 36 Democrats can be persuaded to vote against Yucca Mountain. "That is what we see as a doable number and I think we can get there," Podesta said. By that count, 15 or 16 Republicans would need to be recruited by Ensign and Kenneth Duberstein, President Reagan's former chief of staff who has been retained by the American Gaming Association. When the Senate last voted on nuclear waste, on April 25, 2000, 32 Democrats and three Republicans voted in Nevada's favor. One GOP senator, then-majority leader Trent Lott of Mississippi, did so only for a procedural reason. Podesta, who headed the Clinton White House staff from October 1998 until the end of the administration in January 2001, maintained a strategy relying on Senate procedures to halt Yucca Mountain won't work. "It's impossible for Daschle to avoid any vote on this," he said. "It's clear to us and other people that ultimately we're going to have to get those 51 votes." Podesta questioned attacks on Daschle, who opposes nuclear waste burial in Nevada and has said he would help Reid, the assistant majority leader. "From a political perspective I don't understand what Ensign is attempting to accomplish, which is to take our most important ally and put all the pressure on him," Podesta said. Ensign said he believes it helps Nevada to keep pressure on Daschle, and that Daschle should test his leadership on Yucca Mountain. "Raising the visibility of this actually can be a positive thing because if Daschle backs off, it will be harder for him to back off if its out in the public," he said. Stephens Washington Bureau staff writer Tony Batt contributed to this story. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 30 Experts shrug off leftover questions Friday, March 22, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Advisers say Yucca Mountain licensing will advance despite remaining science issues By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Remaining science questions should not hamper the Energy Department's progress toward readying a license application to operate a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, advisers told members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission this week. DOE scientists have agreed to perform more work on 293 technical issues to satisfy questions raised by NRC staff members preparing to consider a Yucca Mountain license request. Nevada officials have argued the outstanding items are evidence the Energy Department should not have proposed the site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, for nuclear waste burial. At a Wednesday meeting, members of the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste told NRC commissioners not to be troubled by the issue. The four-member panel "is not tremendously startled by 293," said Chairman George Hornberger, a University of Virginia hydrologist. "We don't see that as a huge stumbling block," said Hornberger, who added he was keeping in mind the deep-burial repository is the first project of its kind. Hornberger said NRC staff has figured that about 190 of the items require the Energy Department to add documentation to work already performed. A DOE assessment concluded 11 issues required further testing and analysis, while 41 required further analysis only, he said. Hornberger said the resolution process "is working amazingly well." A Nevada official monitoring the DOE's progress on the technical issues said the advisory committee was painting a rosy picture. Among items requiring more work are questions about the ability of corrosion resistant canisters and titanium drip shields to contain radioactivity from decaying nuclear waste for 10,000 years, said Bob Loux, chief of the state's nuclear projects office. Questions remain about potential volcanic activity and the movement of water both above and below the underground repository, he said. DOE officials have pushed back a license application deadline to 2004. Nevada contends federal nuclear waste law requires the department to be ready for licensing within 90 days of a final site recommendation, which could come this year. Loux said DOE and NRC should be more vigilant because Yucca Mountain is a pioneer project. "With the repository design, there's probably more work to be done than already accomplished," he said. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 31 UK to address Sellafield concerns 21 March, 2002, Opponents fear the plant may damage marine life The UK Government says it will do what it can to address Scandinavian concern about radioactive discharges from the Sellafield plant in north-west England that move into the North Sea. We are anxious to find a solution to technetium-99 which meets Norway's concerns Michael Meacher, UK environment minister Environment Minister Michael Meacher accepted there was a "perception of harm" in countries like Norway, where people fear emissions from the nuclear reprocessing plant are damaging their vital fishing industry. "I think they are right to be concerned about this problem," Mr Meacher told BBC Radio 4's Today programme from Bergen, where he is attending a two-day conference on North Sea pollution. He said he was looking at ways of stopping emissions of a particular radioactive nuclide, technetium-99, that is of concern to the Norwegians. Review process Ocean currents carry small traces of radioactivity from Sellafield's waste pipe on the Irish Sea coast across to Scandinavia, and it has been detected in shellfish and seaweed in Norway. [Michael Meacher] Mr Meacher joined a protest about over-fishing "I should make clear that there has been a 99% reduction in the discharge of radionuclides to the Irish Sea over the last 25 years," Mr Meacher said. The risk to human health from Sellafield discharges was "minimal", he stressed. He said a "formal decision" was about to be made on technetium-99, following the completion of a review of technology that "might make it possible" to remove it from the Sellafield's discharge. Overfishing problem The Bergen summit is being attended by nine countries that border the North Sea. On Wednesday - the first day of talks - the Norwegian Government said it was taking legal advice on how to stop British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) discharging radioactive waste into the sea. Mr Meacher was lobbied at the conference by peaceful demonstrators calling for the complete closure of Sellafield. He was also confronted by a protest about overfishing in the North Sea. The ministers are warning that large areas of the sea will need to be closed off to fishing within two years if the alarming decline in stocks is to be reversed. ***************************************************************** 32 Sellafield hits Norwegian raw nerve BBC News | EUROPE | 21 March, 2002 Norway says discharges from Sellafield reach its shores By Tony Samstag BBC reporter in Oslo The government of Norway is taking legal advice on how to stop British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) discharging radioactive waste into the sea from the Sellafield plant in north-west England. The warning came at a conference on pollution of the North Sea in the Norwegian city of Bergen. [Reindeer] Norwegian reindeer were affected by Chernobyl The hundreds of demonstrators waving banners and chanting slogans calling for the closure of Sellafield are an indication of some of the anxieties that have come to play important part in Norway's foreign policy. The 1986 disaster at Chernobyl, the nuclear power station in Ukraine, and its profound effects on the natural environment, had a traumatic effect on Norway. Barely three weeks after the accident, Norwegian scientists sounded the first environmental note of warning when they announced that reindeer, and people who lived with and from them, might be at risk of radioactive contamination. This proved to be the case, not only for reindeer but for other livestock and foodstuffs in the forests and on the farms. Norway is still coping with the aftermath. Impact on fishing Small wonder, then, that radioactive discharges from Sellafield have been a concern of successive governments, as well as the public, for years. Last year, environment minister Boerge Brende described Sellafield as "an issue of the utmost importance" because of evidence accumulating since the late 1990s that discharges of the radioactive substance technetium-99 from the plant had reached the Norwegian coastline. [Borde Brende] Norway's environment minister says this issue is of "utmost importance" "Fish is Norway's second largest export business," Mr Brende continued. "We cannot sit still and watch our coastal areas being polluted." Mr Brende also cited the controversial mixed oxide (MOX) nuclear fuel manufacturing operation at Sellafield as further cause for concern, particularly as it represented "a potential terrorist target". The Norwegians have fought similar battles before, most notably against acid rain, much of which was also attributed to British industry. It took almost 30 years, but they won. They should not be underestimated this time around. ***************************************************************** 33 Nuclear waste repository is radioactive issue -- The Washington Times March 22, 2002 Jonah Goldberg It's an old joke, but it's still true: More Americans were killed by Ted Kennedy's car than by nuclear power. Washington's about to have another big debate about nuclear power, and amid all of the inevitable fearmongering and hysteria, you should keep that joke in mind. The reason for the debate is President Bush's recommendation to Congress to designate Nevada's Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository. I recently visited Yucca Mountain and the only thing uncontroversial I can report to you is that it is a big hole in the ground; a big, expensive hole in the ground. Beyond that, opinions differ. My opinion is that it's a perfectly good place to store nuclear waste for 50 to 300 years, though it's designed to hold it - quite safely, thank you - for at least 10,000 years. Now I know, Nevadans don't want the nation's nuclear garbage in their back yard. I have sympathy for them. As in many Western states, Nevada feels like it gets the shaft from the East Coast. Indeed, roughly 95 percent of the waste intended for Yucca Mountain will originate east of the Mississippi. The federal government owns 87 percent of Nevada's land and it has a history of being an arrogant landlord. Heck, it detonated some 800 nuclear bombs on Nevada. That'd tick off anybody. But that's as far as my sympathies go. Federalism, after all, is a pretty thin reed for Nevadans to stand their opposition on. Yucca Mountain is already federal land (it sits adjacent to the Nevada Test Site and Ellis Air Force base, making it virtually terrorist proof). And it's not like Nevada is famous for opposing federal subsidies, roads and military bases. Currently there are 103 nuclear power plants in 39 states, generating 20 percent of America's electricity and zero percent of greenhouse gasses. The radioactive waste from these plants - roughly 42,000 metric tons of it so far - is scattered in 131 different locations. Almost all of it is held in "temporary" holding facilities. By law - and good conscience - the feds need to find a permanent home for it. The National Academy of Sciences, which has signed off on the Yucca Mountain plan, has reiterated time and again that the best place to keep this stuff is in a geologic repository. One day, we'll be able to send it into the sun or render it benign with a few squirts from an eyedropper. But for right now, burying nuclear waste deep underground away from people and water is, according to scientists and engineers from all around the world, the best solution. Environmental and anti-nuclear groups say they favor geologic storage, too, but just not at Yucca. They've been denouncing the project as a "geologically unstable" white elephant. They've been particularly eager to scare the bejeebers out of Nevada residents, telling them that it's not a matter of if there will be a major disaster, but when. The reason for all of this nonsense is simple. If we don't put nuclear waste underneath Yucca Mountain, it will probably mean the end of the nuclear power industry in the United States (which is why the utilities are spending lots of money in favor Yucca). No nuclear plant has been built since the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. Power companies want to build new reactors, but nobody's going to finance or license them until the nation figures out where to dump our nuclear garbage. If Yucca is killed, it could take 20 or 30 years to find another viable (but less qualified) site. Senator Harry Reid, D-Nev., has been leading the anti-Yucca fight in Congress. His latest desperation ploy is to try to scare the rest of America the way Yucca opponents have scared Nevadans. He's doing this by claiming that the waste packages used to transport spent fuel are "mobile Chernobyls." Reid and others leave out the fact that there have been more than 3,000 waste transports in the United States since 1964 without a single radioactive spill. (By the way, nuclear waste doesn't actually "spill." Before shipping it is processed into a hard, dry ceramic.) These waste containers have been cooked in aviation fuel, dropped onto unyielding concrete and plunged onto steel spikes, and they have come through with flying colors. These are not the (very dangerous) tanker trucks you see on the highway or on train cars. And, even if one did spill its cargo, it wouldn't be the horror story it's made out to be. You could stand a half mile from the very worst waste and get less additional radiation than you do from the cosmic rays we're all exposed to every day. You'd get a lot more extra radiation from living in Spokane, Wash. - where there's lots of radon - or from moving to a high-altitude city like Denver. Nuclear waste is dangerous. But so are coal and oil. Thousands of early deaths, for example, can be attributed to respiratory diseases associated with smokestacks. Opposing Yucca Mountain, or nuclear power in general, because you're afraid of radioactivity isn't an informed position. It's a sign of scientific illiteracy. ***************************************************************** 34 Radioactive Discharges Confound North Sea Ministers Environment News Service: BERGEN, Norway, March 21, 2002 (ENS) - A conflict over radioactive discharges has overshadowed this week's ministerial conference on the protection of the North Sea. Environment ministers from nine countries bordering the sea reached agreement on a wide range of issues during their two day meeting. But they failed to make any progress in resolving a long standing dispute over discharges from nuclear reprocessing facilities in the UK and France. Countries such as Ireland and Norway have become insistent in their calls for an end to the radioactive releases, particularly those from British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. Sellafield fuel production and reprocessing facility in northern England. [Sellafield] BNFL Sellafield facility in Cumbria (Photo courtesy Nuclear Reactor Engineering ERT [http://www.egi.kth.se/ert] ) Yesterday, Norway's Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik publicly urged citizens to join in peaceful protests against the continued discharges. Still, the ministers could only agree on a commitment to evaluate countries' progress towards cutting the discharges to almost zero by 2020, the same target set under the Ospar Convention for the Protection of the Northeast Atlantic (OSPAR). The North Sea conference is an infrequent but important political talk shop for the region's environmental leaders. Its ambitious declarations have often influenced environmental policy making at the European Union level and beyond. The last conference was held in 1995. But the environment ministers downgraded future gatherings in a move termed "astonishing," by KIMO, the international environmental organization representing 100 coastal local authorities in 10 northern European countries. Only ministers will attend future meetings and they will be held on a single issue basis. The ministers handed future influence on North Sea marine environment issues to the European Commission and to OSPAR. This move was anticipated by KIMO, the organization said today in a statement. KIMO international president Ann-Christine Andersson, told the ministers, "We would strongly urge you to carefully consider the future cooperation for the North Sea and not let your role, as a regional influence be overtaken by other frameworks where you will be in the minority." The ministers considered overfishing of the North Sea as a top priority issue. The forum has relatively little direct influence over fisheries, but environmental groups like WWF and Birdlife International are pleased by what they see as mounting political pressure for environmental issues to be fully integrated into European fisheries policy. In their final Declaration, the environment ministers committed themselves to urge the European Union to "integrate environmental protection into the principles, objectives and operational procedures of fisheries management," as part of this year's review of the EU's Common Fisheries Policy. [sea] Yacht sails the North Sea near the British coast. (Photo by Ian Britton courtesy Freefoto.com [http://www.freefoto.com] ) The WWF applauded the ministers' commitment to "reduce the accidental capture in fishing nets of marine mammals to less than one percent of their estimated population." This means reducing the harbor porpoises accidentally caught every year in the southern and central North Sea by three quarters, said the WWF which staged a demonstration against such lethal by-catch in front of the meeting hall. The ministers agreed to mount a recovery plan for harbor porpoises in the North Sea, which WWF believes commits them to achieving changes in fishing practices. They will request the European Union to identify areas to be closed permanently or temporarily to fishing to help fish stocks recover. This could mean closures in the North Sea for cod, whiting, plaice, and skate. The ministers also agreed that within eight years a network of well managed marine protected areas will be designated to safeguard threatened and declining species and habitats, satisfying another recommendation of conservation groups. WWF estimates that at least 10 percent of the North Sea would have to be protected, with bans in some sensitive areas of the most environmentally damaging practices such as dragging fishing nets along the sea bed and extraction of oil, gas, sand and gravel. Another important development was a commitment to monitor the introduction of ecosystem management in the North Sea through "environmental quality objectives," or indicators. Ten objectives have been adopted and more will be added. The ministerial declaration also includes strong words against the release of genetically modified marine organisms, such as fish. Ministers agreed to take "every possible action" to confine any eventual use of such engineered organisms to "secure, land-based facilities." No genetically modified organisms are currently authorised in the European Union. [turbine] Wind turbine is constructed in the North Sea offshore of Blyth, England (Photo courtesy Blyth Offshore Wind Ltd.) The meeting produced a strong statement in favor of the construction of offshore wind farms, drawing praise from Greenpeace. UK Environment Minister Michael Meacher said, "The 20th century was the century of oil, the 21st must be the century of renewable energy." But Greenpeace warned that this historic commitment to the development of renewable energy in the North Sea will be undermined while the UK and France continue to support the polluting nuclear industry. Greenpeace political advisor Simon Reddy said, "The UK and France have to understand that the policies they articulated in Bergen represent a fundamental contradiction. What use is it signing up to clean renewable energy if you simultaneously continue to support a failing industry that is polluting our environment?" Greenpeace believes that the North Sea governments could "crack the poverty code by kick-starting a global renewables revolution," saving the climate and alleviating poverty in the process. © Environment News Service (ENS) 2002. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 Lobbyist says Daschle, Ensign spat hurts fight Las Vegas SUN March 22, 2002 By Benjamin Grove WASHINGTON -- The political spat between Nevada's Republican Sen. John Ensign and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is a "distraction" to the state's fight against the Yucca Mountain project, Nevada's top Democratic lobbyist said Thursday. "We ought to be working together to get the 51 (Senate) votes," Podesta said. Ensign this week has repeated a vow to keep pressure on Daschle to live up to a vow that the Yucca project was "dead." Daschle is helping Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., convince Democratic senators to vote against the project. Daschle on Thursday for a third day in a row stressed that he would not be able to single-handedly block the Yucca project as majority leader, as Ensign has said. Daschle pointed to a federal law originally drafted in 1982 that established clear rules for voting on the Yucca project and allow any senator to call for a vote on the measure. "I would ask Sen. Ensign to go back and be more careful about his public remarks until he has studied the current set of circumstances," Daschle said. Daschle put pressure back on Ensign to convince Republicans to oppose Yucca. "There are only two declared Republicans now in opposition: Sen. Ensign and Sen. (Ben Nighthorse) Campbell (Colo.)," Daschle said. "So if (Democrats) get a majority, I would hope (Ensign) could get a majority and we could defeat this legislation." Daschle on Wednesday said that he had not understood the details of the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act when, 10 months ago at a Las Vegas fund-raiser, he said the Yucca project was dead as long as he and Reid, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat, were in charge. Ensign this week issued a two-paragraph press release saying, "All Nevadans expect him to keep his word." What initially seemed like mere confusion over Senate procedure took on a political tone as Ensign and Daschle traded comments in the media, and then Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., jumped into the mix. "It is my hope Sen. Daschle did not lie during his fund-raising trip to Nevada last year, and that he will keep his promise that under his leadership, Yucca Mountain will die," Gibbons said in a written statement Thursday. The Ensign-Daschle tiff "portends badly" for the Yucca fight, Podesta said. Daschle cannot block a vote if another senator calls for one, Podesta said. "It is impossible for Daschle to avoid any votes on this," Podesta said. Nevada's Republican anti-Yucca lobbyist, Ken Duberstein, who is working closely with Ensign, did not return phone calls this week. Podesta said he and Reid aim to line up 35 to 36 Democrats to vote against the Yucca project, Podesta said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 36 Hearings set on risks of shipping waste Las Vegas SUN March 22, 2002 LAS VEGAS SUN WASHINGTON -- The House Transportation Committee will hold hearings on the risks of shipping nuclear waste to Nevada's Yucca Mountain, Chairman Don Young, R-Alaska, was expected to announce today in Las Vegas. Young reportedly is concerned about whether the nation's highly radioactive waste could safely be transported by truck and train through 43 states to Yucca Mountain. If Congress and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ultimately approve the nuclear waste repository 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, the site could become a permanent burial ground for 77,000 tons of waste by the end of the decade. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., and Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., along with Republican congressional candidate Jon Porter, have urged Young to hold hearings. Berkley sits on the Transportation Committee. Young has discussed holding hearings in cities along likely waste transportation routes, but it was not clear early today how many hearings Young might hold, or where. Young is in Las Vegas to meet with Porter, and to attend the 30th annual convention and awards ceremony of the Safari Club International, a hunting and wildlife group. The club tonight at the Paris Resort and Casino will honor Gibbons as Federal Legislator of the Year. Former President Bush is expected to attend. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 37 Campaign to include TV ad blitz Las Vegas SUN March 22, 2002 By Benjamin Grove WASHINGTON -- If Nevada lawmakers meet for a special Legislative session to approve more taxpayer money to fight Yucca Mountain, much of the cash likely would be spent on television commercials, officials said. Nevada officials said their campaign against the plan to bury nuclear waste in the state is much like a high-profile political campaign that may be won or lost on the airwaves. "In order to move the kind of votes we're going to have to move in a very short amount of time, we are going to have to focus on some very expensive media markets," said Mark Brown of Brown &Partners Advertising and Public Relations, a firm working for Nevada. "We'll spend whatever we have." Nevada leaders also could use additional money, perhaps as much as 30 percent, on grassroots efforts to build opposition to Yucca Mountain in key congressional districts, Brown said. The money could be used to pay locals to launch Internet, mail or phone campaigns, Brown said. "We would rely heavily on local community leaders and on existing environmentalists and grassroots networks," Brown said. At issue is the Yucca Mountain project, a plan to dump the nation's nuclear waste at the site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. President Bush approved the plan and Gov. Guinn is expected to officially object, which would drop the issue in the hands of Congress. A vote is expected this year and Nevada officials are trying to line up 51 senators -- a majority -- to uphold Guinn's objection. Both Yucca advocates and its critics -- mostly Nevada officials and environmentalists -- are engaging in an intense battle to lobby senators. Nuclear industry officials could spend roughly $30 million as part of a massive lobbying and public relations campaign, Guinn has said. By contrast, Nevada officials so far have about $6 million, much of it approved last year by the Legislature ($4 million) and Clark County ($1 million). But much of the money is already committed -- the state is paying Washington law firm Egan &Associates about $2.5 million and Brown is getting about $1 million, said Bob Loux, director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. "We have talked about (television commercials) but the consensus is that unless we get a heck of a lot more money, we really can't afford it," Loux said. Insiders say Nevada officials are planning commercials for limited release that could expand if the Legislature -- or private companies or other groups -- allocate more cash. State lawmakers have expressed doubt the state could afford it. Guinn on Thursday confirmed that what the state needs now is not more lobbyists or lawyers but a sizeable cash outlay for targeted anti-Yucca Mountain television advertising. "Right now we don't have the money to carry the message about transporting waste to the other states," Guinn said. The idea is to let people know that nuclear waste will be rolling through towns and cities across the country if Congress OKs Yucca Mountain. Of the $10 million Guinn is considering asking for, "virtually all of it would go toward advertising," he said. "I can't collect money fast enough," he said. Nevada's top anti-Yucca strategists -- including its four lawmakers in Congress, along with Guinn, Brown and high-profile Washington lobbyists Ken Duberstein and John Podesta -- have identified key media markets nationwide where anti-Yucca commercials could be most effective. The markets fall mostly in 12 to 18 states that nuclear waste trucks and trains would travel through on their way to Yucca Mountain, Loux said. States include Indiana, Missouri and Nebraska where senators may be persuaded to oppose the Yucca waste repository. But television time doesn't come cheap. A commercial might need to run at least 20 or 30 times in Kansas City for it to be seen by enough people to be worth the expense, said Christopher Klose a Washington political strategist whose firm works for Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev. That could cost roughly $175,000, he said. A similar buy in St. Louis might cost $260,000, he estimated. Many East Coast markets could be far more expensive. Nevada officials who hope to win Sen. James Jeffords, I-Vt., would likely have to run ads in Boston or New York to reach an audience there, Klose said. "It starts to add up fast," Klose said. Although the nation is full of also-ran politicians who blame their losses on an opponent's last-minute television advertising, the results aren't guaranteed, several experts said. Commercials can get a lawmaker's attention even if they don't generate instant outrage among constituents, said Tobe Berkovitz, a Boston University associate professor of public relations and advertising who studies political media buys. "You're probably not going to see someone in Nebraska pick up the phone and call their senator," Berkovitz said. "But what commercials can do in a broader sense is shift public opinion, and the senator may pick up on that. And the local media will do stories about the ad and the issue will get attention that way." Nevada officials can sway a small but crucial number of senators by advertising the risks of transporting nuclear waste through their state, Podesta told Nevada reporters in a conference call Thursday. That could include television advertising and grassroots work, he said. "We have got to get that message out and we have to do that in all the ways we know how to do," Podesta said. Sun reporter Jace Radke contributed to this story. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 38 State could tap 'rainy day' fund Las Vegas SUN March 22, 2002 $10 million sought for Yucca fight By Erin Neff Nevada officials are considering declaring an emergency to shift $10 million from the state's "rainy day" fund to the fight against a proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain. On Thursday Gov. Kenny Guinn said he is deciding whether to call a special session of the state Legislature to ask for the money from the $136 million fund. "These are tough times, but I still think it's worth looking at," Guinn said. "We need to look at all the ramifications." Guinn said Thursday that he and Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., are exploring the legality of taking the money from the state's emergency fund and using it to buy advertising in other states to show the dangers of transporting nuclear waste cross country. State Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, said this morning that he is not convinced that the state has more money to add to the Yucca Mountain fight, and he said the state can't legally access the "rainy day" fund for that purpose. Raggio said he was being heavily lobbied to support a special session but remained skeptical. "We don't have it in the state," he said. "Maybe they can look in Clark County or to private industry." Guinn would need Raggio's support to get the money because Raggio leads the Senate and is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. The discussion over a special session comes as the state is in the middle of a budget crunch fueled by the economic downturn worsened by the tourism dropoff after Sept. 11. Guinn ordered state departments to prepare "flat" budgets with no growth. Raggio is critical of the new request, questioning the fight in Washington, D.C. and wondering whether it would be money well spent. "I'm still at a loss to understand what's going on in the U.S. Senate on this," Raggio said. "I'm not sure how they will use $10 million. I want to be convinced that any money spent would be useful." Raggio called the issue a "political football." "If Sen. (Tom) Daschle, who runs the Senate, and Sen. Reid, who is second in the Senate, are telling us that they can't get the votes, what good is the money?" Raggio asked. "(Nevada is) looking at a $100 million shortfall. Where are we going to get this money?" Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins said he spoke Monday with Reid about the possibility for a special session but has not had a chance to discuss the matter with his Democratic Assembly Caucus. "I think it's certainly something we have to think about," Perkins, D-Henderson, said."Yucca Mountain is the biggest crisis facing the state, but we have to weigh spending the money with the chance for success." Perkins said he was not sure if the state has $10 million it can free up for the fight. However, he added, if the money is available and lobbyists are able to show evidence that it could make a difference, he would be willing to support its expenditure for the Yucca Mountain battle. "We would have to know, and they would have to show us that they think it can make a difference," Perkins said. Guinn said he will decide next week on the special session. He said that dipping into the emergency fund is only under consideration at this point. "I don't know if it's what the people want," Guinn said. "We're going to have to ask them." Outside of the rainy day fund, another possible avenue for Guinn is to try to tap into the emergency fund controlled by the Legislative Interim Finance Committee. There is presently $8.8 million in the fund, and Guinn could ask for some of that money. Perkins, who serves on the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, said he would like to look at the issue and possible sources of money before committing to a special session. The state's rainy day fund can only be tapped if both the governor and the Legislature declare a fiscal emergency. Greg Bortolin, Guinn's press secretary, said the governor is conducting legal research into whether the fund can be tapped for Yucca. One issue is whether this is an emergency. Assemblyman Mark Manendo, D-Las Vegas, said he thinks his constituents would support spending millions more to fight Yucca Mountain because U.S. 95 -- a potential route for the nuclear waste -- travels through his district. "We need to be competitive and we need to get our point across," Manendo said. "Obviously that's done through money, and the people would support that." But not every lawmaker is so convinced. Assembly Minority Leader Lynn Hettrick, R-Gardnerville, said he didn't think the Yucca fight should be the state's top spending priority given the "cash-strapped" schools and doctors leaving the state because of skyrocketing medical malpractice insurance. "I don't see that there's any money to find," Hettrick said. Assemblyman Joe Dini, D-Yerington, said he would not object to a special session for Yucca Mountain. "If we're going to make a last stand, we better have enough dough to do it." Dini said, but added the rainy day fund was not set up to take care these types of things. The most recent special session was in 2001 to take care of reapportionment and bills left over from regular session. It lasted two days. Before that there was a one-day session in 1989 to repeal a legislative pension increase. State leaders said while issues such as medical malpractice and the state's educational funding crunch lie ahead for the next Legislature, they didn't expect anything beyond Yucca to come up in a potential special session. Guinn, who sets the agenda for any special sessions, said he isn't considering those issues because of the complexity involved. He said he doesn't want a marathon session. Lorne Malkiewich, director of the Legislative Counsel Bureau, said today there have note been any preparations for a special session. He said it would cost about $70,000 to $75,000 for a one-day special session. The cost would be about $30,000 a day for any following day. Sun reporters Jace Radke and Cy Ryan contributed to this story. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 39 Report criticizes agency's policy regarding release of radioactive scrap - 3/22/2002 - ENN.com Friday, March 22, 2002 By Nancy Zuckerbrod, Associated Press WASHINGTON — The federal government inconsistently decides whether slightly radioactive materials should be recycled, put in a landfill, or securely stored, says a report released Thursday. There's no evidence public health has been jeopardized, said Richard Magee, an environmental engineer and lead author of the National Research Council (NRC) report. But he said it is bad public policy to have haphazard decision-making. "We ought to agree as a country how we want to manage this stuff, and it ought to be uniform," Magee said. At issue are the tons of materials that are thrown out at existing commercial nuclear facilities or sites being decommissioned. These slightly radioactive items can include piping, tools, cabinets, and building structures. The licensees that operate the facilities say it is cost effective to recycle the scrap into everyday items or release it into landfills. But environmentalists say they want it stored in a secure, isolated facility as nuclear waste. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission makes the decisions. The study found the NRC doesn't always use the same criteria to judge similar materials. For example, a slightly radioactive piece of metal from a nuclear plant is treated differently from metal with the same level of radioactivity that was taken from a hospital. In addition, the NRC relies on standards when considering releasing materials that have radiation on their surface, but it has none for materials contaminated throughout. Instead the agency decides on a case-by-case basis whether to release those materials, according to the report. The NRC asked the research council to examine its policies governing the release of slightly radioactive materials from the commercial facilities it licenses. NRC spokeswoman Rosetta Virgilio said the council was asked to recommend changes to the decision-making process. She declined to comment on the report, saying the agency needed time to review it. In the past, the NRC has tried to set standards that would allow an increase in the amount of slightly radioactive material released but has been thwarted by Congress. The steel industry, against having its product stigmatized as potentially radioactive, is among the groups that have lobbied against the commission's proposals. The NRC asked the council to consider the science behind the issue, but Magee said the panel opted not to take an opinion on what level of contamination is safe for release. Instead, the report recommends the agency involve all interested parties in its decisions. "Our idea is if we're going to move forward, it's got to come out of a process where all stakeholders are involved," Magee said. Among the options the report recommended the agency consider are freely releasing slightly radioactive materials from NRC sites, releasing them for restricted use, or banning their release altogether. The Energy Department has had a ban on recycling scrap metal from its nuclear facilities in place for about two years. The Bush administration is reviewing that policy. Copyright 2002, Associated Press ***************************************************************** 40 Study says TVA is one of nation's worst polluters Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 2:04 p.m. on Friday, March 22, 2002 KNOXVILLE (AP) -- The Tennessee Valley Authority is one of the nation's worst air polluters, an environmental study says. The Knoxville-based federal utility ranked as the third-largest emitter of nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide, according to conclusions drawn from 2000 data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The data was compiled by a coalition that included the Natural Resources Defense Council. The only power producers with higher pollution levels were American Electric Power and the Southern Co., the study found. David Gardiner, one of the report's authors and an assistant administrator for the EPA in the Clinton administration, said government officials could use the data to consider more reductions in air pollutants. "Consumers can use it to judge the companies that operate in their neighborhoods," he said. John Shipp, TVA's manager of environmental policy and planning, said the agency is scheduled to spend $2.7 billion from 1999 to 2010 on equipment and labor that reduces air pollution. TVA's annual power revenues are about $7 billion. "In this decade TVA is spending almost a million dollars a day to reduce our air emissions. That is a substantial, significant investment in reducing emissions," Shipp said. The agency is working as fast as it can to cut harmful emissions, he said. "There's just so much work, so much construction, so much steel, so many fabricators, so much that can be done in a period of time. We are constrained by resources ... by availability of skilled craft labor," he said. One type of equipment to reduce pollution, called an SCR, is seven to 10 stories high and takes about a year to install, he said. TVA plans to install 18 SCRs over several years. TVA has filed a lawsuit against the EPA to challenge an order for more extensive air pollution controls than TVA planned. A court hearing is set for May 21 in Atlanta. President Bush and Congress have been discussing proposals to mandate larger reductions in air pollution but have not agreed on goals. The Natural Resources Defense Council, based in New York City, lists as its mission safeguarding the Earth for all living things. The group says it has 500,000 members nationwide. TVA is the nation's largest public power producer. It provides electricity to some 8.3 million people served by 158 distributors in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia. On the Net: Tennessee Valley Authority: http://www.tva.gov All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 41 Landfill monitor rips state officials / Not told of new rules on radioactive waste Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief [glucas@sfchronicle.com] Wednesday, March 20, 2002 Sacramento -- A regulator who monitors California landfills blasted state health officials yesterday for not telling his board in advance about new rules that set acceptable levels of radioactivity in waste destined for city dumps. The criticism came at a state Senate committee hearing examining the potential health effect of allowing low-level radioactive waste in landfills rather than federally licensed dumps designed to accommodate radiated materials. "I was shocked that (my board) had no knowledge of the disposal of low-level radioactive waste," said former state Senate leader David Roberti, now a member of the Integrated Waste Management Board, which regulates California's 170 municipal landfills. "Citizens of California view municipal landfills as garbage dumps, not toxic dumps," Roberti told the committee. The debate centered on a regulation adopted by the Department of Health Services in November setting the level of cleanup needed on decommissioned radioactive sites. The rule sets a maximum exposure level of 25 millirems per year of radiation in order for a site to be considered clean and no longer subject to state licensing. Once free of state licensing, the site can be used for another purpose, such as housing. Dirt and debris from the site can be used for other purposes or disposed in ordinary landfills. Two environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, say that poses a potential cancer risk to workers at landfills and communities near the landfills. The Davis administration says its cleanup standard is to remove as much radiation as "reasonably achievable" with 25 millirems as the maximum. Previously, the former exposure limit used for decommissioned sites was four times higher, department officials said, but in practice no waste containing anything approaching 100 millirems was sent to landfills. "The number of decommissioned sites is in the hundreds over the past 10 years," said Kevin Reilly, deputy director of prevention services for the department. "There are few that have residual radiation. The vast majority of these licenses are for radioactive material that are in sealed containers and used in instruments or X-rays," Reilly said. Reilly said the state's actual cleanup standard is to make the amount of radiation as low as "reasonably achievable" with a maximum of 25 millirems. Bay Area residents receive 300 millirems a year from natural sources, Reilly said in an interview. Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, who chaired yesterday's hearing asked the department to suspend its regulation. Reilly said in an interview later that doing so would mean a return to 100 millirem per year exposure limit. Roberti's main complaint was that his board was not notified of the health department's rule change. Reilly said the proposed change was circulated widely among state agencies but he could not find specific notification for the waste board. Roberti said that low-level radioactive waste has already turned up in at least one landfill in Los Angeles even before the new regulations were adopted last fall. Concrete debris from a former Rocketdyne facility in Southern California had traces of radioactivity. Reilly noted that dirt from the Rocketdyne site that was disposed of in a hazardous-waste landfill in Buttonwillow was measured by federal regulators at less than 1 millirem. Roberti said landfills are not qualified to handle radioactive waste. "Very few landfills have adequate procedures in place to screen for radioactive waste. I doubt any landfill would knowingly accept low-level radioactive waste, considering the health and safety liability," Roberti said. E-mail Greg Lucas at glucas@sfchronicle.com [glucas@sfchronicle.com] . ©2002 San Francisco Chronicle   Page A - 21 ***************************************************************** 42 Nuclear war at Yucca Mountain: Bush must fight for Nevada dump site The Union Leader & New Hampshire Sunday News Columns - March 22, 2002 Robert D. Novak: KENNETH DUBERSTEIN, President Ronald Reagan's last chief of staff, was tapped last week by Nevada gambling interests as the Republican lobbyist against depositing nuclear waste in the state. He was at least the eighth Republican asked. The others dared not risk the Bush White House's wrath, which now will fall on Duberstein. High-ranking aides to President Bush indicated to me that Duberstein may find the White House door locked, a daunting prospect for a leading Republican lobbyist. That reaction reflects politicization of the long-pending proposal to store the nation's accumulating nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev. It tests whether Bush can prevent the Senate's Democratic leadership from making good on its assurances that Yucca is dead. Ending a 15-year process, the Senate and House appear ready to override Nevada's objections to millions of tons of nuclear waste being sent to Nevada, thereby erasing the biggest obstacle to nuclear power development. Nuclearphobic environmentalists are supported by the gambling industry, which is convinced that underground nuclear storage 90 miles from Las Vegas will deter the high rollers. Sen. Harry Reid, the effective Senate Majority Whip, is from Nevada and places killing Yucca on top of his agenda. In the euphoria after the Democrats took control of the Senate last May, Majority Leader Tom Daschle came to Las Vegas for a fund-raiser and — with Reid by his side — promised that the waste repository would die in the Senate. However, this is not as easy as blocking floor votes on Alaska oil drilling or a judicial nomination. The privileged Senate motion to take up the bill, by law, cannot be locked up in committee or delayed by filibuster. The easiest approach would be for the President to forget about the Nevada storage plan. The state's two most prominent Republicans — Gov. Kenny Guinn and Sen. John Ensign — warned the White House that a pro-Yucca decision might yield a Democratic sweep of Nevada's three seats in the House of Representatives. That could restore Democratic control of the House. A negative Presidential decision would be a death sentence for nuclear power, but this energy mode is backed by Bush and Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham as part of a comprehensive national program. Bush did approve Yucca, and Nevada interests set about recruiting the best lobbyists money can buy. They considered the biggest, most expensive Democratic name: Bill Clinton. Instead, Nevada hired John Podesta, President Clinton's last chief of staff (along with his brother, veteran Democratic political operative Anthony Podesta). The Podesta brothers are unlikely to be effective with Republican senators. So, that left the chore of hiring a Republican lobbyist. The difficulty was demonstrated in the case of Robert Dove, retired parliamentarian of the Senate. Seeking loopholes to block Yucca, Nevada interests last signed up Dove at $3,000 per month. Dove was a consultant to the Patton Boggs lobbying firm, whose electric utility clients protested bitterly about Dove's anti-Yucca role. Patton Boggs informed this column that Dove was no longer with the firm as of Jan. 31. The Nevada interests felt out former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who said no rather than pick a fight with the White House. An offer to Timmons & Co. (headed by ex-Nixon White House aides Bill Timmons and Tom Korologos) also was declined. Former Republican National Chairman Haley Barbour's lobbying company was asked, but rejected the offer; Barbour was not even consulted, but colleagues knew he wanted no conflict with the President. An additional reason for the Timmons company to say no was opposition by a long-standing client, the Union Pacific Corp., which wants to haul nuclear waste to Nevada. The Duberstein Group also has a big railroad client, CSX Corp., which could object. Ken Duberstein told me he had not heard from CSX, but he also expressed doubt that the White House would punish him. He is clearly wrong about the White House. A whole industry's fate and one state's political future are at stake. John Sununu and Geraldine Ferraro have been hired as Republican and Democratic lobbyists by the nuclear industry, but they may not be needed with the Bush team arrayed for battle. Robert D. Novak is a Washington political columnist and a commentator on CNN. ***************************************************************** 43 PACRO enables fluorine cells' cleanup - By Joe Walker The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky Friday, March 22, 2002 A California company seeks to save $2.5 million in federal cleanup costs at the Paducah uranium enrichment plant. By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com--270.575.8650 Seventy discarded fluorine cells are expected to be removed from the Paducah uranium enrichment plant by September if a California firm gets the job in concert with a local economic development group. The Paducah Area Community Reuse Organization and Los Angeles-based ToxCo will bid on the work, estimated to save $2.5 million in federal cleanup costs. PACRO executive committee members were told Wednesday that ToxCo's target removal date of June has been moved back three months to allow ample time for worker training. "It appears to be well on its way," PACRO Director John Anderson said of the project. Last month, the committee signed a deal to sell $75,000 in brokerage services to help ToxCo remove the cells from the plant for sale or use elsewhere. Anderson said Wednesday that 13 breached cells in safe containers will be shipped first, followed by 57 cells that are not breached. The cells were used many years ago in the process of fluorinating uranium to be enriched for use in nuclear fuel. ToxCo has been negotiating with the reuse group for months and if selected by the Department of Energy, will buy the cells from DOE for a price taking into account ToxCo’s considerable cleanup expense. Although PACRO wanted the firm to build a job-creating fluorine conversion plant here, ToxCo said too few of the cells were useful to justify the extensive cost. ToxCo plans to decontaminate the cells at a company facility in Tennessee before going to Ozark Fluorine Specialties, a ToxCo subsidiary in Tulsa, Okla. Anderson said PACRO officials continue talking with the Energy Department about partially lifting a ban on the sale of radioactive scrap metal at all DOE plants because of safety concerns. The change would help the group negotiate with a Canadian firm, Chemical Vapor Deposition Manufacturing, about recycling some of the plant’s tons of contaminated nickel. ***************************************************************** 44 Research Council Withholds Seal of Approval of Radioactive Recycling but Avoids Key Questions Public Citizen March 21, 2002 Council Insists That Nuclear Regulatory Commission Overcome "Legacy of Institutional Distrust" WASHINGTON, D.C. – A long-awaited report rightly admonishes the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for ignoring the public’s concerns about a proposal to widely recycle radioactive materials into industrial and household goods. The report, issued today by the National Research Council,properly calls for the NRC to alter its approach in dealing with solid radioactive wastes. It outlines how the nuclear agency has done little to seriously address the legitimate concerns of citizens while simultaneously advancing a scheme that would reduce costs and liabilities for the nuclear industry. It also details the NRC's past betrayals of public trust on the radioactive release and recycling, and points out that support for the practice generally comes from the nuclear industry. The report reviews the history of NRC efforts to deregulate radioactive materials so they could be treated as if they were not radioactive. Still, the report, entitled "The Disposition Dilemma: Controlling the Release of Solid Materials from Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Licensed Facilities," fails to address a key issue: whether it is responsible to allow nuclear waste to be widely dispersed. It also avoids the question of what should be done with radioactive wastes from nuclear power and weapons facilities, even though the council had been given a clear license to make a detailed recommendation. The National Research Council is a nonprofit group that is part of the National Academies and advises the government. "Fortunately for the American public, the report states the obvious," said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "People with very legitimate concerns have not been treated seriously by the NRC, and the primary supporter of this scheme is – you guessed it – the nuclear industry, which could save billions or even make millions in profits by recycling large quantities of nuclear waste into frying pans and zippers. If the NRC were to listen to the public rather than the industry, this practice would cease." Radioactive materials are currently released for recycling on a case-by-case basis. However, the government is considering standardizing this practice, which would greatly increase the amount of waste released. As the NRC and the nuclear industry have faced strong resistance to the "recycling" of nuclear waste from consumer and environmental groups, unions, and the steel and concrete industries, it has dismissed the concerns as "public perception" problems. The NRC likely had counted on a positive report from the council to provide a green light for recycling and to lend an air of credibility to the project. That the council did not place its imprimatur on the project is a significant setback for the NRC and the nuclear industry, Hauter said. In fact, the Research Council essentially told the NRC to again re-examine recycling – but this time with the involvement of a "broad range" of groups. Today's report redirects the NRC in fundamental ways. Four of its seven recommendations call for the NRC to change the way it deals with solid radioactive wastes by doing such things as developing a new decision-making process, covering an expanded range of alternatives and significantly revising technical support documents. However, the council did not address whether it is prudent to disperse radioactive materials instead of isolate the waste from the public. David Ritter, policy analyst with Critical Mass questioned why the committee did not go further. "The Research Council committee's report doesn’t recommend that these wastes not be released or recycled," he said. "For an organization that claims to promote science 'for the general welfare,' one would think that preventing radiation exposures to the public would be a priority. Better yet, if the wastes are presenting such a dilemma, why not consider halting further waste production?" While today's report could put up a significant roadblock for the NRC's plans to boost recycling, it remains to be seen whether the NRC will begin to take the concerns of the public and non-nuclear industries seriously. Thus far, this ill-advised practice is based solely on economic concerns and has disregarded greater questions of sound science, public health and rational public policy, Ritter said. ### ***************************************************************** 45 Nuclear Weapons Pact Nears Approval http://www.moscowtimes.ru Friday, Mar. 22, 2002. Page 3 Nuclear Weapons Pact Nears Approval By The Associated Press GENEVA -- Top Russian and U.S. arms negotiators began a two-day round of talks Thursday aimed at agreeing on a new reduction in the two countries' nuclear arsenals, officials said. Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Mamedov and U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton could wrap up the formal agreement in the two days of talks so it is ready for the U.S.-Russian summit meeting in May, officials said. The talks in Geneva are to flesh out an agreement reached between Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin in December. Bush has agreed to cut U.S. long-range nuclear warheads to between 1,700 to 2,200 from the current 6,000 allowed each country under START I. Putin has said Russia could go as low as 1,500 warheads. Powell said last week that the agreement would be about three pages long and would be legally binding. ***************************************************************** 46 Islam expert warns of nuke terror WorldNetDaily: MARCH 20 2002 Claims Pakistanis smuggled 'dirty bomb' into U.S. from Canada He predicted the Sept. 11 attacks, and now Islam expert Dr. Robert Morey warns there are three small nuclear devices within the U.S. on standby for more terror, according to Assist News Service (ANS). "I have Middle Eastern friends throughout the U.S. who continually feed me information as to what the terrorists are up to," Dr. Morey told ANS. "I, in turn, feed that information to the FBI and Naval Intelligence." According to ANS, Dr. Morey first began researching Islam when he was a pastor at New Life Bible Church in central Pennsylvania during the 1980s. His research earned him a doctorate. He has authored over 40 books dealing with false religions, cults and philosophies, and founded the California Institute of Apologetics. His work has garnered him "numerous death threats" and one "clear assassination attempt last November the FBI successfully foiled." One of the Pakistani volunteers in his ministry was discovered to be a secret agent for the Pakistani Secret Service. "Hamas has me on a death list of people to assassinate in the U.S.," Morey told ANS. Morey claims a good track record with his gathered intelligence, telling ANS "I've been right so many times the FBI showed up at my house, suspicious as to whether or not I was somehow involved – because I knew too much. I simply pointed out to them they don't have their ear to the ground in the Middle Eastern community." "I told them several years ago that Muslim Pakistanis brought into the U.S. a small nuclear device called a 'dirty bomb' through Niagara Falls out of Canada," Morey says. "They are driving this nuclear device in the back of a van or a car waiting for Bin Laden to tell them when it's time to set it off." Morey received the information through Pakistani Christian sources, according to ANS. "My contacts now within the intelligence community have leaked to me it is feared there are three such devices in the U.S.," Morey added. CNN reports the Bush administration received information last October outlining a plot to smuggle a stolen Russian nuclear weapon into the United States, most likely New York City. The intelligence was deemed "not to be credible" after a polygraph test determined the informant was "bogus," one official told CNN. The perceived threat was one reason the president activated a shadow government, assigning about 100 senior officials to "bunker duty" to keep the government running in the event of a catastrophic attack. Heightened concern over al-Qaida's progress toward obtaining a nuclear or radiological weapon, reports the Washington Post, prompted the Bush administration to deploy "hundreds of sophisticated sensors since November to U.S. borders, overseas facilities and choke points around Washington." And the Delta Force, the nation's elite commando unit, has been placed on alert to "seize control of nuclear materials that the sensors may detect." Dr. Morey points out to ANS, "One would think that if this was not a real threat, the U.S. government wouldn't rush to spend millions of dollars for equipment to protect Washington D.C." © 2002 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. ***************************************************************** 47 Nuclear deal with N Korea shows signs of a meltdown: An agreement to swap power plants for an end to weapons tests threatens to unravel. Andrew Ward reports: Financial Times; Mar 22, 2002 By ANDREW WARD In June 1994, the Koreans were on the brink of armed conflict as Pyongyang threatened to turn South Korea's capital Seoul into a "lake of fire". The crisis caused by the discovery of North Korea's nuclear programme was averted only by an eleventh hour deal brokered by former US president Jimmy Carter. Under the terms of the Agreed Framework, the US and its allies agreed to build a power station in energy-starved North Korea in return for the Communist state halting nuclear activities. That deal is now showing signs of strain and prompting renewed fears for the Korean peninsula. Construction of the two tamper-proof nuclear reactors has fallen years behind schedule. "We may face a similar crisis to the one over Pyongyang's nuclear programme in 1994," said Lim Dong-won, adviser to Kim Dae-jung, South Korean president, in a seminar this week. The 1994 crisis led Washington to threaten air strikes unless Pyongyang froze its weapons programme, which was allegedly based on a stock of plutonium big enough to make one or two atomic bombs. Relations between Pyongyang and Washington have already become fraught since President George W. Bush named North Korea in his "axis of evil" speech. "This agreement is the only thing that has stopped North Korea going fully nuclear", said a European diplomat. "If one side or both pulls out it would lead to proliferation and create a very serious situation." Last week North Korea issued a veiled threat to scrap the agreement amid a spiralling war of words with Washington following North Korea's inclusion in the list of six countries reported this month to be targets for possible US nuclear attack. Yesterday Pyongyang was even reported to be seeking a power station from Russia, suggesting it is looking for alternative energy solutions. This approach to Moscow appears to be an act of brinkmanship rather than a likely prospect. Pressure on the framework intensified on Tuesday when the US signalled its doubts about whether North Korea was keeping its side of the bargain. Washington said it would refuse to certify that Pyongyang was complying with its commitment to freeze weapons development, suspicious that secret research has continued in underground facilities. "A confluence of events ensures that we are headed for the brink again with North Korea in the next 12 months," said Victor Cha of Georgetown University in a recent article. "The Agreed Framework reaches critical implementation stages in the coming months that will test the intentions of Pyongyang." accord." The two reactors, funded to the tune of Dollars 4bn by the US, South Korea, Japan and European nations, were supposed to be completed by 2003 but concrete has not yet been poured into the foundations and completion is unlikely before 2008. Diplomats say Pyongyang could use the delay as an excuse to withdraw from the agreement, freeing it to resume its nuclear programme. It might also end its voluntary suspension of missile tests. Firing the Taepo Dong 2 rocket, which could reach parts of the US when fully developed, would cause even greater panic than the 1998 firing of Taepo Dong 1. Washington's reason for scrapping the framework would be North Korea's failure to allow widespread inspection of its nuclear facilities - a condition that must be met before the reactors are installed. Mr Bush's refusal to certify North Korea's compliance with its framework obligations is meant as a warning to Pyongyang. US officials made clear that the next delivery of 500,000 tons of oil promised by the US to North Korea every year until the reactors were completed would go ahead. But the implication was that continued failure to allow inspections would jeopardise the agreement. South Korea, Japan and the European Union are lobbying Washington to keep faith with the framework and Seoul and European capitals are encouraging Pyongyang to resume dialogue with Washington. But diplomats in Seoul say there is serious concern about the risk and consequences of the pact breaking down. "Pyongyang knows that the Bush administration is much tougher than the Clinton White House so it will not dare to push Washington too far," says Kim Woosang, professor of political science at Yonsei University in Seoul. But with US resolve galvanised since September 11 and North Korea on its hit list, how far is Mr Bush willing to push Pyongyang? "If military action is taken to disable the North's weapons of mass destruction, it will most likely escalate into an all-out war on the Korean peninsula," said Mr Lim. Editorial Comment, Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-2002 ***************************************************************** 48 Hoon's nuclear threat opens way for Star Wars Independent News © 2002 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd By Kim Sengupta 22 March 2002 The revelation was unexpected and took a while to sink in. In a few short sentences, Geoff Hoon, the Secretary of State for Defence, has turned Britain's policy on nuclear strikes upside down, and ushered in a new era in which the previously unthinkable becomes a part of military planning. Mr Hoon told the Commons defence select committee on Wednesday that Britain would be ready and willing to carry out nuclear attacks on Iraq if Saddam Hussein was deemed to be threatening with his alleged arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. This was a fundamental, and critics would say, ominous, change in Britain's policy on nuclear warfare. Until now, the position of successive governments, Labour and Conservative, had been that nuclear weapons would not be used against a non-nuclear state, unless it carries out an attack in association with a nuclear armed enemy. Indeed, the Strategic Defence Review of 1998, had specifically reiterated an assurance last given in 1978 "We will not use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state... unless it attacks us, our Allies or a state to which we have a security commitment, in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state." There is, of course, an American dimension to this, as there is in most aspects of current British foreign and defence policy. The US has carried out a "Nuclear Posture Review", with similar ideas about changing the rules of nuclear war. Selected parts of the review were leaked to the Los Angeles Times, along with a "hit list" of seven countries: Iraq, Libya, Syria, North Korea, Iran, and also, more surprisingly, Russia and China. But whereas even the most vocal hawks in the US administration have remained ambiguous, saying the review was merely floating policy options, Mr Hoon has publicly stated that such a change has already taken place. Saddam "can be absolutely confident that in the right conditions we would be willing to use our nuclear weapons," he said. "What I cannot be absolutely confident about is whether that would be sufficient to deter them from using a weapon of mass destruction in the first place." This is not the first time, since 11 September, that Washington had used London to give public airing to its thinking. Before the bombing of Afghanistan commenced, it was Tony Blair who laid out the supposed evidence linking Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'ida to the attack on the United States. Diplomatic sources say a similar pattern would emerge with Iraq and Saddam in preparation for an autumn war. There is another American angle, the NMD, or "Star Wars" programme, which needs the use of the early warning stations at Fylingdales and Menwith Hill – both in north Yorkshire – to track incoming missiles from eastern Europe and Middle East. Much of what Mr Hoon had to say to say to defence select committee appeared to be to prepare the ground for the British government to sign up to Star Wars, although there was the increasingly unconvincing caveat that the Government has not yet made up its mind. Britain could be attacked by ballistic missiles from the Middle East carrying weapons of mass destruction within the "next few years" said Mr Hoon. The Government was monitoring the activities of "rogue states" such as Iraq and Libya, and liaising with the US over the "developing threat." He added: "HMG believes it is right for the US, its friends and allies, and all responsible states, to consider carefully how best to tackle it with a comprehensive strategy, and the role that missile defences might play as part of this." The defence secretary rolled out the list of the Pentagon's usual suspects: Iraq was developing missiles, North Korea has already acquired the technology to develop missiles of "intercontinental range", and Colonel Gaddafi is supposedly interested in the North Korean hardware. Mr Hoon's controversial views came just before the meeting of the European Union defence ministers meeting in Zaragoza, Spain today to discuss intelligence gathering and co-ordination of plans to protect against nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. "Britain is being used as a megaphone by the US administration on this issue. This is seen as particularly useful in getting a message over to western European allies," said Christine Kucia, a nuclear analyst with the British American Security Information Council. "What Mr Hoon is saying is hugely significant, and shows that the British government is fundamentally changing its views on nuclear proliferation. The US has been deliberately ambiguous about such a change of policy, but the British government is being public and direct." For military planners, the new policy opens up new dangers as well as possibilities. A senior Army officer said yesterday that "such a threat can well be counterproductive. Instead of stopping a rogue leader from using biological and chemical weapons, they may decide to retaliate first, knowing they may face a battlefield nuclear strike. All bets may well be off." ***************************************************************** 49 Crisis looming between U.S., Russia WorldNetDaily: MARCH 21 2002 Moscow singled out as major supplier of weapons of mass destruction Editor's note: In partnership with Stratfor, the global intelligence company, WorldNetDaily publishes daily updates on international affairs provided by the respected private research and analysis firm. Look for fresh updates each afternoon, Monday through Friday. In addition, WorldNetDaily invites you to consider STRATFOR membership, entitling you to a wealth of international intelligence reports usually available only to top executives, scholars, academic institutions and press agencies. CIA Director George Tenet recently singled out Russia as a massive contributor to the spread of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. Despite the cooperation Moscow has given to Washington's anti-terrorism campaign, the Bush administration is putting the Russian government on notice. A severe crisis between the two sides may now be forming. While speaking to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee March 19, Tenet singled out Russia as "the first choice of proliferant states seeking the most advanced technology and training" for weapons of mass destruction, Agence France-Presse reported. Tenet added that Russian sales of technology and expertise applicable to chemical, biological and nuclear weapons were "a major source of funds for commercial and defense industries and military research and development." Tenet's statement – coming in the wake of a recent Pentagon report naming seven countries, including Russia, as potential nuclear targets – was a bombshell. It places responsibility for the spread of Russian weapons of mass destruction squarely on the shoulders of the government in Moscow and sets the stage for a coming confrontation with Russian President Vladimir Putin. STRATFOR has previously said that a new doctrine is emerging within the Bush administration that is based on the following logic: Al-Qaida is not dead and is dedicated to further attacks on the United States. It has demonstrated the desire to obtain chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, which represent a threat to millions of American citizens. The United States must therefore both destroy al-Qaida and eliminate any stockpiles of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons that could find their way into the group's hands. The fact that most of these stockpiles belong to sovereign nations like Syria, Pakistan and Russia complicates the problem for Washington but does not change the Bush administration's policy. If anything, ending the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, or WMD, actually takes priority over destroying the al-Qaida network. Terrorist networks can be badly hurt, but it is incredibly difficult to destroy them completely. WMD stockpiles, plus the accompanying facilities and skilled personnel, are finite and are harder to regenerate than a terrorist network. Now the director of the CIA has named Russia as the key source of WMD proliferation. Tenet stopped just short of explicitly placing the blame on the Russian government, but at the same time, he also did not blame rogue elements in the Russian security services or mafia syndicates. This would have given Putin a certain amount of deniability and raised the potential for Russia to work with the United States – like it did in the early 1990s – on decommissioning weapons of mass destruction. Instead, Tenet delivered a blunt message to Putin: The United States believes that WMD proliferation is official Russian policy. The government in Moscow must either immediately halt this policy or face the consequences. Gone is any residual U.S. gratitude for Russian cooperation during the early phases of the war in Afghanistan. The Bush administration is maintaining that the threat posed to the United States is so great that any and all other considerations – including diplomatic niceties – must take a backseat. This represents the beginning of a severe crisis between the United States and Russia. Putin must weigh his choices very carefully. If he accepts U.S. demands and subordinates Russian foreign policy to Washington again, he acknowledges that his country has effectively become subservient to the United States. This not only would be a bitter pill to swallow but also would feed nationalist political and military elements within Russia that currently challenge Putin's agenda. The president has managed these groups so far, but a gesture of appeasement on this scale would inflame the passions of even the most pro-Western Russians. However, if Putin does not accept U.S. demands, he faces the distinct possibility of attacks on Russian weapons facilities and the potential elimination of his country's nuclear capability. Such an outcome could very easily spark a coup in Russia, which Putin would probably not survive. Even if he did manage to stay in power, Putin's plan to rebuild Russia through economic integration with Europe and closer short-term ties to the United States would be destroyed. And in the worst-case – but still quite likely – scenario, Russia would respond by launching a nuclear attack on the United States. We are not yet at the point of crisis. The Bush administration went public in order to put more pressure on Putin, likely after getting few results from private consultations. Putin is in the process of feeling out American resolve. He knows that Washington has the means to carry out its threat; Putin is now trying to figure out if it has the will. © 2002 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 U.N. Inspector Tells Council Work in Iraq Could Be Fast March 22, 2002 By CHRISTOPHER S. WREN UNITED NATIONS, March 21 — The chief United Nations arms inspector told the Security Council earlier this month that his inspectors could conceivably accomplish their disarmament tasks in Iraq in less than a year once Baghdad gave the green light for their return, but only if Iraqis actively cooperated. Once the inspections were carried out to his satisfaction, the chief inspector, Hans Blix, could recommend that the council suspend, though not lift, penalties that have been in place since Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. Continuing inspections would ensure that Baghdad was not secretly acquiring new chemical, biological and nuclear stockpiles. Mr. Blix, a Swedish diplomat who is the executive chairman of the United Nations arms inspection commission, briefed the Security Council in a closed session on March 8, a day after the first visit in more than a year by an Iraqi delegation. Details of his briefing, and of questions that the Iraqis handed to Secretary General Kofi Annan, filtered out this week. The Iraqi delegation was led by Foreign Minister Naji Sabri and included Maj. Gen. Hussam Mohammed Amin, Baghdad's liaison for working with inspectors inside Iraq. The Iraqis described the meetings as "constructive and positive." A United Nations spokesman called them "frank and useful." Diplomats familiar with Mr. Blix's briefing said he avoided being pinned down on how long the inspectors would be in Iraq, explaining that a renewed search for weapons of mass destruction involved many uncertainties, not least being Iraq's cooperation. United Nations inspectors have not been on Iraqi soil for more than three years, giving Baghdad opportunity to pursue its weapons program without close scrutiny. The United Nations pulled its inspectors out of Iraq in November 1998 after President Saddam Hussein kept obstructing their access. Their departure opened the way for punitive airstrikes in December by the United States and its allies against Baghdad. A year later, the Security Council made clear in Resolution 1284 that Iraq must cooperate with the inspectors and that substantial progress must be made in fulfilling the remaining disarmament tasks before the penalties could be lifted. "It's more than just letting us in," a United Nations official said. Diplomats here doubted that progress would be so smooth, given Iraq's history of intransigence. Baghdad is demanding answers to its list of 20 questions about the inspections. Diplomats who have seen them have described some questions as technical, others as provocative and intended to prompt a dialogue that could sow dissension among the members of the council. Robert Wood, a spokesman for the United States Mission to the United Nations, said the questions given to Mr. Annan were "an attempt by Iraqis to distract U.N. attention away from Iraq's noncompliance with its obligations under Security Council resolutions and to portray Iraq as a victim." Baghdad's questions vary from disarmament and inspection issues to Iraq's relations with the Security Council and the country's right to defend itself and be compensated for destruction caused by the long-running penalties. Some questions alluded to the Bush administration's tough stance on Iraq. One question asked whether one permanent Security Council member could interpret the council's resolutions so as to take "unilateral actions" regarding Iraq. Another asked whether threats to invade Iraq and change its government by force violated the United Nations charter, international law and Iraq's own sovereignty. Other questions asked what was achieved in seven years and seven months of Iraq's cooperation with arms inspectors, what remained to be clarified though inspections, how long would it take to accomplish the tasks and how much time the inspectors would need to reach a degree of certainty that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. The Iraqis further asked whether the inspection teams would include previous inspectors who were "involved in spying activities." They also asked how American and British inspectors could fulfill a neutral international mandate, and what guarantees there were that the inspectors would not use the same inspection "formula" that led Iraq to be bombed in 1998. A senior diplomat said Iraq would not be allowed to set preconditions for cooperation. "The Iraqis have nothing to negotiate," he said. "They have to say yes." Mr. Annan forwarded the Iraqis' questions to the council on Tuesday, diplomats said, and gave it the option of responding by April 10. The Iraqis are due back for further talks, possibly on April 18 and 19. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 51 House Discusses Nuclear Testing Las Vegas SUN March 21, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States must be prepared to test its nuclear weapons in order to sustain the aging stockpile's ability to deter enemies, a former nuclear lab director told Congress on Thursday. "We're running a lot of risk," John S. Foster, Jr., told the House Armed Services Committee panel on the Energy Department. "And it is clear that as we get new and different warheads in the stockpile, we run a lot more risk than we have done in the last decade with warheads that had been tested." Every president should have "a realistic option to return to testing, should technical or international events make it necessary," said Foster. He designed nuclear weapons in the 1950s and 1960s at California's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which he ultimately directed. Conducting nuclear test explosions would conflict with U.S. obligations as a signatory to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which the Senate has not ratified. President Bush has said he does not support the treaty and won't ask the Senate to approve it, but will not violate it. "The need to sustain confidence in our deterrent capabilities is as important as it ever has been," said Foster, testifying as chairman of the congressionally established Panel to Assess the Reliability, Safety and Security of the U.S. Nuclear Stockpile. He said the nation should be in a position to need just three months to a year to prepare to test a warhead. Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., the panel's top Democrat, expressed concern about the aging of nuclear weapons, saying, "Some of them are as old as I am, for God's sake." Tauscher said U.S. nuclear weapons must be examined to determine which are viable as the nation prepares to trim its active arsenal to 1,700 to 2,200 warheads, in line with an agreement between Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin. "The more we reduce (the stockpile), the more you have to be confident that what you have will really work," Foster agreed. But she strongly opposed testing, arguing it would create a "domino effect" among allies and adversaries alike. "How can we talk about nonproliferation and then go testing?" Tauscher asked. Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said after the hearing that even shortening the time needed to prepare for a test "could easily lead to a dangerous action-reaction cycle involving China and Russia that could lead to the erosion of the test moratorium that George W. Bush says he supports." Tauscher backs alternatives to testing, particularly simulations to be done by a superlaser in her district at Lawrence Livermore's National Ignition Facility. The laser is designed to focus 192 beams on a single tiny target in the hope of igniting fusion, letting scientists simulate a thermonuclear explosion. The United States hasn't been able to build new warheads since 1989, Foster said at the hearing on the maintenance of the nuclear arsenal. "The United States is the only major nuclear power that is unable to manufacture the nuclear components for its nuclear weapons," he said. The country lost its ability to build "pits," the warhead core that contains the fissionable material, when the Rocky Flats, Colo., plant that made them closed because of health and safety problems. "We're trying to relearn how to make them," Foster said. A pilot facility at Los Alamos has created a few of them, he said. Getting manufacturing up to speed could take 15 years, Foster told committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. U.S.-Russia arms control agreements limit the number of strategic nuclear weapons each side can have, but do not prevent either side from building new warheads so long as they don't exceed the limits, said Kimball. Foster said he had heard suggestions that the nation should let the warheads decay but keep their deterrent effect alive by simply not revealing they no longer work. Our open society, Foster said, "Can't pull that off." All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 52 Nuclear Weapons Talk on the Rise Las Vegas SUN March 21, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) - In rhetoric and reality, nations around the world seem to be creeping toward a new military philosophy that says it is acceptable to use nuclear weapons on the battlefield or to settle regional disputes. Everywhere, there are signs that "the unthinkable" is being redefined to accommodate new anxieties and advancing technology. President Bush and the British government have warned terrorists with weapons of mass destruction that "all options" are open for a military response. Military officials in both India and Pakistan have openly discussed how their nuclear weapons would prove superior to their neighbors in a conflict. The CIA believes North Korea has produced enough plutonium for at least one nuclear weapon and still has designs to claim South Korea. Those who watch attitudes toward nuclear weapons say the "temperature" is rising. "The world is searching for a new status quo, that will involve new players and new dangers," said Ret. Army Col. Daniel Smith, who is chief of research at the Washington-based Center for Defense Information. "Our nuclear posture seems to move us closer toward use of nuclear weapons in a conflict even against a country that has no nuclear weapons of any kind," he said. "The belief that countries that do develop chemical or biological weapons would be able to blackmail the United States is prompting us to look into ways to change the equation." Part of what is causing the renewed discussion of nuclear weapons is the idea that they can be scaled down and used in a limited fashion, so as not to bring about a doomsday scenario. The United States demolished the Japanese city of Hiroshima with an atomic bomb that had an explosive yield of 13 kilotons - equivalent to 13,000 tons of TNT. In its arsenal now are weapons that dwarf those - some with explosive yields of many megatons (millions of tons of TNT). The nation wants to develop weapons about a quarter of the size of those used in World War II. The Defense Department has asked Congress for permission to develop such bombs for demolishing fortified, underground military facilities. But even if the nuclear weapons are smaller, the United States is setting a harmful precedent by developing them, some say. Atomic pioneer Hans Bethe and fellow Nobel laureates Dudley Herschbach and John Polanyi condemned the plan for ending the taboo against using nuclear weapons "beyond their Cold War function of deterring a Soviet attack." The threat of nuclear weapons being used in regional conflicts has also never been greater. Rivals India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 1998. Since then, the situation has worsened. The conflict over Kashmir, a territory that sits along the border between the countries, brought the neighbors to the brink of war this year. This week CIA Director George Tenet said, "The chance of war between these two nuclear-armed states is higher than at any point since 1971." "If India were to conduct large-scale offensive operations into Pakistani Kashmir, Pakistan might retaliate with strikes of its own in the belief that its nuclear deterrent would limit the scope of an Indian counterattack. We are deeply concerned, however, that a conventional war, once begun, could escalate into nuclear confrontation." Even in a regional war, the effect could be horrific. M.V. Ramana, a Princeton University physicist from India, calculated that a 15-kiloton bomb dropped on Bombay would kill between 150,000 and 850,000 people in the short term. There are also trouble spots in East Asia. In late January, a CIA report assessed that "North Korea has produced enough plutonium for at least one, and possibly two, nuclear weapons." President Bush signaled his concern about North Korea two months ago when he said the country was part of an "axis of evil" together with Iraq and Iran. This week, the administration said North Korean officials need "to comply with their international obligations and agreements." And some experts even worry that the long-standing cold war between China and Taiwan could reach the point where small-scale nuclear weapons could be used one day. There is so much talk about the possibility of nuclear weapons use that even Britain, which usually remains silent in nuclear posturing, felt the need to talk about its arsenal. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and leaders of other "states of concern" should be aware of Britain's willingness to use nuclear weapons if circumstances demanded, Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon said Wednesday. "There are clearly some states who would be deterred by the fact that the U.K. possesses nuclear weapons and has the willingness and ability to use them in appropriate circumstances," Hoon said. But some states less friendly to Britain, "I would be much less confident about." Some of those who oppose the development of nuclear weapons say the United States is worsening the situation. "The approach of this administration has been to throw arms control out the window and attempt to obtain overwhelmingly superior force against everyone, through new weapons and missile defense," said Randall Forsberg, director for the Institute for Defense and Disarmament. "That is going to cause small nations to develop weapons, not stop them." On the Net: Center for Defense Information: http://www.cdi.org/ [http://www.cdi.org/] Institute for Defense and Disarmament: http://www.idds.org/ [http://www.idds.org/] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 53 What We Don't Know (washingtonpost.com) By Richard Cohen Friday, March 22, 2002; Page A27 Sen. Hillary Clinton was "very mad." Her colleague, Sen. Charles Schumer, was critical as well. New York's mayor, Mike Bloomberg, was not happy either, and neither was New York's governor, George Pataki. As for myself, I am painfully perplexed. For once, the right answer eludes me. I am referring now to the report, first published in Time magazine earlier this month, that the feds back in October received a tip that terrorists were planning to detonate a small nuclear bomb in New York City. The information came from an agent code-named Dragonfire, whose reliability was deemed "undetermined." A 10-kiloton bomb would kill about 100,000 people and irradiate about 700,000 more. It would also flatten everything for a half-mile around. What so vexed New York's elected officials was the fact they were not notified of this threat. They all insisted they should have been. The former mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, said that he should have been told so he could alert the police -- "at a minimum, and maybe others." This would have given him an additional 40,000 or so sets of eyes to look for something suspicious. It also would have alerted every living thing for miles around that officials were searching for a nuclear bomb. What would have happened next? Panic. A mass flight out of the city. Four of New York's five boroughs are on islands. Bridges and tunnels are the only way out. A normal rush hour is an ordeal. This would not be a normal rush hour. This would create gridlock, chaos and then, almost certainly, loss of life. I bring up that threat and the response to it because it exemplifies how much our world has changed since Sept. 11. At the six-month anniversary, I read in some places that things had not changed much at all or, if they had, it was stuff like security checks at airports and that sort of thing. Hardly. We now know, if we think about it, that we live on the brink of catastrophe. It just so happens that the nuclear alert turned out to be a false alarm. The purported tipster was characterized by federal officials as a "fabricator" with "delusions of grandeur." (Sounds like a politician to me.) But the feds, while dubious, did not know this at the time -- otherwise they would not have issued any alert at all. It took time to check him out. In the meantime, it paid the feds to be alert. We now have colors for those alerts. The highest level is red, the lowest is green and in between are blue, yellow and orange. According to Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge, we are now on yellow alert and will remain so for "the foreseeable future." This is what Ridge told the nation. I pity Tom Ridge. His new color-coded warning system is easy to ridicule, but it's hard to envision a better one. It's harder yet -- maybe impossible -- to come up with a way to know when a panic can be risked. It would not have been in October, because Dragonfire turned out to be a phony. But it was impossible to know that at the time -- to know with absolute certainty. Unlike Clinton or Bloomberg or any other of New York's elected officials, I'm glad they were kept in the dark. Had the word gotten out, New York would have suffered a grievous blow. Sept. 11 has taught us all that terrorism is not some theoretical threat. It's imminent. An alert would prompt us to flee. Two alerts or so and New York City itself would be crippled. Who would stay? Only people who absolutely have to. The others would leave -- take their laptops and do business elsewhere. New York's politicians responded to the Time magazine piece with anger at the feds. I can understand that. I heard the same dismay from ordinary people. They said they deserved to know about the threat. They were parents. They were children with elderly parents. They wanted information so they could make decisions for themselves. They wanted control over their own lives. So I went back to the politicians and asked what they would have done. Clinton didn't return my phone call, but Schumer did. He was, as usual, thoughtful. His answer, if I may paraphrase it, is that there is no answer. The public has a right to be informed. Government has an obligation to avoid a panic. "There's got to be a balance," Schumer said. I paraphrase again: God only knows what it is. Color him -- color us all -- perplexed. © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 54 France displays Cold War relics - CNN.com - March 21, 2002 [B52 atomic bomb] The 3.6 metre long atomic bomb is on display in a French museum CAEN, France -- Relics from the brief period 40 years ago when the world stood on the brink of nuclear war have gone on display at a museum in France. An atomic bomb and the remains of a U2 spy plane which both featured in the Cuban Missile Crisis are the star attractions of a new Cold War exhibition in Caen. The B28 Hydrogen bomb has been loaned to the Caen Memorial museum by the U.S. National Atomic Museum in Albuquerque for five years. It is the first time a U.S. atomic bomb has been given to a foreign country. The bomb was among the payload on the Strategic Air Commands' B28 flights which were permanently kept in the air ready for use during the Cold War. The exhibition also includes a complete Soviet MIG 21 and two pieces of the Berlin Wall, painted by Eastern artists on the night of the fall of the wall. Museum press manager Christine Dejou said the aim of the exhibition is to explain the diversity between the United Stated and the former Soviet Union during the Cold War. It will also show how close the world came to a Third World War in 1962 when the U.S. and Russia embarked on a tense stand-off over Soviet missiles based 90 miles off the American coast, on Cuba. In September 1962, U.S. president John F. Kennedy warned the Soviets that "the gravest issues would arise" should they place offensive weapons -- a phrase widely understood to mean nuclear weapons -- on the island. [Medium Range Ballistic Missile site at San Cristobal, Cuba during Cuban missile crisis] Medium Range Ballistic Missile site at San Cristobal, Cuba during Cuban missile crisis Spy missions flown by American U2 surveillance aircraft during October that year produced photographs showing nuclear missile bases under construction in Cuba, with evidence of medium-range ballistic missiles and intermediate-range ballistic missiles in place. On October 19 the U.S. announced a blockade of Cuban and demanded Russia withdraw the missiles. During the standoff that followed, low-flying U.S. surveillance aircraft encountered hostile fire, and on October 27 the Cubans shot down a U2, killing its pilot. Eventually, the Kremlin 'blinked' first and on October 28 Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev said he would remove "offensive" weapons from Cuba in return for a U.S. pledge not to invade the island. The exhibition -- which also includes the remains of the U2 shot down on October 27, 1962 -- opened on Thursday. "We are proud of being able to make our visitors think of peace and war prevention," Dejou said. The museum has 420,000 visitors a year and is expecting two thousands visitors on the first day of the exhibition. © 2002 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. ***************************************************************** 55 Nuke fears bring more U.S. agents Friday, March 22, 2002 By TOM GODFREY [tgodfrey@sunpub.com] , Toronto Sun U.S. Customs agents are being posted to two more Canadian ports on Monday to pre-screen shipping containers for potential nuclear weapons. The appointments come at the same time FBI agents will begin to track down and interview 3,000 men who recently arrived in the States from the Middle East. U.S. Customs commissioner Robert Bonner said agents being sent to Halifax and Montreal will help pre-screen shipping containers for potential terrorist nuke-in-the-box weapons. U.S. agents are already in Vancouver. OSAMA PLOT Canadian Customs officers will in return be stationed at the ports of Newark and Seattle to check containers destined for this country. Bonner said al-Qaida terrorist leader Osama bin Laden has been trying to obtain components for nuclear devices for several years. "Al-Qaida would attempt to conceal and smuggle a nuclear device," he said. "The system is vulnerable and the stakes are high." U.S. agents will target "high-risk" containers for thorough searches using the latest X-ray, gamma ray and radiation detection technology, Bonner said. RECENT ARRIVALS Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has ordered his anti-terrorism forces to conduct voluntary interviews of recent arrivals to obtain information that could disrupt possible terrorist activities. The RCMP and Canadian immigration officials have been notified of the interviews and asked to notify U.S. police of any recent arrivals who fit a certain profile. RCMP Sgt. Paul Marsh said he couldn't comment on specifics of the force's terrorism probe. "We liaise and exchange information with other agencies on a regular basis," Marsh said. Previous story: Soldiers grateful for presents Next story: Bagged bodies probed in U.S. CNEWS Headlines [http://www.canoe.ca/copyright.html] © 2002 ***************************************************************** 56 PNNL honored for new technology uses This story was published Fri, Mar 22, 2002 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has won awards for using technology developed for the federal government for new uses -- better inventory management, powerful semiconductors and lightweight computer screens. The Federal Laboratory Consortium chose the Richland lab's products for three of the 26 Excellence in Technology Transfer Awards given this year. It brings the lab's total to 51, more than any other federal laboratory. The 2002 awards were for these projects: -- Manufacturers have been interested in replacing glass with plastic for electronic displays in cell phones, handheld computers and larger computer screens. That would allow the screens to be thin and lightweight and would open up new possibilities, such as screens that roll up. But that has not been practical since water vapor and oxygen can pass through the plastic and harm sensitive display devices. However, Richland scientists developed a coating technology that allows the plastic to be protected but remain thin and clear. Multiple layers of organic and inorganic materials are stacked in a single vacuum production process. Battelle, which operates the lab for the Department of Energy, created Vitex Systems to commercialize the technology. Mitsubishi Corp. invested $15 million and is bringing two products to market. -- In 1990, Richland scientist Scott Chambers designed and built the first molecular beam epitaxy system. It can separately generate and control beams of atoms and molecules to deposit a thin film of crystalline material on a solid substrate. It's proving useful in the semiconductor industry, where more conventional technology is reaching limits on the ability to make chips smaller but more powerful. Motorola has combined its own research with help from the Richland lab to produce a new silicon wafer that Motorola plans to use in communication devices. -- Over the past decade, Richland engineers worked on making radio frequency identification tags that were smaller, less expensive, more powerful and more efficient because many could be read at once. The tag system uses radio-frequency waves to transmit information. The system can inventory items with the tag in minutes instead of days and find the location of each item. In addition, information such as serial number, warranty information and purchase date can be included on the tag. Battelle created a new company called Wave ID to manufacture and market the tags in 2000. Within a year it was acquired by Alien Technology of California, which has a patented technology for dramatically reducing the cost of manufacturing electronic products. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 57 Report blasts inconsistent radioactive metals' decisions Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 2:02 p.m. on Friday, March 22, 2002 from staff and wire reports WASHINGTON -- The federal government inconsistently decides whether slightly radioactive materials should be recycled, put in a landfill or securely stored, says a report released Thursday. There's no evidence public health has been jeopardized, said Richard Magee, an environmental engineer and lead author of the National Research Council report. But he said it is bad public policy to have haphazard decision-making. The Department of Energy has had a ban on recycling scrap metal from its nuclear facilities, including the Oak Ridge Reservation, in place for approximately two years. The Bush administration is reviewing that policy. At issue are the tons of materials that are thrown out at existing commercial nuclear facilities or sites being decommissioned. These slightly radioactive items can include piping, tools, cabinets and building structures. The licensees that operate the facilities say it is cost effective to recycle the scrap into everyday items or release it into landfills. Supporters of recycling also argue that levels of contamination are too low to pose a health threat. On the other side, some groups contend the scrap metal does pose a health risk and it should be stored in a secure, isolated facility as nuclear waste. The National Research Council report found that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which makes the decisions, doesn't always use the same criteria to judge similar materials. For example, a slightly radioactive piece of metal from a nuclear plant is treated differently from metal with the same level of radioactivity that was taken from a hospital. In addition, the NRC relies on standards when considering releasing materials that have radiation on their surface, but it has none for materials contaminated throughout. Instead the agency decides on a case-by-case basis whether to release those materials, according to the report. The NRC asked the research council to examine its policies governing the release of slightly radioactive materials from the commercial facilities it licenses. NRC spokeswoman Rosetta Virgilio said the council was asked to recommend changes to the decision-making process. She declined to comment on the report, saying the agency needed time to review it. In the past, the NRC has tried to set standards that would allow an increase in the amount of slightly radioactive material released, but has been thwarted by Congress. The steel industry, against having its product stigmatized as potentially radioactive, is among the groups that have lobbied against the commission's proposals. The NRC asked the council to consider the science behind the issue, but Magee said the panel opted not to take an opinion on what level of contamination is safe for release. Instead, the report recommends the agency involve all interested parties in its decisions. Among the options the report recommended the agency consider are freely releasing slightly radioactive materials from NRC sites, releasing them for restricted use or banning their release altogether. The Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee has been inquiring about DOE's ban on scrap metal recycling for quite some time. The group, which monitors DOE's environmental activities, requested documentation outlining why the ban was implemented by former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. However, to date, DOE hasn't fully complied with that request. All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 58 LOC plans emergency forum for April 2 Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 2:03 p.m. on Friday, March 22, 2002 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff The Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee has scheduled a public forum on emergency preparedness that will be held April 2. "This is aimed at the general public Š so people know what to do if an emergency happens" said Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the LOC. Her group closely monitors local Department of Energy activities. Speakers from DOE, the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency, the city of Oak Ridge and the Red Cross are scheduled to make brief presentations then respond to questions as a panel. In addition, information displays from several other organizations are also expected to be available. The forum, which is free and open to the public, will be held from 7 to 9 p.m. on Tuesday, April 2, at the Jefferson Middle School auditorium, located at 200 Fairbanks Road. Members of the LOC began planning the forum following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Some people have expressed concern over what might happen if a terrorist attack or major catastrophe happened at one of Oak Ridge's DOE sites, which includes a weapons facility. The LOC was created in 1991 to represent those counties and communities affected most directly by DOE's activities in Oak Ridge. The LOC is funded by a grant from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation's DOE Oversight Division, which is in turn funded by DOE under terms of the Tennessee Oversight Agreement. The LOC's involvement in emergency planning includes a recent review of the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency's multi-jurisdictional plan for handling emergencies at the DOE's Oak Ridge facilities. Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or [pparson@oakridger.com] . [http://www.oakridger.com/contact/index.html] [http://www.oakridger.com] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 59 City appealing for clean bill of health on Parcel 412 Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 2:03 p.m. on Friday, March 22, 2002 by R. Cathey Daniels Oak Ridger staff A prime piece of commercial property could be back on the tax rolls later this year if the state issues Parcel 412 a clean bill of health. The city has had in its pocket an option for property purchase for over a decade, but the former Department of Energy Bulk Oil Facility site on the corner of Emory Valley Road and Lafayette Drive was determined to be contaminated. According to City Manager Paul Boyer, a letter will be sent in the next several weeks seeking a state sign-off on the 11-acre site next to Corporate Center. If that works, the city should be in a position to sell the property to Scientific Applications International Corp. and Cowperwood Company, who have held an option on the property since 1991. "If the state declares it clean, then we will ask the 'optionee' to buy it," Boyer said Thursday. "They will have 30 days to respond, and if they do not exercise their option, then we will put it on the market." Boyer said that over the years several potential buyers had expressed interest in the property. Boyer credited both DOE and the city's Environmental Quality Advisory Board for assisting the city in getting to the point of submitting a request to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Division of Underground Storage Tanks for a site-specific ruling on the property. "DOE has put about $1 million into the site since 1993 to clean this up," said Boyer. "And our staff could not have gotten to this point without the expertise of EQAB." According to Amy Fitzgerald, the city's government and public affairs coordinator, the cost of the land was $36,000 per acre with no escalator to account for inflation over the past decade. R. Cathey Daniels can be contacted at (865) 220-5515 or danielsrcd@oakridger.com [danielsrcd@oakridger.com] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 60 Margaret Chu Sworn-In as Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management ---> energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: March 20, 2002 WASHINGTON, DC – Dr. Margaret S.Y. Chu was sworn-in today as director of the Department of Energy’s Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. Chu was unanimously confirmed by the Senate on March 6. “I am pleased to have Dr. Chu join my team,” Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham said. “ Her years of technical experience in nuclear waste management and environmental remediation will be a tremendous asset to the department’s Yucca Mountain program.” As director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, Dr. Chu will be responsible for advising the Secretary of Energy and the President on issues surrounding the ongoing scientific research and licensing of the Nation’s first permanent geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Dr. Chu previously served as director of nuclear waste management at the Energy Department’s Sandia National Laboratories. She also served as Sandia manager for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. She received her bachelor’s degree from Purdue University and a doctorate degree in physical chemistry from the University of Minnesota. Chu is a native of Albuquerque, N.M. Dr. Margaret S.Y. Chu's Biography Media Contact: Joe Davis, (202) 586-4940 Jacqueline Johnson, (202) 586-5806 Release No. PR-02-047 ***************************************************************** 61 EPA declares state's INEEL oversight soundNews The Spokesman-Review.com - Thursday, March 21, 2002 Environment Boise _ The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has denied a request by nuclear watchdog groups to relieve the state of its waste oversight role at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. In a petition filed last fall, environmentalists accused the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality of allowing long-term operation of nuclear incinerators without proper permits. They also said the state allowed facilities to operate unsafely and failed to curb emissions of radioactive and chemical waste. State INEEL Oversight Program officials disputed the claims, calling them unsubstantiated. The EPA agreed. "Actually, it looks like the state is doing a very good job," Rick Albright, director of the agency's Northwest regional office, said in a prepared statement on Wednesday. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************