***************************************************************** 07/22/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.186 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 AU: MP overboard in nuclear protest - 2 US: Radio-active politics -- 3 Mixed Reactions to G8 Russian Membership and Money Allocation 4 Iran, Russia Voice Continuation of Nuclear Cooperation 5 US: Betting on nuclear power - 6 US: Commission may consider legal action against paper 7 Envoy: Russia-Iran Ties Fret U.S. Less 8 AU: MP jumps into sea in N-protest NUCLEAR REACTORS 9 US: NRC: Press Release Region III - 2002 - 44 - NRC Staff to Meet 10 AU: New fault line found at nuclear reactor site - 11 US: Nuclear plant fuels unease 12 US: TILTING AT NUCLEAR WINDMILLS NUCLEAR SAFETY 13 Al-Qaeda Pirates Radioactive Cargo in Malacca: Report 14 Warning on radioactive risk to Gulf NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 15 US: Nevada: America's Yucca Mountain of vice. 16 Two Nuclear Cargo Ships Evade Boats 17 US: Kansas nearly was waste site 18 US: Rail not adequate to ship to Yucca 19 US: Metal smelting plant was taken on trust 20 US: Editorial: There's a sucker born every minute 21 US: Letter: This scientist isn't sold on Yucca science 22 Unicoi still waiting for nuclear decision 23 US: A Sound Decision on Yucca Mountain 24 Environmental activists run down nuclear waste ships off Australia 25 US: OP: Senate was right to approve site for nuclear waste NUCLEAR WEAPONS 26 Submarine reported near Pacific nuclear ships 27 More Sign Posts for Peace in South Asia 28 AU: Body parts may be returned US DEPT. OF ENERGY 29 DOE: RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP CONTRACT UPDATE 30 DOE may ax 'manager' role 31 DOE Opens New Information Center 32 Pipes may remain at Rocky Flats OTHER NUCLEAR 33 Enrichment Backgrounder 34 UK: Nuclear fusion: It's impossible. And what's more, it's improbab ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 AU: MP overboard in nuclear protest - theage.com.au July 22 2002 Two Australian protesters, including an MP, jumped into the sea to send two ships carrying a cargo of plutonium between Japan and Britain an anti-nuclear message today, Greenpeace said. The dawn confrontation came as the ships sailed in international waters between Australia and New Zealand and tried to dodge a nuclear-free flotilla of 11 small yachts protesting against the shipment. One of the swimmers was Ian Cohen, a member of the upper house in New South Wales Parliament, Greenpeace said in a statement released here. The Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal are carrying a cargo of mixed oxide fuel back to its maker, British Nuclear Fuels, after its Japanese customer refused to accept it. Cohen and Tasmanian Stuart Lennox chased the ships in an inflatable boat and jumped into the water holding aloft a banner reading "Nuclear Free Pacific" as they passed. Earlier, Greenpeace said the Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal had drastically reduced their speed for the first time since leaving Japan on July 4, apparently to try and pass the protest fleet under the cover of darkness. The protest yachts, which had sailed from New Zealand and Australia, waited between the Australian territories of Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Islands and picked up the freighters on radar. "As an elected member of the New South Wales Parliament, representing many Australians who have expressed strong anti-nuclear sentiment, I wanted to make sure that there was no doubt in these shippers' minds that they are not welcome in this region," Cohen said. The protest yachts radioed messages to the ships, but they ignored them, protester Henk Haazen told Radio New Zealand. "It is pretty clear from the plutonium shippers' avoidance tactics overnight that they are scared to face public opinion," said Haazen, who lives in New Zealand. DPA Copyright © 2002 The Age Company Ltd ***************************************************************** 2 Radio-active politics -- The Washington Times July 22, 2002 Gordon Prather Just weeks after a federal judge overruled South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges' orders to forcibly prevent the Department of Energy from trucking several tons of nuke plutonium to its Savannah River Site (SRS), where it is to be converted into mixed oxide reactor fuel (MOX), Congress overruled the objections of Nevada politicos, authorizing the department to truck tens of thousands of tons of partially "spent" nuclear fuel to Yucca Mountain for indefinite burial. We're recycling weapons-grade plutonium as MOX, which makes sense. Why aren't we recycling the reactor-grade plutonium? Thereby hangs a tale. In the fall of 1991, as the Soviet Union was disintegrating, officials from MinAtom — the Soviet equivalent of our Department of Energy (DOE) — came to see Sens. Sam Nunn, Richard Lugar et al. MinAtom was in the process of dismantling tens of thousands of Cold War-surplus nukes. MinAtom was determined to dispose of the recovered plutonium as MOX, but it didn't have the funds to build the necessary plants. Would the United States help? "You bet." cried Messrs. Nunn and Lugar. Because of the difficulty of accounting for and protecting stocks of weapons-grade plutonium from theft, Messrs. Nunn and Lugar judged dismantled Soviet nukes to be more of a nuke-proliferation threat than nukes still in stockpile. So, Congress promptly authorized the to Bush-Quayle administration to help assist the Russians to peacefully dispose of those stocks of excess plutonium. The Bush-Quayle administration — also eager to prevent terrorists from acquiring nuke materials — quickly developed a plan to assist MinAtom. But then — surprise, surprise — we had an election. Exit Bush-Quayle (Stage Right). Enter Clinton-Greenpeace (Stage Left). Recall that — back in the 1970s — Carter-Greenpeace thought they had killed nuclear power. Jimmy Carter prohibited the recycling of slightly "spent" reactor fuel. It had to be buried at Yucca Mountain instead. The Europeans recycled, but we couldn't. Now, in the 1990s, Clinton-Greenpeace was being asked to assist MinAtom in making MOX. Greenpeace realized that, once Russia had used up all its excess nuke plutonium, it would turn to making MOX from spent fuel. Nuclear power — running on reprocessed spent fuel — would have a new lease on life. "MOX nix." cried Clinton-Greenpeace. But, Messrs. Nunn and Lugar insisted that we help the Russians reduce the threat of nuke terrorism. What was Clinton-Greenpeace to do? Why, delay,delay,delay, of course. Run out the clock. Negotiate endlessly with the Russians, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the G-7 group of industrial nations, the lady from Philadelphia, whoever. Then we had an election. Exit Clinton-Greenpeace (Stage Left). Enter Bush-Cheney (Stage Right). Bush-Cheney discovered that Clinton-Greenpeace had saddled them with a real mess, the US-IAEA-Russia Trilateral Agreement. At the end of the Cold War, Bush-Quayle had also begun dismantling thousands of our surplus nukes. Now, no one judged our recovered plutonium to be vulnerable to theft by terrorists. Nevertheless, in 1993, Clinton-Greenpeace offered to provide Messrs. Nunn and Lugar assistance to Russia if and only if we both transparently disposed of — under the watchful eyes of the IAEA — an equal amount of plutonium. The Greenpeace ploy? We got to tell the Russians what they could do with their plutonium. They promptly told us what we could do with ours. The result is that 10 years after Messrs. Nunn and Lugar authorized it, and five years after the trilateral agreement was signed, practically nothing has been done to actually dispose of the Russian nuke plutonium. President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin have just now announced they would begin trilateral implementation, and that the G-8 would fund it. How did Mr. Hodges get in the act? Well, Clinton-Greenpeace had offered to make a teeny-tiny amount of MOX if the Russians would mix some of their plutonium — as we intended to do with all of ours — with highly radioactive nuclear waste and bury it at a Russian equivalent of Yucca Mountain. Eventually, the Russians agreed. South Carolina competed for — and won — the right to have our teeny-tiny MOX plant built at SRS. But Bush-Cheney soon discovered that DOE had already concluded that the Russians had the right idea. Turn all our excess plutonium — not just a teeny-tiny amount — into MOX. Of course, that would mean modifying our end of the trilateral agreement. Meanwhile, the scheduled shipments of plutonium to SRS began. Mr. Hodges ordered state troopers to stop them. Mr. Hodges had fought to get a teeny-tiny MOX plant, but was now fighting against getting a much larger plant? Why? Democrat Hodges said that Bush-Cheney had violated the agreement he had made with Mr. Clinton. What do you suppose he and Mr. Clinton had agreed to do? Run out the clock on MOX? Gordon Prather is a former national-security adviser with several federal agencies, including the Defense Department. He also worked as a nuclear-weapons specialist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National Laboratory in New Mexico. ***************************************************************** 3 Mixed Reactions to G8 Russian Membership and Money Allocation International Co-operation Section on Russia's nuclear industry international co-operation and exports of Russian nuclear technology. At the G8 summit in June, leaders agreed to spend $20 billion over the next ten years in further securing of nuclear materials in Russia. This contribution will help Russia control and eliminate its vast stocks of nuclear materials, chemical weapons and biological weapon agents. Although the decision has received positive responses, many are also sceptical. Helene Tidemann, 2002-07-22 12:46 The Russian newspaper Kommersant was not excited by the decision to allocate $20bn since it was already made back in May at the Russia-NATO summit in Rome when the Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi announced that the European Union would allocate Russia $10bn for the purpose of 10 years. Colin Powell said at the same time that US would allocate the same amount. The newspaper believes the decision is no more than political and that Russia should not count on receiving all the promised money. The reason for this is that the western countries will not start the funding before Russia assumes the responsibility of civil liability in the event of accidents on the country that owns the nuclear establishments. For the time being, Russia does not seem willing to take this responsibility. Kommersant doesn’t believe that Russia will gain much financially on this allocation since half of the money earmarked for this program probably will be spent in the donor countries, giving contracts to their own companies to supply equipment and technologies for the destruction of Russian nuclear weapons. The G8 Russian membership and the decision to allocate money also angered some. Retired Gen. Leonid Ivashov interviewed by Mara D. Bellaby warned that President Putin was leading the country into a potentially dangerous relationship with the West. Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov says according to Interfax news agency that “despite all the buzz and propaganda, it is clear that the billions on dollars to be allocated to Russia by Western countries are designed to completely annihilate Russia’s nuclear missile shield.” Some also fear that the Kremlin is moving too quickly into an international bound without receiving any tangible results. Ivashov was concerned about the creation of a “unipolar world” and warned that Putin was giving up Russia’s natural position as a counterbalance. Jon Wolfsthal says in his article “It takes more than money” that although the decision represents progress, $20 billion is not enough. He refers to the Baker-Cutler report of 2001 where it was recommended a $3 billion support per year for US Department of Energy programs alone. The size of the nuclear waste arsenal and the consequences of the threat it poses, needs at least the same funding as this in order to succeed. Wolfsthal says further that the money is only a part of the challenge. An international co-ordination of the funding programs is non-existent and “co-ordinating the efforts of 7 countries will make past US bureaucratic turf battles on this issue seem like sandbox scuffles.” In addition, US and Russia have not succeeded in building trust with each other. Significant changes is required from both sides concerning this issue, like flexible responses to the issue of access to sensitive facilities, acknowledging that expertise from both sides are useful in solving the proliferation problems. But there is also optimism concerning the Russian G8 membership as well. Ira Strauss writes at the Russian website www.strana.ru of the importance for Russian participation in the G8. G8 is the only important Western grouping that Russia is yet a member of. Russia may soon be a member of OECD, but Russian membership in NATO and EU are not realistic for the moment. The G8 membership is a chance for Russia to increase its role in the world, Strauss says. Russia’s individual interests as well as common interests are global regulation and stability and the struggle against terrorism is vital to reach this goal. Publisher: [bellona@bellona.no] , President: [frederic@bellona.no] Information: [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 4 Iran, Russia Voice Continuation of Nuclear Cooperation Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Monday, July 22, 2002 A senior Iranian official on Sunday said Iran attaches great importance to its relations with Russia and the two sides have voiced their continuation of nuclear cooperation. A senior Iranian official on Sunday said Iran attaches great importance to its relations with Russia and the two sides have voiced their continuation of nuclear cooperation. Hassan Rowhani, Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, made the remarks in a meeting with visiting Russian First Deputy Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Trubnikov, the official IRNA news agency reported. Iran and Russia are two important states in the Caspian Sea region, Rowhani said, citing the Bushehr power plant project in Iran's southern port city of Bushehr as "a symbol of Tehran-Moscow cooperation." He stressed that Bushehr power plant are for civilian purposes and is being built in accordance with international criteria and the principles of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). A third country should not interfere in the construction of the plant, the Iranian official added. For his part, Trubnikov voiced Moscow's resolve to cooperate with Iran in transfer of nuclear technology in line with international conventions and help Iran to utilize nuclear energy for civilian purposes. The U.S. has opposed the building of the Bushehr power plant and accused Iran of seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction. But both Iran and Russia have repeatedly rejected the US allegation. Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 5 Betting on nuclear power - 2002-07-22 - Charlotte Business Journal Barbara Thiede After three months of negotiation, Framatome Advanced Nuclear Power Inc. bought the largest concentration of engineering talent in Charlotte -- Duke Engineering & Services Inc. The subsidiary of Duke Energy Corp. sold for $84 million in a deal that closed April 30; it posted revenue of more than $280 million in 2001. The purchase includes three business groups of Duke Engineering & Services -- nuclear, federal and energy and environmental; some other parts of the company stayed with Duke Energy. The Duke unit has long enjoyed the reputation of being a leading provider of engineering and technical services to private and public energy producers, especially for nuclear power plants. Renamed Framatome ANP DE&S, it makes an easy fit for Framatome ANP, a Paris-based company whose bread and butter is engineering services for nuclear plants across the globe. Framatome has a work force of 14,000 and posts annual revenue of roughly $2.5 billion; its U.S. headquarters is in Lynchburg, Va. Why did Duke dispose of DE&S? Bryant Kinney, Duke vice president of public affairs, says the unit catered to a specialty market and needed to be part of a company that focuses on its field of expertise. "In general, the engineering business was not something we were going to grow. DE&S was either going to stay where it was or decrease, or we could sell it to someone who could take that expertise and build on it." DE&S wasn't "a core piece" of Duke Energy's business, says T.M. Winter, vice president and utility analyst with A.G. Edwards & Sons, the stock brokerage firm. "It was such a small piece of Duke, well under the radar screen." Duke Energy had revenue of $59 billion last year. Winter says DE&S also had consistently been a drag on earnings for the company. Given that the market for building nuclear power plants is expected to slow dramatically after this summer, it made little sense for Duke Energy to hold onto it, he says. Brian Youngberg, analyst with Edward D. Jones & Co., agrees. "Relative to Duke as a whole, DE&S was not a big piece of the pie. Duke Energy is trying to focus on their core regulated businesses and their competitive wholesale energy businesses. In this case, this was a non-core business that didn't supply significant scale." Youngberg says DE&S offers Framatome exactly what that company needed -- the engineering expertise that can complement its work as a technology provider. Framatome's president and executive officer, Thomas Christopher, confirms the assessment. The major growth market for commercial nuclear plants lies in making capital improvements. "This was an area we needed to have strengthened. DE&S is the leader in that field." DE&S brings highly qualified engineering experience to Framatome, which had functioned primarily as an equipment and fuel supplier. "We were engineering on one end, and they were engineering on the other," Christopher says. With their separate specialties, the two companies had often worked on the same projects. The change in ownership has gone well, Christopher adds. "I've been involved in a number of acquisitions, and the remarkable thing about this was the morality with which Duke approached this. There was a great sense of honor and fairness." Bobby Abrahms, former vice president of the unit under Duke Energy and now president of Framatome ANP DE&S Inc., acknowledges that employees were nervous at the beginning. But benefits and existing policies were not fundamentally altered by the sale. Abrahms says DE&S thrives on the skills of its employees, and "when that's your asset, you need to have a work force that is very skilled and motivated. We knew everyone was skilled, but it was important to keep them motivated." Abrahms says no DE&S employee was laid off because of the sale, and given that the unit employs about 1,200, he considers that a significant achievement. Growth, not cutbacks, he says, is in the group's future. Framatome had already garnered work that required DE&S expertise, and DE&S had a full and profitable business for 2002. "We need more people," Abrahms says. "We have to add people." There were some reductions in overhead made in DE&S, Christopher says, but those cuts were planned for the unit before it was sold. Dealing with the inevitable economies of scale and overhead reductions without incurring layoffs was possible because some job openings materialized in other Duke Energy units. Christopher says overhead reductions amounted to "many millions of dollars." The bulk of the employees are based in the Wachovia Center uptown. Framatome officials say they'll remain in the building. Framatome expects DE&S to grow steadily. Christopher says a minimum of 30 nuclear plants will need to renew their operating permits by 2005. There's ample opportunity to garner business in retrofitting nuclear facilities, he says. Framatome also expects to benefit from the experience recently gained by refitting nuclear facilities in Germany and France. Despite the fact that Sept. 11 has made the potential vulnerability of nuclear plants to terrorist attack a topic of some nervous conversation, Framatome executives believe that new nuclear facilities will be an integral part of the country's future energy generation. President Bush is among the leading advocates of nuclear power. "From a national point of view," says Abrahms, "nuclear engineering is a key to the future of the country's energy demands. We now have an administration that has said `nuclear' out loud again." "Framatome is poised to be a player in new nuclear work when it comes about in this country" and having DE&S improves Framatome's chances to do design work for the nuclear power plants of the future, Christopher says. "Duke can focus their capital on their growth businesses, and hopefully Framatome can ex-tract more value from DE&S," says Edward D. Jones' Youngberg. Barbara Thiede is a Concord-based free-lance writer who can be reached at thiede@-charlotte.infi.net. 2002 American City Business Journals ***************************************************************** 6 Commission may consider legal action against paper Story published in the Johnson City Press: 7/20/2002. By Chris Garland Erwin Bureau ERWIN ? The Unicoi County Commission will be asked to consider possible legal action against /The Erwin Record/ and its executive editor. According to County Executive Paul Monk, an addendum to the agenda was requested after the publication of an editorial in Wednesday?s edition of the /Record/ that questioned whether commissioners may have violated the Sunshine Law in endorsing the possible location of a new plant in the town of Unicoi. The request was made by Commissioner Kenneth Lewis. Lewis, in addition to being a commissioner, is also the mayor of the town of Unicoi. ?Sometimes a commissioner will ask to put an item on the agenda,? Monk said. Attempts to contact Lewis on Friday about his request were unsuccessful. Monk said he had been out of town this week and had not talked to Lewis about the request. /Record/ Executive Editor and General Manager Mark A. Stevens wrote the editorial for the weekly publication. In the editorial, headlined ?Commission?s action doesn?t inspire trust,? Stevens said commissioners may have violated the Sunshine Law and ?did? violate the public?s trust in recruiting a $1 billion uranium-enrichment plant silently. The editorial said, ?State law requires our elected officials to conduct our business in public for all to see and hear. But a July 8 letter signed by all nine members of the commission endorsing the proposed plant was never mentioned ? much less discussed ? in a public meeting.? Stevens, who is vacationing out of state this week, responded to the commission?s new agenda item in a phone interview. ?One of the most sacred liberties guaranteed and protected by our Constitution is that of a free press,? Stevens said. ?As our founding fathers knew and as I learned from a dear mentor years ago, what the people don?t know will hurt them. The /Erwin Record/ stands for our community and stands by our editorial.? Monday?s regularly scheduled commission meeting is set to begin at 5 p.m. Other items on the agenda include a request for a quit claim deed of an abandoned bridge right-of-way on Spivey Mountain Road in Earnestville. Also, the commission will consider a 25 mph speed limit for the left prong of Odom Branch Road in the Martin?s Creek community and possible budget amendments. Committee reports, quarterly reports and the election of notaries will also be on the agenda. /(Contact Chris Garland at cgarland@johnsoncitypress.com )./ © 2001-02 Johnson City Press and Associated Press All Rights Reserved This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Johnson City Press 204 W.Main St. ? Johnson City, Tennessee 37605 423.929.3111 ***************************************************************** 7 Envoy: Russia-Iran Ties Fret U.S. Less Las Vegas SUN July 22, 2002 MOSCOW- The United States has less ground for alarm about Russia's nuclear cooperation with Iran, the U.S. ambassador to Russia said Monday, but warned that those ties and Russian weapons sales to China could still threaten world security. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, in a sweeping speech at a conference outside Moscow, also issued frank criticism of Russia's military actions in Chechnya and of threats to Russia's post-Soviet freedoms. Such criticism had been muted in recent months amid warmer U.S.-Russian ties prompted by President Vladimir Putin's support of the U.S.-led anti-terrorism campaign. Washington has "fewer reasons" to be worried about Russian-Iranian cooperation and the possibility of Iran gaining technology that could be used for making nuclear weapons, Vershbow said, according to the Interfax news agency. The report did not elaborate. Moscow has tried to allay U.S. fears over a nuclear power plant Russia is building for Iran. Earlier this month, Russia said it would require Iran to allow it to take back spent fuel from the Bushehr plant. U.S. officials fear Iran could use the spent fuel to generate weapons-grade radioactive material. Still, Vershbow told the political affairs conference Monday that Washington remains concerned about the Bushehr project, which Russia says will be used only to generate energy. "Russia has to keep close watch on nearby countries - Iran, Iraq, North Korea - that are actively seeking to acquire nuclear, chemical or biological weapons," Vershbow said in his speech to the conference, a copy of which was provided by the U.S. Embassy. "Russia has to avoid letting its desire for commercial gain end up hastening the day that these countries can pose a threat that could not only destabilize their own region, but undermine the security of the entire world," he said. The U.S. Embassy text included only Vershbow's speech and not other comments he made at the conference, which was open only to a few Russian journalists. The comments reported by Interfax were apparently said outside the speech. Vershbow noted that the United States and other Western nations recently pledged $20 billion in aid to help Russia destroy or secure its weapons of mass destruction. "We hope that in the wake of this new initiative Russia will do its part by tightening its controls on nuclear cooperation with Iran," he said. The ambassador also expressed concern about Russia's weapons sales to China. "Could the massive amounts of weaponry that Russia sells to China - for understandable commercial reasons - add to the instability of Asia?" he asked. "If war broke out in the Taiwan Straits, this would lead to serious instability on Russia's eastern border." Regarding the Chechnya war, Vershbow asked: "Will Russia have the courage to seek a political solution to the bloody war in Chechnya, which continues despite the government's claims that the situation is returning to normal? Will the Russian leadership hold to account those members of the security forces who, in the name of fighting terrorism, are committing serious violations of the human rights of the civilian population?" U.S. criticism of the Chechnya campaign softened after Sept. 11, and U.S. officials have said international terrorists are among those fighting Russian troops in the breakaway republic. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 8 AU: MP jumps into sea in N-protest ( July 22, 2002) ' + ' NEWS.com.au | NSW Greens MP Ian Cohen has leapt into stormy seas to protest against a shipment of plutonium. Mr Cohen and fellow Greenpeace protester Stuart Lennox today jumped into international waters between Australia and New Zealand before unfurling an anti-nuclear banner as two ships carrying plutonium between Japan and Britain sailed by. Mr Cohen said it was a risky move, but both men were more than 50m from the ships. "But it's not as risky as the plutonium shipments themselves, and we feel it's a sufficiently important issue to undertake those tactics," he said. "It was non-violent actions, the only danger is to ourselves, and we stood off from the ship due to its deadly cargo and certainly wouldn't want to cause any accident," he said. The confrontation began about 8am today as the ships tried to dodge a nuclear-free flotilla of 11 small yachts protesting against the shipment. British Nuclear Fuels Plc (BNFL) is moving around 225kg of plutonium from Japan to Britain via the South Pacific on the two ships. Mr Cohen said the ships broke through the protest blockade about 1am. He and Mr Lennox chased the ships in a high-powered rubber boat for seven hours before leaping into the sea. "We eventually got to a point near the ship where myself and Stuart dived out of the Zodiac [boat] into the sea - myself on a surfboard and him on a rubber ring," he said. "I always do my things on a surfboard - it's part of my Aussie diplomacy." "We held up a banner for nuclear-free seas in the Tasman here ... and let flares off as the ship sailed by," he said. Mr Cohen, a member of the NSW Upper House, has made a reputation as a surfing anti-nuclear protester on Sydney Harbour. The flotilla, with 80 people from Australia, New Zealand, France, Poland and the Netherlands, was enduring rough seas, he said. He said the material on board the ships was highly toxic and the protesters feared the consequences of an accident at sea. "Accidents do happen at sea as with the recent grounding of the HMS Nottingham on Lord Howe Island - I was there to see that, so I've seen what can happen to a highly skilled naval crew, and this is just a merchant marine crew," he said. He said he was happy with how the protest had attracted international attention. "We've achieved drawing the attention of the world's media to the dangerous nature of plutonium shipments going from one side of the world to the other," Mr Cohen said. "The New Zealand Government has been very strident in opposition to the shipment, but the Australian Government has been very quiet about it and I assume that's because they're complacent because there's probably original Australian-mined uranium on board." The Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal are carrying a cargo of mixed oxide fuel back to its maker, British Nuclear Fuels, after its Japanese customer refused to accept it. Earlier, Greenpeace said the Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal had drastically reduced their speed for the first time since leaving Japan on July 4, apparently to try to pass the protest fleet under the cover of darkness. The protest yachts, which had sailed from New Zealand and Australia, waited between the Australian territories of Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Islands and picked up the freighters on radar. AAP ***************************************************************** 9 NRC: Press Release Region III - 2002 - 44 - NRC Staff to Meet with American Electric Power Co. To Discuss Safety Significance of Equipment Cooling Issue at D.C. Cook Plant + [NRC Seal/Skip Navigation] [ border=] Index | Site Map | FAQ | Help | Glossary | Contact Us Advanced Search [ border=] [ border=] [ border=] U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission [ border=] [ border=] [ border=] [ border=] Home [ border=] Who We Are [ border=] What We Do [ border=] Nuclear Reactors [ border=] Nuclear Materials [ border=] Radioactive Waste [ border=] Public Involvement [ border=] Electronic Reading Room [ border=] Home > Electronic Reading Room > Document Collections > News Releases > 02-044 [NRC Seal] NRC NEWS U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532 www.nrc.gov No. III-02-044 July 22, 2002 CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov [opa3@nrc.gov] NRC STAFF TO MEET WITH AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER CO. TO DISCUSS SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE OF EQUIPMENT COOLING ISSUE AT D. C. COOK PLANT The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet July 25 in Lisle, Illinois, with representatives of American Electric Power Company to discuss the safety significance and vulnerabilities revealed as a result of the partial clogging of equipment cooling systems at the D. C. Cook Nuclear Power Station during August of last year. The two-reactor facility is located near Bridgman, Michigan. The NRC staff has completed a preliminary assessment of the problem and concluded that it is of "substantial safety significance." The meeting, called a Regulatory Conference, will seek the utility's evaluation of its significance. The NRC's preliminary assessment was issued in its Inspection Report 01-17, dated June 10. The meeting will be held at 9 a.m. (CDT) in the NRC's Region III Office, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle. Visitors should report first to the Second Floor reception area. The meeting is open to public observation; before the meeting is adjourned, members of the public may ask questions and provide comments. The meeting will also be available for viewing by video conference in Room O-3B4 of the NRC's Headquarters Office, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The vulnerability was discovered on August 29 of last year when lake sediment and debris was drawn into the water system which provides cooling for the emergency diesel generators and other plant safety equipment. The Unit 1 reactor was shut down for maintenance, and the Unit 2 reactor was in operation. A strainer on the water system intake was improperly installed, which allowed the debris to enter the system and reduce the water flow to various heat exchangers in both units. The principal equipment, potentially affected by the debris, were the plant's four emergency diesel generators, which were not operating nor needed at the time. When plant operators discovered the reduced flow in the equipment cooling system, they shut Unit 2 down to investigate and make repairs. NRC inspection findings are evaluated using a four-level scale of safety significance, ranging from "green" for a finding of minor significance, through "white" and "yellow" to "red," for a finding of high safety significance. The NRC's preliminary evaluation determined the D. C. Cook problem to be a "yellow" finding -- one of "substantial safety significance" because it would affect the ability of the emergency diesel generators to function if needed to supply power to plant safety systems in the event of an electrical power loss. Information presented by the utility in the Regulatory Conference will be used by the NRC staff, along with its inspection findings, to determine the final safety significance of the problem. The final determination of the safety significance will be posted on the NRC's web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/COOK1/cook1_chart.html "Yellow" inspection findings may lead to additional NRC inspections and further meetings with the utility to review plant performance. The details of the NRC inspection findings are discussed in Inspection Report 01-17 which is available online in the NRC's electronic reading room. This report may be viewed in the NRC's ADAMS document system, accessible at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Help in using ADAMS is available by contacting the NRC Public Document Room at 301/415-4737 or 1/800/397-4209. ***************************************************************** 10 AU: New fault line found at nuclear reactor site - smh.com.au By Stephanie Peatling July 22 2002 The construction site of the replacement nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights is on top of not one, but two fault lines. Interim findings presented to the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency have shown the site contained more than the one fault line that was discovered last month. The chief executive officer of the agency, John Loy, told a safety committee briefing the company investigating the discovery, the New Zealand-based Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences (IGNS), had found two closely aligned fault lines. One is classified as "normal" and the other as "reverse". Both head north/south across the site, Dr Loy told the committee. The original fault line was found by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation in June during a geological study of excavations for the new reactor's foundations, also carried out by IGNS. ");document.write(" advertisement The final IGNS report on the discovery is still weeks away. Construction of the $320 million replacement reactor began in April. When completed in 2005, the reactor will be used to make nuclear medicine. Community and environment groups want the Lucas Heights reactor closed and construction on the replacement stopped. But at the time of the June discovery, seismologists said such findings were not uncommon and did not necessarily pose a threat to the progress of the reactor. The safety agency called the discovery an "inconvenience" and the Federal Minister for Science, Peter McGauran, promised work on the reactor would resume after a full analysis. Dr Loy told the briefing last week that the construction licence for the replacement reactor remained valid, but he would wait for the final IGNS report on the fault lines before allowing work on the foundations to resume. Copyright © 2002. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 11 Nuclear plant fuels unease newsobserver.com : news Monday, July 22, 2002 6:26AM EDT Sept. 11 prompts more security, fear, criticism Armed guards stand watch at the entrance of the Shearon Harris nuclear plant in Wake County. Since the terrorist attacks last year, more security guards and barriers have been added at nuclear plants. Staff Photos By Robert Willett The cooling tower of CP's Harris nuclear plant is visible from Shearon Harris Road. Some critics say the plant poses a safety risk. By CATHERINE CLABBY, Staff Writer The fact that a Wake County nuclear plant receives and stores radioactive waste from two other power plants has intensified post-Sept. 11 debates over nuclear safety in the Triangle. Shearon Harris has what utility officials think is the largest approved capacity of any plant in the country to stockpile spent commercial waste on its grounds. In recent months, members of the environmental group NC WARN have met with officials in the state Attorney General's Office to argue that the Carolina Power &Light plant poses a significant terrorism target risk. Chatham County commissioner Rick Givens, once supportive of the Harris shipments, wrote to federal officials urging them to stop the transport temporarily. "I think the public in general is more sensitive to the fact that there could be a terrorist attack on our soil. We've had one," said C.S. "Scotty" Hinnant, chief nuclear officer for Progress Energy, which runs CP. Some people, including members of the U.S. Congress, think security at all nuclear power plants needs upgrading. Some favor federalizing plant security. But Hinnant says nuclear plants are less vulnerable than many people think. Hinnant said federal rules forbid him from disclosing specific security provisions at Harris. But he said the number of armed guards, security checks and barriers at nuclear power plants was beefed up after last fall's attacks. The transports, he said, are guarded by armed private security and state highway patrol staff. "Why would anyone try to attack a hard, guarded target?" Hinnant said. CP is in a unique position to find out, critics say. The utility thinks it is the only company in the nation that ships spent nuclear waste from one plant to another. "Through unnecessary transport of and stockpiling of high-level radioactive material in North Carolina by CP Corporation, citizen welfare is being callously and illegally disregarded," reads the complaint that NC WARN, a long-time Shearon Harris critic, and others submitted to Attorney General Roy Cooper. About 10 times a year, on unannounced dates, commercial trains haul 70-ton casks of spent fuel into the pine forest near New Hill where Harris stands. The trip from CP's H.B. Robinson plant near Hartsville, S.C., covers 132 miles. The trip from its Brunswick plant outside Wilmington exceeds 200 miles. The only known disruption on a transport occurred in March, when a man running away from a disciplinary boot camp hopped aboard an empty car on a transport train. A state Highway Patrol spokesman said the man jumped off seconds after a guard yelled at him, and he was apprehended not long after with a second man trying to run away. Operators of nuclear plants must take pains to store spent fuel in safe places because the material remains dangerous long after they use it. The fission process, or the rate its atoms split, slows down in used fuel. But the fuel remains highly radioactive. Utility companies must store spent fuel on their own properties because a national repository, such as the one promised at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, has not yet materialized. Shearon Harris imports spent fuel rods from the two CP plants because it has extra storage space. Originally four reactors were to be built at Harris, but only one was constructed. CP has permission from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to store spent fuel underwater in four pools built there as part of the original design. NC WARN, Orange County commissioners and others opposed CP's efforts to expand storage at Harris from two to four pools without an updated environmental review. A consultant working with Orange County has argued that a seven-step accident sequence could end in a catastrophic fire in Harris' spent fuel pools. The groups would prefer dry storage to the underwater storage. But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board gave CP what it sought in March 2001. The board agreed with CP and the NRC that the accident scenario was extremely far-fetched. Orange County is appealing the decision. Although concern about terror strikes has stirred some attention locally, it has not yet forced CP to change the way it handles business at Shearon Harris. After the March incident, state public safety officials said they think the transports are safe. CP now stores about 3,600 fuel assemblies in three cooling pools at Harris. CP has pledged not to use its fourth pool. Although NC WARN did get an audience with J.B. Kelly, general counsel to Attorney General Roy Cooper, there's no evidence Cooper will act against Harris. Nuclear plants are regulated by federal agencies, not the state. Cooper's office is only saying that the information is "under review." State health officials did decide last month to take up a federal offer and hand out free semi-protective potassium iodide tablets to people living near Harris and three other nuclear plants, to be used in case of an accident or attack. But NC WARN is not giving up. A flyer it is handing out at festivals and other gatherings this summer urges people to write Cooper and ask him to use the state court system to force CP to stop importing waste. Not everyone is fearful Harris poses a disproportionate risk. Local, county and state critics of Shearon Harris typically come from the western Triangle. Wake County officials have been more supportive. That's true of Holly Springs mayor Dick Sears. Since Sept. 11, CP officials have limited visits to the Harris plant. But they have permitted local government leaders to enter, particularly to share information on the latest security strategies. Sears said he left a recent tour of the plant confident that it would be very difficult for anyone unauthorized to enter the plant or reach storage areas at Harris. Visitors are screened for conventional weapons such as guns or knives and for powders and other materials. The staff can shut the plant down quickly. "I was very impressed," Sears said. Staff writer Catherine Clabby can be reached at 956-2414 or cclabby@newsobserver.com [cclabby@newsobserver.com] . © Copyright 2002, The News &Observer. ***************************************************************** 12 TILTING AT NUCLEAR WINDMILLS By WILLIAM TUCKER NYPOST.COM Post Opinion: Oped Columnists: July 22, 2002 -- AS the dog days of summer arrive, it is becoming obvious the campaign for closing down Indian Point is running out of gas. On July 3, Con Edison's consumption hit its fourth highest level in history - 12,000 megawatts. (Last week's high was 11,500 MW.) The city itself generates only 8,700 MW and Indian Point adds another 2,000 MW. That leaves 1,300 MW - plus the recommended 2,400 MW in "spinning reserve" - to be imported from upstate and New England. And relying on long-distance transmission lines is inherently dangerous. The Great Blackout of 1977 occurred when power lines carrying kilowatts from Westchester County became overloaded. Still, none of this has impressed environmentalists. Only last week Riverkeeper, the Hudson Valley group, was touting a report from Synapse, a Cambridge consulting firm, which supposedly shows that closing down Indian Point should be a snap. Released last May, the Synapse study projected that fears of coming power shortages were exaggerated. Forecasters were ignoring "the loss of the World Trade Center load, the impact of the recession, and the transfer of energy load from the New York control area to the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland system." (That means importing more power.) "The public doesn't have to worry about life without Indian Point," exuded Alex Matthiessen, executive director of Riverkeeper, last week. That's interesting, because two months ago Matthiessen was using the same report to draw exactly opposite conclusions. In a May 26 New York Times article ("Fuel Rods and Brass Tacks"), Matthiessen argued that closing Indian Point would create energy shortages - and that this would be a good thing. One of New York's current problems, you see, is Wall Street's refusal to fund Reliant Energy's proposed 1,000-MW natural gas plant in Astoria. Investors are spooked, both by the collapse of Enron and by the uncertainties created by environmental opposition, particularly to the Millenium Pipeline, which is supposed to bring gas supplies to the plant. Not to worry. "Removing 2,000 MW from the system, [Indian Point] opponents say, . . . would crimp the regional electricity supply and send a signal to Wall Street, which would see an opportunity to make money and so throw open the money spigot," said the article. "The plants on the drawing board would be built and Indian Point's electricity gap, they say, would be resolved. . . . ‘The loss of Indian Point Units 2 and 3 would allow market forced to essentially trump any Enron effect,' said Alex Matthiessen, the executive director of Riverkeeper, Inc. . . . ‘It's essentially a supply-and-demand question.' " Now that's interesting. Matthiessen was arguing that - as most experts predict - closing Indian Point would create a big spike in electrical prices. Most consumers would see this as a "conspiracy." But no, says Matthiessen, it would be a convoluted way of encouraging more investment in environmentally benign natural gas plants. The question is this: If we did close down Indian Point, would environmentalists stand firm against the public outcry, reassuring everyone that price increases were a necessary step to eliminating nuclear power? Or would they join the baying hounds, crying of "unconscionable and unfair" price hikes? An instructive example comes from California's recent electrical crisis. California utilities, you may recall, signed an agreement saying they wouldn't raise consumer prices until they had sold off all their obsolete plants. When supplies grew short and wholesale prices spiked, the utilities were caught in a price squeeze. San Diego Gas &Electric, however, resolved its "stranded costs" early and was released from the agreement. The utility raised its consumer prices - and electrical consumption in San Diego immediately dropped 10 percent. Did environmentalists cheer? Did everyone celebrate the triumph in "energy conservation"? No, San Diego residents ran to Sacramento and demanded that SDG be put back under price controls. The Legislature complied, and consumption jumped right back up to its former levels. Environmentalists said not a word. Conservation is a great idea. Unfortunately, the only thing that persuades people to conserve is price increases. Do environmentalists support price increases? Never. Instead, they join the baying pack or hide under the table. So let's pose a question. Suppose we did close down Indian Point in order to create a price spike that would attract Wall Street investment for the Astoria plant. Could we expect environmentalists to stand firm against the public outcry, arguing that price hikes were needed to resolve New York's energy problems? Would they end their opposition to Millennium Pipeline? What do you think? The U.S. Senate finally got serious two weeks ago and approved a permanent nuclear fuel repository at Yucca Mountain. It showed that, when push comes to shove, the nation's leaders can still act responsibly on important matters. As for environmentalists, they will be forever be chasing their will-o'-the-wisp of soft, cheap, clean, imaginary energy. [http://www.nypost.com] ***************************************************************** 13 Al-Qaeda Pirates Radioactive Cargo in Malacca: Report [http://english.people.com.cn] Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Monday, July 22, 2002 Al-Qaeda, an international terrorist network, is involved in the rising piracy against ships carrying radioactive materials through the Malacca Straits, an expert of regional affairs said. Panithan Wattana, a Thai scholar, was quoted by Monday's the Bangkok Post newspaper as saying that the terrorist group's aim isto obtain substances such as uranium and plutonium oxide for making deadly chemical weapons. He obtained the information when attending a recent workshop organized by the International Maritime Bureau (IMB) here. The Malacca Straits, situated between Indonesia's Sumatra island and Malaysia, is not adequately patrolled, which makes suppressing piracy difficult, according to the expert. Aside from Al-Qaeda, ships passing the straits are also targeted by Sri Lanka's rebellious Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), he said. According to IMB figures, there were 649 cases of piracy in thestraits last year, with total losses exceeding 16 million US dollars. Most pirate groups obtained prior knowledge of the route to be taken by their targets, which they trapped by mooring a vessel on either side. The crew of victim ships are always defenseless and most incidents last within an hour, said Panithan. He called on governments around the region to act against piracy in the Malacca Straits which affects regional security and economy. Navies of all Southeast Asian nations should seek to enhance ties and cooperation in exchanging information to curb piracy, urged the expert. Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 14 Warning on radioactive risk to Gulf Gulf News Online Edition <#> * Dubai:Monday, July 22, 2002* Abu Dhabi |By A Staff Reporter | 22-07-2002 * The United States and its Western allies deployed depleted uranium in their 1991 military offensive against Iraq and the local effects of such a weapon could spill into neighbouring Gulf states in future, an Iraqi official warned yesterday. Fahmi Al Qaisi, Director of the Legal Department at the Iraqi Foreign Ministry, said depleted uranium is classified as a radioactive nuclear waste that emits toxic substances that affect the lungs, destroy cells and cause cancer, thyroid problems and physical deformity. "The American and British forces deployed such a type of weapon, which is considered as the new generation of nuclear arms, during their aggression against Iraq in 1991," he said. "It left radioactive and toxic effects in the affected areas in Iraq, including pollution to the environment and health problems to the residents of those areas," he noted in a lecture at the Zayed Centre for Coordination and Follow-up in Abu Dhabi. Al Qaisi said other areas in Iraq had also been affected over the past few years as uranium particles could be carried by air to other areas. Even after those particles settle on the ground, they could be carried again by the wind to more areas. "This means there should be international efforts to minimise its impact in Iraq and this cannot be done without a complete removal of the sanctions," he said. "Such efforts should also include a massive clean-up operation in affected areas in Iraq to protect not only the Iraqis but the people in neighbouring countries as those particles could be carried to other countries...such an environment danger does not recognise boundaries. This means there is a radioactive risk across the border." ***************************************************************** 15 Nevada: America's Yucca Mountain of vice. By Chris Suellentrop Updated Friday, July 19, 2002, at 7:34 AM PT Illustration by Charlie Powell In the novel /Infinite Jest/, David Foster Wallace imagines a future America in which a vast swath of the country has been transformed into a repository for the nation's pollution. Giant fans are erected along the border to blow the waste away from the rest of the now-pristine nation. In this future, Americans call this place "The Concavity." In the present, we call it Nevada. Americans have long thought of Nevada as the place to store our filth, our refuse, our somewhat embarrassing excess. The Senate confirmed this instinct last week when it voted to ship tens of thousands of tons of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, near Mercury, Nev. But the phenomenon is cultural as well as physical: Nevada has always been fenced off from the rest of the country as the landfill for our vice, our cultural pollution. It's the place to store the things we want, even need, but must confine: prostitution, mobsters, secret government areas for military testing, and God knows what else. Things we hate to love have been stored there for easy recall: boxing, gambling, Sammy Davis Jr. "The government has always regarded Nevada as a place unlike others, fit for tests, experiments, and ventures it would sometimes rather not talk about," David Thomson writes in /In Nevada: The Land, the People, God, and Chance/. But it's not just the government or the outsiders that think of Nevada as an experiment. Nevadans themselves think of their state that way, too. If states are the laboratories of democracy, Nevada is the one we've handed over to the mad scientists. Slate: Today�s Papers Perhaps it's in their blood. The first Americans to settle in Nevada were themselves unwanted exports, exiles—Mormons shipped west by an uncaring public. The Utah Territory established for Mormon settlers by Congress in 1850 included nearly all of present-day Nevada. Las Vegas, before it was a glorious Technicolor play-land, was a Mormon colony (unsurprisingly, a failed one). These Mormons were Nevada's first of many encounters with the national policy of YINBY—Yes, In Nevada's Backyard. This sense of Nevada as a dumping ground for the country's castoffs continued into the 20^th century. The nation nodded approvingly as organized crime flocked to Nevada during the three decades after the state legalized gambling in 1931 (or rather, re-legalized it after a two-decade prohibition). Mormons and mobsters don't have a lot in common, but the thought process was the same: Good riddance. At least they're not here. And in what other state would Harry Truman have cordoned off a chunk of land the size of Connecticut for nuclear tests and top-secret government research? To this day, the federal government owns 85 percent of the land in Nevada. It's partly because of this (because Nevada is the storehouse of our nation's secrets) that it's easy for some to believe that an alien spaceship landed in Roswell, N.M., and was shipped to Nevada's mysterious Area 51. Nevada would be the obvious choice for something the government wanted to dispose of: Just stick it in the attic and hope everyone forgets about it. Is Your Portfolio Tanking? Blame Iacocca Luther Vandross Can Improve Your Sex Life Chairs Too Ugly To Sit On The famous Nevadan distaste for government stems in part from this kind of federal meddling, real and imagined. Nevada's state government itself arrived as an imposition from Uncle Sam. The state came into existence because Lincoln wanted an extra state, to get votes both for his re-election and for the 13^th Amendment, outlawing slavery. The fact that Nevada didn't contain enough people to qualify for statehood was conveniently overlooked. That dubious admission to the Union has fostered a still-prevalent local myth in Nevada that Lincoln and the Republicans needed the state's mineral deposits to finance the Civil War. While Nevada disdains the outsiders who view it as a moral wasteland, it also encourages the perception. The state's economy is fueled by Nevada's special role—it's the place you go to get what you can't get at home. So, when Nevada's vice seeps back out into the rest of the country, Nevada suffers. That's what happened to Reno, which made its name in the 1920s as the divorce capital of the nation. Other states made divorce onerous, but Nevada made it easy. Just live there for six months and you could chuck your spouse overboard. Famous and wealthy men and women flocked to the state. "Divorce ranches" popped up to care for them during their stay. But as the moral stigma of divorce faded, other parts of the country started loosening their requirements, too. Nevada engaged in a race to the bottom, lowering its residency requirement to three months, then six weeks. By the 1960s, Americans didn't need to go to Nevada for divorce. They could get it at home. Now, something similar may be happening with gambling. Who needs Nevada when you can gamble in Boonville, Mo.; in Sioux City, Iowa; in Peoria, Ill.? Perhaps that fear is behind Nevada's newest experiment, one that hasn't yet passed: the legalization of the possession of up to 3 ounces of marijuana. Nearly 75,000 Nevadans signed a petition supporting a change in the law, which would need voter approval in November and again in November 2004 to become law. Under the proposal, Nevada would tax marijuana and sell it in state-licensed shops. The vices change, but Nevada remains the same. If the proposal passes, many will condemn Nevada for its hedonism, for its willy-nilly disregard for the consequences of its actions. But Nevada knows exactly what it's doing. And so do we. After all, look who's behind the marijuana initiative: the Marijuana Policy Project, an advocacy group based in—where else?—Washington, D.C. Chris Suellentrop is a */Slate/* assistant editor. You can e-mail him at suellentrop@slate.com . ©2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Use ***************************************************************** 16 Two Nuclear Cargo Ships Evade Boats Las Vegas SUN July 22, 2002 WELLINGTON, New Zealand- Two armed cargo ships carrying nuclear fuel evaded a fleet of protest boats Monday that had tried to block the vessels' passage in international waters between Australia and New Zealand. Environmental group Greenpeace said two protesters - one of them an Australian lawmaker - jumped into the water near the ships in a failed attempt to make them stop. The vessels are carrying 650 pounds of mixed plutonium and uranium reactor fuel, which has been rejected as faulty by a Japanese power company and is being returned to Britain. Critics say they are concerned that the shipment is vulnerable to terrorist attack and could be used to make nuclear weapons - claims the Japanese government has denied. British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., which is transporting the fuel, accused Greenpeace of "maritime lunacy" and endangering lives. "Greenpeace and their crew members ... have deliberately flouted one of the most basic precepts of (maritime) safety by causing a vessel to take an emergency evasive maneuver," spokesman Mark Scott said a statement. Henk Haazen, who skippers a Greenpeace yacht, said the two ships, the Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal, used the cover of darkness early Monday morning to slip past the protest fleet of 10 yachts - from Australia, New Zealand and the tiny South Pacific island nation of Vanuatu - in the Tasman Sea. The demonstrators included families with small children. Ian Cohen, a Greens Party lawmaker in the New South Wales state parliament, said he and a fellow protester chased the ships for several hours in a high-speed inflatable boat before overtaking them and jumping into the sea while holding a banner that read "Nuclear Free Pacific." "As an elected member of the New South Wales Parliament ... I wanted to make sure that there was no doubt in these shippers' minds that they are not welcome in this region," Cohen said in a statement. The two ships left the Japanese port of Takahama on July 4 for the two-month trip which has been condemned by protesters and some Pacific island governments. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 17 Kansas nearly was waste site Lawrence Journal-World: By Terry Rombeck, Staff Reporter Monday, July 22, 2002 Lyons — Bill Hambleton was dealing with a different type of nuclear fallout. The city of Lyons, about 30 miles northwest of Hutchinson, and its nearby salt mine were tentatively selected in 1970 to become the United States' nuclear repository. Joe Fink, who was a member of the Lyons Chamber of Commerce at the time, said the chamber had been eager to find a use for the closed salt mine but, "of course, what we knew about atomic energy could be put in a thimble." It was 1971, and Hambleton, director of the Kansas Geological Survey, was in town to explain why a nearby salt mine wouldn't make a good storage vault for tons of high-level nuclear waste. He was greeted at the airport by a mob of Lyons residents angry with his determination. They saw the waste storage as a way to save the economy of their central Kansas town, which had taken a hit with the closing of a commercial salt mine. One resident was holding a noose. "They were being funny, and I took it that way," Hambleton recalled last week. "They thought this was a good deal, a good economic program for the city, and here was this guy opposing it. It was more to prove a point." Thirty-one years later, the issue of where to store spent rods from nuclear power plants and byproducts from making nuclear weapons remains unresolved — and contentious. As the federal government moves closer to selecting Yucca Mountain in southern Nevada as its nuclear repository, residents of Lyons are reflecting on an era that divided their small town, pitting "not-in-my-back-yard" arguments against fears of a dying community. Salt option Lyons, population 3,700 and located 30 miles northwest of Hutchinson, always has been dependent on the salt formations that surround the city. So when a Carey Salt Co. mine on the north end of town closed in the early 1960s, Lyons — then with a population of about 4,500 — took a big hit. That's why city leaders perked up when officials from the federal Atomic Energy Commission came to town. The idea to store nuclear waste in salt originated in 1955 with a report by the National Academy of Sciences. Geologists thought — and most still do — that salt would be an ideal storage facility because it flows to heal its own fractures, and will absorb heat. The Lyons site also was attractive because it was seismically stable and relatively flat. In 1970, the Atomic Energy Commission tentatively selected Lyons as its deposit site and pegged it for further geological tests. Then the debate began. The way Joe Fink saw it, the nuclear waste was a good way to make lemonade out of lemons. He was a board member of the Lyons Chamber of Commerce at the time. The site would have employed between 30 and 40 people, but chamber officials also planned to take advantage of the traffic coming into the facility with hotels and truck stops. Local disagreement "Initially, as far as the chamber, it was good," Fink said of the plan. "We said, 'Let's get some activity down there at the mine.' Of course, what we knew about atomic energy could be put in a thimble." Not everyone was sold on the idea. "I'd say if it had ever been voted on, the majority would've voted it down," said A.L. "Link" Branson, who had attempted to secure a trucking contract tied to the nuclear site. "Yet the minority talked strongly for it. I'm quite sure it would've changed a lot of the town." The Atomic Energy Commission — which disbanded in 1974 and gave its responsibilities to three other federal agencies — conducted a public relations blitz in Lyons, trying to ease the fears of some residents. Rex Buchanan, who now is the Kansas Geological Survey's associate director, grew up in rural Rice County and remembers taking a commission-organized field trip through the mine. "They were trying to encourage local support," he said. "They wanted people to know what was going on down there and to be comfortable about the project." But little was known about the geology of the 1,000-acre site. The Kansas University-based geological survey began testing there in August 1970. Ernie Angino, a former Lawrence mayor who was associate director of the survey, was in charge of the on-site testing in Lyons. 'A pin cushion' It quickly became apparent, Angino recalled, that the Lyons site would never work for nuclear storage. Hundreds of undocumented holes from oil wells on the land would allow water to seep in and let the radiation spread from the storage facility 800 feet below the surface. "I don't think (the Atomic Energy Commission) realized how many holes had been drilled in this thing," Angino said. "This state's like a pin cushion." Geologists ran into similar problems of uncertainty last year in Hutchinson, when gas escaped from undocumented salt brine wells, causing two explosions that killed two people. The geological survey submitted its preliminary findings to the energy commission in March 1971. It officially dropped the Lyons site from consideration in 1972. But the debate over radioactivity in Lyons was far from over. The Rickano Corp. purchased the salt mine in the late 1970s and made plans to store low-level nuclear waste such as medical equipment there. Though not tied to the government's nuclear waste, the plan brought opposition similar to that for the earlier plan. Steve Woydziak, a hardware store owner, led the fight against the waste. He resigned his position on the chamber of commerce to protest support from local businesses. "We have telephone poles blown over in the wind," Woydziak said. "How would you like barrels of radioactive waste sitting around? We'd have had semis coming from all four directions." He said families would have moved away from Lyons, negating any economic benefit. "There would've been a massive loss," he said. "Everybody I talked to who had children said they wouldn't stay. People were scared to death." Eventually, the bad publicity and lack of local support convinced Rickano Corp. officials to drop consideration of the site. Continuing debate It's been 47 years since the National Academy of Sciences first recommended the government find long-term storage for the nation's nuclear waste. Congress has approved Yucca Mountain in southern Nevada, a site supported by President Bush. Plans call for as much as 77,000 metric tons of waste to be stored there beginning in 2010. But those familiar with the process say the courts will ultimately decide whether any radioactive waste makes its way to Yucca Mountain. Until then, the waste is in temporary storage at the nation's 103 nuclear power plants. "This whole process has been so long," said Hambleton, the former survey director. "I think the reason it finally passed was because everybody's so sick of it." Added former associate director Angino: "You mention radioactivity and people go nuts. Even if you're a person who wants nothing to do with nuclear power, you have to decide what to do with the waste that's already been accumulated. You can't wave a wand and solve the problem." Lyons residents now say they're glad it's somebody else's problem. "It caused a hell of an uproar," said Paul Jones, editor of the Lyons Daily News. "It disrupted the town for quite a while." Copyright © 2002, the Lawrence Journal-World. All rights ***************************************************************** 18 Rail not adequate to ship to Yucca Editorial [online@rgj.com] RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 7/21/2002 09:01 pm Though the Energy Department insists no decisions have been made about how to transport thousands of tons of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, an official said last week that railroads would be the most likely choice. If the plan to ship high-level nuclear waste across the country seemed risky before, it certainly seems downright dangerous now. Railroad statistics show that the number of train derailments has jumped 26 percent since 1997, while the amount of freight carried during the same period grew about 10 percent. We’re shipping more and more on antiquated railroad systems, driving up the risk that tragic derailments will occur. Currently, coal cars weighing 143 tons are among the heaviest cargo transported over mainline track, which carries most of the country’s railroad traffic. Cars envisioned carrying nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain would weigh more than 200 tons. Using rail as the primary transport of nuclear waste will not only require a major overhaul of existing rail systems, but also nearly $7 billion in track upgrades for short line and small regional railroad operations, which connect more isolated areas to the main line. There’s also the small detail of adding rail service to Yucca Mountain, which currently has no rail connection. While railroad officials contend that accidents are down significantly — according to their figures, 73 percent since the 1970s — it seems that derailments have occurred regularly in recent months, and sometimes with disastrous consequences. Consider: There was the chemical fire in a Boston railroad tunnel; four people were killed in a derailment in Crescent City, Fla.; a North Dakota man died after breathing a toxic cloud released after a train wreck; and numerous other non-fatal derailments have been blamed on fractured and old track. Nevada has seen its own derailments in Battle Mountain and Wendover. Yucca Mountain opponents argued that transporting nuclear waste across the country was the most risky part of the national nuclear waste dump project, concerns that federal officials consistently ignored. Given the current state of the country’s railroad infrastructure, it’s becoming clear how valid those concerns were. [http://www.gannett.com] ***************************************************************** 19 Metal smelting plant was taken on trust ST PETERSBURG - The authorities of Sosnovy Bor, Leningrad County, withdrew a suit, banning imports of metal radioactive waste to the town. Company Ekomet-S promised not to import the waste now but is reluctant to abandon such plans for the future. The radioactive metal smelting plant at LNPP. photo: Sergey Kharitonov / ERC Bellona Rashid Alimov, 2002-07-22 16:36 On July 31st, St Petersburg’s Court of Arbitration will be again considering suit, filed by the authorities of Sosnovy Bor against the private company Ekomet-S. At the previous session, which was the second, the authorities refused to continue fighting for one of their suits. Ekomet-S Radioactive metal smelting plant Ekomet-S is situated on the premises of the Leningrad Nuclear Power plant (LNPP), only few hundred meters away from the Baltic Sea shore, four kilometres from Sosnovy Bor with population of 60,000 inhabitants, 80km from St Petersburg. The plant was built secretly from the public and without the environmental impact study, which is required by the Russian legislation. The main initiators of the illegal building were the Ministry for Nuclear Energy - the notorious Minatom - and the fissile fuel monopolists, hoping on the commercial reprocessing of metal radioactive waste at nuclear plants throughout the country. Gazprom-bank invested into Ekomet-S $10m. The very fact that a private plant is located at the territory of the state-ruled LNPP may be considered as a violation of the current legislation. In the turn of 2001, security guards of the LNNP checkpoints published an open letter, claiming that since the smelting installation actually started, they were exposed to radiation, while their contracts didn’t stipulate unhealthy working conditions. "Our attempts to learn the radioactive background level at the checkpoints meets counteraction. The radioactivity of the departing automobiles is measured by an Ekomet-S worker, who in fact represents an interested party. The arriving autos are not checked at all," wrote the guards. Technology of processing, adopted by the plant, was considered dangerous by several researches of a local radiological laboratory. But Ekomet-S keeps on saying that this risky technology is a Russian know-how, which backward Westerners cannot invent. And today, in spite of all the violations, the metal smelting plant is working. First session of St Petersburg’s Court of Arbitration. photo: Sergey Kharitonov / ERC Bellona The suits filed On May 15th, the suits were filed to St Petesburg Court of Arbitration by the Council of Representatives, local parliament, of Sosnovy Bor. The Council, moved by grassroots concern, pronounced imports of metal radwaste from different edges of Russia to Sosnovy Bor to be illegal. Ekomet-S has no rights for imports, just because it has no state environmental impact study for any activity, not mentioning that it has no licence for transportation of radioactive materials outside the LNPP. But anyway, the metal smelting plant is active in the imports. Bellona Web reported earlier, that a train car with radioactive metal waste from Chepetsk mechanical plant in Udmurtia, arrived at the passenger terminal of Sosnovy Bor last fall. 10 casks filled with 20 tonnes of radwaste each, had the maximum radiation level at the car surface, exceeding the natural background radioactivity 1000 times. Neither the car, nor the casks had the required danger marking. According information acquired by Bellona Web, in 2001 such shipments were regular. Moreover, the claimants demanded that activities of Ekomet-S should be suspended, until the state environmental impact study is carried out. The Council of Representatives also insisted that, Act of Launching the Plant should be recognized invalid. The Act was signed by Minatom official Valery Lebedev on February 12th 2002, despite of lack of the environmental impact study and the protest of administration of Sosnovy Bor. In another suit, the authorities of Sosnovy Bor demanded that licence, given to Ekomet-S by the local branch of the Ministry for Natural Resources, should also be declared invalid. First court session: filed suits almost failed On June 26th, the first court session, that showed, Council of Representatives was absolutely unready for the trial. When the session began, it turned out, that the suits had been signed by an incompetent body. The judge recommended that the suit should be lodged not from the Council, but from the administration of Sosnovy Bor. According to Russian laws, legislative branch is not authorized to file such suits. Moreover, Council of Representatives changed the subject and basis of the suits. They particularly changed demand to ban imports for demand to suspend activities of Ekomet-S. The initial subject of the suits was also changed. First the claimants had based their position on the fact, that the smelting plant without proper permission increased its design capacity from five to eight tons of metal radwaste per year. At the first court session the Council claimed another basis: lack of the state environmental impact study. Before the court session, the judge tried to help the Council and suggested to them not to change the suit, but they did not listen. The judge even sent them a list of questions to be solved beforehand, but the claimants appeared in the court not ready for the trial. That accounted for postponing of the session to July 8th. Another suit to the Ministry for Natural Resources was postponed to July 31st, because of reorganization of the ministry, which is being carried out right now. It is strange, but it is the reality: nobody knows today, who should represent the ministry in court. Lawyer of ERC Bellona Alexey Pavlov (to the right) consulting member of the Council of Representatives Alexander Kuznetsov and head of Sosnovy Bor’s environmental department Natalia Malevannaya. photo: Sergey Kharitonov / ERC Bellona Second court session: the suit recalled On the session on July 8th, the claimant side was represented by the local administration, as it is required by Russian legislation. And here is the main unpleasant surprise. During the court consideration, the claimants withdrew the suit, just because Ekomet-S promised not to import waste. “We’ve made a step toward the Council and for the present we’ll keep ourselves from imports of metal radwaste to Sosnovy Bor”, - the plant’s representatives claimed. Alexey Pavlov from the Environmental Rights Centre Bellona says, this promise does not entail any legal effect: “verbal promise to abstain from imports ‘for the present’ doesn’t inflict on Ekomet-S any obligations.” But the authorities of Sosnovy Bor seemed to be satisfied with the promise, and signed a formal refusal of suit straight off in court. “That’s a sabotage” The danger is that the Council of Representatives chose a wrong tactics and strategy to contest activities of Ekomet-S. Alexey Pavlov has many times visited Sosnovy Bor, met local authorities, and consulted them on the trial. But his recommendations were rejected. Local authorities did exactly the opposite to what Alexey advised. “We’re likely dealing with a sabotage. Local authorities intentionally choose wrong tactics,” says Sergey Kharitonov from Environmental Rights Centre Bellona, “What’s the purpose of lodging suits, if you’re going to take them back? The authorities discredit just the court attempt to limit illegal activities of Ekomet-S.” Also it turned out the authorities were using NGO’s as a cloak for their veiled sympathy for Ekomet-S. Before the second session, the head of the local environmental organization “Green World” Oleg Bodrov was excluded from the claimant team. After that he was not informed about changes of the suit demands. Regretfully, such position of local authorities is no wonder for a city, born for life in the world of nuclear technologies, and exists on Minatom’s money. The other suits will be considered Bellona Web already reported that Sergey Kharitonov and Oleg Bodrov, representing Green World and ERC Bellona, lodged their own suits to the other courts – in Sosnovy Bor and in Moscow, where Ekomet-S has its legal address. These suits were filed to make a safety net, according to an advice of Alexey Pavlov, who foresaw the sabotage of the main suits. Members of the State Duma, Yuly Rybakov and Alexander Shyshlov, supported the claim to the court of Sosnovy Bor. But so far, despite of the concern of the deputies, the decision in Sosnovy Bor has not been taken, and the judge preferred to go on leave. The decision in Moscow also has not been made. “But we’ll keep on struggling,” - Sergey Kharitonov says, “everything can be decided soon, on July 31st.” Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 20 Editorial: There's a sucker born every minute Las Vegas SUN July 19, 2002 Utah's two senators thought they had scored a coup for their state on the eve of last week's Yucca Mountain vote in the Senate. In return for voting to send 77,000 tons of nuclear waste to a permanent dump in Nevada, Republicans Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennett secured a statement from Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham pledging that no federal funds would be used to build a temporary nuclear waste dump proposed for Utah. Hatch crowed that this was a "victory" in his state's bid to stop nuclear waste from being stored there. But the reality is that the Utahns were snookered by the Bush administration because they were handed an empty pledge. The utilities that want to store nuclear waste in Utah said late last week that they will go forward anyway with their plans in Utah since they will use private funds, not federal money, for the project. Hatch and Bennett should have been more circumspect about the White House's word on nuclear waste storage. After all, it was during the 2000 campaign that Bush issued a statement in Nevada that he would base his Yucca Mountain decision on science, not politics. But that lie was exposed earlier this year when he approved Yucca Mountain even though unanswered questions remained about the site's suitability. If Bush was willing to dupe Nevada's voters, Hatch and Bennett should have realized that the administration would try to hoodwink them, too. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 21 Letter: This scientist isn't sold on Yucca science Las Vegas SUN July 22, 2002 Isn't it amazing how quickly politicians have set Yucca Mountain aside and moved on to other issues? What is perhaps the most dangerous project since the Manhattan Project is, as far as they're concerned, resolved. But nothing could be farther from the truth. Politicians moved on the basis of the science that's been done, but the science that's not been done is what will cause the project to fail. Let's call it the science of the gaps. There are so many gaps that, putting them end to end, they'd fill up empty space between us and the next galaxy. I, like so many other Americans, responded to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Yucca Mountain Review Plan Draft. As a scientist, I know that radiation converts water to acid. I asked a simple question: At what point will the acid in Yucca Mountain eat through the C-22 canisters? The response I received was pure gibberish, indicating they don't know the answer. The gaps, or not-yet-done science, will cause this project to collapse. Which brings me to my point: Congress had better vote to select another site for a repository. Since it's been determined a site can be engineered anywhere, it makes no sense to select a site for study. Save the time and money and simply select a second site, which might be the first site to accept wastes. RON BOURGOIN Rocky Mount, N.C. Editor's note: The writer was a consultant to the town of Rolesville in Wake County, N.C., in 1984 when a site in that area was being considered by the Energy Department as a potential high-level radioactive waste repository. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 22 Unicoi still waiting for nuclear decision Story published in the Johnson City Press: 7/21/2002. By Chris Garland Erwin Bureau UNICOI ? Louisiana Energy Services has not yet told the Nuclear Regulatory Commission where it will propose to build a $1 billion uranium-enrichment plant, but LES officials have made arrangements for an Aug. 6 meeting. Tim Johnson, the NRC officials handling the LES, said this week the meeting was set to discuss integrated safety, instrumentation and controls. ?We are still expecting LES to name the plant site by the end of this month,? Johnson said. A 100-acre site in Unicoi, named ?The Tinker Road Project? by local officials, is considered a potential site for the plant. LES is a consortium of several large companies, including Urenco, which wants to build the gas centrifuge plant in the United States. Johnson said there are four major companies worldwide, including U.S. Enrichment Corp., that produce the low-enriched uranium fuel that is used in energy plants. ?It is a very competitive market,? Johnson said. ?Last year we shut down a gaseous diffusion plant built in the 1950s in Portsmouth, Ohio. There was also a test facility in Oak Ridge for a gas centrifuge plant,? Johnson said. Both types of plants produce enriched uranium, however, gas centrifuge is a process currently used only in the United Kingdom and Europe. ?These (U.S.) plants were originally built by the Atomic Energy Commission and it evolved into the Department of Energy. The DOE worked the facilities until the early 1990s when they formed a federal corporation to run them. ?In 1998, the companies were privatized and have the responsibility of running them now. As part of the agreement, the DOE said they would take care of decommissioning them. They are now leased to USEC,? Johnson said. The Oak Ridge facility made enriched uranium using the gas centrifuge process at a test plant years ago, but later converted to working with atomic and laser processes instead. Johnson said those processes were also halted. The plant in Oak Ridge has since been decommissioned. Johnson said he has visited Urenco?s plants in England and the Netherlands. In reference to what types of contamination might come from a gas centrifuge nuclear enrichment process today in the U.S., he said very little. ?I would expect very little contamination. In the England and Netherlands plants, it was very clean. There is only one area of the building where contamination could happen and it is where they do maintenance,? Johnson said. Should such a plant run for several years and stop producing the product, Johnson said, ?I expect it would be very easy to decommission these buildings when the time comes.? Urenco has decommissioned one of its plants in Europe. The difference in gaseous diffusion and gas centrifuge is in the heating process, NRC officials said. While a gaseous diffusion plant will heat the material to a liquid, the gas centrifuge will heat just below that point and make a gas. ?For safety in the construction of the plants with this process, all the lines and processing area is done in an environment where if there was a leak of some sort, air would be sucked into the gas and not the other way around,? he said. According to the NRC, the safety of this type of plant exceeds that of other enrichment plants here in the United States. ?LES gas centrifuge plants have a lot of stuff different than Portsmouth and Paducah (Ky.) plants,? Johnson said. ?The process has been improved in safety and technology over the years and I expect the LES operation to be very interesting with its simplicity of operation and cleanliness.? Johnson said uranium is a naturally occurring metal, usually in an oxide form, that is mined around the world. Some areas have a higher concentration than others. Currently, the U.S. market price for mined uranium is low. Once mined out of the ground, uranium is separated from the rock and other ore. It is then milled in a process to a consistency of sand or powder into a yellow cake. At that point, the uranium is sent to a processing center to make uranium hexafluoride. ?The only place in the states that does that process is in Illinois,? Johnson said. After that point, the solid form is put into pressurized vessel cylinders. ?The cylinders are 14 tons heavy each, but only about 4-feet by 6-feet in size,? he said. They are then taken into a plant such as the proposed uranium enrichment plant to be heated until it becomes a gas and the higher product is removed, leaving the tails, or leftover uranium traces. ?LES will not be a facility to dispose of the tails. Under law, the DOE is responsible for finding sites for the tails. Some tails go to other facilities for use in making other products such as armor for tanks and tank ammunition,? he said. ?Depleted uranium makes good anti-armor ammunition. It burns through the armor of a tank. During Desert Storm, this type of ammunition was used to defeat the Iraqis,? Johnson said. There is a market for a small amount of the depleted uranium, but not for all 750,000 tons, he said. The overall market in the world for enriched uranium is steady and growing a little bit, he said. The final product from the proposed LES plant may be sold on a worldwide market. While LES and its major partner Urenco look for opportunities in the United States, USEC will also try to build a new gas centrifuge plant. ?The NRC expects the USEC to propose one in December. The companies are already in competition with each other and it is becoming a very competitive market,? he said. Officials in Unicoi County and the Citizens for the Preservation of the Valley Beautiful may not have much longer to wait for LES to announce what U.S. sites are on the short list and which will be the final site selected. /(Contact Chris Garland at cgarland@johnsoncitypress.com )./ © 2001-02 Johnson City Press and Associated Press All Rights Johnson City Press 204 W.Main St. ? Johnson City, Tennessee 37605 423.929.3111 ***************************************************************** 23 A Sound Decision on Yucca Mountain (washingtonpost.com) Monday, July 22, 2002; Page A14 Mary McGrory's July 11 column "Out of Sight" was troubling because of its selective commentary on the facts surrounding the Yucca Mountain debate. These scare tactics have unfairly politicized the decision and capitalized on the fears of many Americans. This rhetoric was constructed to scare millions of Americans by drawing a picture of radioactive trucks roaring through cities. Here are the facts. The 70,000-ton limit for Yucca Mountain is a statutory cap, not a physical one. The Department of Energy contemplates that Yucca Mountain could hold as much as 130,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste and spent fuel. The statutory limit is a legislative holdover from the days of considering more than one repository. Transportation already is happening. High- and low-level waste has been shipped for decades, with more than 3,000 shipments and no harmful release of radiation. Contrary to what Ms. McGrory believes, the decision was not made in haste. The Senate has spent more than 20 years contemplating this action. Its decision was based on the recommendations of scientists worldwide who believe deep geological disposal is the best method for storing high-level radioactive waste. This vote was not based solely on state interests; the federal government has an obligation to clean up the legacy of Cold War sites around the country. The action by the Senate safeguards America's energy security by ensuring that clean-burning nuclear energy will continue to provide the nation with 20 percent of its electricity. This decision is a sound policy decision, backed by solid science, to solve a national problem. We thank our colleagues who had the courage to vote yes on the Yucca Mountain resolution. FRANK H. MURKOWSKI U.S. Senate (R-Alaska) LARRY E. CRAIG U.S. Senate (R-Idaho) Washington © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 24 Environmental activists run down nuclear waste ships off Australia Monday, 22-Jul-2002 1:20AM Story from AFP Copyright 2002 by Agence France-Presse (via ClariNet) TASMAN SEA, AT SEA, 22-JUL-2002: Ian Cohen, an elected member of Australian state New South Wales' parliament and crew member Stuart Lennox of the African Queen, one of the Pacific Peace Fleet Flotilla, protest in front of the Pacific Teal, July 22, 2002, one of the two ships bringing plutonium through the Tasman Sea, midway between Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands. The Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal, two British freighters transporting nuclear waste material, were stopped July 21 by the protest flotilla in the Tasman Sea, according to Greenpeace. [Photo by Greenpeace/Sandy Scheltema, copyright 2002 by AFP and ClariNet] LORD HOWE ISLAND, Australia, July 22 (AFP) - Protestors in a rubber speed boat ran down two British ships carrying nuclear waste from Japan to Britain early Monday after an all-night chase in the high seas off southeast Australia, activists said. Two of the protestors, including a member of parliament in the Australian state of New South Wales, Ian Cohen, jumped into the sea ahead of the ships and unfurled a banner reading "Nuclear Free Pacific", said James Courtney of the environmental group Greenpeace. A Greenpeace-organised flotilla of 11 boats set up a protest line between Australia's Lord Howe and Norfolk islands over the weekend in hopes of intercepting the freighters Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal and their cargo, which includes 255 kilograms (560 pounds) of plutonium. "The ships held back yesterday until nightfall and then at about 12:30 am cut through the flotilla," Courtney told AFP. "An inflatable took off in pursuit and at sunrise two guys in survival suits jumped into the sea and held up the banner," he said. The two were Cohen and a Greenpeace activist from Tasmania, Stuart Lennox. The freighters, carrying plutonium mixed oxide (MOX) waste for British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. (BNFL), skirted around the two protestors and continued south, Courtney said. The ships kept to a 60 nautical mile gap between New Zealand's and Australia's exclusive sea zones. A spokesman for BNFL angrily denounced the Greenpeace action, which he said forced one of the ships to take dangerous evasive action to avoid hitting Cohen and Lennox. "To throw themselves into the water in front of the vessel is the height of maritime lunacy and does Greenpeace no credit whatsoever," spokesman Mark Scott said in a statement. "We have no objection to legitimate protest. This was not legitimate and could have created a situation with grave consequences," he said, adding that the protestors "should be condemned for their stupidity." Cohen, who jumped into the water on a surfboard, said he participated in the protest in the name of "many Australians who have expressed strong anti-nuclear sentiment." "I wanted to make sure that there was no doubt in these shippers' minds that they are not welcome in this region," Cohen said. Courtney said no further protests were planned until the ships sail past South Africa en route to Britain. "We're going to keep tracking them, and there should be a quite significant protest when they arrive in Britain," he said. New Zealand Defence Minister Mark Burton meanwhile said an Air Force reconnaissance plane had been sent to monitor the ships' progress Monday. "The government has made clear its opposition to such shipments and, as expected, as with previous shipments, the vessels seem to be staying well clear of New Zealand's 200-mile exclusive economic zone," he said. The passage of the two ships through the Pacific, the latest in a series of shipments between nuclear reprocessing plants in Japan and sites in France and Britain, drew a sharp protest last week from a summit meeting of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states in Fiji. "We call for the immediate cessation of such practice, in order to prevent any occurrence of accidents that could seriously threaten (ACP members') sustainable development and the health of their peoples," leaders of the 78-nation group said in their final communique on Friday. ***************************************************************** 25 OP: Senate was right to approve site for nuclear waste [St. Petersburg Times Online: Opinion: Editorials and Letters] [http://www.tampabay.com/] © St. Petersburg Times published July 22, 2002 Re: Creating a new problem, editorial, July 13. Your criticism of the recent U.S. Senate vote to approve Yucca Mountain as a repository for used nuclear fuel ignores the fact that this vote was the logical continuation of a national policy that has been in place for almost a half-century. In 1954, when private organizations were first authorized to use nuclear power, Congress made clear that federal authorities would authorize any civilian use, and the final storage of nuclear fuel waste would be the responsibility of the federal government. Twenty years later, in 1974, Congress specifically charged the predecessor agency for the Department of Energy with the responsibility to construct and operate a facility for the disposal of used nuclear fuel. Eight years later, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 gave specific guidance in the process that should be used in selecting a site. The Yucca Mountain site was selected through the approved process, and after more than 15 years of scientific study, the site was recommended to the president and was approved. When the state of Nevada objected by vetoing the site selection, it was by law the responsibility of Congress to vote on whether to override that veto and support a continuation of the existing policy. Congress did so in the national interest, with approval in both the House and the Senate. In order to have a central repository for used nuclear fuel, it is necessary to move the fuel from multiple sites. Contrary to the assumptions of your editorial, and the comments from some critics, the fact is that used fuel has been shipped in this country for decades without a single incident that created a radioactive hazard to the public. During the past 35 years, the nuclear energy industry has completed more than 3,000 shipments of used nuclear fuel, covering 1.7-million miles, with no injuries, no fatalities and no environmental damage. Europe has already safely moved about as much nuclear material from place to place as would be shipped over the entire active life of the Yucca Mountain Project. Nuclear power provides 20 percent of the nation's electricity, emits no airborne pollution or greenhouse gases and gives us one of the cheapest forms of electricity we have. Securing these benefits requires a permanent, safe and secure site for nuclear waste. I feel strongly that the senators from Florida voted correctly in support of Yucca Mountain because it is the right choice for the nation and the right choice for the citizens of Florida. -- C.S. Hinnant, senior vice president and chief nuclear officer, Progress Energy, parent company of Florida Power, which owns and operates the Crystal River Nuclear Plant near Crystal River Single storage site is better Re: Creating a new problem, editorial. I disagree with your disapproval of Sens. Bill Nelson and Bob Graham's votes to approve the nuclear power plant waste storage facility in Yucca Mountain. A single storage site affords better protection from terrorists. Yucca Mountain is far safer as a location for the thousands of years needed for storage. There, it can be encased in silicon for safety. True, there will be a danger in transportation, but radioactive matter is constantly being transported. Costs should be borne by the power companies. Isn't it about time that a public corporation, similar to the Tennessee Valley Authority, is formed for a standardized nuclear power system that provides electricity and reduces pollution for all Americans? -- Bruce Marger, St. Petersburg Nuclear energy makes sense Re: Nuclear waste transportation. For more than 30 years I worked for a major utility very much involved in electric generation fueled by uranium. These plants started producing electricity in the late 1950s and in all that time there has never been a dangerous release of radioactive material into the ground or the atmosphere, including the Three Mile Island incident where the plant operated as designed and the only problems were caused by liberal antinuclear journalists who never retracted their statements even after they were proven incorrect. As to the matter of transportation of spent fuel rods, extensive tests were made by the industry in cooperation with the Department of Energy on the casks that will contain the spent rods. In one instance a flatbed trailer was parked at an angle across a railroad crossing and a diesel-powered train was crashed into it at a speed in excess of 50 miles per hour. This was done many times and not once was the container breached. Containers were abused in every conceivable manner and did not fail. Why are you not aware of this work? The Yucca Mountain area was chosen from many potential sites because there was no evidence of any disturbance of any kind at the level where the nuclear material will be stored. No earthquakes, no volcanoes, no fault line activity in the last 200-million years. The material being stored is only "waste" because the nuclear power industry was prevented, for political reasons only, from developing a breeder reactor. This type of reactor would use spent uranium available from the power industry for fuel. For every three truck loads of spent fuel used, four truck loads of new usable fuel could be produced. The energy available is greater than all of the oil, coal and gas in deposits known and still to be found. Nuclear reactors produce no pollution. Uranium is still the smart choice for energy production. We should be building nuclear power plants and breeder reactors as fast as we can. That will stop all of the real polluting done by fossil-fueled generators and will pave the way to the energy source of the future, fusion. But that is another story and until we solve the nuclear problems, it will have to wait until mankind is smart enough to do what is right rather than what feels good. -- Joseph F. Hofmann, St. Petersburg A shortsighted, high-risk project Thank you for your editorial, Creating a new problem (July 13), in which you point out the shortsightedness and lack of common sense of our senators for voting to approve the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project. Nuclear waste is one of the deadliest poisons known to humans. And yet, Sens. Bill Nelson and Bob Graham voted for a project that encourages more nuclear waste and puts all of our lives at risk. It is a sad day when our elected officials refute overwhelming scientific evidence showing that Yucca is unsafe and unsound and side instead with the nuclear lobby and its $13-million in campaign contributions. Shame on Nelson and Graham. -- Collin Hu, Clearwater We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by fax to (727) 893-8675 or by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com (no ***************************************************************** 26 Submarine reported near Pacific nuclear ships Go Asia Pacific Breaking News Pacific - [http://www.abc.net.au/ra] Anti-nuclear protestors claim a British navy submarine is escorting two ships carrying weapons grade plutonium-uranium fuel through the Pacific. A flotilla of yachts organised by the international environmental organisation Greenpeace intercepted the ships 'Pacific Pintail' and 'Pacific Teal' between Norfolk Island and Lord Howe Island around dawn Australian time. Eleven yachts were positioned in international waters after picking up the 'Pacific Pintail' and the 'Pacific Teal' on radar just after midnight The two armed British vessels pushed through the lines between Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Island and a Greenpeace nuclear campaigner, James Courtney says they forced their way through without warning: Adam Shaw, aboard the yacht 'Moontide', says there is definitely evidence that a submarine is travelling with the nuclear ships. He says his crew did not see the submarine, but a submarine's communications bouy popped to the surface behind another yacht. Shaw says it turned to investigate this, but the metre long conical bouy promptly disappeared. 22/07/2002 17:46:36 | ABC Radio Australia News ABC 2001 [http://www.abc.net.au/common/copyrigh.htm] ***************************************************************** 27 More Sign Posts for Peace in South Asia IEER | South Asia Peace Plan by Ramdas By Admiral L Ramdas Fortunately India and Pakistan have stepped back from the brink of war and nuclear holocaust, for the time being. But the danger remains, and both countries remain at the mercy of events that they cannot fully control. Fundamentalist elements in Pakistan, bent on violence directed at India and matched likewise by extremist right wing groups in India, both of whom aim to provoke war between the two countries, hold the future of the region in their hands. They will continue to do so unless the two Governments institute further measures to de-escalate the current confrontation and get down to a dialogue. The following objectives are interlinked and need to be achieved : 1. To stop permanently the infiltration from Pakistan into Indian controlled part of Jammu and Kashmir resulting in terrorism and violence there. 2. To stop all forms of human rights violations by militants and security forces alike. 3. To resolve the Kashmir issue peacefully, keeping in mind the legacy of partition and ground realities at present - namely the existence of the Line of Control as a virtual boundary since the Simla Agreement of 1972. 4. To identify a process for ascertaining the wishes of the people of Jammu and Kashmir regarding their future. 5. To defuse nuclear tensions and eliminate the risk of nuclear war 6. To open up the two countries to normal movement of people and trade and create a climate, socially and politically that would promote good relations especially between the peoples of India and Pakistan, and South Asia at large. The immediate elements that would open the way to resolving these long-festering issues could be as follows, keeping in mind the history of the various agreements that India and Pakistan have signed or almost signed, but have so far failed to implement. The approach also explicitly factors in the new and overwhelming reality in South Asia - that the establishment by India and Pakistan of nuclear arsenals means that the threats of conventional and nuclear war are now inextricably linked. If Indian and Pakistani leaders want peace - which is more than the absence of war, then resolving the issues of the relationships between the people and in the communities within countries, with equality, tolerance, and friendship is necessary to a sustained peace. Cross-border infiltration: Pakistan has pledged to stop such infiltration permanently. This will require monitoring. India has proposed joint patrolling of the border. This has not been agreed to by Pakistan. The situation is further complicated by India's `allergy' to any big power/third party interference in the entire Jammu and Kashmir question. However, we are already witnessing a substantial role being played primarily by the USA, and others, in facilitating communications between the leadership of the two countries! It is therefore proposed that a monitoring force drawn from among the members of SAARC countries under mutually agreed leadership, could provide the necessary compromise for the monitoring to be established. This force could be provided with technical data gathered by other countries, including the United States, to better perform its duties. As a first step, India should show its goodwill by beginning to reduce its forces along the border and restore all communication including road, rail and air traffic between the two countries. The aim should be to bring forces at the border to pre-December 13 levels as rapidly as possible. Jammu and Kashmir: There are three parties to the Kashmir question, namely, India, Pakistan and the people of Jammu and Kashmir, and it is essential that India recognize this. By the same token, both India and Pakistan must understand the ground reality of a de facto partition of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir by the acceptance of the Line of Control as the international border between the two countries. There is no denying the fact that the people of Jammu and Kashmir have suffered a great deal due to the Indo-Pak `tug of war' over the past half a century. The levels of disillusionment and alienation amongst the people of Jammu and Kashmir from both India and Pakistan have reached an all time high. Most importantly they seek peace and cessation of all forms of violence. As a first step in this direction and as a gesture of honest intent, both Pakistan and India must reduce the levels of their security forces on both sides of the border in Kashmir, including the closing down of all militant training camps by Pakistan. Many solutions have been proposed over the years for the `Kashmir Problem' by eminent persons, peace groups and `think tanks'. Central to any solution must be a process of ascertaining the wishes of the people of the entire erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, keeping in mind the ground realities of the de facto partition of the State. In order to facilitate the emergence of Peace in the region as early as possible, the following process as a via media could be considered by all parties concerned: + First, the people of Kashmir on both sides of the border would be given the choice of whether they want to be citizens of India or Pakistan, and, if they want to move from one side to another, be given the opportunity to do so in peace and security. To implement this, both countries should agree to some form of international supervision . This role could perhaps be performed by a SAARC monitoring team as proposed earlier. + Second, the people who have been displaced from their lands and homes by the current conflict, such as the Kashmiri pundits from the Valley, should be allowed to return to their homes and lands in peace and security. + Third, the border between India and Pakistan in Kashmir should be kept porous to enable Kashmiris on both sides to cross it for personal, family, and business reasons without too many hassles. This porous border could become the exemplar of a similar opening between India and Pakistan all along the border, since millions of people have family members on both sides of the border. In this way we can facilitate the expression of the wishes of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The Line of Control in Kashmir, with minor modifications to allow for the terrain and other requirements of both sides, could be regularised as the international border between India and Pakistan. In other words, it would be recognized as the de jure result of what has been a de facto partition of Jammu and Kashmir. Surely such a partition cannot be anymore or any less discriminatory or painful than the partition of the erstwhile states of Punjab and Bengal in 1947? The only saving grace now being that there will be controlled and secure movements of the population unlike the holocaust of 1947. Conventional weapons and nuclear weapons: Both countries should reaffirm the pledges to negotiate all outstanding issues between them peacefully and not resort to war, proxy or otherwise. This formulation should meet the concerns of both India and Pakistan adequately. This means, first of all, a cease-fire along the Line of Control. Pakistan would agree to a policy of no-first use of nuclear weapons, which India has already adopted. This is the equivalent of a nuclear cease fire. India and Pakistan could tap their best and deepest traditions and not only avert war but make a real peace between them at last. They could verifiably de-alert all nuclear weapons with bilateral or SAARC monitoring and, in that context, invite all other nuclear weapons states to do the same and together take up leadership in the cause of global nuclear disarmament. People-oriented regional policy: Both countries would :- 1. Encourage people to people contacts. 2. They would discourage expressions of hostility and enmity between religions or sects within their own countries, and between India and Pakistan. 3. Liberalize visa requirements for personal and business needs with the aim of rapidly abolishing them altogether, making the Indo-Pak border akin to the U.S.-Canadian border. Only sustained peace can lift the clouds of war and the threat of nuclear incineration of South Asia. At the horrific dawn of the nuclear age, Albert Einstein called on humanity to develop a new way of thinking or perish. The leaders of the West have recklessly failed to heed that warming and remain on the edge of the nuclear abyss, with the United States and Russia maintaining between them more than 4,000 nuclear warheads on hair-trigger alert, though they claim to be friends and at peace. In a recently concluded and unique workshop 'Initiative for Peace - Focus on Kashmir' at the United World College in Singapore, forty young people from India, Pakistan came together for a week, and agreed on an inspiring Statement of Common Ground. The final paragraph of the statement reads : We believe that we have the power to make this generation and the generation to come, the best ever in the history of humanity, or the worst. The choice is entirely ours; we have made the choice for a better and peaceful world." This, rather than the perpetual state of quasi-war that the countries are now maintaining, would befit the region that gave the world Badshah Khan and Gandhi and the most unique freedom movement the world has known. [The writer is former Chief of the Naval Staff, India.] Other resources: + [http://www.hinduonnet.com/2002/07/18/stories/2002071800601000.htm] , based on this piece + [http://www.ieer.org/webindex.html#sasia] [http://www.ieer.org/index.html] Comments to Outreach Coordinator: [ieer@ieer.org] Takoma Park, Maryland, USA ***************************************************************** 28 AU: Body parts may be returned Sunday Times: By Sean Parnell 22jul02 THOUSANDS of human organs and bones taken from corpses for research may be handed back to families of the deceased. The Federal Department of Health and Ageing is considering a national hotline for people to obtain information about the body parts following two separate inquiries by the Australian Health Ethics Committee. The organs were retained after autopsies while the bones were used in a 21-year nuclear testing program. In both cases, next-of-kin were mostly unaware the body parts had not been buried or cremated with the deceased. The committee found some ashes of the bones were still in storage and the institutions which provided the bones for testing, mostly public hospitals, should pay for disposal as requested by the families. The committee made similar findings and recommendations concerning organs retained after autopsy and urged the Federal Government to consider reimbursing state health departments for any costs incurred in disposing of the body parts. But in both cases, the committee urged authorities to allow families of the deceased to make the first call as some people would probably prefer not to know what had happened to the body of their loved one. A nationally co-ordinated information program is expected in September. A Queensland Health spokesman said the department would provide counsellors to deal with inquiries from families of the deceased. The spokesman said the families of the deceased would be allowed to retrieve the body parts if they wanted special disposal arrangements. After three years, all unclaimed body parts were likely to be disposed of in a public ceremony. A spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Ageing did not return calls last week, but the issue was believed to have been discussed at a Health Ministers' meeting in Darwin. More than a third of about 22,000 bone samples used for testing the radioisotope Strontium 90 came from Queensland. The Mater and Royal Brisbane hospitals participated in the program from 1957 to 1978. In April, health ministers agreed on a new code of practice governing the use of body parts removed during autopsy, ensuring that clinicians first sought approval of the dead person's family. © Sunday Times ***************************************************************** 29 DOE: RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP CONTRACT UPDATE Hanford Press Release 2002 Release date: July 16, 2002 For more information contact: Andrea Powell, 509-376-0626 Marla Marvin, (509) 376-8230 The U.S. Department of Energy’s Richland Operations Office (RL) has begun “discussions” with potential offerors on the Columbia River Corridor Closure Contract, which will clean up about 210 square miles of the Hanford Site along the Columbia River. During discussions, RL officials will meet with prospective offerors to negotiate details and allow revisions within their proposals. In accordance with procurement regulations, we will not release detailed information about these discussions. RL issued its Request for Proposals for the work in March 2002 and proposals were submitted in May. RL expects to award the contract in November. ### RL 02-0034 ***************************************************************** 30 DOE may ax 'manager' role The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- Monday, July 22, 2002 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff Under a new organizational structure, the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Operations office would be left without a chief. In a nutshell, there would be no permanent replacement for Leah Dever because the position she left about three months ago would essentially be scrapped. In April, Mike Holland was brought in to fill Dever's void on an interim basis while the new management structure was developed. Steven Wyatt, an Oak Ridge-based DOE spokesman, said the new management structure should be in place by January. The plan would call for local programs, including science-related missions and cleanup activities, to report directly to DOE headquarters. DOE believes this change will dramatically improve the clarity of line management and provide a direct and clear line of accountability. "It's so hard to tell at this point what's going to happen," said Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee. Her organization closely monitors DOE's local activities. The new organizational structure would create the Office of Operations Support to take over some of the duties that belonged to Dever. The head of this office, who has yet to be named, would serve along with managers for science and cleanup programs on an executive council for the Oak Ridge Reservation. Norman Mulvenon, chairman of the Local Oversight Committee's Citizens' Advisory Panel, said he is concerned that the elimination of Dever's position could create a gap in DOE's relationship with Oak Ridge stakeholders. The manager is essentially recognized as the representative for all DOE Oak Ridge interests and activities. However, DOE expects the executive council will serve as a liaison among DOE, the federal agency's regulators and the public. Gawarecki said she hopes that is the case, but added that it could be difficult to seek information or assistance from a four- or five-person group instead of one individual like Dever or Holland. DOE is hoping the National Nuclear Security Administration will agree to participate on the executive council. The NNSA is the quasi-independent agency within DOE that oversees the nuclear weapons complex. A new organizational structure could result in layoffs, but officials don't know how many people could be impacted. Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or pparson@oakridger.com [pparson@oakridger.com] . [http://www.oakridger.com] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 31 DOE Opens New Information Center NEWS MEDIA CONTACT: Walter Perry, (865) 576-0885 www.oakridge.doe.gov [http://www.oakridge.doe.gov] July 10, 2002 OAK RIDGE, Tenn. – A centralized "one-stop-shop" for public access to U.S. Department of Energy documents and information is now open in Oak Ridge. The Department of Energy Information Center, located at 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, is available for the public to access documents, Internet sites, and participate in public meetings. "We’re very pleased to be able to offer the community a facility of this quality," said Michael Holland, Acting Manager of Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Operations. "We believe our stakeholders will find it a great convenience to have just one place to go for public meetings and information on all DOE programs in Oak Ridge." The Information Center solves a long-standing problem for Oak Ridge. Formerly, stakeholders had to go to the DOE Public Reading Room for Freedom of Information Act documents and to the Information Resource Center across town for information about the DOE Environmental Management Program. Public meetings were scheduled at a variety of locations. With the new Center, everything is now consolidated in one convenient location along with office space for the Oak Ridge Site Specific Advisory Board. Hours for the Information Center are 8 a.m. – 5 p.m., Monday-Friday. The facility is operated by Information International Associates, Inc., an Oak Ridge based, woman-owned small business, for the Oak Ridge Operations Office. Information specialists at the facility may be contacted at (865) 241-4780 or 1-800-382-6938, option 6; fax (865) 574-3521. -DOE- ***************************************************************** 32 Pipes may remain at Rocky Flats Rocky Mountain News: Local By Associated Press July 22, 2002 Officials cleaning up the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant to prepare for its scheduled 2006 closure are developing a plan to deal with the nearly seven miles of underground pipes. The pipes carried toxic solvents and uranium- and plutonium-laced liquids, and occasional leaks tainted some areas. Pulling out all the pipes and testing all the dirt would be prohibitively expensive, cleanup officials say. For the past 12 months, cleanup contractor Kaiser-Hill has been working with citizen groups and state and federal officials to determine how to proceed with underground cleanup. So far, the draft plan involves removing all pipes less than three feet below the surface, cleaning up the soil around the 26 known leaky spots and checking out areas with suspected leaks, said Jeremy Karpatkin, spokesman for the Department of Energy, which owns Rocky Flats. 2002 © The E.W. Scripps Co. Privacy Policy and User ***************************************************************** 33 Enrichment Backgrounder Cameco Corporation - Media Gateway - 2002 News Releases - Introduction + On July 22, 2002, Cameco signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) as an initial step toward entering a formal partnership to build a $1.1 billion (US) enrichment facility in the United States. + The facility would use Urenco's centrifuge technology, the world's lowest cost and most advanced method of uranium enrichment. + Cameco's plans to invest in enrichment increases the company's involvement in the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle to cover all phases except fuel fabrication. The Front End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle + Uranium's transformation from ore in the ground into usable fuel that most reactors use for electricity generation has four key stages collectively described as the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle + Uranium is extracted from the ground, processed in a mill and becomes uranium concentrates in the form of triuranium octoxide (U3O8) also known as yellowcake. + The U3O8 is then chemically refined and converted to uranium hexafluoride (UF6). + The UF6 is then enriched to increase the percentage of the isotope of uranium (U-235). + The enriched UF6 is converted into UO2 and pressed into fuel pellets, which are inserted into thin metal tubes for assembly into fuel bundles. + The enriched uranium in fuel bundles is then ready for use in a nuclear reactor. Enrichment + Most commercial reactors require uranium fuel to have a U-235 content of 3 - 5%. + Naturally occurring uranium is mostly made up of two different types of uranium atoms or isotopes, approximately 99.3% U-238 and 0.7% U-235. + Uranium enrichment is required to increase the U-235 concentration from 0.7% to 3 - 5%. + The enrichment process involves separation of the lighter U-235 atoms from the heavier and more predominant U-238 atoms in order to concentrate the U-235 portion. + There are two commercial enrichment methods: gaseous diffusion and centrifuge. Gaseous Diffusion + In the gaseous diffusion process, U-235 and U-238 atoms are separated by feeding UF6 in gaseous form through a series of porous walls or membranes that allow more U-235 to pass through. + To understand how this method of enrichment works, think of UF6 as equal sized sand particles of two different weights suspended in air. All the sand grains are blown through thousands of sieves, one after another. Because the lighter U-235 particles travel faster than the heavier U-238 particles, more of them penetrate each sieve. As more sieves are passed, the concentration of U-235 increases. + The process continues until the concentration of U-235 is increased to 3 - 5%. + The slower U-238 particles left behind are collected as byproduct and referred to as "depleted tails" or "tails," in other words uranium with a reduced concentration of U-235. + The high amount of energy required to force the UF6 through the porous membranes makes the gaseous diffusion process very expensive. Centrifuge + In this type of enrichment process, the gaseous UF6 is introduced into a centrifuge (a cylindrical container that spins the UF6 at high speeds). + The rapid spinning flings the heavier U-238 atoms contained in the UF6 to the outside of the centrifuge, leaving UF6 in the centre enriched with a higher proportion of U-235 atoms. + The enrichment level achieved by a single centrifuge is insufficient to obtain the desired concentration of U-235. It is therefore necessary to connect a number of centrifuges together in an arrangement known as a cascade. + The U-235 concentration is gradually increased to 3 - 5% as it passes through the successive stages of the centrifuge cascades. + Enrichment using centrifuge technology requires very little energy, giving this method a significant cost advantage. Centrifuge technology requires only about 2% of the energy needed for gaseous diffusion technology. Separative Work Units + Enrichment service is sold in separative work units (SWU). + A SWU is a unit that expresses the energy required to separate U-235 and U-238. Enrichment Process + How uranium is enriched depends on: + the amount of uranium feed (UF6) at the beginning of the process + the amount of SWU used + and the concentration of U-235 atoms left over (tails assay) at the end of the process. + A reactor operator knows the amount and concentration of uranium fuel required by each reactor. By varying the level of tails assay, a reactor operator can find the most economical combination of UF6 feed and SWU required for enrichment. To illustrate, consider the following example: + Let's assume you are in the freshly squeezed orange juice business. By deciding first how much juice you are prepared to leave behind in the pulp, you can then decide the optimum balance between the number of oranges you require and the effort required to squeeze them. + If oranges are cheap and the cost of squeezing is high you are less concerned with how many oranges you use, but you want to make your orange juice with the least amount of squeezing. If oranges are relatively expensive and the squeezing process is cheap, you will minimize costs by squeezing fewer oranges more times to get the same amount of juice. + Now think of the oranges as uranium and the effort to squeeze them as SWU. If the price of uranium is relatively low, then you will use more uranium and less SWU to enrich the UF6. If the price of uranium is high and SWU is relatively cheaper, you will use more SWU and less uranium. + Enrichment is measured both as the percentage of U-235 in the product and in the depletion. So the percentage of U-235 left behind in the tails assay is critical to the calculation of enrichment. The reactor operator always starts with the tails assay to find the best combination of UF6 feed and SWU. The following table shows two examples of how a given quantity of enrichment could be contracted. The shaded part of the table shows the relative amounts of electricity required to produce that quantity of enrichment which points to one of the key advantages of centrifuge enrichment. 1 kg of UF6 enriched to 3% U-235 could be produced by either of the following combinations: Gaseous Diffusion Centrifuge Tails Assay Separative Work Units Natural UF6 Feed Approximate Kilowatt Hours Required to achieve contracted enrichment 0.25% 3.8 SWU 6.0 kg 9,500 190 0.30% 3.4 SWU 6.6 kg 8,500 170 + It takes about 100,000 SWU (100tSW) of enriched uranium to fuel a typical 1,000-megawatt commercial nuclear reactor for a year. A 1,000-megawatt plant can supply the electricity needs for a city of 600,000 people. + SWU spot prices are published weekly on the Uranium Exchange web site ( [http://www.uxc.com] ), however, utility contracts with a new US enrichment plant would be primarily based on long-term prices. World Enrichment Market + The annual world market demand for enrichment is about 35 million SWU according to the World Nuclear Association. + Enrichment services are supplied by a number of sources as outlined in the table below. Actual annual production figures are not published for competitive reasons. Supplier Method Approximate Annual Supply (000s SWU) Market Share USEC (US) Gaseous Diffusion 4,500 – 5,500 13 - 16% Eurodif (France) Gaseous Diffusion 7,000 - 8,000 20 - 23% Urenco (Europe) Centrifuge 5,000 14% Tenex (Russia) Centrifuge 8,000 - 9,000 23 - 26% Other Centrifuge 1,500 4% Highly Enriched Uranium (Russia) n/a 5,500 15% Highly Enriched Uranium (US) n/a 500 1% Total 35,000 100% United States Enrichment Market + The United States is the world's largest market for enrichment services with annual demand of approximately 11 million SWU. + Domestic production currently supplies less than half of the US market and the only operating US enrichment facility is a higher cost gaseous diffusion plant. + US utilities need a secure supply of enrichment services as an integral part of their fuel supply and they prefer a competitive domestic enrichment market to provide it. PDF of Enrichment Backgrounder (0.04MB) This page last updated: July 22, 2002 ***************************************************************** 34 UK: Nuclear fusion: It's impossible. And what's more, it's improbable Economist.com Jul 18th 2002 From The Economist print edition *This month offers a chance for America's fusion researchers to stay in the game* SOME say that a dollar spent on nuclear fusion is a dollar wasted. And many, many dollars have been spent on it, as physicists try to duplicate, in a controlled setting, the process by which the sun shines. Since 1951, America alone has devoted more than $17 billion (see chart) to working out how to fuse atomic nuclei so as to generate an inexhaustible supply of clean, safe power. The claim that this money is wholly wasted may not be entirely fair, though. Fusion science has made a big return on this investment in the form of a new universal constant. This constant is the number 30, a figure that has for the past half-century or so been cited almost religiously by researchers as the number of years that it will take before fusion power becomes a commercial reality. That this number has not fallen explains why the budget for fusion research in America has. Fit a line to the decline, reckons Pete Politzer, a scientist at General Atomics, an atomic-energy company based in San Diego, and it looks as though fusion funding will disappear entirely by 2007. So it is with a heightened sense of purpose that America's fusion physicists have gathered for a fortnight's conference in Snowmass, Colorado, to discuss the future of their country's fusion-research programme. If they act quickly and in concert with their colleagues around the world, they might save their jobs and their research budgets from a quiet and unlamented death. *Star-struck* The physicists gathered at Snowmass must decide whether to recommend that their government rejoins a team from Europe, Japan, Russia and Canada, which is planning to build a device known as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). This will try to create a ?burning? (ie, fusing) plasma of hot, ionised hydrogen gas. Japan, Canada, Spain and France have all offered to host this facility, and they are keen to get the United States to join in and help meet the $5 billion price tag. To rejoin the collaboration could cost America between $500m and $1 billion, according to Ned Sauthoff, a physicist at Princeton University who is one of the chairmen of the conference. The prospect of America stumping up such a sum is not as remote as it might at first appear. The United States withdrew from ITER in 1999, citing budgetary constraints. But since then, the remaining members have halved the project's budget. Meanwhile, the Bush administration has slightly increased its proposed funding for fusion research, and has shown support for experiments at American plasma-physics laboratories. And, at a meeting of G8 energy ministers in Detroit this May, Spencer Abraham, America's energy secretary, said that President Bush was keen on fusion and perhaps on rejoining ITER as well. Fusion physicists say that, because of its scale and potential output, ITER could be the last experiment needed before construction of a working fusion power-plant can begin. (No prizes for guessing how many years off that will be.) The proposed device would use superconducting magnets to confine a burning plasma of deuterium and tritium, two isotopes of hydrogen, in a doughnut-shaped reactor known as a ?tokamak?. The interior of the plasma would have to be maintained at around 100m°C for the deuterium and tritium to fuse, and energy to be produced. If all goes as planned, ITER will generate about 400 megawatts of thermal power, from an energy input about one-tenth of that. Depending on how you do the sums, ITER might thus be the first fusion reactor to produce significantly more energy than is put in to heat up the plasma. For safety reasons, however, the excess thermal energy produced will be released through cooling towers rather than harnessed and converted into electricity. Proposals for smaller tokamaks are also being considered. One is the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment (FIRE), which has been designed by an American team. Its planners estimate that the burning plasma in FIRE would produce between five and 20 times as much energy as is required to heat it up. The experiment would cost about $1 billion that in all likelihood the Americans would have to find by themselves, and it would take about seven years to build, whereas ITER would take 12. The goal of FIRE would be to perform experiments on magnetically controlled burning plasmas. Its opponents say that its smaller size means that FIRE could not give physicists enough information to guarantee that engineers would be able to build a fusion power-plant. At Snowmass, the physicists must sort out these claims, and decide whether it is worth asking for funding for FIRE as well as for ITER, instead of ITER, or not at all. A third proposal under discussion at Snowmass is called IGNITOR. This was designed some years ago by a team led by Bruno Coppi, a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The project would be a collaboration with Italian scientists and is the smallest and cheapest of the tokamak proposals. As with FIRE, however, there are doubts about whether building IGNITOR will advance the technology of fusion power enough. The final option that will be considered at Snowmass, to do nothing at all, is the cheapest and most modest alternative, but also the one least likely to be advanced. *Economic downturn* On July 19th, the organisers of the Snowmass meeting are presenting a report on which option the attendees want America to support. Rallying physicists behind any choice will be a hard task. Rallying political support will be harder still. Some have suggested that fusion enthusiasts should lobby for these projects on the grounds that they advance the understanding of the ?pure science? of burning plasma. Particle physicists, they argue, get away with spending vast sums of public money studying the pure science of fundamental particles. But this line of argument is doomed. The only reason to understand burning plasmas is in order to build a commercial fusion power-plant. In contrast, understanding the physics of subatomic particles is interesting for the light it sheds on the fundamental nature of the universe. To push for a project, only to have its funding denied or cancelled again, would send yet another discouraging signal to a group of scientists who sorely need a new injection of talent and money if they are to continue. On the other hand, that might be exactly the right signal to send. Thirty years is a long time for an ambitious young physicist to achieve nothing at all. International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor , Fusion Ignition Research Experiment Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2002. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************