***************************************************************** 01/24/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.22 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 EU fears over US import duties 2 UK energy minister says nuclear still has a role 3 US panel okays steep duties on French uranium 4 UK: Importance of nuclear power 5 Austrian nuclear petition "smart political move" - Czech 6 Bulgaria: Contract signed for modernization of nuclear reactors 7 UK: Energy review 8 Bulgaria: Ruling party official denies date set for closure of 9 JAPAN: Doubts growing about safety of nuclear plants 10 US: NRC chairman: Post 9-11, still interest in new nuclear power 11 Austria: Haider's stance on Czech nuclear plant threatens coalition 12 Urenco Responds to U.S. Anti-Dumping Decision 13 Austria in Crisis Over Czech Plant 14 US: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards To Meet February 7 15 U.S.-Russia Uranium Crisis Set to Be Defused 16 Concerns over Burma's nuclear plans 17 US: DOE announces go ahead on MOX 18 US: U.S. Moves Closer to MOX Nuclear Plants 19 Ruling lets U.S. levy tariff on nuclear fuel 20 US: Outdated Price-Anderson Act Affords Inadequate Coverage in the 21 US: Plutonium Conversion: Set Under Arms Pact 22 Vietnam solicits support for atomic energy NUCLEAR REACTORS 23 US: Yankee Board Accepts Funds For Fuel 24 Russia: False alarm triggers nuclear reactor shutdown 25 US: NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: Reid challenges insurance program 26 US: Big Rock needs 8 years to unload nuclear waste 27 US: PPL to seek new nuclear license for Susquehanna NUCLEAR SAFETY 28 US: VA Creates Gulf War Advisory Committee 29 Fuel rods seized from criminals in Belarus may have come from Cherno 30 NZ: Brit court case helpful to exposed soldiers in 50's 31 AU: Charges laid over radioactive material 32 UK Court Clears Way For Nuclear Claim - 33 US: Applicants vie for compensation NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 34 UK: EXPOSED: Nuclear DUMPING site has LEAKS 35 US: Haddam To Allow Nuclear Storage 36 Township to weigh in on landfill plan 37 US: Lawyer tells five-state compact chances of lawsuit win are good 38 US: Nuclear waste group's lawyer optimistic 39 Nuclear waste moved to Aomori storage facility 40 UK: Ireland wants proof of safety 41 Sellafield asked to prove waste tanks safe from terrorist attacks 42 UK: Brit ambassador upset over Sellafield demands 43 British Ambassador slams 'alarmist' Sellafield criticisms 44 US: Statement by Congressman Don Young on Yucca Mountain 45 Watchdog calls for proof of safety at Sellafield 46 German train carrying nuclear waste departs for France 47 US: Editorial: Nuclear waste disposal issue AT yUCCA 48 AU: Water authority defends uranium levels. 49 US: Permanent cleanup of river, Stauffer site must not be delayed 50 US: AU: Uranium leak not reported to minister 51 US: Science At Yucca Mountain "Weak To Moderate" At Best 52 US: Reno approves money to aid Yucca fight 53 US: YUCCA EDITORIAL: Same old story? 54 US: Nevada stake great in energy debate 55 US: Goodman tries to turn mayors against dump 56 US: Reno City council OKs funds for anti-Yucca effort 57 US: San Francisco, Navy say they have accord to clean former naval 58 US: LETTER: DOE's deceptions at Yucca 59 US: Brian Greenspun: Straight talk on dump 60 US: Editorial: A change of heart on Yucca Mountain? 61 US: Perkins seeks anti-Yucca support 62 US: Scientific panel rips Yucca study 63 US: Goodman files Yucca petition in Washington 64 US: Regulators want to change rules judging Nevada nuclear dump NUCLEAR WEAPONS 65 US: Star Wars: Protecting Globalization from Above 66 The Frontier Post From Peshawar Pakistan 67 US: POGO to DOE's General John Gordon: You Are Being Misled 68 US: Statement of Gen. John Gordon (Ret. U.S.A.F.) Administrator of 69 US: Congressman: Nuclear Weapons Facilities Vulnerable 70 NZ: N-test serviceman can now sue 71 US: Bomb technology tested in Nevada 72 Pakistan backs de-nuclearisation of South Asia 73 US: U.S. Nuclear Security Falls Short, Congressman Charges US DEPT. OF ENERGY 74 Ruling: Ridger not terminated for reporting safety concerns 75 Former Livermore Lab Guards Sue Over Dismissals UC, Department of 76 ORAU employee appointed to White House advisory board 77 Funds pledge could end SRS standoff 78 DOE to convert tons of plutonium into fuel for commercial reactors 79 editorial: First step on plutonium TO S. Carolina 80 Flats plutonium gets shipping OK 81 Rocky Flats to ship plutonium 82 Rocky Flats: Plan would rid plant of plutonium 83 Oak Ridge: BNFL tells of changes to management structure 84 Hanford forum covers cash, deadlines 85 Plant 6 demolished at Fernald 86 Wamp discounts lax weapons security OTHER NUCLEAR 87 Site sought for fusion project 88 IAEA Daily Press Review Date 2002-01-23 Number 10 89 US in fusion rethink ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 EU fears over US import duties By Guy de Jonquières in London Published: January 23 2002 18:24 The European Union voiced strong concern on Wednesday at a US decision to impose punitive duties on about $500m of enriched uranium imports from four EU member countries, saying the measures were unjustified. The duties have been set at more than 32 per cent on exports by Eurodif, the French government- controlled uranium supplier, and at more than 2 per cent on shipments by Urenco, a British-German-Dutch consortium. Pascal Lamy, trade commissioner, said the EU might challenge the measures in the World Trade Organisation if the dispute was not resolved by negotiation. The US International Trade Commission approved the duties on Tuesday, saying the imports had harmed US industry. The ruling followed a Commerce Department finding that the uranium was unfairly subsidised and that France's exports were also being sold at unfairly low value. But the European Commission said the US action was based on flawed calculations and that the duties - expected to take effect next month - were intended to protect the United States Enrichment Company (Usec), which itself benefited from government subsidies. The Commission said Usec, the only US producer of enriched uranium, would get up to $100m in extra income from the duties. The uranium case will be added to the US-EU trade disputes that Mr Lamy plans to discuss with Robert Zoellick, US trade representative, at a two-day visit to Washington that begins today. At the top of Mr Lamy's agenda are this month's final WTO ruling against a $4bn US corporate tax break and President George W. Bush's threat to impose in March tariffs of as much as 40 per cent on steel imports. UK: financial times ***************************************************************** 2 UK energy minister says nuclear still has a role UK: January 24, 2002 LONDON - Britain's Energy Minister Brian Wilson said this week nuclear power would continue to have a role in the country's energy mix despite speculation about its future after a leaked government report. "For the foreseable future nuclear power has a part to play in Britain's energy needs," Wilson told BBC radio. The BBC said a leaked copy of the government's root and branch energy review said the nuclear power industry would be forced to pay for all its decommissioning and clean up costs. Such a proposition could make investment in the sector unattractive since at present the government underwrites some of the multi-billion pound clean-up liabilities. British Energy, the country's main nuclear generator which provides about 20 percent of the UK's electricity, maintained its nuclear power had a future in Britain. "Our position is clear. We already internalise our own costs. The private sector can fund new build (of new nuclear power stations) on its own, but it needs a government framework to facilitate this," said a spokeswoman for the group which was privatised in 1996. The government's energy review is due to be published shortly. The issue of nuclear liabilities, the legacy of Britain's move into the atomic era in the 1950s, is complex since all the country's nuclear facilities, including power stations, were orginally built by the government or state-owned firms. In November 2001 the government sought to clarify the issue when it set up the Liablities Management Authority to assume the 35 billion pounds ($50.13 billion) liabilities of BNFL and the seven billion pounds ($10.03 billion) liabilities of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 3 US panel okays steep duties on French uranium USA: January 24, 2002 WASHINGTON - A U.S. trade panel this week gave final approval to import duties totaling more than 32 percent on shipments of more than $200 million worth of nuclear power plant fuel from France. In a case brought by the United States Enrichment Corp. (USEC) in late 2000, the International Trade Commission (ITC) also voted 4-0 to approve final import duties of more than 2 percent on more than $200 million worth of enriched uranium from Britain, Germany and the Netherlands. One of the six commissioners was not present for the vote and a second commissioner recused herself. The European Union has threatened to challenge any anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed in the case at the World Trade Organization. The principle EU suppliers are the French government-controlled firm Eurodif SA and the British-Dutch-German consortium Urenco Ltd. Despite concerns raised by the EU, the U.S. Commerce Department said last month it would seek final ITC approval to impose anti-dumping duties of 19.57 percent and countervailing duties of 13.21 percent on Eurodif and other French suppliers. At the same time, Commerce dropped its anti-dumping investigation against Britain, the Netherlands and Germany and said it would seek countervailing duties of only 2.26 percent from those countries to offset government subsidies. In a press release, USEC said the combined duty on imports from France would be 32.10 percent, slightly lower than the figure of 32.78 published by Commerce last month. USEC and Urenco also said the duty on imports from Germany, Britain and the Netherlands would be 2.23 percent, rather than the published Commerce Department figure of 2.26 percent. Maurice Lender, a spokesman for Urenco, said the lower figures were the result of last-minute consultations between Commerce and the affected companies. Urenco also expects the duty on its shipments to apply only until the end of 2002, Lender said. Of the four countries, France is the biggest supplier of enriched uranium to the U.S. market. French sales to the United States in first nine months of 2001 totaled $130 million, compared to $212 million in all of 2000 and $263 million in all of 1999. Provisional countervailing and anti-dumping duties have been applied to imports from the four countries since May and July, respectively, of 2001. Commerce is expected to issue its final duty order in the case sometime around February 4. USEC, which is the United States' only uranium enrichment company, has argued that unfair competition from Eurodif and Urenco was a threat to U.S. national and energy security. In its original petition, USEC charged both companies with selling enriched uranium at below the cost of production and benefiting from government subsidies. However the EU's executive body, the European Commission, has questioned the Commerce Department's method of calculating dumping and subsidy margins in the case, saying European government and industry views were largely ignored. The new U.S. duties come as trade problems between the United States and the EU are again on the rise. A recent WTO ruling in a dispute over tax breaks for U.S. exporters cleared the way for Brussels to impose sanctions on up to $4 billion worth of U.S. goods later this year. At the same time, the EU and other suppliers face possible U.S. import restrictions on steel as the Bush administration mulls way to help struggling domestic producers. Story by Doug Palmer REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 4 UK: Importance of nuclear power Financial Times; Jan 23, 2002 By ANDREW TAYLOR Nuclear energy generators will continue to have an important role in meeting Britain's power needs, Brian Wilson, energy minister said yesterday. A draft of Tony Blair's energy review, leaked last month, concluded that the private sector should be responsible for decommissioning new nuclear plants and disposing of waste. British Energy, the country's biggest nuclear generator, says new investment would be impossible without government financial support. Most plants are scheduled to close by 2020. Mr Wilson told the BBC that the Cabinet Office report simply made recommendations. "The only way we could have security of supply (without nuclear power) would be to become 70 per cent dependent on gas, 90 per cent of which would be imported, some of it from places I don't think we would wish to stake our children's future on." The minister's views conflict with those of the Cabinet Office report, which says: "There is little risk of there being insufficient gas available internationally: there is plenty, and 70 per cent can be accessed from Europe." Andrew Taylor Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-1998 ***************************************************************** 5 Austrian nuclear petition "smart political move" - Czech nuclear watchdog head BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 24, 2002 Text of report in English by Czech news agency CTK Ceske Budejovice, southern Bohemia, 23 January: The Austrian petition referendum against the Czech Temelin nuclear power plant was a very smartly prepared political move aimed at gaining voters' support, State Nuclear Safety Office (SUJB) head Dana Drabova told CTK today. In the last week petition referendum initiated by the Austrian coalition far-right Freedom Party (FPOe) almost 16 per cent of Austrians expressed support for Austria's vetoing the Czech Republic's admission to the EU unless Prague halts Temelin. "From this point of view I do not think that the Freedom Party as the initiator can be satisfied. It probably expected a bigger success. The result shows that a large number of Austrians are normal people and view EU enlargement... [ellipsis as published] approximately as Czechs do. That is as a reasonable matter," Drabova said. If the petition referendum concerned other questions than a veto of Czechs' admission to the EU, its results would have probably been different," she added. FPOe representatives have, however, called the referendum results "a brilliant success". Other parties' assessments were more restrained. Temelin, situated 60km from the Austria, is sharply criticized by Austria as well as environmentalists who say it is not safe because it combines Soviet design and western fuel and safety technology. It started to be launched in October 2000. Source: CTK news agency, Prague, in English 1656 gmt 23 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 6 Bulgaria: Contract signed for modernization of nuclear reactors BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 23, 2002 Text of report by Bulgarian radio on 23 January The Bulgarian-Swedish ABC Avangard-Sevlievo company has signed a contract with the Kozloduy nuclear power plant, according to which the Sevlievo experts will modernize the third and fourth reactors of the N-plant. The contract is the result of a public tender, in which seven other companies took part. According to the contract, the modernization of the third reactor will begin in March and will end by the end of the year, while the modernization of the fourth reactor will be effected in 2003. Source: Bulgarian Radio, Sofia, in Bulgarian 1000 gmt 23 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to ***************************************************************** 7 UK: Energy review The Independent - United Kingdom; Jan 23, 2002 ENOUGH DRAFT versions of the Cabinet Office's long-awaited energy review have been produced to heat a moderately large town. And with each one of them, comes a slightly different spin on the issue at the very centre of the debate - is there a future for Britain's nuclear power industry. Brian Wilson, our nuclear-loving Energy Minister, was doing his best yesterday to put the latest leak of the review's conclusions into context. The document would appear to cast doubt on the economics of any further nuclear power stations, recommending instead a doubling of the renewable energy programme to help Britain meet some very demanding environmental targets like a 50 per cent cut in greenhouse gas emissions. But Mr Wilson is an atomic kitten when it comes to energy policy - something to do perhaps with having the Hunterston reactor in his constituency - as is Tony Blair. And so he made the point that the energy review is a report to the Government not of the Government, suggesting that its conclusions could yet end up gathering dust on a shelf while ministers get on with making the real decisions. This government, like its predecessors, has signed up to the importance of maintaining diversity and security of supply. Britain's increasing reliance on imported gas threatens both of those objectives. The brutal fact is that it will be expensive for consumers and taxpayers whatever route is chosen to guarantee a balanced energy mix. The privatised nuclear industry makes no bones about it -lobbying for pounds 3bn of its liabilities to be written off and a "carbon free obligation" on consumers which would oblige them to pay 50 per cent more for a quarter of their electricity needs. Wind energy doesn't provide a free lunch either, even if it can be produced in the necessary quantities. Mr Wilson's latest Renewables Obligation will cost householders pounds 600m a year and if the bar is raised even higher so that 20 per cent of electricity comes from wind, wave, biomass and the like, then the bill will be higher still. Mr Blair and Mr Wilson are attracted to the idea of replacing nuclear with nuclear and so keeping its share of the energy market at 25 per cent. The technology is there. But is the will? There's no prospect of the City financing it on its own, so if the Government wants it, it will have to find a way of underwriting it too. ***************************************************************** 8 Bulgaria: Ruling party official denies date set for closure of nuclear reactors BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 23, 2002 [Announcer] On 23 January, Veselin Bliznakov, chairman of the National Assembly Power Generation Commission and deputy chairman of the Simeon II National Movement [SND] parliamentary floor group, said in the National Assembly that the reactors of the Kozloduy nuclear power plant have all the qualities and necessary capacity to be used beyond 2006. Bliznakov said this after a sharp reaction on the part of the United Democratic Forces and the Coalition for Bulgaria to the prime minister's statement according to which it would be possible to close the third and fourth reactors of the Kozloduy nuclear plant as early as 2006. Daniela Kusovska reports: [Kusovska] Bulgaria has a nationally responsible government, which will protect Bulgaria's national interests, Veselin Bliznakov also said. According to him, this means that we must demonstrate a high level of political activity until the summer in order to agree with the European Commission on mutually acceptable terms for closing the third and fourth reactors. Bliznakov categorically pointed out that nothing has been predetermined and the terms are yet to be agreed upon. Veselin Bliznakov emphatically stated that he has not heard the prime minister saying on 22 January that it was possible to close the third and fourth reactors in 2006. He announced that the country's power engineering strategy will be updated. The issue of nuclear power generation and the adoption of a new law on the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes will be a part of this updating... Source: Bulgarian Radio, Sofia, in Bulgarian 1200 gmt 23 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World ReporteR ***************************************************************** 9 JAPAN: Doubts growing about safety of nuclear plants asahi.com : ENGLISH The Asahi Shimbun Public confidence in the safety of the nation's nuclear power plants is at an all-time low, but those who live near the facilities are less likely to feel threatened than the population at large, surveys by an industry group found. Forty-seven percent of those polled by the Research Council for Energy and Information Technology responded positively when asked if the safety of nuclear plants can be ensured. That's a drop of 12 points from a survey conducted in 1998 by the council, whose members include utilities and makers of power-generation equipment. In a related survey, the council found that 60 percent of those who live near nuclear power plants believe the facilities can be made safe. That's down 14 points from the previous survey and the lowest figure on record. Respondents in both surveys were asked to choose from among two positive and two negative responses. They were also given the option of choosing ``don't know'' if they were undecided. The 2001 survey of the general public was the first to show less than half of the population felt confident about the safety of nuclear power. ``The public is more critical than ever of nuclear power policies,'' said Hiroaki Fukami, director of the council and professor emeritus of Keio University. Forty-two percent of the respondents in the general survey said it would be difficult or impossible to ensure the safety of nuclear plants. That's an increase of 5 points from the 1998 survey. Among those who live near nuclear plants, 30 percent of respondents expressed doubts about the facilities' safety, an increase of 7 points. The surveys also suggested a growing number of people have doubts about plans to build more nuclear plants. In the general survey, 25 percent of the respondents said they support the construction of additional plants, a drop of 7 points. Twenty-nine percent, down 4 points, opposed their construction, while 34 percent, up 5 points, preferred the status quo. Among those who live near nuclear facilities, 29 percent, down 9 points, favored new construction. Twenty-six percent, up 4 points, were opposed, while 36 percent, up 2 points, wanted things to remain as they are. The nationwide survey of adults was conducted last November, netting responses from 2,317 people, or 72 percent of those polled. The survey of attitudes among those living near nuclear plants was based on 668 responses. The surveys are conducted every two to three years. (01/24) ***************************************************************** 10 NRC chairman: Post 9-11, still interest in new nuclear power plants opEd 1 Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 1:18 p.m. on Thursday, January 24, 2002 Editor's License Dick Smyser Immediately after Sept. 11 there were calls to shut down all 103 operating U.S. nuclear power plants which daily supply 20 percent of the nation's electricity. To which Richard A. Meserve replies: The destruction of skyscrapers does not suggest it was wrong to build skyscrapers nor do anthrax spores in the mail suggest that it is wrong to have postal service. Meserve, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency charged with licensing and regulating all the nation's nuclear facilities, was speaking at the National Press Club in Washington last week. C-Span televised his talk. Of course, Meserve acknowledged, since the attack on the World Trade Center and the anthrax letter scare, there is greatly intensified concern for security at nuclear power plants especially. Nor, frankly, he said, are nuclear safety officials entirely certain what might be the consequences if a jetliner loaded with fuel for a cross-country flight were crashed into one of them. Just as few had conceived that terrorists might hijack jetliners and turn them into missiles, nuclear safety experts had not, until Sept. 11, fully studied a similar threat to nuclear power plants. However, they are intently studying such a possibility now, Meserve said. Meantime, in his view a shutdown is not called for. Nor, since Sept. 11, have there been any credible threats. "Nuclear plants are not soft targets," he said. They are among the nation's most formidable structures surrounded by layers of access-barring barriers and better prepared to withstand attack than many other parts of the nation's infrastructure. (The NRC chairman made no reference to the November 1972 hijacking of a Southern Airways jet with the hijackers threatening to crash it into Oak Ridge nuclear facilities.) U.S. nuclear power reactors are performing with increasing efficiency, Meserve said, in some circumstances producing power cheaper than natural gas and coal. The increased threat of terrorism, however, has increased and will continue to increase costs of security at the plant sites themselves as well as measures to assure the safety of those living in surrounding areas. Meserve favors the present system of reactor guards working under the jurisdiction of the reactor operating companies, this rather than making them federal employees. However, guards under the reactor operating companies are required to obey the laws of the states in which the plants are located, these laws varying from state to state. Therefore, Meserve would seek federal authority to allow the guards to take whatever action they deem necessary to protect plant security, like shooting to kill regardless of individual state laws which might forbid such action. Also, should air defense be deemed necessary, this would obviously have to be provided by the military. Meserve was questioned about the distribution of potassium iodide to be available to the public as an antidote should radioactive iodine be released by a reactor. Maryland has already requested a supply from the NRC, he confirmed, and the NRC is encouraging other states to do the same, this to supplement existing plans for evacuation and sheltering in an emergency situation. He was questioned about concern he had expressed in an earlier speech about media reports of potential vulnerabilities at some reactors. The media have an obligation to inquire and report about nuclear plant safety, he agrees, but he appeals for care in reporting vulnerabilities, whether real or not. Such reports could tempt terrorists, he fears. Regrettably, he said, the NRC has had to pull back on announcing difficulties at some of these plants. Incident reports are no longer posted on Web sites, he said, all of this posing challenges to the NRC's efforts to keep the public informed -- its desired policy of "transparency." The NRC, he said, has had to "rethink just how open we can and should be." (Meserve is the older brother of Jean Meserve, CNN newsperson.) But, thankfully, as NRC contemplates a new policy on public announcement of difficulties at reactors, "There has been a 99-percent decline in the number of significant events in the past 15 years," he said. Prior to Sept. 11, there had been some revival of interest in building new power reactors. What has happened to that interest? he was asked. Indeed, Meserve said, such interest has come as a result of nuclear power's more recent "quiet renaissance." But even after the World Trade Center disaster, that interest remains strong. The key to the possibility of new plants of course, he said, are economic factors and these, he believes, are continuing to improve. Meanwhile, he said, operating licenses have been renewed for eight currently operating plants, with more applications for renewal among the remaining 95 plants expected soon. Is he more apprehensive now when he visits a nuclear power plant? No way, he replied. He's never been frightened and the more he learns about how the plants operate, the more secure -- confident -- he feels. After Sept. 11 the NRC ordered a "top to bottom" review of all safety procedures. This has resulted in significant strengthening of all nuclear power plants' defenses, he believes. Such reviews will continue "with no magic end date," he said. -- RDS Richard D. Smyser is founding editor of The Oak Ridger and can be reached by e-mail at rdsandmps@aol.com [rdsandmps@aol.com] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 11 Austria: Haider's stance on Czech nuclear plant threatens coalition Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Kate Connolly Thursday January 24, 2002 The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk] Austria's coalition government appeared to be on the verge of collapse last night because of a row about a nuclear power station in the Czech Republic and the enlargement of the European Union. The far-right Freedom party, the coalition's junior partner, has broken with the conservative People's party by calling for Austria to veto Czech membership to the EU unless the Temelin nuclear power station in southern Bohemia is closed. More than 915,000 Austrians -a sixth of the electorate - voted in favour of Jörg Haider's proposal in a referendum this week. His party is oppposed to EU enlargement. Yesterday Mr Haider, the FP's de facto leader and governor of the southern province of Carinthia, said early elections should be expected "I expect it will ultimately come to that," he told Austrian radio, predicting that they would be held in the spring. Wolfgang Schüssel, leader of the People's party and chancellor of Austria, tried to steer voters away from supporting the petition, arguing that it was politically driven rather than motivated by concern about safety or the environment. He said yesterday that the coalition would not work any more if the FP continued to go against government policy on EU enlargement. But he added: "Nobody wants new elections." The Soviet-era power plant, which lies 30 miles from the Austrian border, has long been a thorn in the side of relations between Austria and the Czech Republic. Environmentalists in nuclear-free Austria argue that it is unsafe and has suffered a series of mechanical problems. The Czechs insist that it is safe and has been fitted with a western-standard control system. A full-scale diplomatic row has sprung from a verbal spat between Mr Haider and the Czech prime minister, Milos Zeman, a social democrat: Mr Haider called Mr Zeman a "post-communist" and the Czech leader responded with "pro-Nazi politician" and "political Chernobyl". Yesterday a spokesman said the the German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, would travel to Prague next month to discuss with Mr Zeman an issue which has brought relations between the neighbouring countries to their lowest point for years. Commentators say the dispute has increased Mr Haider's popularity. In an interview with a German newspaper he said he would welcome the chance to be chancellor, "if the people wished it". Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 12 Urenco Responds to U.S. Anti-Dumping Decision U.S. Newswire 22 Jan 15:40 Urenco Responds to U.S. Anti-Dumping Decision & Countervailing Duty for Uranium Imports; Says It Has Sought To Compete Fairly To: National Desk Contact: Urenco, 202-337-6644 MARLOW, England, Jan. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- As a result of the decision announced by the U.S. International Trade Commission this afternoon, Urenco's imports of low-enriched uranium into the U.S. from Germany, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom will be subject to a 2.23 percent countervailing duty, which Urenco expects will terminate as of the end of 2002. Urenco will review the Commission's decision, and is considering whether to lodge an appeal in the Court of International Trade. In December 2001, the U.S. Commerce Department rejected the claims of USEC, Urenco's sole U.S.-based competitor, that an anti-dumping duty should be imposed on Urenco's imports. Commenting on the Commission's decision, Klaus Messer, chief executive of Urenco, said, "Urenco has responded to the needs of U.S. customers for enrichment services which cannot be met by USEC. We will continue to do so." He added: "We do not agree with the CV duty as determined by the Commerce Department in December and certainly do not accept that long-past subsidies leading to a countervailing duty of only 2.23 percent for the current year could be regarded as causing or threatening material injury to USEC. The troubles of USEC are of its own making." For earlier press releases and briefing notes on this issue, visit Urenco's Web site at http://www.urenco.com [http://www.urenco.com] . Copyright 2002, U.S. Newswire ***************************************************************** 13 Austria in Crisis Over Czech Plant Las Vegas SUN January 23, 2002 VIENNA, Austria (AP) - It's a public safety slogan plastered on billboards across Austria: "Yes to life - no to Temelin!" The far-right Freedom Party, which put up the signs, insists it's simply trying to pressure the neighboring Czech Republic to shut down the trouble-plagued Temelin nuclear power plant just over the border. Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel and other moderate politicians contend the campaign is a thinly masked, xenophobic crusade to keep the Czechs out of the European Union. On Wednesday, the escalating dispute threw Austria's fragile coalition government into its worst crisis in two years, with the Freedom Party calling for new elections and Schuessel's administration scrambling to avoid a government collapse. Emboldened by petitions for Temelin's closure that were signed by more than 900,000 Austrians - 15 percent of the alpine nation's population - former Freedom Party leader Joerg Haider said new parliamentary elections could be held as early as the spring. "We're prepared for new elections and we're not afraid," said Haider, the governor of Austria's southwestern Carinthia province. Schuessel, whose right-of-center People's Party shares power with the Freedom Party in an uneasy partnership, sought to deflect Haider's call to hold elections - now scheduled for September 2003 - a year and a half early. "Nobody wants new elections. We don't want a broken coalition," he said Wednesday. Schuessel and other mainstream politicians are particularly alarmed at the Freedom Party's insistence that if Czech officials refuse to close Temelin, the Austrian government should veto the country's eventual application to join the EU. The Czech Republic is considered a front-runner for EU membership and could join as early as 2004. Schuessel said he was fundamentally opposed to any effort to block EU enlargement. Across Europe, commentators expressed alarm at the deepening standoff. "A time bomb is ticking beneath the Austrian government," Italy's Corriere della Sera newspaper warned Wednesday. The anti-foreigner Freedom Party has gained influence in Austria by exploiting fears that hordes of jobless immigrants will pour into the country if the EU is expanded. It won 27 percent of the vote in the last parliamentary elections in 1999. Within weeks, the EU slapped diplomatic sanctions on the Austrian government because of the party's anti-Europe rhetoric. Those sanctions were lifted seven months later, in September 2000. Mainstream parties had urged Austrians not to sign the Freedom Party's nonbinding petition, which they saw as a smokescreen inspired more by anti-EU sentiment than by any genuine environmental or safety concerns. Temelin has been taken off-line repeatedly for a wide range of technical troubles, leading to fears that a Chernobyl-style reactor meltdown would endanger Austria, which lies just 30 miles to the south. Austria has no nuclear power plants. Czech officials, irritated at the Austrians for what they see as an intrusion into a domestic matter, insist the plant is safe. "The sooner the Austrians get rid of Mr. Haider and his post-fascist party, the better," Czech Prime Minister Milos Zeman said last week. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 14 NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards To Meet February 7 - 9 in Rockville, Maryland NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 9 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] Public Affairs Web Site No. 02-009 January 24, 2002 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) has scheduled a meeting on February 7-9 in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss, among other issues, the NRC safety research program, the pressurized thermal shock technical bases re-evaluation project, and NRC's risk-informed regulation implementation plan. The meeting, which is open to the public, will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency's Two White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. It will begin at 8:30 a.m. each day. A complete agenda is attached. For additional information or schedule changes, contact Dr. Sher Bahadur at 301-415-0138. ACRS AGENDA THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 7, CONFERENCE ROOM 2B3, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 8:30- 8:35 A.M. Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open) Opening statement Items of current interest Priorities for preparation of ACRS reports 8:35- 9:45 A.M. Risk-Informed Regulation Implementation Plan (Open) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding update to risk-informed regulation implementation plan. 9:45- 10:00 A.M. ***BREAK*** 10:00- 12:00 Noon Meeting with the EDO and the Office Directors of NRR, NMSS, RES Remarks by the ACRS Chairman Discussions with the NRC Executive Director for Operations (EDO), Directors of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Office Of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES), and Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) on items of mutual interest. Members of the ACNW will participate in this discussion. 12:00- 1:00 P.M. ***LUNCH*** 1:00- 2:30 P.M. Proposed Final Revision to Regulatory Guide 1.174 and SRP Chapter 19 (Open) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the proposed final revision to Regulatory Guide 1.174 and associated Standard Review Plan (SRP) Chapter 19 to address the use of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) in license amendment reviews and plans to develop guidance related to PRA quality, including possible endorsement of industrial standards proposed by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and American Nuclear Society. Representatives of the nuclear industry may provide their views, as appropriate. 2:30- 2:50 P.M. ***BREAK*** 2:50- 4:50 P.M. PTS Technical Bases Reevaluation Project (Open) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the status of the Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS) Technical Bases Reevaluation Project, including initial results of the Oconee Unit 1 reactor pressure vessel failure frequency calculated by using the Fatigue Assessment of Vessels - Oak Ridge (FAVOR) code, and the associated models, inputs, and assumptions used in this code. Representatives of the nuclear industry may provide their views, as appropriate. 4:50- 5:10 P.M. ***BREAK*** 5:10- 7:00 P.M. Proposed ACRS Reports (Open) Safety Research Program Proposed Final Revision to Regulator Guide 1.174 and associated SRP Chapter 19 PTS Technical Bases Reevaluation Project Risk-Informed Regulation Implementation Plan FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 8 8:30- 8:35 A.M. Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open) 8:35- 9:00 A.M. Subcommittee Report (Open) Report by the Chairman of the Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee on matters discussed at the January 16-18, 2002 meeting. 9:00- 10:00 A.M. Future ACRS Activities/Report-Planning & Procedures Subcommittee (Open) Discussion of the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future ACRS meetings. Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to the conduct of ACRS business, and organizational and personnel matters relating to the ACRS. 10:00- 10:15 A.M. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Open) Discussion of the responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to comments and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports and letters. 10:15- 10:35 A.M. ***BREAK*** 10:35- 12:00 Noon Follow-up Items Resulting from January 24-26 ACRS Retreat (Open) Remarks by the ACRS Chairman Discussion of the follow-up items resulting from the ACRS retreat on January 24-26, 2002, assignments, and schedule for closure of these items. 12:00- 3:00 P.M. ***LUNCH AND EXTENDED BREAK*** 3:00- 7:00 P.M. Proposed ACRS Reports (Open) Discussion of proposed ACRS reports on: Proposed Final Revision to Regulatory Guide 1.174 and associated SRP Chapter 19 PTS Technical Bases Reevaluation Project Safety Research Program Risk-Informed Regulation Implementation Plan SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 9 8:30- 12:30 P.M. Proposed ACRS Reports (Open) Continue discussion of proposed ACRS reports 12:30- 1:00 P.M. Miscellaneous (Open) Discussion of matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and matters and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit. Note: Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total time allocated for a specific item. The remaining 50 percent of the time is reserved for discussion. Thirty-Five (35) copies of the presentation materials should be provided to the ACRS. ***************************************************************** 15 U.S.-Russia Uranium Crisis Set to Be Defused Monday, Jan. 21, 2002. Page 7 By Valeria Korchagina [korchagina@imedia.ru] Staff Writer A standoff between the Nuclear Power Ministry and a private U.S. company over Russian uranium supplies used to produce some 10 percent of America's electricity looks set to be resolved before deliveries are interrupted. The deliveries, part of the so-called "Megatons to Megawatts" program created in 1993 to purchase 500 tons of highly enriched uranium stripped from dismantled Soviet warheads, was put in doubt after the U.S. firm USEC Inc. demanded a 15 percent reduction from 2001 prices after the previous contract expired Dec. 31, the Los Angeles Times reported last week. Dmitry Kovchegin, an expert with the Center for Policy Studies in Russia, said the deal is "too important to fail for both sides, so an agreement should be reached." Fuel created from Russian uranium is used to run up to 50 percent of U.S. nuclear power stations, the equivalent of 10 percent of all electricity consumed in the United States, said Kovchegin. Since 1995, the deal has been worth some $500 million yearly, a major source of cash for the Nuclear Power Ministry. "The uranium deal is the only thing that stands between anarchy and stability in the Russian nuclear weapon complex," the Los Angeles Times cited Thomas Neff, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology physicist who first proposed the program in 1991, as saying. The Nuclear Power Ministry is responsible for safeguarding nuclear material at production and research facilities. The Russian side said an agreement is likely to be reached before the next shipment -- usually about 3 metric tons of blended-down, bomb-grade uranium -- is due to set sail in March. "We are still negotiating, and I am sure that the deal will be signed," said Nikolai Shingaryov, the head of the Nuclear Power Ministry's department for information policy. Shingaryov also said the ministry will be working only with USEC and will not divert sales to any other buyers as long as USEC remains the official U.S. government agent for Russian uranium. Kovchegin said speculation that Russia might be willing to unilaterally bypass current agreements are unfounded. "The nuclear fuel market is not the oil or gas market, it is strictly regulated and all deals have to be guaranteed by the International Atomic Energy Agency," he said. "Any deals on the side would simply bring more harm to Russia then any possible benefits." Behind the current stall could also be Russia's desire to achieve greater access to the North American market to sell low-enriched uranium, which is not a part of the Megatons for Megawatts program. Russia's access to the U.S. market was blocked following accusations of dumping after an earlier windfall from sales of natural mildly enriched uranium in the early 1990s. Russia could be trying to tie in the USEC deal to the trade limitations imposed by the U.S. government, a source close to Nuclear Power Ministry said. Ministry officials declined to comment. USEC spokesman Charles Yulish said that USEC is not related to the anti-dumping measures and thus is not a part of any possible negotiations on that matter. "[Both sides] have a mutual interest in continuing this important program, and after eight years of a successful business and working relationship, we are confident that the parties will reach agreement on new long-term financial terms for the Megatons to Megawatts contract," Yulish said by telephone. He also pointed out that the deal's importance is growing in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States and the ensuing global terrorist threat. Over the past seven years, the equivalent of nearly 5,600 nuclear warheads have been converted and used as fuel for nuclear power stations, Yulish said. [http://www.themoscowtimes.com ***************************************************************** 16 Concerns over Burma's nuclear plans BBC News | ASIA-PACIFIC | 24 January, 2002, International concerns have been raised over Burma's decision to build a nuclear reactor with help from Russia. The United States, Europe and China say Burma is not adhering to advice from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), on setting up a regulatory framework to ensure the safety of the nuclear plant. The European Commission said without the intervention of a independent regulatory body, operational and maintenance standards might not be sufficient to prevent radioactive leaks. The country's military government says the reactor is needed to produce Isotopes for the medical industry. A BBC science correspondent says Burma's partner, Russia, does not itself have a good safety record, with three of its reactors having been shut down because of malfunctions in the past week alone. From the newsroom of the BBC World Service ***************************************************************** 17 DOE announces go ahead on MOX Secretary Abraham Announces Administration Plan to Proceed with Plutonium Disposition &Reduce Proliferation Concerns Says Plan Will "Enhance National Security &Advance Nonproliferation Goals" energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: January 23, 2002 WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham announced today that the Department of Energy and the Bush Administration will dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus weapons grade plutonium by turning the material into mixed oxide fuel (MOX) for use in nuclear reactors. The decision follows an exhaustive Administration review of non-proliferation programs, including alternative technologies to dispose of surplus plutonium to meet the non-proliferation goals agreed to by the United States and Russia. "Today's announcement is central to enhancing our national security and advancing our nonproliferation goals," Secretary Abraham said. "This path forward is a workable, technologically possible, and affordable solution, that meets our commitments to environmental improvement, energy and national security, and the nuclear nonproliferation policies agreed to by the United States and Russia." In September 2000, the United States and Russia signed the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement committing each country to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium. The decision on plutonium disposition comes after a thorough reexamination of more than 40 disposition alternatives that considered costs, workable technologies, national defense requirements, and compliance with nuclear non-proliferation agreements directed by the Department in cooperation with the National Security Council and the Department of State. The program has been under review since early last year. Previously, the government endorsed a dual-track approach to dispose of the plutonium including turning some of the material into MOX reactor fuel and immobilizing the remaining plutonium in self-protecting radioactive glass logs for long-term storage. Eliminating immobilization from the disposition pathway saves nearly $2 billion in funding, decreases plutonium storage costs, and facilitates the closure of the Department's former Nuclear Weapons Complex sites. "There is an increased urgency to move forward with the elimination of surplus weapons grade material like plutonium," Abraham said. "Focusing on proven technologies to eliminate this material, reducing costs in the process, and keeping our commitment to national security and the clean-up of former weapons sites is the right path to follow," Abraham said, noting that European countries have used MOX fuel in their reactors for over 20 years. The MOX conversion process is expected to cost $3.8 billion over 20 years, including the construction of two new conversion facilities at the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site in South Carolina, including disassembly and fuel fabrication facilities. Construction of the facilities, set to begin in Fiscal Year 2004, will create on average 500 new jobs and operation of the facilities will result in approximately 800 new jobs. The Department of State and the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration will work with their counterparts in Russia to achieve the disposition of Russian surplus plutonium through the MOX process. Bilateral cooperation and inspections will ensure progress. Media Contact: Joe Davis, 202-586-4940 Release No. PR-02-007 ***************************************************************** 18 U.S. Moves Closer to MOX Nuclear Plants Environment News Service: By Cat Lazaroff WASHINGTON, DC, January 23, 2002 (ENS) - The Department of Energy has decided to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus, weapons grade plutonium by turning it into fuel for nuclear reactors. The move overturns a decision by the previous administration to use a portion of the plutonium as fuel, while permanently immobilizing the remainder in glass to prevent its potential use in nuclear weapons. [Kremlin] Former U.S. President Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin crafted an agreement in June 2000 for each country to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus weapons grade plutonium (Photo by David Scull, courtesy The White House) The controversial proposal is sure to bring a storm of criticism from anti-nuclear activists, who warn that the longer the plutonium remains in its current form, the more likely it is that terrorists could steal enough of the radioactive material to make a nuclear bomb. MOX fuel is a mixture of about three percent plutonium oxide with about 97 percent uranium oxide, which can be used in nuclear reactors to produce electricity. Such fuel is routinely used for power generation in Belgium, France, Germany and Switzerland. The decision to turn the plutonium into mixed oxide fuel (MOX) for nuclear reactors follows an "exhaustive" review of nuclear nonproliferation programs, the Energy Department (DOE) said today. "Today's announcement is central to enhancing our national security and advancing our nonproliferation goals," said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. "This path forward is a workable, technologically possible, and affordable solution, that meets our commitments to environmental improvement, energy and national security, and the nuclear nonproliferation policies agreed to by the United States and Russia." In September 2000, the United States and Russia signed the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement, committing each country to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium. The agreement did not specify how the nations were to eliminate their plutonium stockpiles, and both countries have been studying the possibility of using the material as fuel. [press] A MOX pellet press at the Melox facility in Marcoule, France (Photo courtesy Cogema) Under the Clinton administration, the U.S. endorsed a dual track approach to dispose of the plutonium, including turning some of the material into MOX reactor fuel and immobilizing the remaining plutonium in radioactive glass logs for long term storage. Today, the DOE announced that eliminating the immobilization option will save the U.S. almost $2 billion, decrease plutonium storage costs, and hasten the closure of the agency's former nuclear weapons complex sites. "There is an increased urgency to move forward with the elimination of surplus weapons grade material like plutonium," Abraham said. "Focusing on proven technologies to eliminate this material, reducing costs in the process, and keeping our commitment to national security and the clean up of former weapons sites is the right path to follow," Abraham added, noting that European countries have used MOX fuel in their reactors for over 20 years. But the track record of European MOX production has been spotty at best, marred by allegations of data falsification and hints of environmental catastrophe. [entrance] The entrance to Cogema's MOX fuel fabrication plant at Cadarache (Photo courtesy Commissariat l'Énergie Atomique) France's MOX plant in Cadarache, run by nuclear firm Cogema, is under increasing pressure to shut down since a study by France's nuclear safety institute showed that the plant is at risk of serious damage from a major earthquake. The plant has also been plagued by allegations of gaps in its safety records. The United Kingdom's (UK) Sellafield MOX plant in Cumbria began incorporating plutonium just last month, five years after the plant was finished. Operator British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. (BNFL) fought an increasingly bitter battle to win operating approval since its commercial reputation was savaged in 1999 by a data falsification scandal related to the size of MOX pellets it produced. Ireland claims the Sellafield plant will lead to an unacceptable increase in radioactive discharges into the Irish Sea as well as posing security risks. It also argues, as do British environmental groups, that the UK government has bent European Union law to approve the plant. Bryony Worthington, energy campaigner at Friends of the Earth, has called MOX fuel "unpopular, unsafe and uneconomic." The Nuclear Control Institute (NCI), a Washington DC based nonproliferation group, released a study in 1999 which concluded that using MOX fuel in a nuclear power plant raises the cancer risks associated with containment failure or core meltdown accidents at such plants. More deaths would result because the quantities of plutonium and other highly radiotoxic elements in the cores of MOX fueled plants are significantly greater than in plants fueled only with conventional low enriched uranium, the NCI study says. [Sellafield] Sellafield Nuclear Plant on the Cumbrian coast of the Irish Sea. There are 3,500 radiation sources on the site kept in 171 special buildings. (Photo courtesy [http://www.bnfl.com/website.nsf/index.htm] ) Today, NCI Executive Director Tom Clements said the DOE's plan to rely on the MOX fuel option for plutonium disposal "runs headlong into a minefield of legal and economic hurdles, as well as posing safety and security risks." "The Bush Administration has summarily rejected the cheapest, safest and most secure option - the 'immobilization' approach of mixing plutonium with highly radioactive waste for direct, final disposal," said Clements. "Over eight years of DOE research documenting the feasibility and cost effectiveness of immobilization has been thrown out the window in deference to pro-plutonium forces in the nuclear industry and bureaucracy. This decision was formulated behind closed doors and is a full reversal of earlier DOE policy on plutonium disposition, a policy developed through an open public process." The approach is inconsistent with the DOE's January 2000 Record of Decision on plutonium disposition, and thus faces major hurdles under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the NCI said. "DOE's reversal also complicates efforts to meet deadlines specified in the September 2000 U.S.-Russian plutonium disposition agreement," Clements added. "The resulting lengthy delays will require indefinite storage of plutonium at the Savannah River Site in a facility not designed for secure, long term plutonium storage." Federal budget legislation bars constructing and operating a plutonium MOX fuel fabrication plant in the U.S. if Russia does not also construct and operate a MOX plant, Clements noted. The DOE said today that the Departments of State and Energy will work with their counterparts in Russia to achieve the disposition of Russian surplus plutonium through the MOX process. But "Russia's plutonium disposition program is going nowhere," Clements pointed out. "The Russian government cannot begin to shoulder the enormous costs involved, and despite years of fund raising efforts by DOE, Western governments have proven unwilling to foot the bill." [McGuire] The McGuire Nuclear Power Plant in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is one of two that would be converted to burn MOX fuel (Photo courtesy NRC) Numerous hurdles remain to securing licenses for the various aspects of the MOX program. Opposition by public interest groups has led to the scheduling of public hearings by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for October 2002. The groups also plan to challenge the license amendment required for use of MOX in Duke Power's Catawba and McGuire reactors. NCI also questioned the DOE's projected costs for the MOX project. The agency said today that the MOX conversion process is expected to cost $3.8 billion over 20 years, including the construction of two new conversion facilities at the Savannah River Site, including disassembly and fuel fabrication facilities. Last year, the DOE estimated that the MOX disposition program would cost $4.6 billion, with cost of the "dual track" program at $6.6 billion. Given that almost $700 million has already been sunk into the program, only $3 billion is left for remaining development, construction and operational costs, a figure which Clements called "pure fantasy." "DOE must explain to Congress and the public why they anticipate that it will now cost about 20 percent less to manufacture about 25 percent more MOX," Clements insisted. "After the Enron scandal, the American economy has already experienced enough 'stupid accounting tricks' for one year." More information on plutonium disposition and the risks of MOX fuel are available on the NCI website at: [http://www.nci.org/nci-wpu.htm] © Environment News Service (ENS) 2001. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 19 Ruling lets U.S. levy tariff on nuclear fuel Herald-Leader Online | Kentucky.com | Published Wednesday, January 23, 2002, in the Herald-Leader ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON -- The International Trade Commission ruled yesterday that the only U.S. producer of low-enriched uranium, a process done in Kentucky, is threatened by the trade practices of its European competitors. The unanimous ruling means the Department of Commerce can impose duties of about 32 percent on nuclear fuel produced by Eurodif of France, and 2 percent on Urenco, a European conglomerate. The American company, USEC Inc. of Bethesda, Md., and its two European competitors supply fuel to all the nation's commercial nuclear power plants. USEC is a former government enterprise that was spun off in 1998 in a $1.9 billion stock deal. It enriches uranium at a plant in Paducah. The ruling is expected to keep the price of nuclear fuel from dipping as low as it was before USEC filed the trade case. It wraps up a yearlong investigation by the government. ``The U.S. government's decision will help ensure that the U.S. enrichment market remains open for strong, healthy competition,'' USEC President and CEO William Timbers said in a statement. ``Obviously we are disappointed. We think the decision is wrong,'' said Gary Fox, executive vice president of the U.S. arm of Cogema Inc., the majority owner of Eurodif. ``We do believe that the duty that was assessed on us still is not justified,'' said Maurice Lenders, a managing director at Urenco. All content © 1999, 2000, 2001 Kentucky Connect and the Lexington Herald-Leader ***************************************************************** 20 Outdated Price-Anderson Act Affords Inadequate Coverage in the Event of a Nuclear Accident; Taxpayers Liable for Billions Public Citizen Jan. 23, 2002 Senate Committee Considers Act Reauthorization; Would Apply to New Nuclear Plants, But Existing Ones Would Be Still Be Covered WASHINGTON, D.C. –The Senate should not reauthorize legislation to limit the liability of nuclear operators in the event of an accident, Public Citizen said today following a hearing by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. The Price-Anderson Act leaves the public unprotected and the nuclear industry unaccountable in the event of a serious accident. "Why should the nuclear industry be let off the hook for the risks they impose on the public?" asked Lisa Gue, policy analyst for Public Citizen’s Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "If the proposed new generation of nuclear power plants cannot be fully insured, they should not be built." Witnesses at today’s hearing included former Nuclear Regulatory Commission member Peter Bradford, attorney Dan Guttman and celebrity activist Christie Brinkley, who raised concerns about Price-Anderson reauthorization. The Price-Anderson Act was originally passed in 1957 as a temporary measure to help the nascent nuclear power industry get off the ground by providing government-backed indemnification in the event of accidents. By artificially limiting the liability of nuclear operators, the act serves as an unprecedented subsidy to the nuclear industry through foregone insurance premiums. Under the act, nuclear power plants must buy $200 million worth of primary insurance. A second level of retrospective premiums capped at $88 million per reactor (or approximately $9.4 billion industry-wide) would be assessed in the event of an accident. However, a nuclear accident could cost as much as $500 billion, according to government estimates. Without congressional action, the Price-Anderson Act will expire on Aug. 1, 2002, although existing nuclear power plants would continue to be covered under a grandfather clause. Led by pro-nuclear members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the House of Representatives passed legislation last November to extend the Price-Anderson Act for another 15 years. Of particular concern, in light of the recent Enron collapse, is the questionable financial solvency of nuclear operators in the deregulated energy market. "Not only are the levels of coverage afforded under the Price-Anderson Act grossly inadequate, but it is uncertain whether these limited obligations could be met by nuclear operators in the event of an accident," Gue said. "Congress should allow this outdated legislation to expire." ### ***************************************************************** 21 Plutonium Conversion: Set Under Arms Pact WASHINGTON IN BRIEF (washingtonpost.com) Thursday, January 24, 2002; Page A05 Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham announced yesterday that the Bush administration will go ahead with a multibillion-dollar program to dispose of 34 metric tons of plutonium taken from dismantled U.S. nuclear weapons under an agreement that calls for Russia to get rid of a similar amount. The program, originally agreed to as a nonproliferation step in September 2000 during the Clinton administration, had been held up for more than a year while the Bush National Security Council staff reviewed its growing costs and other issues. Abraham said all the surplus weapons-grade plutonium in the program would be converted to a mixed-oxide fuel (MOX) and used in nuclear reactors. The MOX approach has been attacked by some nonproliferation groups that say it encourages the production of additional plutonium as fuel for nuclear power reactors. The Clinton administration adopted a second approach for two metric tons of the surplus plutonium that would involve immobilizing the radioactive material in protective glass logs for long-term storage. Abraham's decision eliminated that approach at a savings of $2 billion, the Energy Department said. Overall, the proposed plan will cost $3.8 billion over 20 years, according to the department. "There is an increased urgency to move forward with the elimination of surplus weapons-grade material like plutonium," Abraham said, adding that he had chosen "proven technologies to eliminate this material." Illustrating the controversy that will come over the decision, Tom Clement, executive director of the Nuclear Control Institute, said that public interest groups already are opposing Nuclear Regulatory Commission licenses for construction of two plants in South Carolina required for MOX conversion of the plutonium. © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 22 Vietnam solicits support for atomic energy [Asia Times Online] [http://www.asiatimes-chinese.com] January 24, 2002 atimes.com HANOI - Vietnam has called for greater support and cooperation from international organizations and governments in the development of a domestic atomic-energy program. The Industry Ministry and Electricity of Vietnam (EVN) have been directed to carry out a pre-feasibility study with a view to starting construction of a nuclear power plant by 2020. Atomic energy would be crucial to meeting Vietnam's energy demands in the coming century, particularly as the number of coal, oil and hydropower options begins to diminish. Studies on atomic energy carried out in the 1990s claimed Vietnam would need its first nuclear power plant to begin operating in 2017. The pre-feasibility study has already indicated that Vietnam has the materials and locations to make the project work. The study suggested that by harnessing Japanese technology, electricity could be produced for 3.4-4.7 US cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh). But many objections have been raised to the plan, with experts citing concerns over safety, technology, management, the disposal of radioactive waste, production costs, local industry capacity, and public opinion. Therefore, a new and more measured pre-feasibility study is to be undertaken, although there is a lack of skilled and experienced scientists to carry it out. To complete the feasibility study, Vietnam is looking for international assistance, and wants to recruit experienced atomic-energy specialists. Speaking at the third Vietnam-Japan Dialogue on Energy Cooperation, Deputy Industry Minister Hoang Trung Hai said that cooperation efforts should also include personnel training and skills transfer, allowing Vietnamese staff to get experience in this area. Besides international help for the pre-feasibility and feasibility studies, Vietnam also needs assistance in building a legal and regulatory framework on nuclear power. The deputy minister said Vietnam could also use assistance in evaluating public attitudes to nuclear energy, developing research capabilities, and tracking down financial support for the project. (Asia Pulse) ***************************************************************** 23 Yankee Board Accepts Funds For Fuel ctnow.com: CONNECTICUT $13 Million Offered For Nuclear Storage January 24, 2002 Associated Press HADDAM -- Town selectmen on Wednesday voted 2-1 to accept $13 million from the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co. in return for allowing the company to store spent nuclear fuel three-quarters of a mile from its decommissioned nuclear power plant. The agreement also puts an end to litigation filed by Connecticut Yankee that charged the town with illegally preventing it from storing its spent nuclear fuel at the best possible site on its property. The company and the town were trying to reach a settlement before a Feb. 6 deadline, after which a federal court would have decided the issue. "We're making the best of a bad situation and doing what's pragmatically in our best interests," Selectman Keith Ainsworth said. The dry cask storage complex is to be situated on a 15-acre residentially zoned parcel less than a mile from the nuclear plant. The agreement calls for Haddam to receive an $800,000 down payment for allowing the facility to be built in that area and 10 years of annual minimum payments of at least $1 million that are to increase 2.5 percent each year. Connecticut Yankee also has made assurances that only its own waste would be stored at the proposed site, after residents expressed concern that the facility would become a national nuclear dumping ground. Connecticut Yankee also would routinely monitor water runoff and the air for radiation. The company has agreed to have an extra transportable cask on site should a problem be detected. ctnow.com is Copyright © 2002 by The Hartford Courant ***************************************************************** 24 Russia: False alarm triggers nuclear reactor shutdown BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 24, 2002 Text of report by Russian news agency RIA Kursk, 24 January, correspondent Valeriy Grigoryev: The fourth power unit of the Kursk nuclear power plant reached its project capacity on Thursday [24 January] after a four-day shutdown. It was stopped automatically by the emergency control system after one of the indicators reported an increase of pressure in the reactor. A shutdown command was generated due to a malfunction of the indicator, the Kursk nuclear power plant administration told RIA. Naturally, there was no increase of radiation level or outbreak of radioactive substance into the atmosphere, the administration said. The managers said that previously 40 minutes had been given to plant's personnel to eliminate an exceptional situation [before shutting down a reactor]. Now the shutdown occurs immediately as in the recent case. Source: RIA news agency, Moscow, in Russian 0758 gmt 24 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 25 NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: Reid challenges insurance program Thursday, January 24, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Law enacted in '50s for young industry criticized by some as crutch By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., on Wednesday challenged a government-backed insurance program that could leave taxpayers liable to pay claims from catastrophic accidents at nuclear power plants. Reid said it may be time for fundamental changes in the Price-Anderson Act, enacted in 1957 as a safety net for the then-fledgling nuclear power industry but now criticized by some as a crutch. The industry defends the insurance system as crucial to its workings. "The generation and selling of electricity are very different today than 50 years ago," Reid said at a hearing of the Senate's nuclear safety subcommittee. "A new electricity market demands a new Price-Anderson system." Reid, the panel's chairman, invited testimony from government and industry witnesses, and actor-model Christie Brinkley, who sits on the board of Standing for Truth About Radiation, an anti-nuclear group on Long Island, N.Y. Brinkley said as a mother of three living in the vicinity of three nuclear reactor stations, she is concerned about safety, and beyond that the ability of the nuclear industry to come up with adequate funds to pay claims in the event of a catastrophic accident. "This discussion today is really about an industry owning up to its responsibilities," Brinkley said. Reid praised her testimony "because you speak for a lot of people." Reid said afterwards he plans to hold more hearings on the Price-Anderson Act before deciding on a course of action this year. The current law expires in August. If the law expires, coverage would continue for 103 commercial nuclear plants now operating, but government backing would not be available for new facilities. Nevadans have taken interest in the act because it also covers accidents at government nuclear facilities, including the radioactive waste repository under consideration for Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Another controversial part of the law indemnifies government contractors involved in nuclear accidents, even if they are found to be negligent. It would cover contract operators of a nuclear waste repository and transportation firms involved in shipping radioactive materials to a repository. Price-Anderson requires nuclear plant operators to buy $200 million in primary insurance per reactor, plus secondary insurance up to $88 million per reactor that is put into an industry pool. The pool currently totals $9.5 billion and is to cover potential accidents at commercial plants and government nuclear weapons facilities. The law requires Congress to step in, and presumably tap taxpayer funds, to cover damages above $9.5 billion. Reid said the private insurance pool may be too small, citing a 1986 General Accounting Office report stating costs of a nuclear accident could total "hundreds of billions depending on which way the wind is blowing." He also questioned why the government gets behind insurance for nuclear power when it doesn't extend the same treatment for other energy forms. "The nuclear power industry moved through adolescence and has not settled into a comfortable middle age," he said. "It no longer needs the federal government to nurture it." Peter Bradford, an energy lecturer at Yale University and a former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Price-Anderson is "anti-competitive." As long as their accident liability is limited, companies have fewer incentives to explore safer designs, he said. "It provides a subsidy to nuclear power plants compared to other sources of electricity and renewables and even between nuclear power plant designs," Bradford said. New designs that might be inherently safer don't enjoy an advantage because all would be treated the same under the law, he said. Bradford suggested calculating the monetary value of Price-Anderson to the nuclear industry and then offering an equivalent amount to alternative fuels that are "in the startup phase," where nuclear power was 45 years ago when Price Anderson was established. Marvin Fertel, a senior vice president for the Nuclear Energy Institute, disputed the notion the nuclear industry enjoys a subsidy. Power companies, and by extension their ratepayers, bear the cost of insurance, he said. Fertel also argued no other energy provider is required to buy insurance as the nuclear power industry is. "Risks of dam failure and flooding at hydroelectric facilities are borne directly by the public, not the hydropower facilities," he said. At one point, Fertel was talking about nuclear plant workers being concerned about safety when Reid interrupted. "Doesn't Homer Simpson work in a nuclear plant?" he asked. "Homer Simpson works in Hollywood," Fertel responded. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 26 Big Rock needs 8 years to unload nuclear waste Traverse City Record-Eagle - News Story -- www.record-eagle.com January 20, 2002 - That's how long it will take to move 66 tons of fuel waste, official says Big Rock Point was the world's first high power-density boiling water reactor and was an important research site for the nuclear power industry. After 35 years in operation, the plant was shut down on August 29, 1997, making it the longest running nuclear plant in the nation. The American Nuclear Society has named Big Rock Point a Nuclear Historic Landmark because of its contributions to the nuclear and medical industries. By MICHELLE BARBERCHECK Special to the Record-Eagle CHARLEVOIX - Big Rock Point nuclear plant officials say that if President Bush designated a nuclear waste dump site today, it would still be eight years before they could unload their radioactive garbage. This spring, workers will begin the arduous task of storing and moving 132,300 pounds - roughly 66 tons - of nuclear fuel waste, according to Big Rock Point public affairs director Tim Petrosky. Petrosky said he is "cautiously optimistic" about Department of Energy secretary Spence Abraham's recommendation that President Bush declare a site at Yucca Mountain, Nev., as the nation's nuclear waste dump. Abraham's decision was met with sighs of relief from the nuclear power industry, which has been pushing for a permanent repository for more than 20 years. Tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste is accumulating at 70 sites in 31 states, and experts say the waste pile is growing by about 2,000 pounds a year. Abraham said he will tell President Bush that the Yucca Mountain site, located about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is a "scientifically sound and suitable" place to bury the estimated 77,000 tons of radioactive waste. If Bush supports the recommendation, Nevada residents will have 60 days to protest. Opponents fear that the president's endorsement would be impossible to overturn. "It's going to be a tough deal ... nothing has been easy on this thing," said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who for years has battled against the proposed Yucca Mountain site. There are no nuclear power plants in Nevada. For Big Rock Point, Abraham's recommendation signals a "a huge, key step" in satisfying the long-time dilemma of where to dispose of the plant's nuclear waste, Petrosky said. "It's been an agonizingly slow decision ... 20 years in coming," Petrosky said. During that time, states generating nuclear waste have been forced to pay hundreds of millions to store their radioactive garbage. Petrosky said it will cost Big Rock Point $58 million to store its nuclear waste until 2010. "That (figure) won't go up if the fuel leaves in 2010, but if it doesn't, the cost will go up. If Yucca Mountain had opened in 1998 like it was supposed to, we would be shipping the (spent) fuel out and not having to pay to store it," Petrosky said. Until the 2010 target disposal date, Petrosky said Big Rock Point's radioactive waste will be stored at a dry fuel storage containment pad on site. In May or June, plant employees will begin packing and storing 431 bundles of spent fuel and miscellaneous irradiated equipment and moving it to the dry fuel storage site. The site is about a half mile from the big, green containment sphere where the nuclear waste matter is stored. Petrosky said the dry storage site is a 75-by-99 steel-reinforced concrete pad that sits about three feet above ground. The pad is situated about halfway between Lake Michigan and U.S. 31 on the Big Rock Point premises. The structure is surrounded by earthen berms and reinforced security fences, he said. Petrosky said until then, the waste will remain where it's been for years - in a 20-by-30 pool called a spent fuel pool inside the containment sphere. When workers begin to pack the spent fuel, they will lower a transfer cask containing a stainless steel liner and storage baskets into the spent fuel pool, Petrosky explained. Spent nuclear fuel is a hard, pellet-size substance about the size of a fingernail. The pellets are packed in long rods. Bundles of the spent fuel rods will be loaded into the storage baskets and lowered into the stainless steel liner while underwater. The liner is later vacuum drained and the spent fuel is sealed into a 19-foot-tall, concrete "overpack" canister. Petrosky said Big Rock Point will have eight such canisters. When full, the combined weight of the canister and its contents would be about 165 tons. Some won't be filled to capacity. Seven of the canisters will be filled with spent nuclear fuel and the eighth with irradiated equipment, beams and racks, he said. It will take about a month to pack and move each canister to the dry fuel storage site a half mile away, he said. "It's an enormous amount of work. And of course whenever you deal with spent nuclear waste, you use extraordinary caution," he said. By the end of 2004, the dry fuel storage pad will be the only visible sign that Big Rock Point ever existed, Petrosky added. "We're on schedule to have the whole site back to green-field status, free for unrestricted use, by 2004. You will never know there was a nuclear plant there. The property will look pretty much the same as it did when the Indians were walking on it 200 years ago," said Petrosky. "We're very proud of the work we're doing," he said. Copyright © The Traverse City Record-Eagle ***************************************************************** 27 PPL to seek new nuclear license for Susquehanna Yahoo - Wednesday January 23, 2:53 pm Eastern Time NEW YORK, Jan 23 (Reuters) - PPL Susquehanna notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) it intends to seek renewal of its operating license for the Susquehanna nuclear plant in Berwick, Pennsylvania, the company said in a statement on Wednesday. If the NRC approves PPL's application, the plant's operating license would be extended by 20 years. The Susquehanna plant employs about 1,100 people and is the largest taxpayer in Luzerne County. The plant has two boiling water reactors, each with more than 1,100 megawatts (MW) of generating capacity. The current operating licenses will expire in July 2022 and March 2024 for Units 1 and 2, respectively, but those terms would be extended to 2042 and 2044 if the NRC approves PPL's application. Because the review process takes about two years, PPL said the NRC has requested plant owners to file early notification of their plans to apply. PPL's letter of intent to the federal agency states the company plans to file a license renewal application in 2005. License renewal requires proof the plant can operate safely and can manage maintenance issues related to aging equipment. A nuclear plant that has its license renewed can get a maximum 20-year extension on its operating license, during which time it will continue to be monitored by the NRC. Nuclear energy provides more than 30 percent of the electricity produced in Pennsylvania and about 20 percent nationwide. U.S. nuclear power plants initially were given a 40-year operating license. To date, 50 of the nation's 103 operating commercial nuclear reactors are committed to license renewal. Since April 1998, 22 units have submitted applications for license renewal, 14 of which are in the review process and eight of which have been approved. Another 28 units have notified the NRC of their intent to submit applications. Nuclear power accounts for roughly 20 percent of PPL's nearly 10,000 MW generation business. The Susquehanna plant is operated and 90 percent owned by PPL Susquehanna LLC, a subsidiary of PPL Corp. (NYSE: [http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=ppl&d=t] - news). Allegheny Electric Co-op Inc. owns the remaining 10 percent. Unit 1 began commercial operations in June 1983, and Unit 2 joined it in February 1985. PPL Corp., of Allentown, Pa., controls more than 10,000 MW of generating capacity in the United States, markets energy in select U.S. states and Canada, and delivers electricity to nearly 6 million customers in Pennsylvania, the United Kingdom and Latin America. Copyright © 2002 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy ***************************************************************** 28 VA Creates Gulf War Advisory Committee Panel includes NGWRC's Robinson and other Gulf War veteran supporters January 23, 2002 WASHINGTON – Secretary of Veterans Affairs Anthony J. Principi today announced a new advisory committee that will help the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) oversee its research into the medical problems of Gulf War veterans. "Gulf War veterans have waited too long for answers to many of their questions," Principi said. "This committee, composed of medical experts and veterans, will focus on the research that we hope will improve the health of ill Gulf War veterans." The 12-member Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses was established by Congress to advise the VA secretary on proposed research studies. The panel must submit an annual report on the status and results of government research during the previous year and on research priorities identified by the committee. The group's charter, established by Section 104 of Public Law 105-368, which was signed Nov. 11, 1998, says the panel shall "provide advice and make recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on proposed research studies, research plans and research strategies relating to the health consequences of military service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War." Although the panel will not conduct research, its charter instructs the committee to review "all relevant research, investigations, and processes" done in the past to assess methods, results and implications for future research. The committee will also review proposed federal research plans, initiatives, procurements, grant programs and other activities regarding Gulf War-associated illnesses. The committee will be led by James H. Binns Jr., a Vietnam veteran, former principal deputy assistant secretary of defense, and chairman of the board of Parallel Design, Inc., of Tempe, Arizona, acquired by General Electric in December 2000. The advisory committee will be assisted by an expert panel of scientists and subject matter authorities who will add additional expertise, functioning as an auxiliary that reviews committee findings and provides expert guidance to the committee and the Secretary. # # # Membership of Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses And Expert Panel Advisory Committee: · James H. Binns Jr., Chairman, · Dr. Nicola Cherry, Professor of Public Health Sciences at the University of Alberta, · Dr. Beatrice Golomb, assistant professor of medicine at the University of California at San Diego, · Dr. Robert Haley, chief of the epidemiology division of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, · Marguerite Knox, nurse practitioner, Hopkins, S.C., · Dr. William J. Meggs, chief of the division of toxicology of the East Carolina University School of Medicine, · Jack Melling, Ph.D., director of the Karl Landsteiner Institute for Vaccine Development in Vienna, Austria, · Dr. Pierre Pellier, vice president, neurosciences, global medical affairs, with GlaxoSmithKline, Inc., · Lea Steele, Ph.D., director, Kansas Persian Gulf War Veterans Health Initiative and former epidemiologist with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, · Joel C. Graves, an Army Gulf War veteran from Washington state, · Stephen L. Robinson, executive director of the National Gulf War Resources Center; Silver Spring, Md., · Steve Smithson, assistant director of the Gulf War Task Force for the American Legion, Indianapolis, Ind. The Expert Panel · Dr. Ira B. Black, chairman, department of neuroscience and cell biology at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, N.J., · Dr. Joseph T. Coyle, Eben S. Draper professor of psychiatry and neuroscience, Harvard Medical School, Belmont, Mass., · Dr. Floyd E. Bloom, chair, department of neuropharmacology, Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, Calif., · Dr. Eugene Johnson, professor, department of neurology, Washington University, St. Louis, Mo., · Dr. Marsel Mesulam, director, The Cognitative Neurology and Alzheimer's Disease Center, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, · James J. Tuite, III, chief operating officer, Chronix Biomedical, Inc., Benicia, Calif., · Dr. Bailus Walker, Jr., professor of environmental and occupational medicine, Howard University, Washington, D.C. POSTED TO NGWRC WEB Wed Jan 23 13:00:47 2002 Send mail to hq@ngwrc.org with questions or comments about this web site. For technical questions, contact support@ngwrc.org Webmaster: Charles Sheehan-Miles Copyright © 1995-2002 National Gulf War Resource Center, Inc. Last modified: January 16, 2002for More Information Contact: National Gulf War Resource Center, Inc. 8605 Cameron Street, Suite 400 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Tel: 800-882-1316 x 112 Internet: hq@ngwrc.org Executive Director Steve Robinson: srobinson@ngwrc.org President Mike Woods: mwoods@ngwrc.org Send mail to hq@ngwrc.org with questions or comments about this web site. For technical questions, contact support@ngwrc.org Webmaster: Charles Sheehan-Miles Copyright © 1995-2002 National Gulf War Resource Center, Inc. Last modified: January 23, 2002for More Information Contact: National Gulf War Resource Center, Inc. 8605 Cameron Street, Suite 400 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Tel: 800-882-1316 x 112 Internet: hq@ngwrc.org Executive Director Steve Robinson: srobinson@ngwrc.org President Mike Woods: mwoods@ngwrc.org ***************************************************************** 29 Fuel rods seized from criminals in Belarus may have come from Chernobyl BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 24, 2002 Text of report in English by Russian news agency Interfax Minsk, 24 January: A probe has been launched at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant following the arrest of a criminal group attempting to sell 1.5 kg of uranium in Belarus earlier this month. Spokesman for Chernobyl Stanislav Shestelo has told journalists that Minsk does not rule out that the uranium was stolen from the plant. He said such probes are conducted regularly. However, this time the inventory of radioactive materials is being taken ahead of schedule due to the detention of the six people in Belarus. "The uranium rods priced at 250,000 dollars by the traders are identical to those used in Chernobyl," Shestelo said. However, similar rods are employed at the plants in Ignalina, Lithuania, and Smolensk, Russia. The Chernobyl management is convinced that the uranium could not have been stolen from the facility because it is currently guarded by the IAEA, as well as its own security. However, Shestelo admitted that radioactive materials were stolen from Chernobyl in the early 1990s and the rods were never found. Therefore the station does not rule out the probability that those rods surfaced in Minsk. Source: Interfax news agency, Moscow, in English 0955 gmt 24 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 30 NZ: Brit court case helpful to exposed soldiers in 50's NZOOM - ONE News - National A High Court decision in Britain could prove helpful to the case being prepared by New Zealanders who were exposed to British nuclear fallout in the 1950s. A Palmerston North barrister representing the New Zealanders says the ruling removes a potential line of defence for the British authorities. In the London decision, a 1947 law barring soldiers from suing the defence forces was ruled incompatible with human rights legislation guaranteeing people the right to have their day in court. Although Britain's Ministry of Defence is appealing the verdict, it is being seen as making it easier for British ex-servicemen to sue. Gordon Paine represents New Zealand personnel exposed to radio active fallout near Christmas Island. He says the argument to be used in his case differs from the British ex-soldiers' strategy. But he says the London decision will prevent the British authorities from using the 1947 law to block the New Zealand claim as well as any British ones they might face. Many veterans allege they developed diseases like cancer after the nuclear testing was finished. Published on Jan 24, 2002 ONE News sourced from TVNZ, RNZ, Reuters and ['Bridge'] ***************************************************************** 31 AU: Charges laid over radioactive material news.com.au - 24 January 2002 CRATES being removed from the Morley St, Toowong, home. Simon Lomax and Emma Chalmers A BRISBANE university yesterday admitted it could not account for all its radioactive material after police charged one of its staff with stealing leftover chemicals and storing them at his home. Queensland University of Technology registrar Ken Baumber yesterday announced a review of procedures for disposing of dangerous chemicals. Mr Baumber also said a laboratory technician would be suspended from duty until the outcome of an internal investigation was concluded. The technician, 44, was charged yesterday with two counts of stealing and one count of possessing radioactive material. Mr Baumber said the man had worked at QUT since 1988. When asked if the university knew where all its radioactive materials were located, Mr Baumber answered: "We know where most of them are." On Tuesday afternoon a state of emergency was declared around the technician's Toowong home after a massive stockpile of chemicals was allegedly found inside the premises. Police were still working to identify the substances yesterday but it is believed a range of radioactive materials used during chemical experiments were allegedly found. It is further believed cyanide-based materials and large containers of chloroform were also allegedly found. Police yesterday continued their clean-up of the technician's Morley St home. The man's neighbours yesterday described the man as "a real hoarder who kept everything". Police yesterday refused to release the technician's name ahead of his first court appearance, which is scheduled for March 22 in Brisbane Magistrates' Court. Mr Baumber said QUT's internal auditor would investigate the matter "quickly and thoroughly". Australian IT [http://australianit.com.au] . ***************************************************************** 32 UK Court Clears Way For Nuclear Claim - Political News, Business News and Press Releases for New Zealand NewsRoom.co.nz Agency Story at 8:12am, 24th January 2002 New Zealand and Australian ex-servicemen could sue Britain for injuries suffered 50 years ago after a London high court judge ruled that a law barring legal action, infringes human rights. Mr Justice Keith ruled that the 1947 law - which prohibits legal claims by veterans against Britain's Ministry of Defence - clashes with the Human Rights Act, which guarantees the right to a fair hearing. The judge allowed a claim to go ahead by a former Royal Navy engineer who alleged he developed an asbestos-related disease during his service from 1955 to 1968. More than 500 New Zealander servicemen were involved in 21 nuclear explosions at Maralinga in South Australia and several Pacific islands from 1952 to 1958. © NewsRoom 2002 NewsRoom at wapnews.co.nz on your WAP phone! ***************************************************************** 33 Applicants vie for compensation The Hawk Eye Newspaper January 24, 2002 By Dennis J. Carroll The Hawk Eye Anna Hoover and her son-in-law Gary McMeins, both of Mount Pleasant, had signed in and were waiting for a Labor Department worker to explain whether she might qualify for a $150,000 compensation package for former nuclear weapons workers or their survivors. "My husband didn't tell me anything," Hoover said, referring to the heavy secrecy lid placed over the operations of the Atomic Energy Commission at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant. The AEC, from the late 1940s to the mid-1970s, assembled and in later years test-fired components of nuclear weapons at IAAP. Anna's husband, Earl, helped build the plant in the early '40s and then again worked on the nuclear production line and in the laundry area from 1969 to 1973, McMeins said. Earl Hoover died of prostate and bone cancer in 1991. "We just want to see if she qualifies," McMeins said of his mother-in-law. The two were among dozens of former Middletown workers or their survivors seen by Labor Department representatives at their "traveling resource center" at Pzazz Best Western resort over the past two days. Department case worker Susan Adkinsson of Oak Ridge, Tenn., said 86 were interviewed Tuesday and 49 by about 1 p.m. on Wednesday. The resource center will be interviewing again today until 7 p.m. No appointments are necessary. Six department workers from as far away as Idaho Falls sat with the workers helping them fill out the necessary forms to determine whether they qualify for the Department of Energy's compensation program for workers, or their survivors, who suffered medical problems related to their work with radioactive materials, beryllium or silica. Those who suffered from exposure to other materials were assisted with worker's compensation claims. Adkinsson said that since the program was signed into law by President Bush last year, more than 14,000 people nationwide have filed claims; 437 (mostly uranium miners) have received the lump sum payment or help with their medical bills. She said 749 claims have been given final approval, and 6,700 submitted for radiation "dose reconstruction" to determine wheth-er the amount of radiation they were exposed to could have caused workers' particular health problems. The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 Front Desk · 319-754-6824 FAX · 1-800-397-1708 Toll Free ***************************************************************** 34 EXPOSED: Nuclear DUMPING site has LEAKS Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:05:32 -0600 (CST) Excerpted below, see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1766000/1766365.stm UK Government documents show that waters off south-west England were used as a radioactive waste dump. They detail the dumping of civil and military waste between 1965 and the early 1980s. In one incident the crew of a dumping vessel were exposed to radiation. A local politician has asked the government whether it is monitoring the waste, and whether it can retrieve it. The documents, released by the Public Records Office, show the waste was dumped about 250 miles (400 km) west of Land's End in Cornwall. The site chosen was 2,000 metres deep, in international waters. But there is concern that some consignments may have ended up elsewhere. A Cornish MP, Andrew George, the Liberal Democrat member for St Ives, said some of the waste was high-level and included plutonium, which has a half-life of 24,100 years. He said the documents also showed one trip had had problems. Mr George said: "The archives show that there was at least one incident, in 1969, when a full flask cracked and contaminated the MV Topaz. "Its crew were exposed to radiation.. ...Thursday, 17 January, 2002, 17:20 GMT Nuclear dumping leak sparks concern Nuclear waste drums found by Greenpeace By Alex Kirby BBC News Online environment correspondent UK Government documents show that waters off south-west England were used as a radioactive waste dump. They detail the dumping of civil and military waste between 1965 and the early 1980s. In one incident the crew of a dumping vessel were exposed to radiation. A local politician has asked the government whether it is monitoring the waste, and whether it can retrieve it. The documents, released by the Public Records Office, show the waste was dumped about 250 miles (400 km) west of Land's End in Cornwall. The site chosen was 2,000 metres deep, in international waters. But there is concern that some consignments may have ended up elsewhere. All at sea A Cornish MP, Andrew George, the Liberal Democrat member for St Ives, said some of the waste was high-level and included plutonium, which has a half-life of 24,100 years. He said the documents also showed one trip had had problems. Nuclear fuel ship: Safe from attack? Mr George said: "The archives show that there was at least one incident, in 1969, when a full flask cracked and contaminated the MV Topaz. "Its crew were exposed to radiation. The archives also contain reports of vessels becoming lost due to navigation problems. "The planning was careful, but it appears that the dumping was sub-contracted to mariners with little experience in dumping such potentially dangerous substances. "Evidence recorded by Greenpeace in the Hurd Deep showed how quickly barrels can become corroded and disintegrate. ... Different world Another Liberal Democrat, Malcolm Bruce MP, said relying heavily on nuclear power in the future would be an unwise step for any government to take. He said: "Since 11 September the risk of terrorist attacks on nuclear installations must be put in a different order. "We have to recognise that we're in a new era. Perhaps you can protect a nuclear plant like Sellafield against attack, but if you're sending fuel shipments 12,000 miles across the world, the risk is unacceptable." ... Related Links: http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/contentlookup.cfm?SiteKeyParam=A&CFID=19993&CFTOKEN=3251852 ***************************************************************** 35 Haddam To Allow Nuclear Storage ctnow.com: CONNECTICUT 15-Acre Site Will Hold Spent Fuel January 24, 2002 By GARY LIBOW, Courant Staff Writer HADDAM -- The board of selectmen voted 2-1 Wednesday to allow the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co. to construct a spent nuclear fuel storage complex the size of a football field on residentially zoned land in Haddam Neck. It will be Connecticut's first community-sanctioned storage facility for spent nuclear waste. Republican Selectmen Keith Ainsworth and Phil Pessina supported the out-of-court settlement with Connecticut Yankee, granting permission to build the dry cask storage facility on a 15-acre site outside the footprint, or specific area, of the decommissioned nuclear power plant. First Selectman Tony Bondi, a Democrat, left the more than three-hour-long meeting without explaining why he voted against the pact. The town agreed in the early 1960s to permit Connecticut Yankee to operate within a specific area. The utility proposed siting the dry casks - steel-reinforced concrete enclosures containing radioactive waste - about 200 feet outside the plant's footprint. Connecticut Yankee filed a federal lawsuit charging the town with thwarting its rights to store its spent fuel anywhere on its 500-acre property. Ken Heider, a Connecticut Yankee vice president, said that the deal calls for the town to issue a building permit "very soon" to the company to commence construction of a $40 million outdoor storage facility near an old landfill and firing range to house the plant's radioactive nuclear fuel rods. He expects construction to take 10 months. Under the settlement, Connecticut Yankee has vowed that only its spent nuclear fuel can be stored at the site. The federal government, however, is not bound by the agreement and could decide to sanction storage of nuclear waste from outside sites. The pact stipulates that the town will receive an $800,000 cash payment from Connecticut Yankee, plus a decade of annual payments of at least $1 million as long as the company-owned spent nuclear fuel is stored at the facility. Those payments amount to several thousands dollars more than projected annual assessments of the property. Connecticut Yankee will also pay the town $1.4 million, or 10 percent of the sale price, should a firm purchase acreage to construct a gas-fired electric plant on a portion of the decommissioned plant's site. The utility was involved in talks with a global power company, but negotiations were suspended until the controversy with the town had been settled. Connecticut Yankee also has agreed to provide security at the fenced storage facility and install a vehicle barrier system. Extensive air and water monitoring will also take place to protect against leaks. Pessina said that the multimillion-dollar payments that Haddam will receive can be used for infrastructure enhancements needed to boost economic development. "I feel good on security," said Pessina, a Middletown police captain. "I feel good ... there's nothing else [outside nuclear waste] coming into this town." Ainsworth lambasted the federal government for failing to remove Connecticut Yankee's spent nuclear fuel years ago, as promised. "We are making the best of a bad situation," Ainsworth said. Ed Schwing, a resident, urged the selectmen to reject the settlement, saying that it might result in the shipment of outside nuclear waste into town. He voiced fear that sanctioning a storage facility on residential land sets a poor precedent. Cynthia Nicastro, another resident, told the selectmen that 380 residents have returned postcards opposing the deal. "It's really a shame we haven't had a referendum before the vote tonight," she said. ctnow.com is Copyright © 2002 by The Hartford Courant ***************************************************************** 36 Township to weigh in on landfill plan mcall.com - From The Morning Call Lower Saucon site must be set to handle radioactive waste. By Kevin Pentón Of The Morning Call January 24, 2002 Lower Saucon Township Council learned Wednesday it has until the end of February to give the state Department of Environmental Protection its opinion on a plan by IESI Corp. to test for radioactive waste at its landfill. The modified permit plans are tied to a request by IESI to deposit more waste daily on 46 additional acres at its Applebutter Road landfill. The DEP required IESI, as part of their expansion application, to discuss their response if radioactive material entered their facility, said Lorissa McNamara, a landfill consultant for the township. The DEP deemed IESI’s paperwork complete at the end of December and sent a letter to a Lower Saucon official explaining they had 60 days to respond, but the letter was not detected by the township until recently, said Layne Turner, the township’s manager. Turner must now locate a “certified health physicist” so the professional can assess IESI’s plans and report back to the township before the end of February, McNamara recommended to council. Items that typically tip off the machines at a landfill like IESI’s are hospital waste, smoke detectors and certain types of watches, said Sam Donato, the company’s state district manager. “People don’t go out and collect radioactive waste on a regular basis,” Donato said. IESI would put the detection machines at the scale where garbage trucks are weighed, Donato said. If alarms went off, the truck would be quarantined on site, and environmental officials would be called to the scene, Donato said. The machines are strong enough to detect a smoke detector in a garbage truck, something Councilman Joseph Colosi couldn’t believe. “A smoke detector is not going to be found through the walls of a truck,” Colosi said. “No way.” Council President Priscilla deLeon, who said she had worked more 20 years in the X-ray business, said all workers at the site should be physically protected from the detection machine by wearing protective devices called badges. Colosi disagreed, saying that was impractical. “You’re going to have all the people in the landfill wearing badges?” Colosi asked. In other business, council told representatives from Giant Food Stores Inc. that they are two steps away from a certificate of occupancy — the last measure needed to open the store. All they need is a final inspection from a township official and for the traffic lights in front of the store to be turned on. Giant recently shielded the lights on its property after neighbors complained they were too bright. Colosi and Councilman Glenn Kern said they were still too bright for motorists driving by the site at night. kevin.penton@mcall.com 610-861-3638 © 2002 THE MORNING CALL Inc. ***************************************************************** 37 Lawyer tells five-state compact chances of lawsuit win are good NOLA.com: Newflash Louisiana News By KELLY WIESE The Associated Press 1/24/02 1:16 AM LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) -- A lawyer for a five-state nuclear waste compact says the organization should win its lawsuit accusing Nebraska of bad-faith dealing after the state backed out of a deal to build a waste dump. The Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission held its midyear meeting in Arkansas. Among the issues discussed Wednesday was a 1989 plan to build the low-level nuclear waste dump in Nebraska. The compact includes Nebraska, Louisiana, Arkansas, Kansas and Oklahoma. In 1998, Nebraska backed away from its support of a waste-disposal site in Butte, Neb. The state refused to issue a license for the dump's construction, citing concerns over possible contamination of a high water table or other pollution. Nuclear waste generators and the waste compact are suing Nebraska, accusing the state of acting in bad faith. A trial is set to start in June. Compact attorney Alan Peterson was optimistic Wednesday about the likelihood of victory in the suit. "The usefulness of an idea of a compact between states depends on the resolution of this case," he said. "It's not just this compact." He referred to an expert report that he said helps the compact's case. The report came from David Siefken at PMC, a Rockville, Md., company. Siefken has been involved with nuclear waste disposal sites in many other states, Peterson said. Peterson said the report concluded that bad faith appears to be the only reason Nebraska tried to bail out. The proposed dump would be a reinforced-concrete bunker that could hold such items as used filters from nuclear generators and resins, contaminated tools and clothing, and materials from nuclear utilities, industries, academic research centers and hospitals. Peterson said the report also found that specifics in the site plan are sound. For example, the buffer zone around the disposal site is adequate, and the monitoring system is capable of early warning if radioactive materials are released at the site. The report also found that Nebraska acted in bad faith by using water-level readings provided by the company hired to build the dump to deny the license. Those reviewing the license application and the company also should have communicated better, the report found. F. Gregory Hayden, Nebraska's delegate to the compact, said the storage system as proposed in the license application is not viable, and that the commission should research legislation in other states for dealing with all kinds of waste. "The current system isn't working," he said. A report from Nebraska's expert is expected within the week, Peterson said. If the commission wins the lawsuit, Nebraska could be liable for up to $160 million or more, Peterson said. The compact is seeking money on the deal dating to 1991 -- about $75 million -- and a neutral license reviewer to finish considering the license for the site, he said. If that does not happen, the commission wants about $94 million plus interest. Copyright 2002 Associated Press. All rights reserved. © 2002 New OrleansNet LLC. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 38 Nuclear waste group's lawyer optimistic Omaha.com January 24, 2002 THE ASSOCIATED PRESS A five-state nuclear waste compact has a strong case in its lawsuit against Nebraska for trying to back out of the deal to build a waste site, a lawyer for the group said in a compact meeting Wednesday. The Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Compact held its midyear meeting in Arkansas. Nuclear waste generators and the waste compact are suing Nebraska, alleging that it has acted in bad faith. A trial is set to start in June. In 1998, Nebraska backed off its support for the waste disposal site in Boyd County. It refused to issue a license for the site's construction, citing concerns about a high water table and potential pollution. It is a trial the group should win, compact attorney Alan Peterson told the group Wednesday. "The usefulness of an idea of a compact between states depends on the resolution of this case," he said. "It's not just this compact." He referred to a report that he said helps the compact's case. The report came from David Siefken at PMC, a Rockville, Md., company. Peterson said the report found that specifics in the site plan are sound. For example, the monitoring system is capable of early warning if radioactive materials are released at the site. F. Gregory Hayden, Nebraska's delegate to the compact, said the storage system as proposed in the license application is not viable. If the commission wins the lawsuit, Nebraska could be liable for $160 million or more, Peterson said. ©2002 Omaha World-Herald. ***************************************************************** 39 Nuclear waste moved to Aomori storage facility Japan Today Japan News - News - Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 09:30 JST AOMORI — A load of highly radioactive reprocessed nuclear waste that arrived in Rokkasho village, Aomori Prefecture from France on Tuesday was transported to a temporary storage facility in village on Wednesday. The 152 blocks of vitrified waste, reprocessed by France's state-owned nuclear fuel firm COGEMA from spent nuclear fuel removed from nuclear reactors in Japan, was moved from Mutsu-Ogawara port in the village to a local nuclear waste storage facility, where it will be left for 30-50 years. (Kyodo News) ***************************************************************** 40 UK: Ireland wants proof of safety WEDNESDAY 23/01/02 12:27:59 Sellafield row Ireland's nuclear watchdog has demanded that Sellafield bosses hand over evidence to prove the plant's radioactive waste storage tanks could withstand a major terrorist attack. The Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII) said the recent increased risk of an attack on nuclear plants made it vital that British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) made the disclosure. In its annual report, the RPII also revealed that radioactive contamination from the Cumbrian plant found in seaweed was 150 times higher on the north east coast of Ireland than in seaweed on the south and west coasts. It stated that the amount found was small and did not pose a significant health threat. The RPII said: ``This report has gained heightened relevance from the fear, following September 11, of a terrorist attack on Sellafield. ``The RPII considers that BNFL should now make available any evidence it can as to the capability of these tanks to withstand a major terrorist attack,`` it added. The watchdog also questioned the fact that the consequences of an accident stemming from the storage of the liquid waste have not been properly assessed, putting Ireland at risk. It said the discharge of radioactive waste from the Sellafield reprocessing plant is still ``the dominant source of contamination in the Irish marine environment``. ``Any contamination of the Irish Sea arising out of practises at Sellafield is highly objectionable from an Irish viewpoint,`` it said. Despite the watchdog`s demands it reassured people that it was safe to eat seafood landed at Irish ports and to enjoy fishing or swimming in the sea or to walk along the beaches on the east coast. Sellafield has been a contentious issue between the governments of Britain and Ireland. It was most recently raised by Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern with his British counterpart Tony Blair at a meeting of the British-Irish Council at the end of last year. Mr Ahern said many Irish people had a greater fear of Sellafield than their British neighbours, as Sellafield was closer to Dublin than London. Mr Blair said his Government would not allow a facility to operate that endangered British people. Earthwatch - Friends of the Earth Ireland ***************************************************************** 41 Sellafield asked to prove waste tanks safe from terrorist attacks online.ie : News The Irish Examiner 24 Jan 2002 By Fionnuala Quinlan IRELAND'S nuclear watchdog yesterday called on Sellafield authorities to hand over documents which prove the plant's radioactive waste storage tanks could withstand a terrorist attack. The Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII) said the risk of a terrorist attack on Sellafield had increased since September 11. "The RPII considers that British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) should now make available any evidence it can as to the capability of these tanks to withstand a major terrorist attack," the RPII said at the launch of its 2000 report. RPII chief executive Tom O'Flaherty said BNFL executives had travelled to Ireland and provided the authority with some information about the tanks' capability to withstand a terrorist attack. While the RPII agreed not to disclose the information on security grounds, Mr O'Flaherty said: "However, we feel they could make more information available to the public without compromising security. "We have long-standing and continuous concerns about Sellafield. If there was a major incident there, it could have an impact on this country and the terrorist threat just reinforces that," he added. The RPII said the discharge of radioactive waste from the Sellafield reprocessing plant remains the dominant source of contamination in the Irish marine environment. "Contamination of the Irish Sea arising out of practises at Sellafield is highly objectionable from an Irish viewpoint," the report notes. The RPII's report reveals radioactive contamination from the Cumbrian plant was 150 times higher in seaweed found on the north east coast of Ireland compared to that tested on the south and west coasts. It stated the amount found was small and did not pose a significant health threat and concluded it was safe to eat seafood landed at Irish ports and to enjoy fishing or swimming at beaches on the east coast. The report also reveals that in 2000, RPII investigated 11 breaches of safety procedures, one of which ended in Cantrell & Cochrane Ireland being fined €1,270 for sending potentially lethal radioactive substances to an ordinary landfill. The radioactive material, contained in three gauges, has never been recovered. While the RPII said they believed these containers were now buried and out of harm's way, Mr O'Flaherty stressed that security lapses of this type have had fatal consequences in other countries. He called for the maximum fine for an offence of this type - €1,270 - to be increased 10-fold. Green Party leader Trevor Sargent yesterday pledged to raise the issue in the Dáil. "The revelation that a company was fined a mere €1,270 for illegally dumping life-threatening radioactive material highlights a dismissive approach to complete and utter carelessness and is criminally ineffective," he said. ***************************************************************** 42 Ambassador insists Sellafield is secure Irish Newspapers - Date: Thu January 24th 02 THE Government is unlikely to succeed in its bid to learn more about the security measures surrounding Sellafield, British authorities indicated yesterday. In a statement, the British Ambassador to Ireland Sir Ivor Roberts defended the nuclear base and called for rational debate. He said British regulators were reviewing and strengthening, as necessary, all relevant precautions in the light of the September 11 attacks on the US. "Stringent security measures are in place to prevent an attack on Sellafield," he said. But Sir Ivor insisted his government "does not discuss details of these arrangements". "However, we can say that the RAF maintains a high state of readiness in support of the air defence of the UK." The Ambassador said the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland had, as recently as this week, stated clearly that radiation doses incurred by people living in Ireland as a result of routine operations at Sellafield are "very small and do not constitute a significant health risk". © Copyright Unison ***************************************************************** 43 British Ambassador slams 'alarmist' Sellafield criticisms online.ie : News online.ie 23 Jan 2002 The British Ambassador to Ireland, Ivor Roberts, has criticised Irish politicians and the media for making "alarmist" statements about the threat Sellafield poses to the Irish population. Mr Roberts said he recognises the concerns harboured by Ireland over the highly controversial nuclear plant, but said those in positions of power should report the matter in a balanced way. Ireland has recently launched three separate international court cases in an attempt to have Sellafield closed, a move that has already attracted support from Norway. A report on safety at Sellafield said an accident at the plant's storage tanks would have severe implications for Ireland, while an attack on the plant could potentially release 50 times the amount of radioactivity released during the Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine in 1986. ***************************************************************** 44 Statement by Congressman Don Young on Yucca Mountain Congressman Don Young (R-AK) - January 21, 2002 Governor Guinn has expressed his tremendous disappointment and concerns to me about the recent decision by Secretary Abraham to recommend Yucca Mountain as the national repository for the nation’s high-level nuclear waste. I share his many concerns about the selection of Yucca Mountain, the process behind that selection and those related to the transportation of the waste to Nevada. The events of September 11th require us to look at many things from a different perspective, including transporting nuclear waste across the country. The issues surrounding transportation of nuclear waste are critically important to the State of Nevada as well as to the 43 states and the hundreds of communities, both large and small, that will be directly impacted should Yucca Mountain be selected. The fact that there will be 3,000 – 4,000 shipments a year for the next 25-30 years across the country provides ample opportunity for severe accidents, sabotage or terrorism. I have committed to Governor Guinn that I will revisit my previous position on Yucca Mountain and that I will work to have the many questions surrounding transportation safety and security answered. Congressman Don Young [http://www.house.gov/donyoung/] ***************************************************************** 45 Watchdog calls for proof of safety at Sellafield Belfast Telegraph; Jan 23, 2002 THE Republic's nuclear watchdog has demanded that Sellafield bosses hand over evidence to prove the plant's radioactive waste storage tanks could withstand a major terrorist attack. The Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII) said the recent increased risk of an attack on nuclear plants made it vital that British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) made the disclosure. In its annual report, the RPII also revealed that radioactive contamination from the Cumbrian plant found in seaweed was 150 times higher on the north east coast of Ireland than in seaweed on the south and west coasts. It stated that the amount found was small and did not pose a significant health threat. The RPII said: "This report has gained heightened relevance from the fear, following September 11, of a terrorist attack on Sellafield. "The RPII considers that BNFL should now make available any evidence it can as to the capability of these tanks to withstand a major terrorist attack," it added. The watchdog also questioned the fact that the consequences of an accident stemming from the storage of the liquid waste have not been properly assessed. 2001 Copyright Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 46 German train carrying nuclear waste departs for France BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 23, 2002 Text of report by German news agency ddp on 23 January Hamburg/Brunsbuettel: The first train of the year carrying nuclear waste in Castor containers [special containers used for the transport and temporary storage of radioactive waste or fuel elements] is rolling through northern Germany. Shortly after three in the morning, the train left the Brunsbuettel nuclear power plant in Schleswig-Holstein. The train is heading for the French reprocessing plant at La Hague. No disruptive action from nuclear opponents has so far been reported. A spokesman for the Federal Border Police West in St Augustin said that a second train with nuclear waste is expected to leave the Muelheim-Kaerlich nuclear power plant this afternoon. He said that this was not definite yet but "90 per cent certain". The two trains would then be linked together near Koblenz, he added. The train should then arrive at the German-French border on Wednesday night [23 January]. The spokesman would not give any details about the exact route of the train. He added that the situation along the track was quiet and that only in Saarbruecken, were a few anti-nuclear activists holding a quiet rally. Source: ddp news agency, Berlin, in German 0246 gmt 23 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 47 Editorial: Nuclear waste disposal issue AT yUCCA Idaho State Journal Our View: Settling on a permanent site for nuclear waste is best for everyone. 01/22/02 A side effect of the nation's use of nuclear energy, both in defense and power generation, over the last half century is the hazardous waste left behind. It's important that we conscientiously dispose of the byproducts in secure places where they'll never be tampered with. It appears our government has found such a place — Yucca Mountain in Nevada. It might seem unpleasant, but a rather sparsely populated and geologically stable location like Yucca Mountain is exactly what's needed to secure the many tons of nuclear waste we've generated. Recently, the Department of Energy recommended to the Bush administration that Yucca Mountain be the official government repository for nuclear waste. After years of searching for a proper site, and after years of eying Yucca Mountain — it's high time the DOE made it official. By doing so, stored radioactive waste in a number of western states, including Idaho, can be transferred from other storage sites to a permanent, highly secure area. Waste from the Rocky Flats weapons lab in Colorado will no longer have to be rerouted through other temporary holding sites — like the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. And waste from the INEEL that's now going to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico will eventually end up deep inside the Nevada desert, too. It's important to note that there is no perfectly safe place to put nuclear waste — it will always pose a risk, environmentally or otherwise. But by placing the waste predominantly in one place, it reduces the contamination possibilities in other sensitive places across the West — such as over the Snake River Aquifer in eastern Idaho. We sympathize with those in Nevada who are opposed to locating the waste storage facility in that state — nobody wants to live next door to an area with the potential for toxic releases. At the same time, the DOE has, in our opinion, looked long and hard for the proper disposal site. Yucca Mountain is the best candidate so far. Hopefully, after settling on Yucca Mountain, the DOE will recognize the importance of getting back on schedule with its waste removal plans in Idaho. As it is now, DOE has until 2035 to remove all the nuclear waste from the INEEL site northwest of Pocatello. And, by next year, the DOE is to be averaging 2,000 cubic meters of waste leaving the site each year — a goal it must reach to stay within the bounds of its agreement with the state. The business of containing nuclear waste is one we all wish we didn't have to engage in. But as long as we continue to delve into the nuclear field — with all the potential it holds — we'll have to worry about what the power source leaves behind. By choosing Yucca Mountain, the DOE will at least know where the waste is and it will know its potential for danger. Right now, that's about all we can ask. ***************************************************************** 48 AU: Water authority defends uranium levels. 24/01/2002. ABC News Online Thursday, January 24, 2002 . Posted: 08:43:48 (AEDT) The Northern Territory's Power and Water Authority says the level of uranium in the water supply at Ti-Tree north of Alice Springs is not dangerous despite it containing double the national recommended limit. The authority is considering whether it is best to treat the water or find an alternative source away while also investigating what the limit should be. The authority's Paul Heaton says regulations in western countries vary and his organisation wants to establish the most appropriate ones. "Because uranium is not an acute problem, the levels of the current 45 milligrams per litre is not at a level that we consider the water supply dangerous at this point in time," he said. © 2001 Australian Broadcasting Corporation ***************************************************************** 49 Permanent cleanup of river, Stauffer site must not be delayed [St. Petersburg Times Online: Pasco County news] A Times Editorial © St. Petersburg Times published January 23, 2002 At the request of environmental officials, Stauffer Management Co. plans to do a project to prevent further erosion of earth from the Stauffer Chemical Superfund site into the Anclote River. But this is a little like closing the barn door after the horse has gotten out. Chunks of dirt and radioactive slag from the Superfund site have been sliding into the river for years, but nearby residents' calls for a fix fell on deaf ears until they asked state Sen. Jack Latvala for help. Political pressure should not have been required to get environmental agencies to do their job. The Anclote River passes right by the 130-acre Stauffer site, which is massively polluted with radioactive elements and heavy metals. For more than 30 years, the property northwest of Tarpon Springs was home to a plant that burned phosphate ore in a giant furnace and turned it into elemental phosphorus for use in fertilizers and food products. The plant closed in 1981. The property is considered so hazardous that it is fenced off and inaccessible to the public. Air monitors checked the windborne dust for harmful pollutants, and monitoring wells are used to determine whether arsenic and other harmful chemicals in the dirt have penetrated into the underground water supply. Yet for years, environmental officials and Stauffer employees ignored the visible evidence that soil and slag, which is a hardened byproduct from the furnace floor that was piled along the edges of the property, has been falling into the river. The Anclote River empties into the Gulf of Mexico not far from the site and is heavily used by recreational boaters and anglers. Now a solution of sorts is planned, but what took so long? That is a question that Latvala and U.S. Rep. Mike Bilirakis ought to ask of the state and federal environmental offices charged with oversight of this Superfund site. Are they keeping a careful eye on the property, as they have promised residents they would, or aren't they? Officials have conceded in the past that after the Superfund site is cleaned up, a cleanup of contaminants that seeped into the Anclote River will have to be done. The erosion that has been ignored, plus any that occurs in the future, will only make the river cleanup more expensive and difficult. The erosion-control project getting under way now is only a temporary measure. Riprap will be piled up to stabilize the river bank. Stauffer Management officials intend to do nothing more permanent until the federal government figures out how to clean up the entire Superfund site. Given the fierce debate about the cleanup method and the pace of study and negotiation on that issue, the wait may be too long to rely indefinitely on riprap, a short-term stabilization method at best. Environmental officials should insist that Stauffer Management begin design of a permanent solution as soon as the riprap is in place. The Anclote River is a valuable resource that should be protected from the hazards at Stauffer. St Petersburg Times ***************************************************************** 50 AU: Uranium leak not reported to minister news.com.au - [24jan02] By Environment Reporter CATHERINE HOCKLEY MORE than 420,000 litres of mining slurry containing uranium accidentally spilled from a tank at Olympic Dam mine last month. The spill was reported to the State Government by mine operator WMC, but was not made public. WMC, confirming the spill to The Advertiser yesterday, also revealed another six leaks occurred at the mine in 2001 – all of which were reported to the Government. The Australian Democrats called last night for a royal commission into uranium mining in South Australia. "I am very concerned about the secrecy that surrounds the uranium industry in this state," the party's mines spokeswoman Sandra Kanck said. Minerals and Energy Minister Wayne Matthew said yesterday he was unaware of the incident. After making inquiries, he said the leak had been reported to the Health Commission's Radiation Protection Branch and the Environment Protection Authority. The level of radiation had been "below reportable levels" and the spill had not been reported to his department or to any ministers. The confirmation of spills at Olympic Dam follows the announcement by the Government last week that it would hold an independent inquiry into reporting of "incidents" at the state's three uranium mines. The Government admitted last week that 24 spills had occurred at Beverley uranium mine, in the state's northeast, in the past two years. WMC spokesman Richard Yeeles said yesterday the December 12 spill of 427,000 litres of concentrate slurry containing 0.1 per cent uranium occurred because a holding tank had had a "structural problem". There had been "no environmental or occupational health and safety impact". The chief inspector of mines, Greg Marshall, has called on Heathgate Resources to improve risk management at its Beverley mine. Released yesterday, Mr Marshall's report into a January 11 spill of 62,000 litres of radioactive liquid at Beverley confirmed that "incorrect programming" had led to the incident. Mr Matthew said last night three government specialists would undertake the inquiry into reporting procedures for incidents at uranium mines. An "eminent" independent person, yet to be announced, would oversee the inquiry. Australian IT [http://australianit.com.au] . ***************************************************************** 51 Science At Yucca Mountain "Weak To Moderate" At Best Senator Harry Reid Thursday, January 24, 2002 WASHINGTON, D.C. - A report released today by the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) indicates that the quality of research and science used by the Department of Energy is only “weak to moderate.” The report also states that the review board has “limited confidence” in DOE’s estimates of Yucca Mountain’s ability to isolate and contain harmful radioactive waste. “We wouldn’t dream of settling for weak to moderate techniques from a surgeon trying to save someone’s life or a pilot trying to land a plane,” Senator Reid said. “I can’t believe that the administration would settle for weak to moderate science as the basis for this decision. I once again call on President Bush to keep his word that he will let sound science prevail in the designation on a nuclear waste repository.” “When we talk about one of the deadliest materials on our planet, sound science should mean strong science not weak science,” Senator Ensign said. The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board is an independent agency of the U.S. Government. Its sole purpose is to provide independent scientific and technical oversight of the U.S. program for management and disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear power plants. In a letter sent last November, Senator Reid and Senator Ensign had asked the board to review the quality of the Department of Energy’s technical basis for the Yucca Mountain project. The review board replied that: “When the DOE’s technical and scientific work is taken as a whole, the Board’s view is that the technical basis for the DOE’s repository performance estimates is weak to moderate at this time.” The review board also questioned the process DOE is using to determine whether or not Yucca Mountain could safely perform as a nuclear waste repository: “...gaps in data and basic understanding cause important uncertainties in the concepts and assumptions on which the DOE’s performance estimates are now based. Because of the uncertainties, the Board has limited confidence in current performance estimates...” The full report can be found on the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board’s website at www.nwtrb.gov. ***************************************************************** 52 Reno approves money to aid Yucca fight Las Vegas SUN January 23, 2002 RENO, Nev. (AP) - The Reno City Council is adding money to Nevada's effort to keep high-level nuclear waste from being buried at Yucca Mountain. The council on Tuesday approved up to $40,000 for the fight. Half of that will go toward the state's campaign to educate other Western states about the dangers of transporting nuclear waste. Mayor Jeff Griffin asked for another $20,000 to alert Reno-area residents of the possibility that nuclear waste could shipped through the city, either by rail or truck. Council members, though, said they want to see whether Sparks and Washoe County will contribute to the effort before deciding how that money should be spent. An environmental impact statement for the project said nuclear waste from the West Coast could be transported by rail or truck through Reno. The Nevada nuclear energy office expects a final environmental report to outline the preferred routing when U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham formally recommends the Yucca site to President Bush next month. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 53 YUCCA EDITORIAL: Same old story? Thursday, January 24, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, who heads the House transportation committee, was in town Monday, raising money for his re-election campaign. While he was here, his fund-raising activities were interrupted by a series of meetings with local officials, who hope to turn him into an ally in the fight against Yucca Mountain. So far, so good: Rep. Young, who voted for the "Screw Nevada" bill in 1987, said he would reconsider his support of the Yucca Mountain site. Citing concerns over the safety of transporting more than 77,000 tons of toxic waste through some 43 states, Rep. Young said, "It may be more viable to leave the rods in place." Nevada Rep. Shelley Berkley, who serves with Rep. Young on the transportation committee, was quick to point out that her colleague could be a valuable ally to the Silver State if he chose to hold hearings on the risks of transporting the fuel rods. Rep. Young could also delay any movement of waste from reactors by insisting that stringent regulations govern any shipments by road or rail. Still, Rep. Young's public stance differs little from the demurrals we've heard from other out-of-state lawmakers who politely empathize with the plight of Nevadans while they accept our hospitality (and campaign contributions), but then back off their tentative promises once they've returned to the beltway and the checks have cleared. Until we've seen solid evidence that Rep. Young has indeed changed his mind, local policy-makers should keep the champagne corked. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 54 Nevada stake great in energy debate Thursday, January 24, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By CHRISTINE DORSEY STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Democrats and Republicans alike are tossing around the buzzword "renewable" to frame the energy debate expected to take place in the Senate as early as February. Whether they can overcome other differences to pass legislation that benefits geothermal, wind or solar power producers remains to be seen, officials said. Nevada's stake in the debate is great. The state sits atop vast pockets of underground steam with the potential to provide between 2,000 and 10,000 megawatts of power for the West. Also, the Nevada Test Site is home to what developers say will someday be the nation's second-largest wind farm, as well as promising solar power technologies. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., rekindled the energy debate this week. In a speech to the Center for National Policy, Kerry used renewable energy as an example of the split over national energy policy between President Bush and the Democrat-controlled Senate. "The administration sees a world where our principle effort is to drill our way out of our problem while alternative, renewable fuels and technologies rise or fall on their own at the margins no matter what compelling reasons exist to behave differently," Kerry said. "I see a world, where even as we drill because it makes economic sense and we have to, our primary focus shifts to cajoling and exciting a new market place for those alternative and renewable energy sources because there are compelling reasons to do so." Kerry suggested that by 2020, 20 percent of the nation's electricity should come from domestic alternative and renewable sources. His idea goes further than the 10 percent goal outlined in the energy proposal introduced by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., in December. Nevada established its own "renewable portfolio standard" in June, when Gov. Kenny Guinn signed a law that calls on Nevada utilities to provide 15 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2013. The Daschle bill offers an alternative to President Bush's energy policy, represented largely by a bill the House passed last summer. Daschle promised to bring the Democratic version up for debate early this year. "They're going to have to find bipartisan support (for the energy package), and one of the strengths of renewables is it has bipartisan support," said Karl Gawell, executive director of the Geothermal Energy Association. Geothermal producers in Nevada and the West are eager to see renewable energy production tax credits included in any energy bill. Will it happen? "Nobody knows," Gawell said, noting the Senate Finance Committee is considering a bill by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., that provides permanent production tax credits for geothermal, solar, wind and other renewable technologies. Other proposals limit the tax breaks to five or 10 years. The Bush administration has touted its emphasis on renewable energy in recent weeks. Interior Secretary Gale Norton last week announced she will add nearly $1 million to her 2003 budget request to help increase geothermal production on public lands. In November, Norton and Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham convened a "renewable energy summit," highlighting their commitment to fund renewables research and production. Kerry said that U.S. energy sources have evolved from wood and whale oil to coal to natural gas, nuclear and hydroelectric sources. "It has been our history to evolve from one fuel source to another gradually and economically," Kerry said. "Now we need to prepare our nation for the 21st century and begin a gradual economic transition to domestic, clean and reliable energy technologies." Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 55 Goodman tries to turn mayors against dump Thursday, January 24, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By TONY BATT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman began his anti-Yucca Mountain campaign Wednesday at the U.S. Conference of Mayors and told a reception of about 40 people that nuclear waste is no longer just a Nevada problem but a national issue. As fellow mayors munched on cheese and crackers, Goodman spoke about the possible dangers of transporting highly radioactive nuclear spent fuel through the nation's cities to Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "The transfer of this high-level nuclear waste ... really impacts real estate values along the way," Goodman said. "It gets into constituents' pockets, and when it gets into their pockets and the values go down, we're unable to provide services to the folks that we represent." The mayor presented two videos, each about five minutes long. The first featured City Councilman Gary Reese delivering a speech about the illnesses and deaths of some of his family and friends in Utah because of atmospheric nuclear blasts at the Nevada Test Site. The second video included details of a study concluding that real estate values would drop by as much as $650 million in the cities on the nuclear waste transportation route. The study, by Urban Energy Research of Arizona State University, said that Clark County would need $275 million to provide police, fire and emergency response services for the Yucca Mountain Project. Goodman said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, who earlier this month recommended the storage of 77,000 tons of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, is "full of baloney." The Las Vegas mayor warned that a person could buy a bazooka on the black market and fire one shot at a truck transporting nuclear waste on the highway "and change the world." Calls to the Nuclear Energy Institute were not returned. About 300 mayors are attending the conference, and 35 mayors had sent RSVPs for Goodman's reception, officials said. Las Vegas Assistant City Manager Betsy Fretwell, who attended the reception, said the event cost about $2,300. Vicki Cram, a lobbyist for Ball Janik, a Washington, D.C., firm hired by Las Vegas, paid for the reception, Fretwell said. Wine, cheese and crackers were served. Goodman's presentation drew the praise of two mayors from Illinois, which is home to several nuclear reactor sites. "It raised questions about the fairness of sending nuclear waste to a state that does not produce any," said Arlene Mulder, mayor of the Chicago suburb of Arlington Heights. "The nuclear industry has not adequately addressed this problem (of nuclear waste storage)," said Al Larson, mayor of Schaumberg, Ill., another Chicago suburb. "I have a lot of empathy for Mayor Goodman." Allen Joines, a newly elected mayor from Winston-Salem, N.C., said Goodman's presentation was "pretty compelling in terms of the impact on Clark County because they are so dependent on tourism." Mayor Paul Bowlen of Cerritos, Calif., said salt mines would provide better storage for nuclear waste. "Number one, they've got to have a safe way to transport (nuclear waste)," Bowlen said. "It should be escorted by the military. It's that important." Goodman said he was pleased with the turnout at the reception, which included Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., and Mayors Jeff Griffin of Reno and Tony Armstrong of Sparks. "It was a good first step," he said. "I'm not going to convert anyone today. This is the beginning of an educational process." Earlier in the day, Goodman was interviewed on National Public Radio about the costs of additional security for terrorism. Also, he was interviewed by ABC Radio on the Internet. The mayors are scheduled to meet President Bush this morning at the White House. "I don't know if I will get close enough to talk to him, but I will definitely mention Yucca Mountain if I do," Goodman said. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 56 Reno City council OKs funds for anti-Yucca effort LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: NEWS: News Wrap Thursday, January 24, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal The Reno City Council is adding money to Nevada's effort to keep high-level nuclear waste from being buried at Yucca Mountain. The council on Tuesday approved up to $40,000 for the fight. Half of that will go toward the state's campaign to educate other Western states about the dangers of transporting nuclear waste. Mayor Jeff Griffin asked for another $20,000 to alert Reno-area residents of the possibility that nuclear waste could be shipped through the city, either by rail or truck. Council members, though, said they want to see whether Sparks and Washoe County will contribute to the effort before deciding how that money should be spent. An environmental impact statement for the project said nuclear waste from the West Coast could be transported by rail or truck through Reno. The Nevada nuclear energy office expects a final environmental report to outline the preferred routing when U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham formally recommends the Yucca site to President Bush next month. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 57 San Francisco, Navy say they have accord to clean former naval shipyard at Hunters Point SignOnSanDiego.com > By Mark Sherman ASSOCIATED PRESS January 23, 2002 WASHINGTON  Local and federal officials signed an agreement on Wednesday that they said will at long last lead to the cleanup of hazardous waste and the building of new housing at the old Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. But the agreement sets out neither a timetable nor a budget to complete the work at a facility that has been closed since 1974 and on the list of highly contaminated Superfund sites since 1989. The 936-acre site that abuts the bay in San Francisco's southeastern corner is the largest tract of undeveloped land in the city. Still, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, members of Congress and Secretary of the Navy Gordon R. England hailed Wednesday's accord as a new day in the often contentious relationship between the city and the Navy. "It will be done," England said at a ceremony in the Capitol office of Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco. Brown called the agreement "historic" and said the first parcel, 66 acres of land on the site that have been cleaned, would be transferred to San Francisco's control within days. A developer who plans to put affordable housing on the site said work could begin in the spring of next year. If the signing ceremony seemed familiar, Brown and other Navy officials agreed on a four-year cleanup plan in November 2000. "This is a landmark day for the Bayview-Hunters Point community," he said then. Now, nearly 15 months later, Brown said the difference is that the Navy, not the city, is providing the impetus for finally cleaning a site that is contaminated with fuel, batteries, solvents and radioactive waste. England said the Navy would be pushing for similar agreements at other contaminated sites it owns. "We want to be out of land management," he said. Reaction from community advocates was restrained. Saul Bloom, executive director of a Bay Area nonprofit group that has worked on the Hunters Point issue, said agreements have been in hand before with little to show for them. Bloom, who heads Arc Ecology, characterized Wednesday's agreement as an "addendum to a nonbinding agreement." Pelosi, whose district includes the neighborhood, alluded to the project's troubled history. "So many times before we thought we had an agreement," said Pelosi, newly installed as the No. 2 Democrat in the House. Pushed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Congress recently voted to spend $50 million on the Hunters Point cleanup. Feinstein inserted the money in a spending bill only after she learned that the Navy was planning to spend less than $10 million on decontamination there. Brown aide Jesse Blout, the city's lead negotiator in talks with the Navy, said the Navy's budget for the cleanup is more than $100 million. But Navy officials did not provide any budget figures. The Navy has done sporadic cleanup work at Hunters Point. It halted work in 1999, saying costs were higher than expected. The Navy also came under heavy local criticism for waiting two weeks to inform the Environmental Protection Agency of an underground fire at a landfill on the site in 2000. © Copyright 2002 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 58 LETTER: DOE's deceptions at Yucca IdahoStatesman.com Thursday, January 24, 2002 Letters to the Editor The Snake River Alliance, Idaho´s nuclear watchdog, promotes removing nuclear waste from above the Snake River Aquifer and stopping the flow of nuclear waste into Idaho. So why are we opposed to Yucca Mountain? Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham this month said that Yucca Mountain is a scientifically sound site for disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The decision to recommend Yucca is based on politics, not science. Here´s how the Yucca game works: Every time the Department of Energy (DOE) finds that the mountain doesn´t meet previously set standards for health and safety, it just changes the standards. For instance, Yucca was first chosen because it was believed to be arid and away from any major earthquakes. This assumption was proven wrong. The water table is much higher than expected and Yucca is riddled with fault lines. Also, it was believed that the rock inside Yucca would itself be able to hold waste for 10,000 years. It won´t. Now DOE will rely on canisters created out of an alloy that has only been around for two decades and has been studied only briefly. If DOE gets away with scientific fraud in Nevada, what´s to stop DOE from being fraudulent here? Jessica Hixson, Outreach coordinator, Snake River Alliance, Boise ***************************************************************** 59 Brian Greenspun: Straight talk on dump Las Vegas SUN Today: January 24, 2002 at 8:57:53 PST I DON'T NORMALLY agree with the publisher of the other newspaper. It is bad form. So, in keeping with this long-standing tradition, I will respectfully disagree with Sherman Frederick's treatise on Yucca Mountain that he wrote this past Sunday in which he decries the idea of Nevadans using the "Chicken Little" approach to the nuclear waste issue. Sherm was eloquent in his description of any number of reasons why locating the high-level nuclear garbage dump in Nevada is a bad idea. Be it the transportation issue which involves a minimum of some 43 states to get that deadly stuff from where it is made to where we live; or the "retrievability" concept that suggests one day we can take that stuff out of the very expensive hole they are digging beneath Yucca Mountain -- an idea that is bought only by those so desperate for Nevada's acceptance that they will tell us anything to accomplish their goal; or the basic unfairness of a political process that would take a non-nuclear state and bury it under the radioactive garbage created in those states that have opted for cheaper power but that refuse to deal with the mess thay have made in their own back yards; his reasoning was sound and right on the mark. Where I differ, though, is in his castigation of those "on the fringe of the Yucca debate" who claim that our water will be poisoned and our children could die. His reasoning is simple: If we take a "Chicken Little" approach to the dump, how can we ever do business again in this state. He used an example of a home builder who would be caught in the middle of a moral dilemma if he thought "we're all gonna die" and still built and sold another home while harboring such thoughts. He added the Nevada Development Authority for good measure, suggesting that they couldn't in good conscience invite new businesses to town, feeling the way they do and all. So, here's why I differ. I think we would do a supreme disservice to the community we serve as newspaper people and as citizens if we don't explain in the most dramatic of terms the potential for danger that siting the nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain poses to the families who live and work in this state. It is, in my opinion, not a question of 'if" there is an accident involving the transporation of a minimum of 77,000 tons of the deadliest poison known to man, only when. And when when comes, it is beyond any doubt that the unbreakable casks will break and the unleakable packages will leak. Anyone who thinks to the contrary is not a student of history and not up on the inevitability of Murphy's Law. There is also no question that a seismic incident will occur in what is the third most active earthquake zone in the continental United States. Small quakes happen all the time. Is it that hard to believe that sometime in the 10,000 year half-life of the plutonium and other radioactive fuels that will be buried in Yucca Mountain, the "big one" will happen and the water table that runs so deep below the mountain will be reached by the canisters within seconds? How long after that will a major water source for the Southwestern United States be breached and forever poisoned? I don't think it is unreasonable or even unwise to alert the people in this state or in these United States in the plainest language we can muster to assure us and them that we have done all in our power to avert this disaster waiting to happen to us. And if, along the way, one of Sherm's advertisers loses a little business because the argument sinks in then that's just the cost of the business that the federal government and the nuclear power industry is doing to us. In fact, we would be derelict if we didn't speak and editorialize in the most emphatic terms possible our dislike, disdain and disgust at what our government is trying to do to us. For those of you who didn't read the sequel to Chicken Little it went something like this: Finally the sky did fall and it fell on the little chicken. If the difference between getting that dump and not getting it; between catching and holding the attention of the powerful gaming industry so it can work its will in Washington or leaving it to worry about relatively inconsequential matters like taxes and betting bans; between alerting potential allies in other states along the transportation routes so they can garner congressional support for our position or leaving them deaf, dumb and blind to problems in their own back yards so that we get the dump and they get the transportation nightmares; between a complacent Southern Nevada or an extremely active citizenry putting maximum pressure on our leadership to save us from this nightmare; if the difference is using language to press the point, then I say let the rhetoric begin and not let it stop until the nuke trucks and trains are halted where they stand a nd sanity reigns. There is a reason no one in this country wants this poison in their back yards. And that reason is because it kills children, poisons drinking water and is utterly incompatable with life. Nevadans are not chickens and not Chicken Littles. We should not be afraid to say what is on our minds. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 60 Editorial: A change of heart on Yucca Mountain? Las Vegas SUN Today: January 24, 2002 at 8:57:53 PST Rep. Don Young, chairman of the House Transportation Committee, said in Las Vegas on Monday that he is willing to revisit his support of a nuclear waste dump in Nevada. The Alaska Republican, who was in Las Vegas for a political fund-raiser, said he may even hold hearings about the dangers of nuclear waste transportation. Conversions do occur in politics, but Nevadans would see this one as miraculous if Young, who previously has been a strong supporter of sending nuclear waste to Nevada, followed through on his musings and joined our state in its fight against Yucca Mountain. It would be like President Bush admitting that his tax cut was poorly thought out and should be postponed, or if Sen. Ted Kennedy suddenly advocated smaller government. Still, it's hard to imagine Young turning his back on GOP House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who has referred to Yucca Mountain opposition as "left-wing political grandstanding." In addition, not only is Young viewed as having a poor environmental record in Congress, but he also has consistently voted against Nevada's interests regarding Yucca Mountain. As recently as 2000, Young voted in favor of legislation that would have sent nuclear waste to Nevada by 2007. Maybe Young has seen the light, and for now we're willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But let's just say that Nevadans have become bitterly accustomed to members of Congress and presidential candidates pledging fairness on Yucca Mountain while passing through our city to collect political contributions, yet never following through after they return to Washington. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 61 Perkins seeks anti-Yucca support Las Vegas SUN Today: January 24, 2002 at 10:18:19 PST Assembly speaker calls on his counterparts across the country By Erin Neff Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins is hoping to chip away support for Yucca Mountain one state at a time. Perkins, D-Henderson, sent a letter to the speakers of the 49 other state legislatures urging them to oppose Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's recommendation to store 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste at the mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "I think it's part of the Yucca Mountain battle we haven't explored yet," Perkins said. "Particularly in light of the tragic events of 9-11, it's easier to protect and control this material on site than it is transporting it all over the country." Perkins said he hopes he can convince one state legislature at a time that transportation concerns outweigh any benefit an individual state may receive shipping nuclear waste to Nevada. "This is Nevada's issue today, but it could be Missouri's or Florida's or any other state's down the road," Perkins said. Perkins wrote that an estimated 96,000 shipments of waste will travel through 43 states over the next 24 to 30 years, putting populated areas such as Chicago, Los Angeles, St. Louis and Atlanta at risk of an accident or a terrorist attack. As a member of the executive committee of the National Speakers Conference, Perkins said he has learned how much clout speakers of the house can have in their individual states. A speaker of the house could convince a legislature, or even the congressional delegation from a particular state, to oppose Yucca Mountain, he said. His letter urges speakers to consider passage of resolutions in their legislatures and to send letters to President George Bush and Congress. Perkins couched the issue as a states' rights issue. "This is Nevada's problem today," Perkins wrote. "Federal steamrolling over the rights of your constituents, threatening their health or economic well-being, could be next."" All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 62 Scientific panel rips Yucca study Las Vegas SUN Today: January 24, 2002 at 10:59:17 PST Independent group calls report 'weak to moderate' By Mary Manning An independent scientific panel released a report on the Energy Department's work at the proposed Yucca Mountain repository, calling it "weak to moderate." However, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board was not critical of Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's announcement that he would recommend the site, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, to President Bush next month. The board's report made it clear that criticizing the recommendation of the site was beyond its responsibility. The Nevada congressional delegation seized on the latest scientific review as another example of poor science, rather than the sound science on which the Bush administration said it will base its repository decision. The report said the panel had concerns on gaps in DOE data about how fast water travels through the mountain, how quickly nuclear waste containers with 77,000 tons of radioactive material could corrode and how long man-made shielding would protect buried wastes. In a letter sent by Board Chairman Jared Cohon to the DOE, the panel said it had "limited confidence" in the complex computer models federal scientists are relying on to predict the repository's behavior for thousands of years. By law the repository has to be demonstrated safe for 10,000 years. "We wouldn't dream of settling for weak to moderate techniques from a surgeon trying to save someone's life or a pilot trying to land a plane," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said. "I can't believe that the administration would settle for weak to moderate science as the basis for this decision. I once again call on President Bush to keep his word that he will let sound science prevail in the designation on a nuclear waste repository." Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., also focused on the role of science in the repository decision. "When we are talking about one of the deadliest materials on our planet, sound science should mean strong science, not weak science," Ensign said. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said both the latest report and a General Accounting Office review that found 293 unresolved technical issues proves the site is not ready. "It has become painfully clear how premature the recommendation is and how this decision was made based on the disgraceful bias of Spencer Abraham and the Department of Energy," Berkley said. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., had not reviewed the report and had no comment. Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, said the review board is only the latest in mounting criticism of the Yucca Mountain repository. "There isn't anybody who believes there is sound science here outside of the DOE," Loux said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 63 Goodman files Yucca petition in Washington Las Vegas SUN Today: January 24, 2002 at 11:14:22 PST By Benjamin Grove WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's recommendation to build a high-level nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain will cause "immediate and irreparable harm" to Las Vegas, the city charged in a court documents filed in federal court today. Filed jointly by the city of Las Vegas and Clark County, the petition for review asks the Washington, D.C.-based federal appeals court to delay Abraham's formal recommendation on the site, saying Abraham and his agency ignored federal law and exceeded their jurisdiction in the matter. "It could be the end of the whole ballgame with a few court appearances," Mayor Oscar Goodman said in an interview. "But as a lawyer, I know not to make that kind of prognosis. I know this is going to be a long battle." The petition was filed by Goodman, who is in the nation's capital this week for the U.S. Conference of Mayors. The federal appeals court, according to federal nuclear waste law, is the court of jurisdiction for such a petition. DOE lawyers had not immediately seen the court papers, a DOE spokesman said. "It is difficult to understand how a recommendation yet to be made and acted on by the president, which would likely require congressional action ... would cause immediate harm given that Yucca Mountain would not begin receiving waste for nearly a decade from now," DOE spokesman Joe Davis said. Abraham told Gov. Kenny Guinn on Jan. 10 that he would make the recommendation. By law, he had to wait 30 days. Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, has been under study by the Department of Energy for years to determine if it would effectively isolate 77,000 tons of the nation's high-level nuclear waste away from the environment and humans for thousands of years. The waste is now stored on-site at the nation's 103 active nuclear reactors. The court papers charge that Abraham's recommendation will reduce property values, the county's tax base and tourism. The recommendation will affect the county's population growth and cause "high levels of anxiety and stress" among its residents. The court document filed today is one of several designed by Nevada officials to tie up the Yucca Mountain plan in court. "Today's legal action represents our continued commitment to working with the governor and other elected officials as we pursue every option to keep Nevada from becoming the nation's nuclear waste dump," Clark County Commission Chairman Dario Herrera said in a written statement. The petition is "helpful support" to a suit filed in December by Gov. Kenny Guinn and Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa challenging DOE rules governing Yucca Mountain, Guinn said in a written statement. Both court documents allege that DOE officials changed the original Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, which deemed that a national nuclear waste repository had to rely on its geographic feature to isolate waste. Nevada officials allege DOE officials know the Yucca site itself isn't suitable to contain waste, so they officially changed the rules in December. The new rules allow them to rely more on man-made waste containers. The petition filed today asks the court to declare the new rules "inconsistent with applicable law." State officials are considering future lawsuits if Bush recommends the site. "We're going to use every legal means at our disposal to see this monster defeated," Goodman said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 64 Regulators want to change rules judging Nevada nuclear dump KOLOTV.COM 01/23/02 - The commission issued public notice Wednesday that it wants to change the numbers it uses to determine if the Yucca Mountain repository meets Environmental Protection Agency standards, and that it was giving the public 75 days to comment. A Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposal to amend regulations for monitoring a proposed nuclear waste dump in Nevada might make it easier for the federal Energy Department to comply with environmental standards, a Nevada state official said. The commission issued public notice Wednesday that it wants to change the numbers it uses to determine if the Yucca Mountain repository meets Environmental Protection Agency standards, and that it was giving the public 75 days to comment. NRC spokeswoman Sue Gagner said the new rules will be published in the Federal Register in the next few days. Bob Loux, director of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects, said state officials were still reviewing the proposal. "We're not sure what effect it will have,"Loux told the Las Vegas Sun on Wednesday,"but it seems to make the standard a little easier to comply with." The NRC rules change would set numerical values for some events, such as earthquakes and floods, and their possible effect on the Yucca Mountain repository. Events deemed unlikely _ such as a volcanic eruption or drilling into the deep waste tunnels _ might not need to be considered in determining whether the repository would meet overall radiation dose standards, the commission statement said. NRC staff believes those two incidents have less than a 10 percent chance of occurring within the 10,000 years the repository is being designed to contain radioactivity, Gagner said. The Energy Department has been studying the plan to entomb 77,000 tons of radioactive waste from the nation's commercial, industrial and military nuclear sites in mined tunnels 1,000 feet below the mountain surface. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said this month he'll recommend to President Bush after Feb. 10 that Yucca Mountain, 90 miles from Las Vegas, is a suitable place for the nation's nuclear waste dump. If Bush approves the plan and it passes expected congressional and legal fights, the Energy Department would apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to build and operate the facility. It wants the first shipments of spent nuclear fuel to begin arriving in 2010. Information from: Las Vegas Sun ***************************************************************** 65 Star Wars: Protecting Globalization from Above Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:03:14 -0600 (CST) WHAT'S NEW ON CORPWATCH Holding Corporations Accountable January 18, 2002 MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX Star Wars: Protecting Globalization from Above http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=1333 Bush's revived Star Wars program got a boost after 9-11. He's asking for $8.3 billion for a missile program from Congress, and the big defense contractors are hoping to make a fortune. Veteran journalist Karl Grossman, who has covered the military space program for years, looks at the shifting forces for and against missile defense since the 9-11 attacks. He examines the ties between the "Big Four" defense contractors and Bush Administration, and the campaign contributions these companies have made. TAKE ACTION Tell Shell to Stop Polluting Curacao http://www.corpwatch.org/action/PAA.jsp?articleid=1340 A Shell refinery on the island of Curacao (Netherlands Antilles), near the coast of Venezuela, is causing health threats to nearby poor neighborhoods and the entire island. A series of recent alerts and pleas for help have been received. People are asked to send letters and faxes to the following persons demanding that the refinery be brought up to European standards. IN THE NEWS http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PNR.jsp * USA: VP Tried to Aid Enron in India * India: Dam Being Built on Backs of Poor, Critics Say * USA: Bush Bans Unions at Justice Department * USA: Bush Faces Flak Over Links to Defense Contractor * Argentina: Food Emergency as Gov't Looks into Capital Flight * USA: Washington Pressures EU to Drop GMO Labeling BULLETIN BOARD http://www.corpwatch.org/bulletins/PBR.jsp * Coalition Fights NAFTA * Union Wants WTO to Hold Guatemala Liable for Maquila Abuses CORPWATCH IS HIRING! CLIMATE JUSTICE COORDINATOR Based in San Francisco's Presidio, CorpWatch works to hold corporations accountable to human rights, environmental justice and labor rights, locally and globally. CorpWatch's Climate Justice Initiative aims to broaden the constituency of people working on climate change in the US and globally. The initiative works to give rightful ownership of the climate change issue to communities most impacted by climate change and the fossil fuel industry. CorpWatch works closely with domestic and international networks to make connections between climate change and people's everyday lives, and placing corporations at the center of the problem. A combination of popular education tools, coalition building, public events, media advocacy, strategy meetings and political analysis are used to meet the initiative's goals. For a full job description, requirements and information on how to apply see: http://www.corpwatch.org/misc/PFR.jsp?freestyleid=CJCampaigner Please pass the word on. ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: mapm@pencil.math.missouri.edu EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxikF.aVyTWy Or send an email to: corp-watchers-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================ ***************************************************************** 66 The Frontier Post From Peshawar Pakistan Updated on 1/24/2002 9:27:26 AM WASHINGTON (Online): President General Pervez Musharraf Wednesday said Pakistan was prepared to accept de-nuclearisation of South Asia and sign a No War Pact with India.“Pakistan is prepared to go much farther: accept de-nuclearisation of South Asia and sign a No War Pact with India,” Gen Musharraf said in an interview with NBC. The President however, said that he would not reciprocate India’s No First Use of Nuclear Weapons Pledge. When suggested that India realizes the danger of nuclear war better than Pakistan and that is why it had pledged No First Use, Gen Musharraf said, “I would like to differ on this issue that India understands it better than Pakistan. We understand it, if not better, as much as they do. “When you talk of (India’s) No First Use, Pakistan has been offering de-nuclearisation of South Asia; Pakistan has been offering reduction of forces in South Asia, so we are going far, far beyond them. It is not an issue of no first use but far beyond that.” Asked why he did not accept No First Use of Nuclear Weapons, he said, “Why should we be accepting what they (Indians) say? Why don’t they accept what we are saying? “Also, may I say the world should accept what we are saying. We want to de-nuclearise South Asia. We want to sign a No War Pact with them. Isn’t that better? I think the world community should insist on that. Pakistan is offering a much bigger deal,” he said. © Copyright 2001 The Frontier Post ***************************************************************** 67 POGO to DOE's General John Gordon: You Are Being Misled Project On Government Oversight (POGO) - Back to POGO Main Page [http://www.pogo.org/main.htm] Nuclear Security & Safety [http://www.pogo.org/nuclear/nucindex.htm] Defense Investigations [http://www.pogo.org/mici/index.html] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 24, 2002 Contact: Beth Daley (202) 347-1122 beth@pogo.org Today POGO warned the head of security at U.S. nuclear weapons facilities that he is being misled about the severity of security problems plaguing those facilities. The letter was addressed to General John Gordon (Ret. U.S.A.F.), Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration and Under Secretary of Energy. Yesterday Gordon issued a statement questioning the validity of concerns raised by POGO and security experts about how our nation's nuclear stockpile is vulnerable to terrorist attack. Gordon's statement can be viewed at: http://www.energy.gov/HQPress/releases02/janpr/pr02008.htm [http://www.energy.gov/HQPress/releases02/janpr/pr02008.htm] Click on the link to view a copy of POGO’s recently released report, “U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex: Security At Risk.” [http://www.pogo.org/nuclear/security/2001report/reporttext.htm] [pogo@pogo.org] Contact POGO if you have inside information concerning abuse of power, mismanagement or subservience to powerful special interests by the federal government. ***************************************************************** 68 Statement of Gen. John Gordon (Ret. U.S.A.F.) Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration and Under Secretary of Energy Security at Nuclear Weapons Facilities energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: January 23, 2002 WASHINGTON, DC - Administrator John Gordon released the following statement regarding security at the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons facilities: "As the Administrator of the NNSA, I am responsible to the Secretary of Energy and the American people for the security of the U.S. nuclear weapons complex. I have assessed the security conditions at our sites many times and I personally reviewed our posture immediately following the terrorist attacks in September. Allegations that the Department of Energy has lax security at its nuclear weapons facilities are false and misleading. Charges that there is a fifty percent failure rate in our security tests are simply untrue. While we welcome serious inquiries into the Department's security practices, it is unfortunate that some try to create a climate of fear grossly disproportionate to the risks to the public. Such unfounded allegations are a disservice to the communities that are home to our national defense facilities. There is no question that DOE takes security seriously as a critical part of our mission. The strong group of professionals who protect our sites are a source of pride and it is grossly unfair to characterize individuals or the system as uncaring or ignoring problems. Other federal agencies look to the DOE's force as a model for effective practices, and in fact DOE regularly trains other federal security organizations. As is often the case in "reports" such as the one from POGO, the use of outdated data contributes to misleading conclusions. In the mid 1990s, when budgets were severely cut and security was progressively degraded, there was a higher level of risk. Now we aggressively protect our people, facilities, and material, and we display a formidable security posture to potential attackers. Our forces are well-trained and well-equipped. They are tested by outside challengers, often to failure - so we know where weaknesses are. Then we fix the problem. The physics of creating a bomb has been well understood by the DOE for a long time. That is why we have security and operational measures in place to provide a high level of assurance that these materials remain safe and secure. Nuclear material is not at risk at Department of Energy facilities." (Additional information on this topic is available by calling the Department of Energy's Office of Public Affairs 202/586-4940 or www.energy.gov [http://www.energy.gov] ) Media Contact: Jeanne Lopatto, 202/586-4940 Lisa Cutler, 202/586-7371 Release No. PR-02-008 Back to Previous Page> ***************************************************************** 69 Congressman: Nuclear Weapons Facilities Vulnerable FOXNews.com January 24, 2002 WASHINGTON — A well-armed terrorist group could break into America's nuclear weapons facilities, steal weapons-grade nuclear materials and quickly make a crude nuclear weapon, a congressman said Wednesday. The Energy Department called allegations of lax security at nuclear weapons facilities "false and misleading" but, in a letter to the department, Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., cited a report by a private watchdog group, Project on Government Oversight. He said that in half of the mock attacks conducted at weapons facilities, the intruders were successful - a claim denied by the Energy Department. At one exercise at the Rocky Flats compound in Colorado, a Navy SEAL team cut through a fence and in minutes "were able to steal enough plutonium to make several nuclear weapons," Markey said. The SEALs were detected only when leaving. In another test in October 2000, intruders at the Los Alamos National Laboratory "were able to gain control of sensitive nuclear materials which, if detonated, could have endangered significant parts of New Mexico and Colorado," Markey wrote. Also at the news conference were several former guards at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, a federal lab run by the University of California. The ex-guards alleged that their complaints about poor security led to reprisals. Federal nuclear facilities are guarded by private security. Markey said the guards and the department's security plans are ill prepared to deal with an attack by a significant number of terrorists with sophisticated weapons. In the Los Alamos test, officials complained that the attackers used a commercially available gas "to disorient the security forces." "Experts have told me that that a group of suicidal terrorists could, once inside [a] facility, quickly build and detonate a dirty bomb or a homemade nuclear bomb capable of achieving explosive critical yield," said Markey. John Gordon, who heads the Energy Department's nuclear weapons programs, said Markey's concerns are based on "unfounded allegations" and "outdated data." "Charges that there is a 50-percent failure rate in our security tests are simply untrue," Gordon said in a statement. Gordon, a retired Air Force general and head of the National Nuclear Security Administration, a semiautonomous agency within the department, said such allegations "create a climate of fear grossly disproportionate to the risks to the public." "Allegations that the Department of Energy has lax security at its nuclear weapons facilities are false and misleading," he said. The Associated Press contributed to this report. ***************************************************************** 70 NZ: N-test serviceman can now sue news.com.au - 24 January 2002 From AAP AUSTRALIAN ex-servicemen could sue Britain for injuries suffered 50 years ago after a London high court judge ruled that a law barring legal action infringed human rights. Mr Justice Keith ruled that the 1947 law which prohibited legal claims by veterans against Britain's Ministry of Defence clashed with the Human Rights Act, which guaranteed the right to a fair hearing. The judge made the ruling when he allowed a claim by former Royal Navy engineer Alan Matthews, who alleged he had developed an asbestos-related disease during his service from 1955 to 1968, to go ahead. The ruling opens the way for Australian and British servicemen who claim to have suffered a variety of cancers and other illnesses after radiation exposure during Britain's nuclear testing in Australia and Christmas Island in the 1950s to take their cases to court. Servicemen won the right to sue the MoD in 1987, but only for claims dating from that time. Justice Keith's ruling could now lead to thousands of claims, dating from 1947 and 1987, by ex-servicemen or by the families of those killed. London's Metropolitan police is currently investigating claims from British widow Shirley Denson that her husband was forced to fly his plane through mushroom clouds following a nuclear test blast on Christmas Island in 1958. Squadron leader Eric Denson suffered a string of physical and psychological illnesses before committing suicide in 1976. If police decide the MoD has a case to answer in court, it would set a precedent for thousands of other claims, although Justice Keith has already dismantled one of the biggest hurdles. More than 22,000 British, 14,000 Australian and 500 New Zealand servicemen were involved in 21 nuclear explosions at Maralinga in South Australia and several Pacific islands from 1952 to 1958. The Australian Government has already paid out $3.4 million in compensation. The MoD said it would appeal Justice Keith's ruling which also has ramifications for British veterans of the Falklands and pre-1987 service in Northern Ireland. Australian IT [http://australianit.com.au] . ***************************************************************** 71 Bomb technology tested in Nevada Las Vegas SUN Today: January 24, 2002 at 11:05:41 PST LAS VEGAS (AP) - A new laser-guided bomb designed to blow up caves has been tested successfully in a tunnel at the Nevada Test Site and deployed to Southern Asia. On Dec. 14, an F-15 Eagle combat jet from the 53rd Wing at Eglin Air Force Base in northwest Florida took off from Nellis Air Force Base, flew over the Test Site and dropped the bomb into a tunnel about 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The thermobaric bomb was rushed into production after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "It was fast-tracked when we realized it would be very effective in clearing people out of caves," Air Force Capt. Joe Della Vedova told the Las Vegas Review-Journal from the Pentagon. Before Sept. 11, the government planned to wait until this year to test the bomb. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency, a Pentagon branch, said the Nevada experiment culminated a two-month accelerated effort to produce a weapon that would better destroy caves. After the test, 10 of the new and unusually powerful thermobaric bombs were to be deployed to Southern Asia. So far, the bombs have not been used in Afghanistan. The production of the thermobaric bomb resulted from a partnership among the Department of Energy, Navy, Air Force and Defense Threat Reduction Agency. The Nevada Test Site was chosen for the experiment because it is a facility "specifically designed to deal with tunnels storing chemical or biological weapons," said John Pike, director of globalsecurity.org, a defense policy Web site. "Obviously, Nevada has a long association with weapons of mass destruction," Pike said, referring to underground nuclear blasts at the Test Site, which ended in September 1992. Experiments to determine how to penetrate and collapse tunnels have been going on for the past three or four years, said Derek Scammell, a Nevada Test Site spokesman. The thermobaric bomb - "thermo" refers to heat and "baric" to barometric pressure - features a two-stage explosion. The first blast occurs upon the bomb's penetration of a cave or tunnel and scatters explosive dust throughout the area where the bomb has landed. This is followed a fraction of a second later by another larger explosion that literally sucks oxygen out of a cave or tunnel. Its powder-based explosive gives the thermobaric bomb a longer burn in confined spaces than the liquid explosive in the 5,000-pound bunker-buster bombs used during the Persian Gulf War, Della Vedova said. One of the advantages of the thermobaric bomb is that it could reduce the need to use ground troops to infiltrate caves and tunnels where booby traps and ambushes abound. But by obliterating caves and tunnels, the thermobaric bomb also makes it more difficult to recover evidence to determine whether a mission has succeeded. Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 72 Pakistan backs de-nuclearisation of South Asia ©The Frontier Publications (Pvt) Updated on 1/24/2002 9:27:26 AM WASHINGTON (Online): President General Pervez Musharraf Wednesday said Pakistan was prepared to accept de-nuclearisation of South Asia and sign a No War Pact with India.“Pakistan is prepared to go much farther: accept de-nuclearisation of South Asia and sign a No War Pact with India,” Gen Musharraf said in an interview with NBC. The President however, said that he would not reciprocate India’s No First Use of Nuclear Weapons Pledge. When suggested that India realizes the danger of nuclear war better than Pakistan and that is why it had pledged No First Use, Gen Musharraf said, “I would like to differ on this issue that India understands it better than Pakistan. We understand it, if not better, as much as they do. “When you talk of (India’s) No First Use, Pakistan has been offering de-nuclearisation of South Asia; Pakistan has been offering reduction of forces in South Asia, so we are going far, far beyond them. It is not an issue of no first use but far beyond that.” Asked why he did not accept No First Use of Nuclear Weapons, he said, “Why should we be accepting what they (Indians) say? Why don’t they accept what we are saying? “Also, may I say the world should accept what we are saying. We want to de-nuclearise South Asia. We want to sign a No War Pact with them. zIsn’t that better? I think the world community should insist on that. Pakistan is offering a much bigger deal,” he said. ***************************************************************** 73 U.S. Nuclear Security Falls Short, Congressman Charges Environment News Service: By Cat Lazaroff WASHINGTON, DC, January 23, 2002 (ENS) - Lax security at the Energy Department's nuclear weapons sites could allow terrorists to detonate bombs at the sites, warned Representative Edward Markey at a press conference today. The Energy Department responded with a strongly worded statement calling Markey's allegations "false and misleading." [tmi] In 1993, an individual with a history of mental illness crashed a car through the front gates at the Three Mile Island plant near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, site of the nation's worst nuclear accident (Photo courtesy NRC) Representative Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat who co-chairs the Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation, released a letter which he sent to Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Spencer Abraham regarding security problems at DOE nuclear weapons facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Center near Denver, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Ten DOE sites, some of which are located near urban areas such as Denver, Colorado and the Bay Area of California, contain enough weapons grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium to build a crude nuclear bomb. Markey said nuclear experts report that terrorists would need about 10 kilograms of plutonium (22 pounds) and 50 kilograms (110 pounds) of uranium to build a bomb. Markey says there have been numerous security problems at these DOE facilities. "Mock 'terrorists' were able to access the weapons grade uranium and plutonium in security tests [force on force exercises] at DOE facilities more than 50 percent of the time," Markey said. Had these been real attacks, suicidal terrorists might have been able to use the plutonium or uranium to construct and detonate so called dirty bombs, which could spread radioactive materials over a large area, or homemade nuclear bombs which could achieve the same explosive force as a small nuclear weapon. "Experts have told me that a group of suicidal terrorists could, once inside the facility, quickly build and detonate a dirty bomb or a homemade nuclear bomb capable of achieving explosive critical yield," said Markey. [los alamos] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory performed research that led to the first atomic bombs (Photo courtesy LLNL) General John Gordon, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration and DOE's Under Secretary of Energy Security at Nuclear Weapons Facilities, said Markey's statements are not true. "Allegations that the Department of Energy has lax security at its nuclear weapons facilities are false and misleading," Gordon said today in a prepared statement. "Charges that there is a 50 percent failure rate in our security tests are simply untrue." Gordon said he has assessed the security conditions at DOE nuclear sites many times, "and I personally reviewed our posture immediately following the terrorist attacks in September," he added. "Nuclear material is not at risk at Department of Energy facilities," Gordon concluded. Onsite conditions at DOE facilities were not the only problems identified by Representative Markey, however. For example, the DOE's Transportation Security Division regularly transports nuclear weapons materials on public highways from site to site. Recent press reports have detailed both Al Qaeda members' attempts to obtain nuclear materials as well as their desire to attack U.S. nuclear facilities, Markey charged. [Markey] Representative Edward Markey (Photo courtesy Office of the Representative) Markey has sent a letter to Brent Scowcroft, who is currently preparing a report on security of DOE nuclear facilities for the Nuclear Command and Control Group at the National Security Counsel, asking that an unclassified version of the report be prepared and publicly released as soon as possible. The Representative said today that the storage vaults and other rooms used to store weapons grade uranium and plutonium may not be adequately protected against impacts from large commercial aircraft or the detonation of large truck bombs nearby. Vaults containing weapons grade plutonium or uranium have been found left unlocked and open for eight hours a day, five days a week, at some DOE sites, Markey charged. The DOE sets security levels for its facilities based on a Design Basis Threat, but those regulations may not reflect the type of threat that the U.S. experienced on September 11. The DOE's rules require that the facilities protect against a small group of attackers, but do not assume that the attackers may have access to sophisticated weaponry, including chemical and biological weapons. DOE preparations may not protect against very large truck bombs such as those that have been used in other terrorist attacks, Markey said. [Gordon] General John Gordon (Photo courtesy National Nuclear Security Administration) "We aggressively protect our people, facilities, and material, and we display a formidable security posture to potential attackers," Gordon responded. "Our forces are well trained and well equipped. They are tested by outside challengers, often to failure - so we know where weaknesses are. Then we fix the problem." Markey charged that for decades, DOE management has been ignoring critical reports on security of its facilities by presidential task forces, General Accounting Office, Congressional, internal DOE and independent experts. The agency has failed to allocate sufficient resources to security, and fails to oversee security at its facilities to ensure that it is adequate, he said. DOE personnel have been found to have improperly altered security ratings to make it look as though security was better than it was, Markey added. "DOE has been ignoring expert critical reports on security of its facilities for decades, and as a result we are all at risk. This has never been acceptable, and it is even less so given the events of September 11," said Markey. [worker] Repackaging radioactive salts at Rocky Flats (Photo courtesy DOE) Markey also noted that the DOE has sometimes retaliated against whistleblowers who bring security flaws at agency facilities to the attention of their superiors. General Gordon said that Markey is creating "a climate of fear grossly disproportionate to the risks to the public." "Such unfounded allegations are a disservice to the communities that are home to our national defense facilities," Gordon said. "There is no question that DOE takes security seriously as a critical part of our mission. The strong group of professionals who protect our sites are a source of pride and it is grossly unfair to characterize individuals or the system as uncaring or ignoring problems." © Environment News Service (ENS) 2001. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 74 Ruling: Ridger not terminated for reporting safety concerns Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 12:50 p.m. on Thursday, January 24, 2002 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff The Department of Energy's Office of Hearings and Appeals has determined that an Oak Ridge woman was not laid off from Oak Ridge National Laboratory because she was a whistleblower. Janet Westbrook filed her complaint under DOE's Contractor Employee Protection Program against UT-Battelle, which manages the federal lab. The Oak Ridge resident maintained that she was retaliated against and ultimately discharged for making a series of disclosures about radiation safety at ORNL. Billy Stair, a spokesman for UT-Battelle, said the company could not comment on the case. Westbrook worked at ORNL as a radiological engineer from Nov. 13, 1989, until she was laid off on Dec. 1, 2000, as part of a large workforce reduction implemented by UT-Battelle. She contends she was the "most experienced, qualified and senior" person in her group when she was let go. Westbrook, who has master's degrees in physics and in nuclear engineering from Purdue University, is a certified health physicist and a registered professional engineer. On several occasions while working at ORNL, Westbrook says she disclosed to lab officials, DOE and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, a federal watchdog agency, her belief that radiation safety reviews were not performed in cases where procedures required them, or that reviews were performed, but not in accordance with requirements. Westbrook's complaint that she was retaliated against for these disclosures was heard by DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals late last year. She says her lawyer received a copy of the ruling early this month. Roger Klurfeld, assistant director of DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals, presided over the case and ultimately determined that Westbrook's discharge would have happened even if she had not made safety disclosures. To support his conclusion, Klurfeld pointed out the decision to fund the group Westbrook worked in through the programs that used them. He said friction between potential customers and Westbrook meant her time was the least likely to be able to be charged out to customers. "The record clearly indicates that Westbrook may at times have been a difficult person to deal with," Klurfeld's ruling states. "Nevertheless, the record also shows that she sincerely believed the issues she raised could affect the safety and health of workers at the laboratory." Westbrook, who is appealing Klurfeld's ruling, disputes claims that she was difficult. She also says if she had it to do all over again, she would still report her safety concerns. "Yes, because that's the kind of person I am," she said. Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or pparson@oakridger.com [pparson@oakridger.com] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 75 Former Livermore Lab Guards Sue Over Dismissals UC, Department of Energy Criticized for Security Lapses The Daily Californian By BRITTANY ADAMS and RONI POMERANTZ Contributing Writers Thursday, January 24, 2002 Two former security guards have filed suit against UC and the Department of Energy, saying they were wrongfully fired from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Former Livermore lab security guards Charles Quinones and Matthew Zipoli have filed retaliation complaints with UC and the Department of Energy, saying they were fired for raising awareness of security deficiencies at the lab. They plan to file a lawsuit in state court. The two men were fired for orchestrating a "sickout" on a day of heightened security, said Lynda Seavers, a spokesperson for the lab. They urged their colleagues to call in sick on Aug. 6, Hiroshima Day, and that is why they were fired, Seavers said. The day is historically met with protesting at the lab. Quinones and Zipoli filed their suit with the help of whistleblower group Government Accountability Projects. At a Washington press conference Wednesday, Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass, recognized the Livermore lab as one of many labs across the country that have security problems. Quinones and Zipoli and many other lab workers from around the country attended the event to provide examples of security breaches. Problems the men exposed included lack of training and equipment required to work around radioactive material, said Tom Carpenter, director of Government Accountability Project's Nuclear Oversight Program. "These have been longstanding concerns that have been neglected, and are particularly poignant in light of September 11," a spokesperson for Markey said. The events of the press conference included the release of a letter written by Markey to former energy secretary Federico Pena of the Department of Energy. The letters described the Congressman's concern about security lapses at the labs. The Livermore lab maintains it did not know about the men's security complaints when the workers were fired, Seaver said. "We hire security here to keep the lab free from risk and vulnerability," Seaver said. "And by staging the sickout these men subjected the lab to exactly that." But Carpenter said the lab knew the men had exposed security breaches. "It was no secret that the men were involved, and for the lab to pretend otherwise just shows how low they would sink," Carpenter said. "Instead of taking the necessary steps to protect the population that live next to and around the lab, they fire those who bring forth the concerns." The lab did not receive a report on security problems until a month after the men were fired, Seavers said. The lab was nonetheless aware of the men's activity "before the report was officially released, and before the men were fired," according to Carpenter. Two California judges rejected the lab's reasons for dismissing the security guards and have granted the fired workers unemployment benefits. The university will stand by the lab's decision to dismiss the officers, said Paul Schwartz, a UC Berkeley spokesperson. "The employees at the lab are involved in a collective bargaining process that gives them many other options to air grievances," he said. Neither the Department of Energy nor UC have been formally served with a lawsuit, Carpenter said. Quinones and Zipoli must wait "a reasonable amount of time" before filing a state lawsuit. Berkeley, California Email: dailycal@dailycal.org ***************************************************************** 76 ORAU employee appointed to White House advisory board Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 1:52 p.m. on Thursday, January 24, 2002 Sally Gadola from staff reports Sally Gadola, an Oak Ridge resident and an occupational health nurse with Oak Ridge Associated Universities, has been appointed by President Bush to serve on the newly formed Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health. The board, which includes scientists, physicians and workers, will advise the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services about activities under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. The program is designed to compensate men and women with illnesses resulting from exposure to beryllium, ionizing radiation and other hazards they encountered in the course of building the nation's nuclear defense. The primary importance of the program, Gadola emphasizes, is on "what workers go through and how their needs are met." She said the board's research "will benefit our whole society by helping us learn more about some illnesses." Gadola will travel to Washington, D.C., several times to work with the board over the course of the two-year appointment. She has worked at ORAU since 1998 and has 20 years' experience in occupational health. She holds a bachelor of science degree in nursing and a master's degree in health education from Pennsylvania State University. All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 77 Funds pledge could end SRS standoff [charlotte.com] 23, 2002 FEDERAL HELP Facility to reprocess plutonium from bombs to get $3.8 billion By JIM DAVENPORT Associated Press COLUMBIA -- Several S.C. leaders confirmed Tuesday the Savannah River Site will receive federal funds to begin building a $3.8billion plutonium reprocessing facility. That may help end a monthslong battle that pitted Gov. Jim Hodges against the U.S. Department of Energy. Hodges said he'd block plutonium shipments to the Savannah River Site near Aiken until DOE came up with a plan to move that material out of the state. House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, and Lt. Gov. Bob Peeler announced the project, and U.S. Rep. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., of Seneca, followed up the announcement with details. "The federal government is going to invest $3.8billion over the next 20 years in the Savannah River Site," Peeler said. "Not one single gram that enters South Carolina will stay in South Carolina." "It shows absolute good faith on the part of the Bush administration," Wilkins said. "It shows what can be done when people work quietly behind the scenes." Graham said there would be two operations. The first would disassemble nuclear warheads and the second would convert the warheads' weapons-grade plutonium into commercial-grade mixed oxide, or MOX, fuel that can be used to run nuclear power plants. Graham said DOE's plans call for full-scale processing to begin in 2007. The MOX facility building would begin in 2003, and the dismantling facility's construction would start in 2004 and be complete by 2006. "Congress has approved the building of these facilities," Graham said. He said Bush's spending plan puts everything in line to implement the plan Congress approved in 1997. "I think this is a step in the right direction," Hodges said after talking with Energy officials. The governor said he would receive a briefing from DOE personnel later Tuesday and was waiting to see more details from budget proposal for the facility that President Bush would make today. The governor said he wants to see a strong commitment from the U.S. House and Senate to long-term funding for the project. When completed, the project would employ about 500 people, Peeler and Wilkins said. The conversion process works to reduce the chance of bomb-making nuclear material falling into the hands of terrorists, but some in the Bush administration had backed away from the MOX project because of high cost estimates. A measure passed by Congress last year requires Energy Department officials to submit a report by Feb. 1 on options for disposing of, processing and storing plutonium at SRS. The reprocessing also is tied to a nuclear disarmament treaty between the United States and Russia. Both nations have agreed to build facilities to turn nuclear weapons pits into fuel. Last year, Hodges said he would block planned plutonium shipments until there was a clear plan for the material to leave the state for a permanent disposal facility. At one point, Hodges threatened to lie down in the road to block trucks bearing the nuclear material. Plutonium shipments have been on hold since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and DOE now must give 30 days notice before shipping plutonium to the state. The plutonium has been piling up at the department's Rocky Flats site in Colorado. Officials there have said it must be shipped out soon to meet a 2006 deadline to close that nuclear site. Tuesday's announcement also puts an end to plans to create a processing facility at SRS that would encase nuclear material and make it unusable, Graham said. "We will only receive plutonium that can be converted to MOX fuel," Graham said. The decision disappointed Don Moniak, the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense Fund's SRS expert. "The entire program is just a front for propping up one part of the nuclear industry," said Moniak. Encasing the material and burying it is a better solution, Moniak said. ***************************************************************** 78 DOE to convert tons of plutonium into fuel for commercial reactors Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 1:57 p.m. on Thursday, January 24, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Energy Department will dispose of tons of surplus plutonium by converting it into commercial reactor fuel instead of putting some into glass logs for storage, the administration announced Wednesday. The department rejected a 1999 Clinton administration plan to mix about a fourth of the plutonium with other waste and enclose it in glass. It concluded that the process is too expensive and still has some technological hurdles. The 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium is being disposed of under an agreement reached with Russia in which Russia pledged to dispose of a like amount of the weapons-grade, highly radioactive material. The new plan brought strong criticism from nuclear nonproliferation advocates who have opposed the use of weapons-grade plutonium for commercial reactor fuel. The disposal plan "runs headlong into a minefield of legal and economic hurdles as well as posing safety and security risks," said Tom Clements of the private Nuclear Control Institute. All but a small amount of the 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium will converted into a mixed oxide, or MOX, which in turn can be used in commercial reactors. Some of the plutonium also will have to be purified to meet MOX specifications. The Energy Department estimates the disposal to cost $3.8 billion over 20 years including the cost of building new conversion and purification plants at the federal Savannah River weapons complex in South Carolina. That's $2 billion cheaper than the dual-path approach, said the department. The Clinton program, in which 25 tons would have been used as MOX fuel and the rest put into glass for future burial, originally was estimated to cost $4.4 billion. But last summer, a revised estimated put the cost at more than $6 billion over 22 years. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham called the MOX conversion approach "a workable, technologically possible and affordable solution" that meets the U.S. commitment to dispose of plutonium under the U.S.-Russia agreement. Although the department has estimated that the U.S. about 50 tons of surplus plutonium, only about 38 tons are considered weapons grade. The U.S.-Russia agreement covers only 34 metric tons. Clements called the department's estimated cost savings "pure fantasy," saying that only last summer the MOX program was estimated to cost $4.6 billion. Power companies have not rushed to join the plutonium disposition program, which some opponents have criticized as a dangerous marriage of military and commercial nuclear programs. Duke Power has agreed to purchase the MOX fuel converted from the plutonium and burn it in its four reactors at the McGuire and Catawba power plants in the Carolinas. Virginia Power pulled out of a similar arrangement in early 2000. Cogema, the French nuclear fuel manufacturer, also is part of the consortium and will be responsible for plutonium conversion to MOX at a plant yet to be built at the Savannah River facility. The first plutonium-derived reactor fuel is not expected to be available until 2007. The Energy Department has been grappling for more than a year over how best to dispose of the plutonium and still meet the commitments to Russia. Last year, the administration stopped funding the immobilization program, saying it was too expensive. The uncertainties caused anxiety in South Carolina, where state officials, including Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges, began worrying that the government would ship plutonium to the Savannah River complex near Aiken with no commitment to get rid of it. Complaining about the "shifting nature" of the administration's plutonium strategy, Hodges for a time threatened to block plutonium shipments into the state if a "timely exit strategy" were not announced. All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 79 editorial: First step on plutonium TO S. Carolina Denver Post.com Thursday, January 24, 2002 - The truce between South Carolina and the U.S. Department of Energy solves an immediate crisis but leaves long-term questions unanswered - including how to resolve international worries about terrorism and nuclear proliferation. Last summer, South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges halted all plutonium shipments to the DOE facility at Savannah River. The move threatened to slow or even sideline the cleanup of Rocky Flats, the mothballed nuclear bomb trigger factory north of Golden, as well as other federal atomic facilities nationwide, since their excess weapons-grade plutonium and plutonium oxides were destined for Savannah River. During the Clinton administration, the federal government promised South Carolina it would build a high-tech facility to mix plutonium with other substances, rendering the plutonium impossible to reuse. This "mixed oxide," or MOX, process would almost eliminate the threat that terrorists or renegade regimes would try to steal the material. But it was just one of two processes the federal government had committed itself to trying. The other was a far more troubling program that will reuse plutonium as reactor fuel, create more radioactive wastes and leave the plutonium vulnerable to theft and terrorism. To make room for last year's huge tax cuts, the Bush administration tossed the MOX facility's funding in "File 13." Instead, the Bush team planned to pursue only the second, troubling re-use option. Furious, Hodges said South Carolina would refuse any more federal nuclear material until the MOX facility's funding was restored. He also wanted DOE to explain how it plans to keep its promises to eventually remove the plutonium from the temporary storage sites in South Carolina. This week, though, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham promised Hodges that the Bush administration will restore the MOX facility's funding to this year's budget. However, DOE will put even more money in a new plutonium plant to be built at Savannah River. Those moves, supported by U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, a Colorado Republican, should address South Carolina's worries and get the Rocky Flats cleanup back on track. It's imperative that the process not get delayed further. As understandable as Hodges' concerns are, one state must not be allowed to stall the cleanup of the federal atomic weapons complex. While the Bush administration promised Hodges that the plutonium will eventually be moved, the White House and DOE still haven't said what will happen to the nuclear material in the long term, particularly because reusing the plutonium as fuel will generate more wastes down the line. For its own selfish reasons, South Carolina has raised questions important to both national and global peace and security. All contents Copyright 2002 The Denver Post ***************************************************************** 80 Flats plutonium gets shipping OK Denver Post.com By Jenn Kostka Special to The Denver Post --> Thursday, January 24, 2002 - ARVADA - Rocky Flats, once one of the nation's deadliest weapons facilities, is one giant step closer to becoming a national wildlife refuge. Federal officials in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday announced plans to ship plutonium from the Jefferson County site to South Carolina. Colorado officials said their key challenge will be to rid Rocky Flats of the radioactive material and clean up the site by the 2006 deadline. "This is the pivotal year for Rocky Flats, because we really need to ship plutonium and process plutonium this year to remain on schedule," said Rocky Flats field office manager Barbara Mazurowski at the State of the Flats 2002 meeting Wednesday night in Arvada. Her expectations for Rocky Flats followed U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham's announcement Wednesday morning that the Department of Energy approved the shipment of processed plutonium to South Carolina. Kaiser-Hill Co., the firm conducting the cleanup of Rocky Flats, needs plutonium shipments to begin this spring to meet the deadline. Alan Parker, president and CEO of Kaiser-Hill, said 30 percent of the plutonium is canned and ready to be shipped. "We still have a lot of hurdles before we can ship plutonium off-site," Mazurowski said. Congress must receive a 30-day notice before the shipments can leave Colorado. The Energy Department is drafting that notice, but it has not yet been sent. The Energy Department also is seeking approval from South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges to send the plutonium to the department's Savannah River site in that state. Hodges, who has threatened to lie down in front of plutonium trucks that enter South Carolina, has not approved the Energy Department's plan, but he will meet with department officials today, Hodges spokesman Jay Reiff said in a telephone interview. Plutonium would bring money and jobs to South Carolina, but Hodges wants to be sure the government will eventually remove the plutonium from South Carolina. "South Carolina can't be bought. The governor is committed to making sure the plutonium doesn't stay here," Reiff said. Abraham said the government would convert the plutonium into mixed oxide fuel, or MOX, for nuclear reactors, instead of using the vitrification process, which combines plutonium with glasslike materials to make the atomic material unusable. When completed, the wildlife refuge at Rocky Flats will complement 5,000 acres of existing open space, creating an 11,000-acre mosaic of protected lands in the shadow of the Flatirons. All contents Copyright 2002 The Denver Post ***************************************************************** 81 Rocky Flats to ship plutonium Rocky Mountain News: Local Energy Department gives green light for radioactive shipments to South Carolina site By Berny Morson, News Staff Writer Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham will announce this morning that Rocky Flats can start shipping plutonium to South Carolina, a milestone in cleaning up the defunct nuclear weapons plant. The decision to begin shipments comes afer months of wrangling between Abraham and South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges. The governor is seeking assurances that the radioactive material eventually will be sent to a permanent repository in another state. Under the plan to be announced this morning, the plutonium will go to the Energy Department's Savannah River Site in South Carolina, where it it will be turned into nuclear reactor fuel. The fuel will be used in the U.S. and abroad. Hodges' spokeswoman Tuesday said that the governor -- who once threatened to lie down in front of any trucks carrying plutonium from Colorado -- has not signed off on the plan. "The governor has said the devil is in the details," said Cortney Owings, Hodges's spokeswoman. "He believes this is a big step in the right direction." Hodges will want to see a "time line" of how long the plutonium will be in South Carolina, Owings said. But a senior administration official said of the nuclear fuel plan, "We assume this takes care of the issues." "This is the policy of the administration, this is what's going to be announced," the official said. Converting the plutonium from Rocky Flats and other weapons plants to nuclear fuel at Savannah River will pump $3.6 billion into the South Carolina economy. But the economic benefits were not held out to Hodges as a "sweetener," the official said. The energy department must give Hodges 30 days' notice before shipments begin. The notice will go out "in relatively short order," the administration official said. Abraham briefed U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard Tuesday on plans to begin the shipments. "It is good news -- it's great news," Allard said. "He assured me he was going to be able to put money in the budget . . . to get these facilities built," Allard said of his conversation with Abraham. He said Abraham is committed to the goal of closing the plant by Dec. 15, 2006. Rocky Flats manufactured nuclear weapons from 1954 until 1989, when it was closed amid a controversy over pollution. It was never re-opened because the Cold War ended. All completed weapons were removed from the plant two years ago. The material going to South Carolina is the stockpile of plutonium, the radioactive material at the heart of the nuclear weapons. The plutonium shipments were scheduled to begin in October, but that plan was put on hold after Hodges issued his threat. John Corsi, a spokesman for Kaiser-Hill Co., the firm conducting the Rocky Flats cleanup, called Abraham's policy "good news." He said company officials had not yet been told of the policty. Kaiser-Hill wants all the plutonium out of Colorado by the end of this year in order to complete demolition by 2006. Kaiser-Hill wants to begin shipments by spring. January 23, 2002 2002 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 82 Rocky Flats: Plan would rid plant of plutonium Rocky Mountain News: Local Security at Flats criticized Nuclear arms plants labeled as vulnerable by lawmaker; federal officials deny claims By M.E. Sprengelmeyer, News Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- A Massachusetts congressman charged Wednesday that security is still woefully lax at Rocky Flats and other nuclear weapons plants, but he was promptly blasted by a fellow Democrat who called his comments false and alarmist. Joined by a group of current and former security workers, Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., claimed at a press conference that the nation's nuclear stockpiles remain vulnerable to terrorists despite the attention since Sept. 11 and a watchdog group's scathing report last year. "Unfortunately, security is so lax at some Department of Energy nuclear weapons sites where these materials are kept, that terrorists could find what they needed to launch a nuclear attack right here in the United States of America," Markey said. His colleague, Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., said she was disappointed that Markey "has chosen to unnecessarily alarm the American public." "Security is reflective of the threat level," Tauscher said in a news release. "That is why security at the labs was good on Sept. 10, and on Sept. 11 security was immediately heightened to address a new international situation, and remains vigilant today." In a report first released in October, the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight cited a 1998 drill at Rocky Flats, when Navy SEALs allegedly broke through a chain-link fence and simulated stealing enough plutonium to make several nuclear bombs. Mark Graf, a contract security officer and longtime critic of Rocky Flats security, said Wednesday that some improvements have been made since then, but that the facility is still highly vulnerable. DOE spokesman Jeremy Karpatkin called the watchdogs' account of the 1998 Rocky Flats drill highly misleading. Evaluations like that do not simulate attacks in their entirety, he said. Instead they test individual phases, like breaking through a fence, or breaking into a building. Never, Karpatkin said, has any enemy, simulated or real, been able to break into the complex, take nuclear materials and then escape from the complex. "Their grand, melodramatic claims have consistently proven not to be true, and they're doing it one more time," Karpatkin said. John Gordon, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, accused the whistle-blowers of using outdated data to make misleading conclusions. "In the mid-1990s, when budgets were severely cut and security was progressively degraded, there was a higher level of risk," Gordon said. "Now we aggressively protect our people, facilities and material, and we display a formidable security posture to potential attackers." January 24, 2002 2002 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 83 Oak Ridge: BNFL tells of changes to management structure By Frank Munger, News-Sentinel senior writer OAK RIDGE - BNFL Inc., the American subsidiary of British Nuclear Fuels, announced a management restructuring Wednesday and said it's expected to make the cleanup operations more efficient. A BNFL spokesman, however, said the move was not tied to problems at the company's $238 million Oak Ridge project, which has fallen behind schedule in recent months. As part of a restructuring, BNFL will consolidate its nuclear cleanup work, both commercial and government, into a single decommissioning and decontamination operation. The unit is headed by Vice President John Christian, and the Oak Ridge work for the U.S. Department of Energy will fall under that organization. Christian will move to Oak Ridge. According to a statement released by BNFL, the move will help the company "further leverage its investment in facilities and technologies." James McAnally, who was president and general manager of the Oak Ridge project at DOE's K-25 Site, will "pursue other business and professional interests," according to a BNFL press release. He also will serve as a part-time senior consultant to BNFL on cleanup matters, the company said. In 1997, BNFL and DOE signed a $238 million contract for the cleanup of three huge buildings once used to process uranium for nuclear weapons and reactor fuel. About half of the cleanup project is completed, but BNFL's work has slowed significantly in recent months because of safety issues raised by DOE and others, including the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. Nearly 900 people are working on the project. All work was suspended briefly in November. Although much work has since resumed, DOE continues to impose restrictions on some activities where there's uranium involved. Hammitt said BNFL is not allowed to compact materials bearing uranium, significantly reducing productivity. "That's a discussion we're having with DOE right now," Hammitt said Wednesday. He said the company hopes to soon get approval for full resumption of activities." Copyright 2002 The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. January 24, 2002 ***************************************************************** 84 Hanford forum covers cash, deadlines This story was published Wed, Jan 23, 2002 By John Stang Herald staff writer SEATTLE -- Questions about money and deadlines dominated a meeting on Hanford cleanup Tuesday evening in Seattle. "What can we do more of ... to say we demand enough money?" asked Ruth Yarrow of Seattle, representing Physicians for Social Responsibility. Yarrow pointed out that the nation's defense spending dwarfs nuclear cleanup spending. "You can't tell me the money isn't there," she said. Many of the 80 people at Tuesday's question-and-answer session with Hanford officials at Seattle Pacific University applauded her remark. "The answer is for you people to participate. There needs to be a national outcry," said Harry Boston, manager of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection. Tom Fitzsimmons, director of the Washington Department of Ecology, noted that the money materialized last year after state officials threatened DOE with a lawsuit if Hanford's top-priority tank waste glassification project wasn't adequately funded. The state is willing to repeat the lawsuit threat this year, Fitzsimmons said. The meeting was the first of three public feedback sessions sponsored this week by DOE, the Environmental Protection Agency and the state Department of Ecology. The second session is tonight in Portland, and a third is scheduled at 6:30 p.m. Thursday at Columbia Basin College's Workforce Training Center in Pasco. Much of Tuesday's session addressed qualms that the federal government might not provide enough money for Hanford's cleanup to meet legal deadlines. DOE is supposed to submit next year's national cleanup budget to Congress in early February. So far DOE has not indicated whether it will seek enough money to meet Hanford's legal obligations for fiscal 2003. DOE is completing a "top-to-bottom review" of all its cleanup programs. The results are supposed to guide the department's latest long-term cleanup plans. Even though the unveiling of its 2003 budget request is a couple of weeks away, DOE has not yet released a draft of the cleanup review. DOE has said it will seek public feedback on that draft before releasing a final report. Susan Gordon, director of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, a coalition of environmental organizations based in Washington, D.C., chastised DOE officials Tuesday for the lack of public participation so far in creating the draft report. "We asked to participate in the top-to-bottom review, and we've been shut out," Gordon said. Fitzsimmons agreed there has been no public participation so far, but he added that the state Ecology Department has discussed the review three times with DOE, and he believes the state's input is sufficient. "Participation is not as bad as you perceive, but it is not as good as it should be," Fitzsimmons told Gordon. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 85 Plant 6 demolished at Fernald - 2002-01-22 - Cincinnati Business Courier The Fernald Environmental Management Project reported that workers have razed Plant 6 at the former Fernald uranium processing facility. Only four more structures remain to be demolished at the 136-acre site, located in Crosby Township, about 18 miles northwest of Cincinnati. The demolition project is expected to be completed in 2004. Plant 6 was the former metals fabrication plant at Fernald, where high-purity metals were machined. Before it could be demolished, Fernald workers had to remove 205,000 pounds of hazardous materials that had been in the process lines and equipment since 1989. Now that the building has been razed, workers can begin to excavate the underlying soil and remove contaminants. Once the entire cleanup is complete, the site will be returned to a natural state of trees, grass and wetlands. A corner of the site may be used for a museum with exhibits on the history of the uranium processing plant and its role in making nuclear weapons during the Cold War. ***************************************************************** 86 Wamp discounts lax weapons security The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- Thursday, January 24, 2002 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-3rd District, says he has faith in the security of the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons facilities including the Oak Ridge Y-12 National Security Complex. "I have been briefed thoroughly and regularly about the increased security measures and procedures put in place since Sept. 11 and I am confident that the National Nuclear Security Administration will continue to be vigilant in protecting our nuclear weapons stockpile and the facilities charged with their stewardship," Wamp said. The NNSA is the quasi-independent agency within DOE that oversees the nuclear weapons complex. Wamp's statements were in response to a letter U.S. Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., sent to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham blasting the federal agency for lax security at DOE nuclear weapons facilities. Markey also released a letter to Brent Scowcroft, who is currently preparing a report on security of DOE nuclear facilities for the Nuclear Command and Control Group at the National Security Council, asking that an unclassified version of the report also be prepared and publicly released. "Mock 'terrorists' were able to access the weapons grade uranium and plutonium in security tests Š at DOE facilities more than 50 percent of the time," Markey said in a press release. "Experts have told me that a group of suicidal terrorists could, once inside the facility, quickly build and detonate a dirty bomb or a homemade nuclear bomb capable of achieving explosive critical yield." Wamp said Markey and groups with an anti-nuclear agenda are using "fear tactics to scare Americans into believing that our nuclear facilities are vulnerable and unprotected. ... "These individuals have a long history of opposing the development and maintenance of a nuclear weapons deterrent and they unfortunately are preying on the fears that follow the shock of Sept. 11," Wamp said. "Their statements undermine our national security and erode confidence in our federal government without necessary justification." Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or pparson@oakridger.com [pparson@oakridger.com] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 87 Site sought for fusion project January 24, 2002 Critics clamor about ITER feasibility, safety, costs By ERIKO ARITA Staff writer The government is expected to soon announce its candidacy to host an international nuclear fusion project, despite the concerns of citizens, lawmakers and scientists about its safety and feasibility. The government regards the project as a promising new power source for a country that is lacking in natural resources and has suffered a series of accidents at its nuclear plants. The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor Project envisions using nuclear fusion technology, the development of which remains in an embryonic state, to make electricity in a manner similar to the way the sun creates energy. It is altogether different from the nuclear fission technology used in conventional nuclear reactors. The Council for Science and Technology Policy, the top government body in compiling the nation's science and technology policies, issued a report in December stating that it recognizes the significance of Japan hosting the ITER nuclear fusion project. Some experts have estimated the project will cost 1 trillion yen. Others say it will run more. According to the Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Ministry, it would cost 700 billion yen to host the project, compared with 300 billion yen if the country does not host but instead participates in a joint project. Citizens and lawmakers Monday held a meeting to protest the project and submitted an appeal to the government to halt it. "The nuclear fusion project would be a huge waste of money and a threat to the environment and the safety of residents at the site," said Renko Kitagawa, a Lower House lawmaker of the Social Democratic Party. On Tuesday, a two-day intergovernmental meeting on the project kicked off in the Koto Ward of Tokyo. At the meeting, officials of the ITER participants -- Japan, Russia, Canada and the European Union -- held preliminary discussions about how to decide on a site for an experimental fusion reactor. When heated to 100 million degrees, heavy hydrogen or tritium -- a radioactive isotope of hydrogen -- becomes plasma, causing atomic nuclei in the substances to collide and combine, producing energy. Plasma is a nonconductive, highly ionized gas. It is a phase of matter distinct from solids, liquids and normal gases. At present, the hydrogen bomb is the only practical use of nuclear fusion. The project was first proposed in 1985 at a U.S.-Soviet summit. Although the U.S. backed out of the project in 1998 due to financial concerns, Washington has recently indicated it may rejoin the project. The countries plan to decide on the site for the fusion reactor at a meeting to be held in France in May. It will take 10 years to build the reactor and another 20 to operate it on an experimental basis, according to ministry officials. Japan has been considering the use of nuclear fusion as an alternative energy source for some time. The government, hoping to "create a sun on the Earth," invested 594.8 billion yen in the development of nuclear fusion technology between 1968 and 2000, according to the ministry. Three municipalities have announced their candidacies as host site. According to a report issued by the ministry in October, the towns of Naka, Ibaraki Prefecture, and the village of Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture are considered the top candidates for the ITER project. The city of Tomakomai, Hokkaido, is regarded as less promising. However, some residents of the candidate sites as well as nongovernmental organizations and scientists have lodged protests with the state and local governments bidding to host the project. Tadahiro Katsuta, an employee of Citizens' Nuclear Information Center and an expert on nuclear science, questioned the safety of the project. According to Katsuta, tritium can destroy DNA and produces radiation strong enough to pass through metal walls. "It is dangerous to deal with even in a normal situation, and the impact of an accident at a reactor could be extensive," Katsuta warned. Ryoichi Hirano, a member of a group of Aomori residents demanding the government stop transferring nuclear waste to the village of Rokkasho, criticized the central and local governments for promoting the project without fully informing local residents. Rokkasho is Japan's main dump site for nuclear waste. According to a survey conducted by a private institute in the city of Aomori, less than 20 percent of those polled said they know about the project. In the same survey, 41.1 percent of those polled in the prefecture said they are undecided about inviting the the project into Rokkasho. Some 36.1 percent said they are opposed to it and only 16.5 percent said they welcome the project. The poll was carried out in August on 285 people. Hirano also criticized the prefecture for claiming the fusion project is safe when there is scant information to back its claim. "(The prefectural government) is trying to make us blindly believe the project is safe and there is no problem," he said. The feasibility of the fusion reactor has also been questioned by scientists, including Hiroaki Koide, a researcher at Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute. It would be extremely difficult for scientists to develop technology to maintain the state of plasma of heavy hydrogen and tritium in a stable manner over a long period of time, which is essential to the project's success, according to Koide. Other critics have pointed out that the fusion reaction itself is expected to require huge amounts of electricity, thereby making it an inefficient power source. According to Katsuta of CNIC, it requires about of 500,000 kw of electricity to trigger an atomic reaction, which amounts to energy costs of about 10 million yen. "Operating the reactor itself requires an extremely large amount of energy," Katsuta said, adding that, as a power source, "It is obviously not useful." The Japan Times: Jan. 24, 2002 ***************************************************************** 88 IAEA Daily Press Review Date 2002-01-23 Number 10 1. IAEA India will reportedly accede to 1980 Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, reinforcing its commitment to international legal instruments against terrorism in general and nuclear terrorism in particular. (R - 22/1) IAEA; India 2. Terrorism Since terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, some experts on nuclear security are increasingly concerned that intruders could break into US weapons plants, assemble a nuclear bomb from materials there and explode it on the spot. (NYT; WP - 23/1) United States of America 3. Nuclear power More on Czech/Austrian dispute over Temelin NPP: EU says that latest Austrian protest against plant won't derail Czech Republic's application to join EU. Viet Nam to consider proposal for launching domestic nuclear power programme capable of supporting construction and initial operation of up to four reactors by end of decade 2011-2020. British Prime Minister reportedly tried to forge compromise over future energy policy as conflict raged between Government ministers over future of nuclear power. (G; NW; R - 17, 23/1) Austria; Czech Republic; European Union; United Kingdom; Viet Nam 4. Radiation, health At IAEA request, expert of French IPSN visits Tbilisi to verify doses received by three individuals, following recent radiation incident in the Republic of Georgia. He will also assess patients' condition and treatment required. Safety of source transports in question after recent iridium leak. (NUC - 17, 22/1) France; Georgia; IAEA; United States of America 5. Radwaste, fuel Cargo of reprocessed nuclear fuel arrives on board a British freighter at Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture. (JAP - 23/1) Japan; United Kingdom ***************************************************************** 89 US in fusion rethink BBC News | SCI/TECH | 24 January, 2002, By BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse The United States may rejoin Iter, the international consortium to build an experimental fusion reactor. It is just three years since the Americans walked away from the project, complaining about excessive costs and technical issues. President Bush's science advisor and director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, John Marburger III, says the US is now reviewing its position. Iter, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, will be built in the next few years. A decision on its site, thought likely to be Canada or Japan, is expected in 2003. The reactor aims to produce energy in the same way as the Sun, by forcing together atoms at very high temperatures (about 100 million degrees Celsius). High expectations Fusion energy offers many advantages over "conventional" nuclear power, which works by fission, or the splitting of atoms. [Marburger, OSTP] John Marburger III says the US may go back into the Iter project Fusion reactors could use seawater as a source of fuel. They would not emit greenhouse gases like fossil fuel power stations and neither would they create the highly radioactive waste found in current nuclear stations. But exploiting fusion power has not been easy. The initial high expectations of researchers in the 1950s were quickly dampened when they realised how difficult it would be to solve some of the technical problems involved. These included learning how to control the complex behaviour of an electrically charged gas, or plasma. The plasma, which contains the atomic nuclei to be forced together, is held in place inside the reactor by huge magnets that make the reactor look like a giant doughnut. Final leap It has taken several decades of research, at places like the Jet (Joint European Torus) project in Britain, to get a reactor to produce even a small amount of fusion energy. Inside the Jet "doughnut" Iter could be the final stage before the world sees the first commercial fusion power station. In 1999, the US balked at Iter's $10bn price tag. Since it left the project, Iter scientists have revised the project and the expected cost now stands at about $4.5bn. Those involved in the programme are urging the US to make its mind up soon, as the decision on where to build the experimental reactor must be made within a year. Privately they are hoping that the US joins without interfering with the choice between Canada and Japan. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************