***************************************************************** 06/27/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.163 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: Energy NW to upgrade security plan 2 Never Say Nuclear 3 Russia asked to speed up Indian nuclear power project 4 NIREX BOSS HOPES TO REGAIN PUBLIC SUPPORT NUCLEAR REACTORS 5 The human factor 6 US: Nuclear plant upgrades after NRC inspection 7 * UN Launches Chernobyl Disaster Website * 8 Chernobyl fallout fears 9 Extent of Chernobyl damage questioned 10 CHERNOBYL ECHOES AGAIN. THIS TIME IN GREAT BRITAIN NUCLEAR SAFETY 11 US: [radiation-survivors] Hanford exposures can sue...Medscape artic 12 US: Dirty nukes: Nuclear proliferation is a neglected threat 13 US: Uranium processor in S.C. is closed 14 US: GAO Cites Rising Nuke Smuggling Risk 15 US: Terrorism and Nuclear Energy Understanding the Risks 16 U.N. nuclear agency sees theft danger 17 Harrietsfield upset over new uranium standards for water 18 Bomb Material Missing From Tbilisi 19 This proves N-plant killed my daughters 20 A New Bid to Keep Nukes Safe 21 G-8 leaders provide $20 billion to keep Russian nukes away from terr 22 Leaked Minatom Documents Show No Plan For Iranian SNF 23 US: Me and My Geiger Counter NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 24 US: Waste storage gets few volunteers 25 US: Opponent: Yucca not a solution 26 US: Yucca Mountain foes care little for halting shipments 27 US: Yucca's false promise: Nukes repository a gift to nuclear power 28 US: U.S. plan would ship radioactive waste through S. Florida 29 US: Nuclear waste paths proposed 30 US: Nuclear Waste Plan Worries Vermont Senators 31 US: Coleman turns up the heat 32 US: Six tons of plutonium starts making its way across the USA 33 US: DOE says Hodges dispute not stalling cleanup funds 34 Fire this morning at BNFL project 35 US: Nevadans rap 1998 Abraham letter 36 US: Lost Fuel Rods Prompt Fines 37 US: Brian Fraser's Adventures in Energy Destruction 38 US: Nuclear waste crash could kill 1,200 in Chicago 39 US: Execs urge lawmaker to vote for nuke dump* 40 What a waste 41 UK: CALDER HALL FORCED TO CLOSE NEXT YEAR 42 US: D'OH NO!: Character won't help in Yucca fight 43 UK: LOCAL TORY LEADER CALLS FOR NEW CALDER HALL 44 UK: £5M WORK ON VISITORS CENTR 45 SELLAFIELD VISITOR CENTRE OPENS AFTER £5M REVAMP 46 US: Nuke waste: It's coming to your neighborhood! 47 US: Moving nuclear waste 48 US: Choosing routes, testing safety NUCLEAR WEAPONS 49 US: Senate Compromises on Defense Bill 50 Faslane to house new nuclear submarines 51 Councillors oppose building of new nuclear submarines at Faslane 52 NUCLEAR FEARS SPARK PROTEST OVER REFITS 53 G-8 to Help Russia Dismantle Weapons 54 *G7 to fund Russian arms control* 55 The Pasko Case 56 RUSSIAN DEFENCE MINISTER TO EXAMINE NUCLEAR TEST GROUND AT NOVAYA ZE 57 THE KURSK MYSTERY IS NEVER TO BE UNVEILED 58 WORLD'S LARGEST SUBMARINE LAUNCHED IN SEVERODVINSK TODAY 59 Mossad chief: Israel must foil regional nuclear arms plans US DEPT. OF ENERGY 60 $5.3 billion needed for Hanford cleanup, report to DOE says 61 Plutonium-laced liquids converted to safer powder 62 Thyroid study fails to find Hanford link 63 DOE cleaning up 'Boneyard/Burnyard' 64 Students make DOE-related documents 'understandable' 65 Historic Y-12 calutrons producing stable isotopes: future unstable 66 ORNL nabs 3 research awards OTHER NUCLEAR 67 ISU wins $11,000 to study nuclear energy 68 NASA reactors take final voyage 69 Radioactive drilling tool lost on Padre Island 70 *WNA NEWS BRIEFING 02.26 | 19 - 25 June 2002* 71 U.S. renews travel warning for South Asia 72 The Kremlin readily supported the US-led war on terror ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Energy NW to upgrade security plan This story was published 6/27/02 *By Chris Mulick Herald staff writer* PORTLAND -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is requiring Energy Northwest to upgrade its security plans to protect highly radioactive spent fuel assemblies it will store outdoors. The public power consortium does not yet have an NRC license for outdoor storage. Reactors already licensed for such facilities, such as the defunct Trojan Nuclear Plant near Portland, won't immediately be required to meet the new standards. Those standards largely mirror what the commission ordered for all nuclear plants in February in response to the Sept. 11 attacks. They include upgrades for protection from truck bombs, insider threats, attacks from the nearby Columbia River and the like. John Wyrick, Energy Northwest resource protection manager, told members of the utility's governing board Wednesday that the organization is on schedule to meet its Aug. 31 deadline for implementing new security measures. The NRC added to its new requirements last week when it issued a draft order calling for upgrades for the outdoor storage pad. It's already clear those requirements will force Energy Northwest to add to its staff of 90 security guards. The utility plans to store the waste outdoors in canisters because it has run out of room in its spent fuel pool inside the 1,150-megawatt Columbia Generating Station north of Richland. That pool stores the approximately 2,200 assemblies used by the plant since it began operating in 1984. Energy Northwest plans to lower the fuel assemblies into large steel canisters and encase them in concrete casks, then move them to the storage pad. The utility needs more space in the pool by spring because it is scheduled to remove about 300 more spent fuel assemblies from the reactor during its next refueling outage in May. Complicating matters is the storage pad's location outside the plant's protected area, a fenced perimeter with video cameras and an array of other security measures. "We're in a worst-case scenario," said Greg Smith, Energy Northwest vice president for generation. If the agency had known this was coming, "we would have never located it outside the protected area." Ultimately, Energy Northwest may opt to extend its protected area to include the storage pad. "That's a big deal," Wyrick said. In the short term, officials may opt to create a separate protected area. At their nearest, the fences around the pad and the plant would be 500 feet apart. The utility would also have to erect a protection zone for the half-mile-long road between the plant and the pad. Security upgrades will have to be in place before fuel begins moving. Wyrick said that still could happen in September. *Reporter Chris Mulick can be reached at the Herald Olympia bureau at 360-753-0862 or via e-mail at cmulick@tri-cityherald.com.* *Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.* ***************************************************************** 2 Never Say Nuclear Issue cover-dated July 4, 2002 JAPAN A politician's remarks are jumped on by an alarmist press and opposition leaders.But the country is not about to ditch its non-nuclear policies By David Kruger/TOKYO *FEW WORDS IN THE JAPANESE *political lexicon evoke greater emotion than "nuclear." In recent years "scandal," "corruption" and even "reform" have at times jolted the nation and prompted change. But the word nuclear conjures up bitter memories of the devastating bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in the final days of World War II. It upsets the political opposition and proponents of the nation's pacifist constitution. Mention of nuclear, the media know, will stir emotions, sell newspapers and raise ratings. So it was not surprising that a storm of controversy greeted a May 31 comment by Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda that the country could some day alter its three non-nuclear principles. Japan established the principles in 1967, stating that it would not possess or produce nuclear weapons nor allow them on its soil. "The principles are just like the constitution," Fukuda was quoted as saying by Kyodo Newswire. "But in the face of calls to amend the constitution, amendment of the principles is also possible." Some media portrayed the comment as a significant shift in government policy. Protesters then rallied at Hiroshima's Peace Park, ground zero of the atomic bomb that demolished the city in August 1945, and demanded that the government back the abolition of all nuclear weapons. The opposition berated Fukuda and demanded that he resign or be sacked--the chastened politician later reaffirmed the non-nuclear principles in parliament. But emotion aside, does Fukuda's comment represent a shift in security thinking in Japan? Many analysts saw nothing new in the comment aside from the fact that it was made public. Others see the statement as another sign of a new awareness in Japan that the country needs to take greater responsibility for its own security in a volatile region. Fukuda "wasn't in any way suggesting that Japan would or is even thinking about changing its non-nuclear principles," says a senior diplomat in Tokyo. Hideshi Takesada, a professor at the National Institute for Defence Studies in Tokyo, agrees that Fukuda's comment does not suggest a change in policy or a shift toward militarism. "He just spoke what the government has been saying on this nuclear issue," Takesada says. But that does not mean that Japan's security posture is fixed in stone. In the wake of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington last September Japan passed anti-terrorism legislation to allow the Self-Defence Forces, the nation's military, to provide noncombat logistical, medical and equipment-repair support to United States forces deployed in Afghanistan. When Japanese military vessels sailed to the Indian Ocean in November it represented the first dispatch of troops to assist a military action since World War II. The anti-terror law has a two-year time limit and the support it allows is restricted in nature, degree and geographic area. "When September 11 happened there was a coincidence of factors that enabled Japan to make a very quick, in Japanese terms, and decisive response," says the senior diplomat. "If you look at it in the context of most other countries it wasn't a huge thing. In the context of Japan it was a major step forward." Three emergency measures bills currently before parliament are designed to set the framework for a response to an attack, or the threat of attack, on Japanese soil. One bill outlines the decision-making process in times of attack and gives greater powers to the prime minister to coordinate a response. A second bill aims to revise the Self-Defence Forces law to allow the SDF to commandeer private land and dismantle structures on that land to fulfil their missions. The third bill would revise the make-up of the government's Security Council of Japan to include more ministers whose jurisdictions may be involved in a response. These bills, too, are limited in scope. The legislation "increases the legal clarification of what the SDF is allowed to do in Japan and to defend Japan," says the diplomat. "I would resist any suggestion that Japan is going down the militarism track." These legislative moves do suggest that Japan is starting to act on the realization that it may now be more vulnerable than during the Cold War when it served as a key Asian base for U.S. military forces and effectively left its defence in American hands. Japan is still home to the largest number of U.S. forces based on foreign soil, with some 47,000 troops around the country. But with America preoccupied with the war on terror, Japan is under pressure to assume greater responsibility for its own security and to contribute to the balance of power in the region. The main threat to Japan, military analysts say, comes from North Korea. As indications mount that the U.S. may take action in Iraq to break one arm of the Iraq-Iran-North Korea "axis of evil" described by President George W. Bush, the possibility of a North Korean attack on U.S. bases in Japan also rises, says Robyn Lim, a professor of international relations at Nanzan University in Nagoya. "All nations that decide for aggression and terror will pay a price," Bush told the graduating class at the West Point military academy on June 1. "We will not leave the safety of America and the peace of the planet at the mercy of a few mad terrorists and tyrants. We will lift this dark threat from our country and from the world." If that sort of talk unnerves North Korea, Japan has reason to worry. North Korea demonstrated its ability to hit Japan's biggest cities in 1998 when it launched either a rocket or a Taepodong missile over the main island of Honshu. North Korea said it was launching a satellite. Japan felt it was being intimidated. In December, the Japanese coast guard exchanged heavy fire with an unidentified boat that later sank in the East China Sea. Japan believes North Korean spies or drug runners were in command of the boat, which it is now attempting to raise from the ocean floor. "Fukuda and company must be thinking about Iraq. And they have to be thinking about the reaction of North Korea because the North Koreans are going to think they're next," says Lim. Koizumi said upon taking office in April 2001 that he believes Japan should play a larger role in security and foreign affairs. He has said that he favours revising the constitution to remove some constraints on the military. These issues have largely fallen off his agenda as his government struggles to right the faltering economy. But Ichita Yamamoto, a Liberal Democratic Party MP, praises Koizumi for taking a clear position and softening the ground for a future debate. "I really believe that he is the first prime minister to make a comment on security issues without reading from any paper," says Yamamoto, emphasizing the highly controversial nature of any discussion of security issues in Japan. The prospect of revising the constitution has been debated in fits and starts in Japan for decades. But the issue is so divisive that politicians quickly find it safer to put off discussion to a later date. Whether Fukuda's comment was a slip of the tongue or an effort to bring that debate to life is unclear. But few observers expect concrete change any time soon. Masashi Nishihara, president of the National Defence Academy, figures it would take about 10 years to revise the constitution, a move that would require a two-thirds majority in both houses of parliament before being put to a national referendum. Koizumi has clearly said "he is a constitutional revisionist," says Nishihara. "But he also said that during his tenure as prime minister revision of the constitution is not on his agenda." Those who fear a more assertive Japanese military must decide if that is cause for comfort or concern. But Yamamoto says any discussion that brings greater clarity to the nation's security policy should be welcomed. "Security issues are so complicated the official position of the government of Japan sometimes seems not to be understandable," says Yamamoto, a former state secretary for foreign affairs. Far Eastern Economic Review, Copyright ©2002 Review Publishing Company Limited, Hong Kong. All rights reserved. Please direct all queries about the copyright of articles in the feer.com archive to webmaster@feer.com ***************************************************************** 3 Russia asked to speed up Indian nuclear power project *Thursday June 27, 4:46 PM* /By Papri Sri Raman, Indo-Asian News Service / Chennai, June 27 (IANS) India has insisted on the timely supply of equipment from Russia for speedy completion of a Rs.140 billion nuclear power project being constructed in the southern state of Tamil Nadu. S.K. Agrawal, project director for the two 1,000 MW nuclear plants being built in Koodankulam, said India had asked Russia to speed up the supply of designs and equipment for the reactors. "The first consignment of Russian material for the Koodankulam plant was expected by the year-end," he said. "India is pressuring Russia to speed up the process of giving us the drawings and equipment ahead of schedule." The Russians have said they will be able to meet the revised schedule, he said. Agrawal was speaking to reporters in Thirunelveli district of Tamil Nadu, 900 km south of capital Chennai. Russia is helping the Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCI) to build the nuclear reactors in Koodankulam village in the district. Work on the project began in March and is advancing ahead of time, Agrawal said. Russia will supply enriched uranium for the entire life of the power plants, provide the design of the reactors and bring equipment and components. NPCI will build the reactors. The reactors will be of the VVER, or pressurised water, type. They will use enriched uranium as fuel and light water as coolant and moderator. India will finance 46 per cent of the construction cost while the balance will be met by a soft loan from Russia. Agrawal has just returned from a visit to China, where he inspected similar nuclear power projects being set up by Jiansu Nuclear Power Corporation with Russian help. The Chinese hope to complete their project by 2004. An Indo-Russian coordination committee will meet in Moscow on July 6 to review the Koodankulam project. NPCI director V.K. Chaturvedi will lead the Indian team while Deputy Minister For Atomic Energy E.A. Reshetnikov will lead the Russians. Agrawal said the meeting would discuss future contracts with Russia and third country deals related to purchase of equipment worth $200 million from former Soviet republics like Ukraine. Copyright © 2001 IANS India Private Limited. All rights Reserved. Copyright © 2002 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 NIREX BOSS HOPES TO REGAIN PUBLIC SUPPORT The Whitehaven News *The Full Story...* NIREX will not be changing its name to make it more acceptable to the public. The new chairman of the nuclear waste body, Sir Ken Jackson, was asked if a new title was planned when he met some 100 shop stewards at Sellafield on Monday. "People would distrust us more if we tried to change the name, but we have to learn from the past and change the policy approach to regain public support," said Sir Ken, who is also General Secretary of the million-strong AMICUS (AEEU) union. He went to Sellafield to explain what Nirex is planning. He said the nuclear waste body is going to be "independent and transparent" in the way it tackles the problem of waste. But his visit angered Copeland Council leader George Usher. He said: "I thought it a bit cavalier for Sir Ken to come here to talk to his trade union colleagues but not to have the courtesy to let the local council know. "I am trying to attract more people to this area and then we get Nirex rearing its ugly head again. "Hearing his interview on the radio was the first I knew of this. "Ignoring the views of local people was the problem Nirex had last time.'' Sir Ken fielded questions from all the shop stewards at Sellafield. Barry Kane asked what he thought of the fact that the French were allowed to use the cross channel inter-connector to export their electricity but would not allow a return sale of power. Sir Ken said: "France and Germany may not always play by the Marquis of Queensbury rules and we have to insist that the interconnector link should be two-way.'' But he praised the way the French had invested in nuclear power and added: "We in Britain need to decide quickly on new build and investment in nuclear power.'' Talking of his position, he said: "When I agreed to take the chairmanship it was on the basis that Nirex is independent and that all decisions will be transparent and open to public scrutiny. "The waste will have to be monitorable and retrievable, whether it is in surface storage or underground.'' He estimated some four to five years of discussions before a likely solution was hammered out. "Even if the nuclear industry closed tomorrow we have to deal with the waste. It is not acceptable to leave it for future generations to deal with.'' Welcoming the union chief were local union leaders Alan Westnedge, Doug McCartney, Doug Rooney, Grant Cattanach, Howard Rooms and Peter Kane ***************************************************************** 5 The human factor Sci/Tech > Environment: "Soundings" Column from the June 27, 2002 edition The human factor By Susan Llewelyn Leach When Chernobyl's Unit 4 exploded in 1986, I was sitting in Scotland. Soon, I was reading about radioactive sheep; lamb was off the menu, and hundreds of upland farms were coping with contamination from the fallout of the Soviet nuclear-power plant. Back then, British scientists were predicting that restrictions on the sale and slaughter of sheep would last only a few months. Now, almost two decades later, contamination lingers and some restrictions have been extended for another decade. The disaster's half-life is proving longer than anticipated. But perhaps the greater fallout has been the erosion of trust. Things nuclear have become suspect in the public eye. And what the authorities say about things nuclear is equally under suspicion. The public might not have it all wrong. In the early days after Chernobyl, secrecy, confusion, and misinformation fed people's fears. Some of that was standard Soviet operating procedure. But even in the US, when Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island reactor core partially melted down in 1979, obfuscation ruled. When the dust settled, Metropolitan Edison was indicted on 11 counts and pled guilty to one for violating NRC regulations. In the thick of a crisis, facts can be scarce, and human error often a central player. The Chernobyl technicians were running a test when they decided to turn off all safety mechanisms. The rest is history. For good nuclear design, suggests one nuclear-materials consultant in our lead story , the philosophy should boil down to: "You can't trust humans." Copyright © 2002 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Nuclear plant upgrades after NRC inspection *Pittsburgh, PA* Wednesday July 3, 2002 Thursday, June 27, 2002 By Don Hopey, Post-Gazette Staff Writer There was no problem last August at FirstEnergy's Beaver Valley nuclear reactors in Shippingport, but if there had been, as many as 1,200 homes in the more remote reaches of Beaver County might not have heard an alert siren. A Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspection determined that FirstEnergy could not provide early notification to the entire population living within a 10-mile emergency planning zone because a majority of the personal home alerting devices had not been adequately maintained and tested. The personal home alerting devices have not been repaired, but are no longer a concern because FirstEnergy has installed additional pole-mounted sirens to alert those residents who were relying on the older devices. "These were minisirens installed in the mid-1980s outside of those homes and upstream from the electric meter," said Neil Sheehan, an NRC spokesman. "Beaver Valley is the only plant in the nation that used such devices, which were installed to deal with those residents living in remote areas." He said NRC inspectors weren't satisfied with the alert system tests performed by FirstEnergy in August. Other nuclear facilities commonly rely on pole-mounted sirens to alert nearby residents in case of an emergency. Sometimes the siren systems are supplemented by emergency vehicles using loudspeakers or automatic phone dialing to call every household in area. Although FirstEnergy has corrected the problem, the NRC yesterday characterized the August inspection report as a "white" finding, meaning it had low to moderate safety importance. Under its safety process, the NRC classifies conditions at nuclear plants as being one of four colors, beginning with "green" at the least threatening end and progressing to "white," "yellow" or "red." Sheehan said the "white" finding requires the NRC to reinspect the alert system. He said it is "unlikely" the Toledo, Ohio-based energy company will be fined. Copyright ©1997-2002 PG Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 7 * UN Launches Chernobyl Disaster Website * *GENEVA, Switzerland,* June 26, 2002 (ENS) - The United Nations has created a new website to encourage countries to recommit themselves to an active role in the relief effort for the victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Stressing the human dimension of the Chernobyl disaster and the continued suffering of its victims 16 years after the world's worst nuclear accident, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Tuesday, "If we are to mobilize the international support that the people still living in the shadow of this tragedy so badly need, we must ensure that others do not forget it, by providing a steady and sustained flow of impartial and reliable public information." child Child victim of the Chernobyl explosion and fire on April 26, 1986. (Photo courtesy Greenpeace /Spasokukotskiy) "During my recent visit to Ukraine and the Russian Federation - which, along with Belarus, are the countries most affected by the catastrophe - I saw that, despite the passage of 16 years, much still remains to be done to alleviate the human suffering that resulted from it," the Secretary-General added in his message, which was delivered by Sergei Ordzhonikidze, director-general of the UN Office in Geneva. In pledging the UN's continued support, Annan called for a concerted effort by all countries and urged them to follow the example set by Switzerland, which conceived of, supported and created the site providing comprehensive information in German, English and Russian on the international response to the disaster. * * * Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2002. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Chernobyl fallout fears WEDNESDAY 26/06/02 16:31:30 Infant deaths and birth deformities in England and Wales may have been increased by the fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster, a scientist said. Clouds of radioactive gases went into the atmosphere following an explosion at the Soviet plant in 1986 which caused devastation across the Ukraine, Russia and Belarus. But a British researcher believes the true impact has yet to be fully assessed and could cause grave concerns across Britain. John Urquhart, the statistician who discovered leukaemia outbreaks in pockets around the Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria, researched health indicators across 15 health districts in England and Wales. He discovered important variations in levels of congenital malformations and baby deaths in 1986. Prior to the Chernobyl disaster incidents of infant death rates and birth defects were generally on the decline, he said, but figures showed that trend was reversed in the wake of the nuclear fallout. The North West, North East, South West and Trent regions experienced distinct jumps in congenital deformity and infant mortality rates post-Chernobyl. Mr Urquhart, based in Newcastle upon Tyne, said: ``We do not know if there is any long-term damage to the reproductive system of people. The one thing we do know is that we have been too complacent about the extent to which Chernobyl affected Western Europe.`` Mr Urquhart was asked to write a paper on national health studies after Chernobyl and assessed health records from 1983 to 1992. He calculated that added radiation could have accounted for more than 600 extra cases of Down`s Syndrome, spina bifida, cleft palate and other abnormalities across England and Wales during these years. The Government must look more closely at the Chernobyl phenomena for two reasons, according to Mr Urquhart. Not only could there be important indicators for health issues, but also vital historical information could be collected which previously was unavailable. The vast majority of research into nuclear fallout was carried out following the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Mr Urquhart said. But a gap exists in studies because no work was conducted in the first five years following the Second World War devastation. ``If there were early health effects from the bombs` fallout, they never found them because they weren`t looking there,`` he said. ``The Chernobyl explosion has given us the opportunity to look at early health factors. ``This has to be tested and a lot more investigation has to take place.`` Mr Urquhart`s findings were presented to the Dublin Institute of Technology`s conference on low-level radiation and health last weekend. ***************************************************************** 9 Extent of Chernobyl damage questioned The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition Wednesday Jul. 3, 2002 (09:35) Jun. 27, 2002 Extent of Chernobyl damage questioned By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH Sixteen years after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, the head of the Israel Cancer Registry says scientific studies show the fallout caused much less damage to those exposed to its effects than had been expected. Dr. Gad Rennert, an epidemiologist at the Technion's medical school who maintains records for the Health Ministry on all cancer cases, says the principal harm from the nuclear meltdown has been a significant increase in thyroid cancer in children, which is "relatively easy to treat." Rennert said low levels of radiation were responsible for the happy news. He believes that increased reports of breast cancer and other conditions in the Chernobyl region are the result of "increased anxiety among residents, who go for checkups; but when we compared the prevalence of various cancers in the affected area with those in Moscow or Leningrad, where there was no radiation, we didn't see a difference." Rennert insisted: "We have to trust true scientific evidence, and not go by what people say. In fact, no one has yet shown any significant health effects other than a huge increase in thyroid cancer in children there [about 400 percent]. "There is practically no evidence today of genetic damage, although we have found some genetic changes in the children of 'liquidators,' who were immediately send to clean up the reactor, and have since come to Israel. But we found these kids were perfectly healthy and had no symptoms. We didn't even tell them of these changes, so as not to cause them unnecessary anxiety." Rennert wants to continue to conduct research, "but it is getting harder to find funding, because major Western institutions... are unwilling to give grants since no studies so far have shown significant harm to residents of the Chernobyl region." There has been an increase in reports of chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the CIS, but every expert agrees that this is one of the few types of cancer that is not caused by radiation, said Rennert. "The higher rate in the CIS, we believe, is caused by worried people going for tests." CIS health experts, he continued, "are interested in publicity about increased disease due to Chernobyl, because they then get political support... There is no food production in a 30-kilometer zone around the reactor. People quickly knew they shouldn't eat food there, and they don't live there." But Jay Litvin Chernobyl liaison of the Chabad project that has brought thousands of Jewish children from Belarus and Ukraine to Israel said he disagrees with Rennert on nearly all of his points. Litvin, who has made many visits to the CIS, said that "Chernobyl children continue to be at high risk even 16 years after the accident, and the consequences seem to be worse, not better than expected." He said that because the Chernobyl accident occurred at ground level, the radiation's effect was even worse than an equivalent amount released from an atmospheric detonation, such as occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. "While it is true that radioactive iodine that can cause thyroid cancer has a half-life of only 16 days, cesium, strontium, and plutonium have half lives that last for decades, and in some cases for hundreds of years." In addition to thyroid cancers, maintained Litvin, "there are reports of serious health consequences in children, both those alive at the time of the disaster and those born after. An increase in breast cancer has been recognized internationally, with a doubling of breast cancer cases in the area of Gomel, Belarus, and others reported to me personally on my visits to Zhitomer, Ovruch, and Chernigov Regional Hospitals in northern Ukraine." Along with reported increases of tumors of the thyroid, lung, stomach, skin, prostate, breast, and uterus of adults and children, there is serious concern for the genetic effects of low-dose radiation both on the children alive at the time of the disaster and those born after. Each year, 2,500 births are recorded with genetic abnormalities, and 500 pregnancies are terminated after testing. According to Olga Bobylova of Ukraine's health services, "Ukrainian children harmed by radioactive food form a new generation of Chernobyl victims who could pass the accident's tragic legacy on to the next." Litvin said that "while there is merit in not exaggerating Chernobyl's consequences, there is danger in understating it. Not only do we take risk underestimating radiation's effects, we jeopardize the chances for the contaminated republics to receive the medical aid they so desperately need." Previous article Digital Israel / JPost Radio © 1995-2002, The Jerusalem Post - All rights reserved, ***************************************************************** 10 CHERNOBYL ECHOES AGAIN. THIS TIME IN GREAT BRITAIN Jun, 27 2002 *15:36 2002-06-27 * The consequences of the 1986 catastrophe at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (Ukraine) are still the focus of numerous investigations. These are investigations mostly held, not in Russia or Ukraine, but in Western Europe. A group of British scientists headed by John Urquhart has come to a conclusion that the radioactive cloud affected the state of people’s health in many European countries, Great Britain in particular. The scientists analyzed infant mortality and sickness rates in England and Wales. The /New Scientist/ magazine reports that the infant mortality rate increased by 200 children within 36 months since the passing of the radioactive cloud. At the same time, thenumber of registered defects, including Down Syndrome, increased by 600 children within the same period. Professor Urquhart’s group analyzed the records of infant mortality and birth defects over the period of 1983–1992 and concluded that all anomalies were concentrated in the regions and time periods connected with the radioactive cloud from Chernobyl. The results of the investigation reveal that the Chernobyl catastrophe has brought grave consequences even to such remote countries like Great Britain, although it is situated far from the Ukraine. It is not ruled out that more investigations of the negative consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe are to be held soon. *Vasily Bubnov PRAVDA.Ru * *Translated by Maria Gousseva* Read the original in Russian: http://pravda.ru/main/2002/06/27/43340.html TOP.RBC.ru Chernobyl nuclear power station becomes history TOP.RBC.ru Shut down of Chernobyl nuclear power station won’t lead to mass migration PRAVDA.Ru 16 years of Chernobyl catastrophe PRAVDA.Ru Chernobyl – everlasting concern of Ukraine PRAVDA.Ru UN to turn Chernobyl into tourist Mecca? Chernobyl Suspected in Rise in UK Child Deaths BBC : Chernobyl could happen again BBC : Chernobyl radiation on the rise The Guardian (UK). : Sellafield attack could be worse than Chernobyl Printing version you may discuss the article in our forum Pravda.RU:Top Stories *15:36 CHERNOBYL ECHOES AGAIN. THIS TIME IN GREAT BRITAIN * The consequences of the 1986 catastrophe at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (Ukraine) are still the focus of numerous investigations. These are investigations mostly held, not in Russia or Ukraine, but in Western Europe. A group of British scientists headed by John Urquhart has come to a conclusion that the radioactive cloud affected the state of people’s health in many European countries More details ... Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU ". When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, reference to Pravda.RU should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coinside with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors. ***************************************************************** 11 [radiation-survivors] Hanford exposures can sue...Medscape article Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:18:38 -0500 (CDT) Thought this might be of interest...Sincerely, Agnes (Please remember the Tooth Fairy Project for baby teeth....www.radiation.org June 27, 2002 US Court Rules Washington Residents Can Sue For Nuke Exposure SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) Jun 19 - A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled thousands of Washington state residents could sue over illnesses blamed on a Cold War plutonium plant, reversing a lower court dismissal of most of the claims. The ruling rebuffs defense lawyers' efforts to limit damage awards against contractors who operated the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, the most highly contaminated nuclear site in the United States, which released radiation as it produced fuel for US atomic weapons as far back as 1943. Many of the plaintiffs claimed radiation had caused thyroid cancer, as well as bone, breast and salivary gland cancer. Damage awards could reach tens of millions of dollars. The defendants include several industrial companies that ran the plant until 1986, including General Electric Co. and DuPont Co. "We are of course disappointed. We are studying the ruling and we are not sure exactly where we will go from here," defense lawyer Randy Squires said of the 12-year-old case. Hanford, a former nuclear weapons production site in south-central Washington state, released radioactive materials into the air, water and soil, sometimes intentionally and sometimes by accident, according to Washington state health officials. Many of those who lived downwind from Hanford or who used the Columbia River downstream were exposed to radiation that may have caused various diseases, state officials said. The appeals court panel in San Francisco overturned a ruling by Judge Alan McDonald from the US District Court of Eastern Washington that would have eliminated claims of about 90% of some 4000 plaintiffs from southeast Washington and nearby Oregon and Idaho. On Tuesday the appeals court lowered the amount of exposure to radiation required to prove physical harm, thereby allowing thousands to sue, but also limited damages for emotional distress to only those plaintiffs who actually became ill. Defense lawyers could ask for a hearing before the full appeals court or appeal to the US Supreme Court. Barring settlement talks, plaintiffs' attorneys were preparing to seek class certification for their clients and to present their full case before the circuit court. "We are looking at another year of development and preparation, but who knows what could happen to this case in that time," plaintiffs' attorney Tom Foulds said. Both sides said the case could go on for several more years. The federal government has begun cleaning up or stabilizing some of the Hanford waste. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Reuters Health Information 2002. © 2002 Reuters Ltd Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/3PCXaC/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/6xSolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: radiation-survivors-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ----- Together we can make a difference.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 12 Dirty nukes: Nuclear proliferation is a neglected threat Thursday, June 27, 2002 Dirty nukes: Nuclear proliferation is a neglected threat *News-Journal editorial* /Editor's note: This is the second in a series of three. / In the old world order, the nuclear triad referred to nuclear arsenals: Sea-launched ballistic missiles, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and nukes dropped from bombers. Cold War diehards may wish it still were so, but the new world order's triad more accurately refers to something else: Commercial nuclear energy, nuclear waste and nuclear weapons proliferation. If the world escaped annihilation from the first triad, it has yet to figure out how to escape localized annihilation from the second. Far from a plot line in a Tom Clancy novel, nuclear trafficking is getting insidious. It just hasn't reached critical mass to yield a disaster. Since 1993, the United Nation's International Atomic Energy Agency has reported more than 500 seizures of nuclear materials. Six of those seizures since 1999 involved weapons-grade nuclear materials. In late 1998, Russia's equivalent of the FBI busted an insiders' heist that would have netted 35 pounds of enriched uranium from a weapons lab. That would have been enough to build a bomb. Those are the lucky few instances when seizures were possible. Officials at the agency and the Department of Defense believe most trafficking slips through, beginning on a "nuclear silk route" that leads to 600 metric tons of enriched uranium and plutonium stockpiled in Russian weapons labs. Those stockpiles are Klondike gold to terrorists. Sooner or later, al-Qaida-grade terrorists could strike a vein. Through the 1990s, the United States took the threat of that kind of nuclear proliferation seriously, investing billions of dollars to improve nuclear security in Russia, to retrain Russian nuclear scientists (who could otherwise be blackmailed into working for bad guys), and to fund the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors stockpiles and chases after nuclear thieves. Then came President Bush. Just before Sept. 11, his proposed budget included a $100 million cut in America's nonproliferation spending. You'd think Sept. 11 would have changed the president's view. But only Congress did, barely: Instead of cutting non-proliferation programs $100 million, they were cut $69 million. Bush wanted to kill the separate program designed to keep nuclear scientists from free-lancing for rogue states. Congress saved that one, too, but many wanted it increased from its current $27 million budget. They failed. Cutting nuclear non-proliferation money is like cutting foreign aid. The effect won't be felt immediately, maybe not even for years. But it will be felt eventually. And when it hits, the consequences could be disastrous. Of course, a badly guarded stockpile of plutonium somewhere in Russia's Ural Mountains isn't likely to get American constituents jamming their congressional representatives' e-mail accounts with petition drives to do something about the problem. Yet that's exactly what constituents -- whether in Holly Hill, Bismark, N.D., or Midland, Texas -- ought to be doing if they don't want the wrong kind of bang for their "homeland security" bucks. © 2002 News-Journal Corporation , news- journalonline.com (SM) ***************************************************************** 13 Uranium processor in S.C. is closed *Charlotte Observer* ** *Thursday June 27 07:40 AM EDT* /By JENNIFER TALHELM, Staff Writer/ South Carolina's environmental control agency has ordered an emergency shutdown of a uranium processing company where investigators fear the groundwater is badly contaminated and which, they say, unsafely stores material that could be stolen for a dirty bomb. The S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control closed down the Barnwell County company Starmet CMI Inc. Tuesday night, evicting most of the employees and installing armed guards. Starmet immediately requested an emergency appeal, which is scheduled for Monday. Company officials and employees decried the shutdown. They said Gov. Jim Hodges was behind the order, using the company to help his re-election bid. * Full story at The Charlotte Observer * Copyright © 2002 Yahoo! and Charlotte Observer Copyright © 2002 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 GAO Cites Rising Nuke Smuggling Risk *Las Vegas SUN <../>* June 26, 2002 WASHINGTON- The nation's vulnerability to attacks using nuclear weapons or "dirty bombs" is worsened by its own poorly funded, ill-coordinated efforts to stop the smuggling of radioactive materials, the General Accounting Office said Wednesday. Citing 181 incidents in which nuclear materials were smuggled over the past decade, GAO said the six federal agencies involved do not work together and use different methods of detecting radiation at border crossings. Investigators said the United States has spent nearly $90 million on efforts that include outfitting more than 30 other countries with radiation detection equipment but has not installed the same gear at U.S. border crossings. "Basically, we're doing more to protect the borders of Russia than we're doing to protect our own," said Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., who asked for the report from GAO, the investigative branch of Congress. The GAO said U.S. assistance generally is helping countries including former Soviet Union nations stop the smuggling of radioactive materials. Assistance includes radiation detection equipment, mobile X-ray vans, inspection tools, patrol boats and training. Even so, investigators found widespread problems with equipment. Examples: -GAO found a portal monitor on a road in Bulgaria not open to traffic. -Portal monitors sat unused for two years in the basement of the U.S. Embassy in Lithuania. -Protective suits and detectors were stored for seven months in an embassy garage in Estonia. -Half of portal monitors provided to Belarus were never installed or not operational. -Mobile X-ray vans idled by cold weather and fuel costs in Russia and Kyrgyzstan. In addition, GAO said that widespread corruption exists among border crossing guards and customs officials; one Eastern European law officer said inspectors switch off detectors in exchange for bottles of alcohol. GAO said the U.S. government has no strategic plan to coordinate all its programs. The departments of Defense, Energy and State and the Customs Service, FBI and Coast Guard all provide assistance, but some agencies install more sophisticated equipment than others, leaving border crossings in some countries more vulnerable than others. However, Roberts, top Republican on the Senate Armed Services subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities, said the White House knew the report was coming and will tackle nuclear smuggling problems as it puts together the proposed Homeland Security Department. The White House Office of Homeland Security and the National Security Council have assembled a working group on nuclear smuggling, Roberts said. "This comes right in the midst of the reorganization of the Office of Homeland Security, and it points out one of the primary concerns in regard to intelligence threats and what could happen," Roberts said. "If there's a wave of reorganization and reform, you want to catch it." --- On the Net: Congress: http://www.thomas.loc.gov -- All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 15 Terrorism and Nuclear Energy Understanding the Risks © 2002 The Brookings Institution All Rights Reserved. Terrorism and Nuclear Energy Understanding the Risks by *Gwyneth Cravens* Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, Americans have had to learn to discriminate between real and imagined risks in many areas. When it comes to domestic nuclear terrorism--a subject that has been touched recently by highly speculative journalism--making that distinction requires knowing some nuclear fundamentals. Based on science, what should Americans worry about? Is radiation always dangerous? How do we protect ourselves? Could terrorists unleash a Chernobyl on our soil? Could nuclear waste dumps or power plants be transformed into atomic weapons? Could terrorists make a "dirty" bomb capable of widespread contamination and deaths from radiation? Could they steal an American nuclear weapon and detonate it? The Energy Department's nine national laboratories have begun an extensive review of counterterrorism, including the vulnerability of U.S. nuclear sites and materials. Some findings may remain undisclosed for security reasons; others may be made public--soon, one hopes. Meanwhile, here are some basics. * Radiation * Radioactive materials contain unstable atoms, radionuclides, that emit excess energy as radiation, invisible but detectable by instrument. Some atoms lose their energy rapidly; others remain dangerous for thousands, even millions of years. Certain forms of radiation are more hazardous to humans, depending on the type of particles emitted. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), composed of scientists and consultants from 21 nations, provides comprehensive evaluations on sources and effects of radiation as the scientific basis for estimating health risk. UNSCEAR's reports are almost universally considered objective and reliable. It recently listed annual average exposures per person worldwide. Natural background radiation: 240 millirem worldwide (300 millirem in the United States). The earth's core is a natural reactor, and all life evolved within a cloud of radiation stronger than background radiation is today. Cosmic rays, sunlight, rocks, soil, radon, water, and even the human body are radioactive--blood and bones contain radionuclides. Exposure is higher in certain locations and occupations than in others (airline flight personnel receive greater than average lifetime doses of cosmic radiation). Diagnostic medical radiation: 40 millirem (60 millirem in the United States). This is the largest source of manmade radiation affecting humans. Other common manmade sources include mining residues, microwave ovens, televisions, smoke detectors, and cigarette smoke--a pack and a half a day equals four daily chest x-rays. Coal combustion: 2 millirem. Every year in the United States alone, coal-fired plants, which provide about half of the nation's electricity, expel, along with toxic chemicals and greenhouse gases, 100 times the radioactivity of nuclear plants: hundreds of tons of uranium and thorium, daughter products like radium and radon, and hundreds of pounds of uranium-235. Radioactive fly ash, a coal byproduct used in building and paving materials, contributes an additional dose. Coal pollutants are estimated to cause about 15,000 premature deaths annually in the United States. Nuclear power: 0.02 millirem (0.05 in the United States). The Environmental Protection Agency, whose standards are the world's strictest, limits exposure from a given site to 15 millirem a year--far lower than average background radiation. For radiation to begin to damage DNA enough to produce noticeable health effects, exposure must dramatically increase--to about 20 rem, or 20,000 millirem. Above 100 rem, or 100,000 millirem, diseases manifest. Whether low-dosage radiation below a certain threshold poses no danger and may in fact be essential to organisms is controversial (the Department of Energy began the human genome project to help determine if such a threshold exists). If exposure is not too intense or prolonged, cells can usually repair themselves. Radiation is used widely to treat and to research illnesses. The horrible--and preventable--reactor explosion at Chernobyl caused fatalities and suffering among the local population but increased the overall background radiation level by a factor of only 0.00083 worldwide. According to UNSCEAR, contamination greater than background radiation was limited to 20 square miles around the plant. The severest casualties occurred among plant workers and firemen, two of whom died from scalding. Another 134 suffered acute radiation sickness. Twenty-eight of those victims died within three months; 13 succumbed later. The rest survived. Among civilians in surrounding communities, UNSCEAR found 1,800 cases of thyroid cancer, mostly in children, and predicted more would develop. Thyroid cancer could have been avoided, however, had the entire population surrounding Chernobyl been promptly given potassium iodide, which blocks the uptake by the thyroid of radio-iodine, a radionuclide produced by reactors. Fourteen years after the accident, no other evidence of a major health effect attributable to radiation exposure had been found. The UNSCEAR report states: "There is no scientific evidence of increases in overall cancer incidence or mortality or in non-malignant disorders that could be related to radiation exposure. The risk of leukemia, one of the main concerns owing to its short latency time, does not appear to be elevated, not even among the recovery operation workers. Although those most highly exposed individuals are at an increased risk of radiation-associated effects, the great majority of the population are not likely to experience serious health consequences from radiation from the Chernobyl accident." What UNSCEAR also found was that "the accident had a large negative psychological impact on thousands of people." Fear, born of ignorance of real risk coupled with anxiety about imagined harm, produced epidemics of psychosomatic illnesses and elective abortions. Better management of the emergency, including adequate dissemination of facts, probably could have prevented much of this psychic trauma. Risk perception tends to be skewed by unexpected, dramatic events--a quirk of human nature exploited by terrorists. More severe risks almost always lurk in everyday life: cardiovascular disease (about 2,286,000 U.S. deaths annually), smoking-related illnesses (over 400,000), and motor vehicle accidents (about 42,500). That other accident-related cancers may eventually appear around Chernobyl is possible but unlikely, given results of long-term surveys of the approximately 85,000 survivors of the bombs exploded over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Despite the far higher dosages of radiation to which these victims were exposed, recent data cited by Fred Mettler, U.S. representative to UNSCEAR and chairman of the Radiology Department at the University of New Mexico, show that 12,000 have died of cancer--700 more than would be expected. (Normally about one in three humans gets cancer.) A few years ago, after much debate, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission offered free emergency contingency supplies of potassium iodide to the 31 states with reactors, but most declined. Illinois has 11 reactors; its officials feared that the pills--"a cruel hoax"-- would fool people into thinking they were safe from radiation; they and officials in other states argued that evacuation was the best protection. Delay from the Food and Drug Administration regarding approval of the antidote, as well as opposition to it at the county level, created further obstacles. After September 11, communities and politicians expressed indignation that this inexpensive drug had not been stockpiled. Last December, the NRC announced that it would require states with populations within the 10-mile emergency planning zone of a nuclear power plant to consider "including potassium iodide (KI) as a protective measure for the general public in the unlikely event of a severe accident. This measure would supplement sheltering and evacuation, the usual protective measures." Nine states have now requested tablets. * Reactors * Could any of the 103 nuclear reactors in the United States be turned into a bomb? No. The laws of physics preclude it. In a nuclear weapon, radioactive atoms are packed densely enough within a small chamber to initiate an instantaneous explosive chain reaction. A reactor is far too large to produce the density and heat needed to create a nuclear explosion. Could terrorists turn any of our reactors into a Chernobyl? Again, extremely unlikely. American reactors have a completely different design. All reactors require a medium around the fuel rods to slow down the neutrons given off by the controlled chain reaction that ultimately produces heat to make steam to turn turbines that generate electricity. In the United States the medium is water, which also acts as a coolant. In the Chernobyl reactor it was graphite. Water is not combustible, but graphite--pure carbon--/is/ combustible at high temperatures. Abysmal management, reckless errors, violation of basic safety procedures, and poor engineering at Chernobyl caused the core to melt down through several floors. A subsequent explosion involving steam and hydrogen blew off the roof (there was no containment structure) and ignited the graphite. Most of the radioactive core spewed out. A similar meltdown at the Three Mile Island power plant in 1979--one caused by equipment malfunctions and human failure to grasp what was happening and respond appropriately--involved no large explosion, no breach. The reactor automatically shut down. Loss of coolant water caused half the core to melt, but its debris was held by the containment vessel. Contaminated water flooded the reactor building, but no one was seriously injured. A minute quantity of radioactive gases (insignificant, especially in comparison to the radionuclides routinely discharged from coal-fired plants in the region) escaped through a charcoal-filtered stack and was dissipated by wind over the Atlantic, never reaching the ground. The people and land around the plant were unharmed. In response, the NRC initiated more safeguards at all plants, including improvements in equipment monitoring, redundancy (with two or more independent systems for every safety-related function), personnel training, and emergency responsiveness. The commission also started a safety rating system that can affect the price of plant owners' stock. The new science of probabilistic risk assessment, developed to ensure the safety of the world's first permanent underground nuclear waste-disposal facility, has led to new risk-informed regulation. In over two decades no meltdowns have occurred and minor mishaps at all nuclear plants have decreased sharply. Cuts by Congress in the NRC's annual research budget over the past 20 years--from $200 million to $43 million--may have considerably compromised ongoing reforms and effectiveness, however. U.S. nuclear power plants, which are subject to both federal and international regulation, are designed to withstand extreme events and are among the sturdiest and most impenetrable structures on the planet--second only to nuclear bunkers. Three nesting containment barriers shield the fuel rods. First, metal cladding around the rods contains fission products during the life of the fuel. Then a large steel vessel with walls about five inches thick surrounds the reactor and its coolant. And enclosing that is a large building made of a shell of steel covered with reinforced concrete four to six feet thick. After the truck-bomb explosion at the World Trade Center in 1993 and the crash of a station wagon driven by a mentally ill intruder into the turbine building (not the reactor building) at Three Mile Island, plants multiplied vehicle and other barriers and stepped up detection systems, access controls, and alarm stations. Plants also enhanced response strategies tested by mock raids by commandos familiar with plant layouts. These staged intrusions have occasionally been successful, leading to further corrections. On September 11, all nuclear facilities were put on highest alert indefinitely. Still more protective barriers are being erected. The NRC, after completing a thorough review of all levels of plant security, has just mandated additional personnel screening and access controls as well as closer cooperation with local law-enforcement agencies. Local governments have posted state troopers or the National Guard around commercial plants, and military surveillance continues. What if terrorists gained access to a reactor? An attempt to melt down the core would activate multiple safeguards, including alternate means of providing coolant as well as withdrawal of the fuel rods from the chain reaction process. And if a jetliner slammed into a reactor? Given what is now publicly known, one could predict that earthquake sensors, required in all reactors, would trigger automatic shutdown to protect the core. Scientists at the national labs are calculating whether containment structures could withstand a jumbo jet, specifically the impact of its engines, which are heavier than the fuselage, and any subsequent fire. Even the worst case--a reactor vessel breach--would involve no nuclear explosion, only a limited dispersal of radioactive materials. The extent of the plume would depend on many variables, especially the weather. As a precaution, no-fly zones have been imposed over all nuclear power plants. Military reactors used for weapons production have all been closed for a decade and are spaced miles apart on isolated reservations hundreds of miles square. Any release of radioactivity would remain on site. * Commercial Nuclear Waste * Commercial radioactive waste is generated chiefly by nuclear power plants, medical labs and hospitals, uranium mine tailings, coal-fired power plants (fissionable materials are concentrated in fly ash), and oil drilling (drill-stems accumulate radioactive minerals and bring them to the surface). Nuclear power provides about one-fifth of the energy the United States needs for electricity generation. At plants around the nation, in deep, steel-lined, heat-reducing pools of water, spent-fuel rods are accumulating in temporary storage. In the 1950s the National Academy of Sciences determined that deep geologic disposal is the safest means on land of permanently isolating nuclear waste. Congress designated Yucca Mountain, at the Nevada Test Site--scene of more than 1,000 atomic blasts--as the first permanent U.S. repository for spent fuel. Its burial has been the goal of the Energy Department and the NRC for decades, but political and bureaucratic obstacles, rather than lack of scientific know-how, have slowed progress. If the present timetable holds, and if political support is forthcoming--still an open question despite President Bush's recent approval of Yucca Mountain--shipments of spent fuel from plants will begin around 2015. These days citizens have become acutely aware of the waste pools and have questioned their presence in populated areas, yet environmental activists have long sought to keep nuclear waste at power plants, insisting that its removal poses grave dangers. This view, though unsupported by the EPA, the NRC, and numerous risk-assessment studies (nuclear materials are transported daily around the nation without mishap, in contrast to accidents regularly associated with transport of toxic chemicals), has also resonated with politicians. Nevertheless, growing concern about fossil-fuel pollutants and global warming and the realization that nuclear power has spared the atmosphere from billions of tons of carbon dioxide emissions may be encouraging a change of attitudes. Challenges regarding subterranean disposal have already been solved. Because of breakthrough methodologies evolved during construction (by the Energy Department) and certification (by the EPA), New Mexico's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is the world's first successful deep geologic repository for the permanent isolation of federal (as opposed to commercial) nuclear waste. It is a model for other nations. For political reasons, WIPP is permitted by Congress and the state of New Mexico to accept only certain military waste. But nearly 1,000 detailed studies, as well as an innovation in probabilistic risk assessment invented by WIPP's scientists, have demonstrated that its remoteness, size, and stable geological and climatological features make it the safest place to store any type of waste. In fact, if enlarged or annexed, the WIPP could hold all U.S. nuclear waste generated for decades to come. Would a jet plane crashing into a waste pool cause a nuclear explosion? Given information now available, one can state that if the small target a pool presents were actually hit and coolant water were drained, spent fuel bundles would melt, react with the concrete and soil below the pools, and solidify into a mass--in effect causing containment. Some radionuclides would be vaporized and scattered, but in a very limited fashion, since spent-fuel rods lack immediately releasable energy. The waste pools contain practically no burnable materials. In dry-cask storage, an innovation safer than waste pools, a single bundle of rods is entombed in a thick concrete cylinder, 18 feet tall and 8 feet across, designed to withstand powerful impacts and widely separated from its neighbors. Air is the coolant. If one bundle somehow failed, not enough heat would be available to cause it or other bundles to melt. Sixteen plants have already converted to dry casks, and more will follow. Could terrorists steal spent nuclear fuel? First they would have to get past multiple impediments: guards, high double fences with concertina wire, floodlights, motion detectors, and cameras. Fuel rods are so radioactive that anyone coming within a few feet of them would become extremely ill and die within hours if not minutes. The more radioactive something is, the harder it is for someone to steal--and survive. Special equipment and thick lead shields are required for handling, and spent fuel for transport must be placed in casks weighing about 90 tons that have been stringently tested (burned with jet fuel, dropped from great heights onto steel spikes, and otherwise assaulted) and have remained impervious. Could terrorists make a nuclear weapon from commercial U.S. reactor fuel? Not easily. It is enriched with uranium-235 but not nearly enough to make it weapons-grade. Extracting the enriched uranium-235 would require a large, sophisticated chemical separation plant. * Weapons Facilities * Could terrorists rob a weapons facility of weapons-grade plutonium or uranium? Mock raids of the kind used to test nuclear power plants have been conducted to uncover weaknesses at weapons research sites. The exercises have demonstrated the need for maximum protection and independent oversight of security forces as well as of the network used to transport weapons materials. Since 10 a.m. on September 11, these sites have been placed on highest security. Precautions at some nuclear weapons facilities abroad are almost certainly weaker than here--and international terrorists would seem more likely to make a run at those installations before challenging ours. Terrorists with sufficient expertise and resources could in theory build a nuclear bomb but only with enormous difficulty. Starting a chain reaction is not simple. Highly enriched uranium--very problematic to acquire--would have to be correctly contained to obtain an explosion. Terrorists stealing an American nuclear weapon couldn't explode it without detailed knowledge of classified procedures that unlock numerous fail-safe mechanisms. Nuclear weapons that have been accidentally dropped from aircraft or involved in plane crashes, for instance, have not exploded. The reason: these devices are designed to blow up only when properly detonated. * Military Nuclear Waste * More than 61 million people live within 50 miles of temporary military nuclear waste sites, many of which hold--in antiquated, leaky enclosures or pressurized tents--the legacies of the Manhattan Project, the Cold War, and disarmament treaties requiring the dismantling of nuclear weapons. If politics do not interfere, within 10 years radioactive military waste will remain near 4 million people. In the 1980s, the Energy Department began a massive cleanup, the world's largest public works project ever. After a decade of delays and lawsuits by environmentalists, the WIPP opened in 1999. The satellite-monitored trucks that transport the waste have been highly and redundantly engineered, and their casks subjected to the same tests as those for commercial waste. Drivers are thoroughly vetted. Most shipments consist of mildly radioactive trash like coveralls, paper cups, and sludge. The debris is entombed half a mile underground in steel drums in a salt bed sandwiched between water-impermeable rock strata. The salt, plastic at that depth, and impermeable to radionuclides, eventually encloses the drums, providing another natural barrier. An aircraft diving into an above-ground nuclear waste dump could not cause a nuclear explosion. The materials are neither refined nor concentrated enough to start a chain reaction. (Any material that could sustain one has been removed to be reused.) And because most high-level waste is isolated on big reservations like Hanford and Savannah River, which are fenced in and under heavy surveillance, casual access is highly unlikely. Recently considerable apprehension has been expressed about nuclear materials being wrapped around conventional explosives to make a "dirty" bomb. This relatively low-tech approach appears more feasible than other threats and could induce widespread panic by appearing to expose a population to radiation. But how radioactive could such a bomb be? Spent fuel would deliver the highest dose of radiation. Contamination from such a bomb would be serious. But wrapping the conventional explosives with spent fuel would be, as noted, a cumbersome operation and would promptly subject the perpetrators to fatal exposure. Suicidal terrorists might nevertheless make the attempt, but it would be surprising indeed if simpler projects that can also pack a big punch were not pursued first, even by fanatics who are less than entirely rational. Last winter's "shoe bomber" tried to detonate not a nuclear device but rather a relatively available, very dangerous chemical compound concealed in his shoes. Neither medical nor WIPP-destined waste would provide much radioactivity because of the low concentration of radionuclides. More accessible materials (syringes, fly ash, uranium mine tailings, smoke detectors) could be included in a conventional bomb to make a Geiger counter tick a little faster, but physical damage from an explosion would be limited to what the conventional blast could do. Radiological harm would be negligible, if any occurred at all. * Further Steps * More must be done to secure our nuclear facilities. Operators must continue to improve safeguards, giving high priority to human engineering. Inexpensive but highly effective entry systems like those used at national laboratories should be instituted at power plants, and more fail-safe systems to compensate for human error ought to be installed. Safer, cleaner, more efficient reactor designs now exist and should replace outmoded ones. Without further delay, nuclear waste must be transferred to permanent repositories. Ultimately all nuclear facilities would be even safer if relocated underground. An infrastructure in which small reactors provided energy to regions, each independent of the national grid, would prevent a catastrophic nationwide power failure in the event of an attack. In recent years, the Energy Department has tried to make its operations more transparent, but it still needs to reach out to the public to win trust. The technological and political communities--now sharply divided--must begin dialogues at both national and local levels. Because people are now recognizing as never before government's essential role in providing protection, aid, and counsel, the time is right for leaders and policymakers in both camps to clear up old misunderstandings. *Gwyneth Cravens* has written about science and public health for the /New York Times, Harper's,/ and other publications. She is collaborating with Charles Platt on a book about nuclear issues. Assistance with technical information for this article was provided by D. Richard Anderson, a scientist specializing in risk assessment and environmental health and safety at Sandia National Laboratories until his retirement last December. The Brookings Institution, 1775 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 797-6000 | Facsimile: (202) 797-6004 | E-mail: Brookings Info ***************************************************************** 16 U.N. nuclear agency sees theft danger June 26, 2002 By Thomas Wagner ASSOCIATED PRESS LONDON ? More than 100 countries around the world may have inadequate programs to prevent or even detect the theft of radioactive materials a terrorist would need to build a "dirty bomb," a U.N. agency said yesterday. Governments, including the United States, must take urgent steps to raise security to prevent theft and recover supplies that are missing, the International Atomic Energy Agency said. "What is needed is cradle-to-grave control of powerful radioactive sources to protect them against terrorism or theft," said Mohamed El Baradei, the head of the IAEA. Since the September 11 terror attacks, the organization has stepped up efforts to prevent terrorists from obtaining weapons-grade nuclear materials or radioactive sources for a "dirty bomb." Fears of radiological terrorism grew when a purported plot to detonate such a weapon in Washington failed with the May 8 arrest of Abdullah al Muhajir, described by U.S. officials as a protege of Abu Zubaydah, a senior leader in the al Qaeda terror organization. Muhajir, a U.S. citizen, was formerly known as Jose Padilla. Priority must be given to help states create and strengthen national regulatory infrastructures to ensure that radioactive sources are properly registered and secured, the IAEA said. The IAEA did not list the more than 100 countries that may have inadequate security programs. But it did identify one widely known problem area ? former Soviet states that have become a traffickers' marketplace for radioactive materials. The U.N. agency said "uncontrolled radioactive sources are a widespread phenomenon" in states such as Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Even the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has reported that American companies have lost track of radioactive materials within the country since 1996, much of which was never recovered, the IAEA said. A European Union study estimated that every year up to 70 sources are lost from regulatory control in the bloc, and that a recent European Commission report estimated that 30,000 unused sources held in storage in the European Union are at risk of being lost from regulatory control, the IAEA said. A "dirty bomb" is not a weapon of mass destruction like a nuclear bomb, but uses conventional explosives to disperse radioactive materials. Nuclear experts say such an attack would kill no more people than a conventional bomb, but the dispersal of radioactive materials could lead to the exposure of some victims and cause widespread panic. In its report, the IAEA identified radioactive sources used in industrial radiography, radiotherapy, industrial irradiators and thermoelectric generators as those that are the most significant from a safety and security point of view because they contain large amounts of radioactive materials. As part of its worldwide efforts to improve security, the agency, Russia and the United States agreed on June 12 to develop a strategy to recover, secure and recycle radioactive sources that are outside official regulatory control in former Soviet states. ... All site contents copyright © 2002 News World Communications, Inc. Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 17 Harrietsfield upset over new uranium standards for water Thursday, June 27, 2002 Back The Halifax Herald Limited Harrietsfield upset over new uranium standards for water By Stephanie Roberts Residents of a community considered at high risk for uranium in well water are furious that the safe detection level was lowered more than a year ago, but they weren't told. Health Canada lowered the drinking water guideline for uranium, which applies to all provinces, from 0.1 milligrams per litre to 0.02 milligrams per litre in March 2001. But most Harrietsfield residents just found out last week. About 50 people attended a meeting Wednesday evening to voice their concerns to representatives from the provincial Departments of Environment and Health. "We weren't notified the uranium levels went up. It's a year and a half and we were just notified last week," said Newman MacNeil. "Everyone's upset here today," he said. The province has identified Harrietsfield as being at high risk for uranium contamination. "It's one of those things where if you live in this area, you're in an area where there is a potential for higher levels of uranium than other areas in the province," said David Briggins, manager of water and wastewater for the Environment and Labour Department. He said the guideline was lowered as part of an ongoing review process as new information became available. Some information came from animal studies. Also factored in were the results of studies of people living in other high-uranium areas. Several Harrietsfield residents expressed a fear of getting sick or developing serious health problems as a result of exposure to uranium. Mr. Briggins was quick to point out that uranium is not E. coli. "This is a very different situation from E. coli. With E. coli, that's a bacteria that can make you sick the next day if you drink just a little bit of the water," Mr. Briggins said. Dr. Robert Strang, medical officer of health for the Capital health district, said excessive long-term exposure would be needed to see any consequences, such as nephritis, or inflammation of the kidneys, the most commonly associated health concern. "So even though we changed the level from 0.1 to 0.02, I'm very comfortable saying that if your water has all along been meeting the level of 0.1, there's no concern about any health effects," Dr. Strang said. But Mr. Briggins noted standards exist for a reason. "However, we do set guidelines that have a potential for health risk and that's why we refer to them and we advise people to adhere to them." Mr. Briggins urged residents to test their water and, if uranium exceeds the national standard, to remove the chemical via distillation or reverse osmosis. That advice comes a bit too late, some residents said. When asked by a woman who said she has a chronic kidney condition why she wasn't notified of the change in standards, Mr. Briggins said the department doesn't maintain a database of private well owners. He said the department placed ads in newspapers and on its Web site, but he admitted those ads didn't mention uranium specifically. That didn't satisfy Mr. MacNeil. He said he pays $96 to have his water tested by the lab at the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre. Copyright © 2002 The Halifax Herald Limited ***************************************************************** 18 Bomb Material Missing From Tbilisi *Las Vegas SUN <../>* June 26, 2002 TBILISI, Georgia- International nuclear inspectors, already troubled by the disappearance of bomb-grade uranium from an ex-Soviet institute, want answers to an even more disturbing question: Has any equipment that makes such material disappeared as well? The facts lie beyond easy reach, on the overgrown grounds of the abandoned facility in rebel-held Abkhazia, a breakaway province of this post-Soviet republic run by separatists as a de facto independent state since 1993. Sometime after insurgents captured the Abkhazian capital, Sukhumi, driving Georgian scientists from the institute, its cache of highly enriched uranium - the stuff of nuclear bombs - vanished. A 1993 inventory showed 655 grams (1.4 pounds) of the material at the site, the Sukhumi I. Vekua Institute of Physics and Technology. American nonproliferation specialists say Georgian sources report it may actually have totaled 2 kilograms (4.4 pounds). It would probably take many times more than that to build a bomb. But the uranium dioxide pellets are of the highest grade - enriched to over 90 percent of the fissionable isotope U-235 - and it's the only known case of missing bomb uranium in the world, according to data maintained by California's Monterey Institute of International Studies. Georgian authorities say they have no clue whether illicit traffickers, well-intentioned scientists or others took the material. "There are many people who would be interested in it," the minister of Georgian state security, Valerian Khaburdzania, said in an interview here in the Georgian capital, 210 miles southeast of the Black Sea coastal city of Sukhumi. "It would have been easy for them to take it out by a ship coming in from Turkey, or from Ukraine. It's an uncontrolled area." Scientists of Russia's Atomic Energy Ministry, regaining brief access to the institute in 1997, later quietly informed Monterey nonproliferation experts that the uranium was missing from its bunker. In May 2001, an International Atomic Energy Agency mission, finally allowed to visit Sukhumi, also found no highly enriched uranium, said Kenji Murakami, safeguards division director, in a telephone interview last week from the Atomic Energy Agency headquarters in Vienna. The IAEA mission was dispatched at Georgia's request and under U.N. auspices to inspect the security of cesium and other radioactive materials still at the institute. Security there was "far from acceptable," said an IAEA source, speaking on condition of anonymity. The Sukhumi complex's work historically focused on enriching uranium to the high levels needed for bombs, and the U.N. agency, responsible for guarding against the spread of nuclear weapons, wants to learn what equipment was housed there and whether it is still there, the source said. But the 2001 mission had neither the experts nor legal authority to conduct such an investigation. Even if it had easy access to Abkhazia, the IAEA still wouldn't have full international legitimacy for conducting an inspection; that would come only when the Georgian Parliament ratifies an international agreement granting the IAEA deeper access to nuclear programs. The institute's history calls for such an investigation, the IAEA official said. "It needs a more extensive inspection" but, he said, "it needs a legal instrument." Said another agency official, spokesman Mark Gwozdecky, "We're concerned about the situation in any non-nuclear-weapon state and the possibility they have equipment or material that could be involved in the development of nuclear weapons." In the 1940s and 1950s, with the aid of physicists from conquered Germany, Sukhumi scientists developed gaseous-diffusion and gas-centrifuge technologies, processes in which uranium isotopes are separated and enriched sufficiently to produce an atomic explosion. After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Russian scientists at the institute withdrew to Russia, Georgia became independent, and ethnic Abkhazians rebelled. The last 200 scientists and technicians fled to Tbilisi in 1993. Isolated Abkhazia, in an uneasy truce with Georgia, has no international recognition and access from Georgia is severely restricted. For Iraq and other would-be nuclear powers, enrichment technology is a major stumbling block. Even 40-year-old centrifuges or other enrichment equipment, if available at Sukhumi, could benefit a state or group with nuclear ambitions, said physicist David Albright of Washington's Institute for Science and International Policy. "Anything helps. They certainly would look for what they could learn there at Sukhumi. Proliferation has always happened through slow acquisition of equipment to build a program," said Albright, who helped stifle Iraq's plans as an IAEA inspector in the 1990s. The Sukhumi institute eventually branched out to other fields. Its equipment inventory remains unknown to the IAEA, but institute staff may have worked on enrichment technology until the end. Ukrainian officials have disclosed that scientists who fled Sukhumi helped Ukraine develop its own centrifuge-enrichment technology in the 1990s. "The secrecy was so deep at Sukhumi. Nobody talked to each other about what was going on," said Valter Kashia, a space systems engineer who heads a Sukhumi institute-in-exile in Tbilisi. Kashia said the secrecy might account for reports that the highly enriched uranium at Sukhumi amounted to more than indicated in the 1993 inventory. "The Russians there might have been up to other things." Georgian scholar Tamara Pataraia, a nonproliferation specialist, said scientists in Tbilisi don't know what technology may have been stored at Sukhumi's top-secret sites. "It seems very urgent to get a clear answer. Is equipment still at Sukhumi or not?" In 1998, the U.S. Energy Department and other agencies organized the transfer of 4.3 kilograms (9.5 pounds) of enriched uranium from Georgia's other nuclear institute, in Tbilisi, to safekeeping in Scotland. But an Energy Department spokeswoman, Lisa Cutler, citing Abkhazia's inaccessibility, said last week she was unaware of any U.S. plans relating to Sukhumi. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 19 This proves N-plant killed my daughters Preston Online brought to you by the Lancashire Evening Post Published: Wednesday, 26 June 2002, 12:16 PM GMT By Ann-Marie Houghton A former nuclear chemist who believes the deaths of his three daughters were caused by the radiation he received, said today a new report proves he is right. Scientists now believe working in nuclear plants may be harmful after children of men exposed to radiation were found to have twice the normal risk of leukaemia and lymphoma. The new study, based at Sellafield, found that the incidence of leukaemia and non-Hodgkins lymphoma was 15 times higher in Seascale, a small village next to the nuclear plant, than in the rest of Cumbria. And they discovered the risk to children rose in line with the radiation received by their fathers who worked at Sellafield. Joe McMaster, of Greystoke Avenue, Fulwood, Preston, was working as an analytical chemist at Springfields, near Preston, in 1953 when he received a dose of radiation from enriched uranium during an incident at the plant. He today welcomed the new report. Mr McMaster said: "At long last the truth is slowly emerging. "I have been trying for years to get some answers ? my wife and I had four lovely daughters but alas have now only one. "Three have died ? two from leukaemia the type of which, we were told, was due to radiation. "I will never give up my quest for truthful answers as regards my family tragedies." Mr McMaster was working in Springfields' Hex plant where he claims he ingested a dose of enriched Uranium 235. ***************************************************************** 20 A New Bid to Keep Nukes Safe Thursday, Jun. 27, 2002. Page 4 A New Bid to Keep Nukes Safe The Associated Press LONDON -- New efforts are under way, including a program involving the United States and Russia, to safeguard dangerous radioactive materials that terrorists could steal around the world to build a "dirty bomb." The UN's International Atomic Energy Agency said in a report Tuesday such materials are easily available because more than 100 countries may have inadequate programs to prevent or even detect such thefts. The IAEA did not list the countries that may have inadequate security programs. But it did identify one widely known problem area -- former Soviet states that have become a traffickers' marketplace for radioactive materials. The UN agency said "uncontrolled radioactive sources are a widespread phenomenon" in states such as Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. As part of a worldwide effort to improve security, the agency, Russia and the United States agreed on June 12 to develop a coordinated strategy to locate, recover, secure and recycle radioactive sources that are outside regulatory control in the former Soviet Union. The Bush administration expects to spend $20 million this year to find and protect such radiological materials in Russia and the former Soviet states, a spokesperson for the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration, a division of the Department of Energy, said Tuesday. "This is a very important agreement," said Mark Gwozdecky, an IAEA director. "It addresses the region with the highest risk of large numbers of lost or 'orphaned' radiological sources." ***************************************************************** 21 G-8 leaders provide $20 billion to keep Russian nukes away from terrorists ROBERT RUSSO A look at the G8 summit Canadian Press Thursday, June 27, 2002 (CP /Adrian Wyld) Prime Minister Jean Chretien gestures during a news conference at the end of the first day of meetings. (CP /Adrian Wyld) KANANASKIS, Alta. (CP) - Russia reaped the rewards of being admitted to the world's most powerful club Wednesday and then collected $20 billion US to help keep its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons out of the hands of terrorists. After years of being treated as a poor relation invited to a rich man's table, Russia was accepted as a full member of the Group of Eight, the world's most exclusive economic forum. The dominant issue on the first day of the G-8 summit was a controversial new U.S. proposal for Middle East peace. Prime Minister Jean Chretien helped thwart his stated intention of keeping aid to Africa front-and-centre by sowing confusion over whether he endorsed a U.S. demand to replace Yasser Arafat before a Palestinian state can be recognized. The G-8 countries - France, Italy, Britain, Germany, the United States, Japan, Russia and Canada - began their meetings Wednesday among the magnificent mountain vistas of a secluded lodge. Access to Kananaskis was sealed off to all but authorized traffic. The air space above was closed, and even some local grizzly bears were fitted with radio transmitters to avoid any nasty surprises for the troops dotting the Kananaskis ridge surrounding the resort. The high-tech hardware wasn't enough to save one bear. The animal was accidentally killed on Wednesday when it got too close, Italian Prime Minister Sylvio Berlusconi said. The old Russian bear that was once the nemesis of those gathered at these jamborees was rewarded for shedding the yolk of communism and embracing capitalism. "The world is changing. Russia has demonstrated its potential to play a full and meaningful role in addressing the global problems that we all face," G-8 leaders said in a statement. "This decision reflects the remarkable economic and democratic transformation that has occurred in Russia in recent years, and in particular under the leadership of President (Vladimir) Putin." Russia will host the 2006 economic summit. The plan to eliminate Russia's old stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction will cost the United States $10 billion over 10 years. The other G-8 countries, excluding Russia, will contribute an additional $10 billion. Those gathering at the first G-8 since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 saw the money as a prudent investment. Fears have mounted since the attacks that terrorist groups such as al-Qaida might succeed in procuring biological, chemical or nuclear weapons from Russia's poorly guarded stockpiles. A Bush administration desperate for international support clung to the notion Wednesday that Chretien supported its plan to bring peace to the Middle East. Chretien refused to state outright if he agrees with Bush on Arafat, suggesting rather that Canada would accept the will of the Palestinian people. Chretien noted the Bush plan calls for elections, a constitution and a just legal system. "'I agree with that," Chretien said during a news conference. "I'm very much in favour of elections." But, he added: "I said that it's going to be the people of Palestine who decide who will be the leader." American officials insisted earlier Wednesday that Chretien supports the initiative, citing Chretien's comment Tuesday night that getting rid of Arafat "might be a good thing." That made him the only G-8 leader to appear to endorse Bush's proposal and contradicted an earlier statement by Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham. When asked during a briefing Wednesday if any G-8 leader backed Bush's blueprint, a senior aide to Bush immediately responded, "Chretien last night." "You heard what he said in public. It was very pronounced," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. Chretien said the leaders also: - Discussed the situation in Afghanistan, but did not consider expanding the war against terrorism. - Agreed that the global economy is on the upswing. - Expressed concern that the WorldCom fraud scandal has hurt financial markets: "It's a preoccupation and everybody agrees that we have to work on it collectively." - Agreed to keep working toward freer trade. - Agreed on a series of measures to make transportation more secure in the wake of Sept. 11, including reinforced cockpit doors, a global standard for the sharing airline passenger information and the need for a better system to identify high-risk shipping containers. As the G-8 met, several African leaders began arriving to pitch an aid plan for the troubled continent. Doubts about the success of the Africa initiative, championed by Chretien, have grown in recent days, especially after reports that Blair suggested it was "a washout." That was news to Chretien. "He didn't say that," Chretien insisted. "We will achieve our goals." The so-called NEPAD initiative, the New Partnership for African Development, rounds out the G-8 summit agenda. The plan aimed to attract an extra $100 billion of resources a year to the world's most impoverished continent. Its authors say it offers the best, and perhaps also the last, real chance of breaking the vicious circle of bad government, war, disease and poverty in which Africa is trapped. Under the scheme, rich countries would increase debt relief, aid and long-term investment. In return, participating African countries would commit to standards of good governance and human rights which they would police. In this way, they hope to lay to rest the negative image of Africa, perhaps the greatest deterrent to private investment in the continent. But countries such as the United States, Japan and Russia have shown little interest in the NEPAD plan, and Canada was struggling to get an agreement from the world's wealthiest countries to commit 50 per cent of their foreign aid to Africa. About 100 kilometres from the summit site, protesters marched peacefully through the streets of Calgary to protest the G-8, capitalism and globalism. "Who owns the streets? We own the streets!" they chanted as they marched amongst the skyscrapers. Things were more rowdy in Ottawa, where hundreds of rain-soaked protesters marched through downtown, some hurling golf balls and paint-filled balloons and buildings. Top developments Wednesday related to the G-8 summit: - Leaders agree on a series of measures to make transportation more secure in the wake of Sept. 11, including reinforced cockpit doors, a global standard for sharing airline passenger information and the need for a better system to identify high-risk shipping containers. - Prime Minister Jean Chretien says leaders close to a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin on a proposal to help the country eliminate much of its nuclear, chemical and biological arsenal under the terms of treaty signed recently between the U.S. and Russia. - Leaders express concern that the WorldCom fraud scandal has hurt financial markets. "It's a preoccupation and everybody agrees that we have to work on it collectively," Chretien says. - Leaders agree to keep working toward freer trade. - Chretien says he supports U.S. President George W. Bush's Mideast peace plan, which calls for Palestinians to elect a new government, enact a constitution and establish a just legal system. But he seems to back away from Bush's demand that Yasser Arafat be replaced, saying it's up to Palestinians to choose their leader. - African leaders visiting the summit in support of an aid plan for the troubled continent worry about how the proposal will fare after reports it isn't getting full backing from all G-8 leaders. The plan is to be discussed Thursday. - About 1,000 demonstrators march peacefully through Calgary in the morning, briefly blocking downtown intersections to protest the G-8 summit in nearby Kananaskis. They oppose globalization and capitalism. Smaller protests continue throughout the day. - In Ottawa, hundreds of rain-drenched protesters march through downtown. Some hurl golf balls and paint-filled balloons, breaking some windows and blocking traffic. More than 1,000 gather on the front lawn of Parliament. Hundreds later gather outside the U.S. Embassy and burn an American flag and an effigy of Bush. © Copyright 2002 The Canadian Press ***************************************************************** 22 Leaked Minatom Documents Show No Plan For Iranian SNF Charles Digges , 2002-06-27 15:42 *MOSCOW - Russia's Ministry of Nuclear Energy, or Minatom, has failed to secure guarantees from Iran that Teheran will return spent nuclear fuel that could be converted into weapons-grade plutonium, despite repeated assurances to the contrary from Moscow.* Iranian NPP was being constructed near the Persian Gulf city of Bushehr. With the cooperation and support of West Germany, Iran was building two reactors, each with a capacity of 1,200 megawatts to be operational in 1980. The entire programme came to an abrupt end in 1979. Russia decided to take the project over in 1990s. photo: sedona.net Charles Digges , 2002-06-27 15:42 Internal Russian government documents shown to Bellona this week prove that no agreement has been reached on the sensitive issue of how to handle the used nuclear fuel from a power station being built by Russia in Iran, which is to come into operation in a couple of years. The documents, which were originally leaked to the environmental group "Greenpeace" can now be viewed on the web at http://nuclearno.ru/text.asp?3305 (Russian only). Moscow's nuclear cooperation with Iran has become a heated subject between Russia and the United States ? which accuses Iran of sponsoring terrorism ? ever since Sept. 11, and the centre of this tension is the 1,000 megawatt Bushehr reactor located 800 kilometers south of Teheran. According to Russian news reports, the surfacing of the leaked documents early this week caused Nuclear Minister Alexander Rumyantsev to publicly admit that the deal for the return of the Iranian spent nuclear fuel (SNF) was still in "negotiation" stages ? forcing him to eat his words from a number of public television appearances and newspaper quotations where he had announced that the deal to ship SNF back to Russia from the Bushehr facility was sewn up. The Kremlin and Minatom insist the Bushehr reactor is a mammoth venture, an $800 million ? and supposedly civilian ? nuclear power enterprise that adheres to international norms, brings home cash, and ensures close relations with the Islamic regime in Teheran. Minatom has said publicly and repeatedly that the risk of nuclear arms proliferation is non-existent and that the spent fuel is to be repatriated to Russia for storage or reprocessing. In an interview earlier this month on Russian NTV channel's popular program "Geroi Dnya," or Hero of the Day, Nuclear Minister Rumyantsev said: "We have agreed with Iran that the used fuel will be returned to Russia." "This is fulfillment by Russia of our obligations on the non-proliferation of weapons-grade fissile materials," he added for a television audience of millions. He made a similar declaration in November last year. But a paper among the confidential documents, written for the Kremlin by Minatom, flatly contradicts that assurance. The paper states: "The question of managing the spent nuclear fuel is absent in the agreement between the governments of Russia and Iran on the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant on Iranian territory [?] Negotiations are taking place on the return of the spent nuclear fuel to the Russian Federation." Minatom's press service, reached Thursday, confirmed that "negotiations were taking place," but refused to comment directly on the leaked documents, saying that any questions related to the Bushehr reactor project would have to be faxed to press officials, at which point they would be reviewed and possibly answered in 40 to 45 days. The lack of an agreement about who gets the spent fuel suggests Iran is playing for time and may want to retain the SNF, which, when reprocessed, yields weapons-grade uranium and plutonium. "Iran would be in possession of weapons-usable material, plutonium," said a US Government official, who requested anonymity. "For a country like Iran, it would not be difficult to reprocess the spent fuel and isolate the plutonium. It would be a matter of weeks, not months." Despite top-level denials of wrongdoing from Moscow and Teheran, and piecemeal indications that Russia has refused several questionable Iranian requests in recent years, US officials interviewed by Bellona Web this week said that illicit technology and know-how transfers from Russian entities to Iran are continuing. But the secretive world of nuclear and missile exports; the murky role of Russia's security services, often vulnerable to bribery; and the desperation of Russia's nuclear scientists ? impoverished since the USSR's fall ? have created new risks. US concerns focus not on mishandling of nuclear materials at Bushehr ? which are supposed to remain under internationally monitored Russian control ? but on the possibility that Russian know-how will create a nucleus of Iranian experts who could apply new knowledge to a weapons program. "The new generation [of Russian nuclear experts] may work in Iran, and may work on nuclear weapons, because their lives are too hard and they want money, money, money," Valentin Tikhonov, a Russian Academy of Sciences expert on non-proliferation, told Bellona Web this week. "Most [of these scientists] can't see the difference between working on civilian or war production ? for them it doesn't matter," Tikhonov said. "In these conditions it is difficult to speak about human values, about the dangers of their work. They only want to survive. It is a catastrophic situation." Most nuclear scientists in Russia, Tikhonov added, make less than $50 per month. One Russian scientist, who has repeatedly travelled to Bushehr, told the Boston Globe late last month that Iran ? under the guise of the power plant ? is on the cusp of reaching its alleged weapons goals thanks to Russian help. "So what?" the Russian scientist told the Boston Globe on the condition of anonymity. "The Iranians will acquire these weapons. Pakistan has them. Israel has them. Other countries have them. So what if Iran has them?" The disclosure of the Minatom documents will undoubtedly increase broad trepidation about Russia's determination to push ahead with the lucrative contracts for the Bushehr power plant, and reinforce US criticism of the project. Despite the recent warming in relations between the White House and the Kremlin, Russia's nuclear assistance to Iran ? a country on the US list of "rogue states" ? is one of the biggest irritants in the Russian-American relationship. In February, President Vladimir Putin ordered Minatom to provide an "analysis" of Russia's year-old plans to import nuclear waste, a project critics contend will turn Russia into the world's nuclear dump. The Russian parliament passed ? under dubious circumstances and strong public opposition ? three bills last year on the importation of nuclear waste and the analysis was required by the Kremlin for Putin to give the final go-ahead, probably within months. Rumyantsev has acknowledged the dangers of the spent fuel remaining in Iranian hands. At a dinner in Washington last month he conceded that it was a "very sensitive issue," saying: "It is true that a nuclear power plant can become a source of proliferation once it has accumulated a certain amount of spent nuclear fuel," according to The Associated Press. The documents Minatom sent to the Kremlin recognise that the Iranian connection could upset Rumyantsev's plans to make Russia the world's leading importer of nuclear waste, a scheme that could, his ministry has claimed ? to widespread derision ? earn Russia $20 billion over 10 years. Aside from a long critical letter about Minatom's spent fuel market analysis, written by Russia's nuclear regulatory body Gozatomnadzor (GAN) ? also released earlier this week ? there is the fact that 70 to 90 percent of the world market in spent nuclear fuel is under the control of the United States, which has a commanding veto over what happens to that highly radioactive SNF. For the Russian import scheme to work, America's blessing is required. Russia needs a political agreement with the US for the nuclear imports plan to be feasible, the leaked documents state. "For a long time now the US has been making the issue of such an agreement conditional on Russia refusing nuclear cooperation with Iran," the documents say. Publisher: Bellona Foundation , President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway Menu system java script courtesy of Peter Belesis at the Dynamic HTML lab . [ (c) BELLONA -- Reuse and reprint recommended provided source is stated ] ***************************************************************** 23 Me and My Geiger Counter The New York Times *June 27, 2002* *By FRED BERNSTEIN* SHOULD I keep my Geiger counter running during dinner? Will its constant clicking keep me up at night? Those are the kinds of questions I've been asking myself since a black plastic Geiger counter, a camera-size device designed to measure gamma, alpha, beta and X-rays, arrived last week. All I had to do was switch it on and set it on my dining table. The clicks ? about 10 per minute ? announced the presence of background radiation (generally considered harmless) in my Greenwich Village apartment. In a nuclear emergency ? an attack or a reactor meltdown ? the rhythm would become more urgent. "At 100 clicks a minute, I'd start to worry," said Tim Flanegin of Mineralab in Prescott, Ariz., who sold me the $279 unit. Geiger counters, it seems, are the new Cipro. "Since 9/11, orders have doubled," said Mr. Flanegin, whose company uses the Web address www.geigercounters.com . Prices start at $170 for a kit and climb past $900 for a particularly sensitive model. The company's original customers were mineral collectors, Mr. Flanegin said, "but then this whole other market developed." First came Sept. 11, he said, and then another surge this spring, as tensions rose between India and Pakistan, and the Justice Department announced that it had foiled a plot to set off a crude radioactive weapon ? a "dirty bomb" ? in the United States. International Medcom, a manufacturer in Sebastopol, Calif., that also sells units to the public at www.geigercounter.com, is having trouble meeting demand, said its president, Dan Sythe. "We're hiring people and trying to increase production," he said. In my case, the decision to buy a counter followed a decision to buy potassium iodide, a drug that reduces the chances of thyroid cancer after exposure to fallout from a reactor. More than a dozen states plan to distribute the drug to people near nuclear power plants. (I live 40 miles from a nuclear plant, but the drug could also be useful after a dirty-bomb attack.) Once I got the pills ? a three-month supply, available on the Internet for $18 ? I began wondering how I would know when it was time to take them. "The question is, do you trust the government to keep you informed?" asked Lionel Zuckier, director of nuclear medicine at the New Jersey Medical School in Newark. Even assuming a policy of full disclosure, there might be delays ? possibly breakdowns in communication ? in getting information to the public. Debbie Baker, who lives near the nuclear power plant at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, has kept a Geiger counter on her window sill for 14 years. In 1979, when an accident at the plant released radiation into the atmosphere, Ms. Baker recalled angrily, "We didn't get information for three days." At the time, she said she had a 9-month-old daughter at home. The window-sill counter "represents peace of mind," said Ms. Baker, who is president of a citizens' monitoring committee. Not everyone, though, thinks the Geiger counter should take its place alongside the home smoke detector. David Allard, who oversees radiation-disaster preparedness for Pennsylvania, advises against the purchase of personal Geiger counters. For one thing, "you have to know how to interpret the data," he said. "If someone who had just ingested radioactive material in connection with a medical procedure walked past your house, the thing would start clicking like crazy," Mr. Allard said. "And there are trucks that carry nuclear material in the normal course of things. You'd be in a constant state of alarm." For an actual emergency, "there are plans in place, response teams that know what to do," he said. "The best thing is to turn on the TV and follow official instructions." Told of Mr. Allard's advice, Ms. Baker scoffed. She said her detector is set to sound whenever radiation hits three times the background level in her area, an event that she said typically occurs once a year, after a heavy rainfall brings down naturally radioactive dust. So if a bona fide alarm went off, what then? Dirty bombs, nuclear weapons and reactors present different issues, of course. The Council on Foreign Relations, in an encyclopedia of terrorism on the Web (www.terrorismanswers.com ), states, "In the case of a dust cloud thrown up by a dirty bomb, experts stress the importance of prompt decontamination ? taking off outer layers of clothing and washing any exposed skin." In the case of "penetrating radiation" like gamma rays or neutrons, the site advises those affected "to minimize the duration of their exposure by getting as far away from the radiation source as possible." In other words, act quickly. Still, $279 is a lot to spend for an alarm that probably will never sound. So what about some sort of communal early-warning system: public Geiger counters transmitting data around the clock? One such network, in central Pennsylvania, was installed in the early 90's by Ms. Baker's nonprofit group, the Three Mile Island Citizens' Monitoring Network. It posts the readings at www.tmi-cmn.org/map.htm , although Ms. Baker said that recent thunderstorms had knocked out part of the system. A larger network with 178 counters has been operating for more than a decade in France, which relies heavily on nuclear power; it can be monitored at www.opri.fr/html_opri/web_mesure_som.htm . About eight years ago, the designers of the French system, called Téléray, installed a unit atop a federal building at Varick and Houston Streets in Manhattan for the United States Department of Energy. The department has since added its own monitors at the site, and posts results, updated every 15 minutes, at www.eml.doe.gov/homeland . Mitchell Erickson, director of the department's Environmental Measurements Laboratory, said his agency was trying to secure $5 million to install some 30 monitors around the city. "We don't have that kind of money in our budget," he said. Dr. Zuckier of the New Jersey Medical School said he had proposed such a system for the city over three years ago. Linked by the Internet, the units could generate a kind of weather map of radiation. But he said he got nowhere, in his view because officials feared that real-time information could cause panic. But that was before Sept. 11. Francis McCarton, deputy commissioner of the city's Office of Emergency Management, said this week: "We have a new commissioner in place. We'd be happy to take a look at the plan." Dr. Zuckier's own demonstration unit, at Jacobi Hospital in the Bronx, feeds data to a graph at www .awel.com/nyc. A disaster would send the line on the graph shooting up, Dr. Zuckier said. Certainly, during an emergency, the radiation monitor or its Internet connection could fail. (Indeed, if the attack generated an electromagnetic pulse, most Geiger counters would be rendered useless. Some older models, including government surplus counters, would probably survive a pulse, according to Radmeters4U.com, a company that says it has 100,000 counters from the 60's and 70's at its warehouse in Gonzales, Tex.) For a newer, PC-compatible model, Dr. Zuckier referred me to Brian Boardman of Aware Electronics of Wilmington, Del., the company that made the unit at Jacobi (www.aw-el.com ). Aware's Geiger counters lack dials or displays and feed information to PC's instead. (Other companies make similar models for Macs, including Black Cat Systems, which is online at www.blackcatsystems.com .) For $149, I ordered Aware's RM-60, which arrived the next day. Connecting it to my PC took less than five minutes. Almost immediately I had a graph of radiation levels in my bedroom ? a chilling if fascinating sight. Mr. Boardman advised that as long as the reading remained flat, at around 15 microroentgens per hour, there was nothing to worry about. (The unit can be programmed to sound alarms or even send e-mail warnings when radiation levels increase.) Mr. Boardman had enclosed an egg-size rock containing uranium ore. When I held it near the small round opening on top of the RM-60, the line on the graph shot up. The same radioactive stone helped me confirm that my hand-held counter from Mineralab was working. Of the two devices, the RM-60, at half the price of the stand-alone unit, seemed the better buy. Its PC feed allows you to compare radiation levels over time and to check data accumulated while you are sleeping or otherwise engaged. And yet, if I needed to evacuate in an emergency, I would want to take my Geiger counter with me. Mr. Boardman recommended that I buy one of two accessories ? an attachment that generates audio clicks, for $19, or an L.C.D. display for $159 ? or that I connect my RM-60 to a palmtop instead of my desktop computer. I went ahead and ordered the $19 attachment. It has been a week since my first Geiger counter arrived, and I am beginning to find its slow click reassuring. Michael Nagle / The New York Times The spike in a graph on a PC monitor reflects the hand-held Geiger counter's reaction to a rock containing uranium. Kalim A. Bhatti for The New York Times Debbie Baker keeps a Geiger counter in her home near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania. Michael Nagle/The New York Times PREPARED - Mitchell Erickson, the director of the Energy Department's Environmental Measurements Laboratory, with a counter on a building at the corner of Varick and Houston Streets in Manhattan. ***************************************************************** 24 Waste storage gets few volunteers Sci/Tech > Environment from the June 27, 2002 edition Waste storage gets few volunteers By Seth Stern | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor While federal law gives the government the final say on where to put nuclear waste, states are not necessarily happy to see the materials arrive. *Related stories:* *06/27/02* Moving nuclear waste *06/27/02* Choosing routes, testing safety South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges recently challenged the pending shipment of six tons of weapons-grade plutonium to the Savannah River complex near Aiken, S.C. It would be brought from a Colorado nuclear-weapons plant for reprocessing into fuel for nuclear-power plants. The US is required to decommission some 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium under arms-control agreements signed with Russia. Governor Hodges wanted a binding agreement from the federal government that any plutonium left unreprocessed would not permanently remain in the state. He even posted state police at highway roadblocks to prevent trucks carrying the material from entering. However, a federal judge last week barred Hodges from blocking the shipments. Strong resistance to President Bush's designation of Yucca Mountain as a permanent waste depository has also sprung up in Nevada. In April, Gov. Kenny Guinn vetoed the site selection, and an override by both houses of Congress is now required to revive the project. The House of Representatives has already voted to override that veto, and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee has approved an override. The full Senate has until July to cast its vote. Nevada has also filed a half-dozen lawsuits in federal court challenging the process used to select Yucca Mountain. In the latest suit filed this month, Nevada alleged the Energy Department failed to address the environmental impact and terrorist risks of shipping fuel to Nevada. Even if the Yucca site is approved, more challenges will likely continue as shipments begin. Communities from suburban New Jersey to Columbus, Ohio, have announced they don't want fuel shipments passing through their jurisdictions. The US Conference of Mayors this month voted to oppose shipments to Yucca until cities along the routes have adequate funding and training to handle accidents or terror attacks. Write a letter to the Editor For further information: ? Yucca Mountain Project DOE ? Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office ? Nuclear Waste Route Atlas Environmental Working Group ? Just How Secure Is a Nuclear Waste Truck? Moscow Times Please Note: The Monitor does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window. ? *Visit the Monitor Web Directory : sites we like.* Copyright © 2002 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights ***************************************************************** 25 Opponent: Yucca not a solution Jul 03, 2002 Site Index Opponent: Yucca not a solution EWG leader says mountain would be full in one year Tue, June 25, 2002 * By NESREEN KHASHAN* Standard-Examiner Capitol Bureau SALT LAKE CITY -- The question of what to do with the nation"s radioactive waste will not be answered by selecting Yucca Mountain as the permanent repository for such material, a Washington, D.C., environmental group warned Monday. Instead, the Environmental Working Group said there are still gaping issues that the country needs to sort through, and it renewed its exhortation that the U.S. Senate oppose the Yucca Mountain proposal until those questions can be resolved. Ken Cook, president of the EWG, blamed the federal government for what he called the misconception that the Nevada desert site located about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas will solve the nation"s problem of storing spent fuel rods. "This is really just a matter of unpacking this story and the kind of mythology that has been developed by the Department of Energy that Yucca is the solution, that the waste will just be moved without describing the net effect of the waste that is left behind," Cook said. Citing DOE documents, Cook said the Yucca repository would store some of the nation"s radioactive waste while nuclear reactors scattered throughout the United States would continue to generate more. Cook"s comments were a pointed rebuttal at government contentions that storing the waste at one location was safer than keeping it at 131 separate nuclear power stations in 39 states. Currently Yucca Mountain is approved for storage of some 70,000 metric tons of waste if it were to open as proposed in 2010. "That means the site would be full within a year after it were to open," Cook said. According to Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of nuclear utility companies, a typical nuclear power plant generates about 20 metric tons of spent fuel rods a year. Dozens of plants nationally have renewed licenses to continue operating for at least the next 20 years. Those statistics means that some sites could in the coming decades store more spent fuel rods than they do now, even if Yucca were to handle some of the older waste. "The government needs to be honest with the public. They need to say that Yucca Mountain will leave a lot of waste behind," Cook said. Mike Casey, also with EWG, said nuclear power plants are not in crisis mode. Most have the ability to store their spent fuel rods for another 50 years before the DOE would have to decide what to do with the waste, he said. Yet if the Senate were to vote in favor of Yucca Mountain now, the decision would have profound implications for Utah, Casey said, because of the specter that Skull Valley would be a more attractive secondary site to handle the overflow waste. At the very least, Casey said it would mean Utahns would have to resign themselves to waste coming through the Wasatch Front for generations. Earlier this month, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee advanced the Yucca proposal to the full Senate in a 13-10 vote. The full Senate vote is expected next month. DOE spokesman Joe Davis said Yucca Mountain could expand to such a size that could store all spent fuel rods generated for the foreseeable future. "It is inconceivable that any environmental group could oppose Yucca Mountain when it will help us clean up the environment, Department of Energy nuclear weapon facilities and shut down nuclear power plants that store waste," Davis said. Copyright ©2002, Ogden Publishing Corporation ***************************************************************** 26 Yucca Mountain foes care little for halting shipments *Wednesday, July 3, 2002* *Twin Falls, Idaho* *Today's Editorial* Our view: If opponents to Yucca Mountain were concerned over waste shipments they would oppose shipment requests to Idaho, too. *Yucca Mountain foes care little for halting shipments* If some polticians truly think shipping spent nuclear waste to Nevada is a recipe for disaster, why do they support shipping the same kind of waste to Idaho? It's a good question. U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, wants to pose it to members of Congress who are undecided or opposed to building the Yucca Mountain waste repository in Nevada. Last week Simpson wrote to New York Sen. Hillary Clinton to ask for her support on Yucca Mountain. Simpson's letter came after Clinton's request that the Energy Department set a date to ship 125 spent nuclear fuel rods from West Valley, N.Y., to the Idaho National Environmental and Engineering Laboratory. He wants her to show that she supports a long-term solution to nuclear waste instead of merely a quick fix. Politicians and activist groups who oppose Yucca Mountain say nuclear waste shipments to Nevada will endanger U.S. cities. They say the trucks and rail cars equipped with waste caskets may leak radioactive material if there is an accident -- even though no such incident has ever occurred over 40 years and 1.5 million miles of waste shipments. But the "mobile Chernobyl" argument falls flat on its face when these same politicians and activists endorse shipping the same material to Idaho or other states. Clinton has made no public indication of how she'll vote on Yucca Mountain. Congress has until July 26 to decide. Simpson told Clinton that if she opposes Yucca Mountain, she'll "demonstrate to the people of Idaho and me that you only seek a politically expedient approach to this complex issue -- making New York's problem Idaho's problem." Clinton won't be alone if she does that. Other politicians such as Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, R-Colo., oppose the Nevada repository but have no problem parking their state's nuclear waste in Idaho. Politicians' willingness to ship here, but not to a permanent repository, reflects the hypocrisy of the Yucca Mountain opposition. If opponents really think cross-country waste shipments are unacceptable, they should fight Clinton's request (and similar shipments) just as vigorously as they're fighting Yucca Mountain. But stopping shipments isn't really their goal at all. If Yucca Mountain fails, shipments will go on like nothing ever happened -- and the opponents know it. What opponents want is to straitjacket the nuclear industry. By blocking Yucca Mountain, they'll make sure the problem of spent-fuel storage doesn't get solved in our generation. That would stymie further development of commercial nuclear energy. It's this kind of cynical strategy that keeps nuclear waste in the backyards of 161 million Americans, rather than one safe repository. If politicians were truly concerned about nuclear safety, they would support the only practical solution for spent-fuel storage. That's Yucca Mountain. Copyright © 2002, Magic Valley Newspapers A Lee Enterprises Publication ***************************************************************** 27 Yucca's false promise: Nukes repository a gift to nuclear power industry Tuesday, June 25, 2002 *News-Journal editorial* / Editor's note: This editorial is first in a series of three / The nuclear power industry on one side and the Bush administration on the other are trying to surround and disarm Nevada's resistance to becoming the nation's permanent nuclear waste dump. Other states shouldn't be fooled into indifference by Nevada's distance and deserts. They should join the resistance not because finding a permanent repository for waste isn't necessary. It is. But because Nevada's Yucca Mountain, the volcanic ridge where 75,000 metric tons of waste would be stored, is a dubious fix, and because rushing to Yucca is a favor to the nuclear power industry. If the repository is approved, the industry can build new nuclear power plants. It has been barred from doing so for two decades because the waste issue has been unresolved. Yucca's approval, in the words of Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, "will promote our energy security by removing a roadblock to expanding nuclear power." But the last thing America's energy future needs is increased reliance on nuclear power. The country doesn't need the additional waste. It doesn't need the potential dangers. It doesn't even need the energy. The administration also argues that storing waste away from the nation's 104 commercial nuclear power plants is a matter of national security. Its concern is hard to believe considering its refusal in April to approve the Energy Department's request for money to improve security at the plants (as opposed to the $26.4 million the administration approved for emergency response). The administration is more concerned about a string of lawsuits by the nuclear energy industry contending that the government broke a promise under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, which mandated that the Department of Energy would open a waste site by 1998. Contracts are contracts. But public health and safety come first. The decision to store waste at Yucca Mountain should be based entirely on scientific certainties that assure the site's and Nevada's safety for centuries. What has become clear is that current energy policies, misguided as they are, and nuclear power industry lobbying, which is self-serving, are the driving forces behind the manufactured sense of urgency the Bush administration has attached to the Yucca approval process. Science is secondary. That's reckless. Yucca would be the world's first repository of its kind. It has been studied for 20 years. Still, the Department of Energy's conclusion that it is a safe bet is based on assumptions, not evidence the same sort of supercomputer-based models, incidentally, that the Bush administration ridicules when they are applied to global warming. And those models predict trends only over the next 100 years. Yucca's models look to the next several millennia. Yucca may well turn out to be the ideal site, but the NRC's own Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste hasn't signed off on the risks, while most scientists studying the site have yet to resolve many issues. Letting waste stock up as it has for decades at the nation's power plants is a smaller danger than incurring the risks of transporting it all on 175 train and truck convoys a year, traveling 125,000 miles of suburbs and cities. It is a smaller danger than storing it in unproven metal casings, and dumping it in a questionable site at Nevada's expense. Let the science of nuclear waste-disposal improve first and come closer to certainties than assumptions. If the delay proves fatal to the nuclear power industry in the meantime, then so much the better. Commercial nuclear power was always a beautiful but radioactive promise. It isn't worth the hundred-thousand-year sentence on the environment it condemns. © 2002 News-Journal Corporation , news- journalonline.com (SM) ***************************************************************** 28 U.S. plan would ship radioactive waste through S. Florida By David Fleshler Sun-Sentinel Posted June 27 2002 Dozens of barges of radioactive waste could arrive at Port Everglades and the Port of Miami under a federal plan to store the nation?s nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Encased in lead-lined canisters, used fuel rods from South Florida?s two nuclear power plants would be collected at the ports and placed on railcars for the trip through Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties on their way west, according to an environmental impact statement by the U.S. Department of Energy. The Yucca Mountain plan, supported by the Bush administration and approved by the House, is expected to come up for a vote in the U.S. Senate in the next few weeks. If it wins approval, it would go to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for further study and the preparation of a final plan. The repository, which would be 90 miles from Las Vegas, would open in 2010. The Bush administration and the nuclear power industry say it makes sense to concentrate the nation?s nuclear waste in a secure, central repository rather than allow it to remain scattered among the nation?s 103 nuclear power plants. But environmental groups, fearing an accident along the route or a leak at Yucca Mountain, are trying to drum up opposition by publicizing the likely routes the radioactive waste would take. ?We do not need these shipments on roads, rails and barges with these terrorists out there,? said Claude Ward, community organizer with the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, a North Carolina group that held a news conference in Miami to denounce the plan. ?Talk about dirty bombs. We don?t need to furnish them with one.? If terrorists breached a truck shipment in an urban area, a canister leak could cause about 48 fatal cases of cancer, according to the environmental impact statement. A rail shipment leak would cause about nine cancer deaths, because a rail canister would release less material. But Joe Davis, spokesman for the Department of Energy, said the canisters would be impossible to crack. The timing of the shipments would be secret. They would be accompanied by armed guards. And the rods would be encased in canisters that had been subjected to puncture tests, immersion in water, a 30-foot free-fall and a 1,475-degree fire. ?They can?t open going through an interstate in a city,? he said. ?It would be impossible.? Nuclear waste consists of rods that contain uranium pellets the size of pencil erasers. During their useful life, the uranium undergoes atomic fission, generating heat that generates steam that moves turbines that create electricity. After a few years, when the uranium pellets give off insufficient heat, they?re considered spent. For years, nuclear plants have stored spent fuel rods in on-site ponds. Florida Power & Light?s Turkey Point and St. Lucie plants have stored about 1,600 metric tons of spent fuel, said Rachel Scott, spokeswoman for FPL. ?The nuclear power plants of this country were never intended to be used as permanent storage sites for used fuel. We believe it makes sense to store the used fuel in a central repository.? The shipments to Yucca Mountain would take place over 24 years, at 175 shipments a year, the Department of Energy said. Under the department?s scenario, nuclear waste from the St. Lucie plant would go by barge to Port Everglades because the port has a railhead. An alternative scenario calls for the waste to be placed on trucks. In that case, the waste would go up Interstate 95 from the St. Lucie plant, located on Hutchinson Island just south of Fort Pierce. But in that case, fuel from Turkey Point would go up I-95 through Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties. Environmental groups say the transport of nuclear waste through heavily populated areas creates an unacceptable risk and an opportunity for terrorists. Mike Casey, spokesman for the Environmental Working Group, in Washington, D.C., said a terrorist could use a shoulder-fired anti-tank missile to pierce the casing. His group has posted a Web page to let people find the likely routes through their communities: www.mapscience.org. /David Fleshler can be reached at dfleshler@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4535./ Copyright © 2002, South Florida Sun-Sentinel ***************************************************************** 29 Nuclear waste paths proposed By David Fleshler Staff Writer Posted June 27 2002 Dozens of barges of radioactive waste could arrive at Port Everglades and the Port of Miami under a federal plan to store the nation's nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Encased in lead-lined canisters, used fuel rods from South Florida's two nuclear power plants would be collected at the ports and placed on railcars for the trip through Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties on their way west, according to an environmental impact statement by the U.S. Department of Energy. The Yucca Mountain plan, supported by the Bush administration and approved by the House, is expected to come up for a vote in the U.S. Senate in the next few weeks. If it wins approval, it would go to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for further study and the preparation of a final plan. The repository, which would be 90 miles from Las Vegas, would open in 2010. The Bush administration and the nuclear power industry say it makes sense to concentrate the nation's nuclear waste in a secure, central repository rather than allow it to remain scattered among the nation's 103 nuclear power plants. But environmental groups, fearing an accident along the route or a leak at Yucca Mountain, are trying to drum up opposition by publicizing the likely routes the radioactive waste would take. "We do not need these shipments on roads, rails and barges with these terrorists out there," said Claude Ward, community organizer with the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, a North Carolina group that held a news conference in Miami to denounce the plan. "Talk about dirty bombs. We don't need to furnish them with one." If terrorists breached a truck shipment in an urban area, a canister leak could cause about 48 fatal cases of cancer, according to the environmental impact statement. A rail shipment leak would cause about nine cancer deaths, because a rail canister would release less material. But Joe Davis, spokesman for the Department of Energy, said the canisters would be impossible to crack. The timing of the shipments would be secret. They would be accompanied by armed guards. And the rods would be encased in canisters that had been subjected to puncture tests, immersion in water, a 30-foot free-fall and a 1,475-degree fire. "They can't open going through an interstate in a city," he said. "It would be impossible." Nuclear waste consists of rods that contain uranium pellets the size of pencil erasers. During their useful life, the uranium undergoes atomic fission, generating heat that generates steam that moves turbines that create electricity. After a few years, when the uranium pellets give off insufficient heat, they're considered spent. For years, nuclear plants have stored spent fuel rods in on-site ponds. Florida Power & Light's Turkey Point and St. Lucie plants have stored about 1,600 metric tons of spent fuel, said Rachel Scott, spokeswoman for FPL. "The nuclear power plants of this country were never intended to be used as permanent storage sites for used fuel. We believe it makes sense to store the used fuel in a central repository." The shipments to Yucca Mountain would take place over 24 years, at 175 shipments a year, the Department of Energy said. Under the department's scenario, nuclear waste from the St. Lucie plant would go by barge to Port Everglades because the port has a railhead. An alternative scenario calls for the waste to be placed on trucks. In that case, the waste would go up Interstate 95 from the St. Lucie plant, located on Hutchinson Island just south of Fort Pierce. But in that case, fuel from Turkey Point would go up I-95 through Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties. Environmental groups say the transport of nuclear waste through heavily populated areas creates an unacceptable risk and an opportunity for terrorists. Mike Casey, spokesman for the Environmental Working Group, in Washington, D.C., said a terrorist could use a shoulder-fired anti-tank missile to pierce the casing. His group has posted a Web page to let people find the likely routes through their communities: www.mapscience.org. David Fleshler can be reached at dfleshler@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4535. Copyright © 2002, South Florida Sun-Sentinel ***************************************************************** 30 Nuclear Waste Plan Worries Vermont Senators July 3, 2002 Vermont's two U.S. senators are reconsidering their support for a plan to ship nuclear waste to Nevada. The federal government plans to build a repository in Yucca Mountain for long-term storage of radioactive material from the nation's nuclear plants. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, and Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vermont, had expressed support for the idea previously, especially as an alternative to keeping waste in Vermont. But now Leahy says he's concerned about the safety of transporting the waste across the country. And Jeffords says he's concerned about the long-term capacity of Yucca Mountain. All content © Copyright 2001 - 2002, WorldNow and WCAX. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 Coleman turns up the heat Michael Fielding , Staff Writer June 26, 2002 *Republican Senate candidate Norm Coleman has turned his attention to Minnesota' freshman Democratic senator, Mark Dayton, as he lobbies for approval of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada.* * Coleman was in Red Wing Tuesday to urge Dayton and senior Sen. Paul Wellstone, who is Coleman's election opponent, to support the 306-117 House vote approving Yucca Mountain as the site to store 145 million pounds of spent, radioactive nuclear fuel.* Yet while he has all but given up on converting the hard-line Wellstone, Coleman said he hopes Dayton forms his decision without yielding to partisan pressures. "I hope politics don't play into his decision," Coleman said during a brief news conference at the St. James Hotel. He said he believes the issue of nuclear storage is a "fundamentally basic" one that realistically can be left out of partisan politics. It was left out of the House vote, he said, so "let's do the same thing on the U.S. Senate." In April, Republican Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn vetoed the Energy Department's recommendation to approve Yucca Mountain. The Senate has until the end of July to follow the House and reverse the veto. As Coleman travels the state promoting his Senate bid, Democrats are charging that he's too closely tied to the nuclear industry to make an objective decision. Critics rank Coleman as one of the top four Senate candidates nationwide who have received the most money from nuclear industry political action committees. Yet Coleman Tuesday said his support is not about the industry. "Of course I have an interest in it, but the industry doesn't pay for it," he said. "The rate payers pay for it. This is Senate partisan politics tied to special interest politics tied to (Guinn)." Both the Red Wing City Council and Goodhue County Board have passed resolutions supporting the Yucca repository, and community support is overwhelming. Yet Coleman argued that the debate isn't one of not-in-my-backyard. There's a difference between waste stored "on the banks of the Mississippi" and at Yucca Mountain, where "it's geologically secure," he explained. More than 150 truck and train convoys per year are expected to transport waste from the nation's 113 nuclear plants to Yucca Mountain beginning in about 2010. Currently the waste is stored at temporary sites in 39 states. Coleman didn't rule out Wellstone deciding to support the House vote, though. "Be the Senator from Minnesota," he urged Wellstone. "Support the people of Red Wing and the people of Minnesota." fielding@republican-eagle.com /©Red Wing Republican Eagle 2002/ copyright © 1995 - 2002 PowerOne Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 32 Six tons of plutonium starts making its way across the USA /Tue Jun 25, 8:20 AM ET/ /Deborah Sharp USA TODAY / JACKSON, S.C. -- A heavily guarded shipment of plutonium on its way here is part a national debate over transporting nuclear material in the new age of terrorism. But in this small town outside a sprawling complex built in 1950 to make Cold War-era bombs, six tons of plutonium barely raise an eyebrow. The Energy Department is shipping the radioactive material 1,500 miles to the Savannah River site here from a defunct weapons center in Rocky Flats, Colo. ''Most people here don't even talk about it,'' says Alan Teuton, 18, a clerk at Jackson Supermarket. ''And believe me, people here usually love to gossip about anything and everything.'' The Energy Department, citing national security, is tight-lipped about the shipment that could have left Colorado on Saturday at the earliest. The plutonium will be shipped over 18 months. ''I cannot stress how secure these shipments are,'' says Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis. ''This is not a U-Haul.'' The federal government plans to build a $3.8 billion processing plant at Savannah River to convert the weapons-grade plutonium into fuel for commercial nuclear power plants. South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges filed a lawsuit to stop the shipments but lost. He has appealed, and oral arguments are set for July 10. He fears the government will abandon the conversion proposal and leave his state a plutonium ''dumping ground.'' Some details about the shipping came in the Energy Department's response to the lawsuit: * ** The plutonium, in both powdered and metal form, is inside airtight metal canisters enclosed within larger steel barrels. Plutonium is deadliest when inhaled, and even minute amounts can cause cancer. Environmentalists fear a canister leak or security breach could cause the substance to be dispersed. * ** Fire can engulf the trucks without damage to the cargo. * ** The trucks are under satellite surveillance and guarded by armed federal agents authorized to use deadly force. Drivers go no faster than 55 mph, won't travel in bad weather and stop only at government facilities. The destination is a 310-square-mile site along the Savannah River on the border of South Carolina and Georgia. The site is one of South Carolina's largest employers, with 13,800 workers. Outcries about the plutonium are more common outside this southwestern slice of the state. ''Once that plutonium is brought here, it's going to stay forever,'' says Del Isham, director of the South Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club ( news - web sites ). ''We don't want to be the guinea pigs.'' About one in five residents in the four South Carolina counties adjacent to the complex are dependent on the Savannah River site for their economic well-being. In a survey of local residents, one-third ranked jobs as the most important issue surrounding the facility. About 6% ranked contamination as their top concern, according to university researchers working with the site. ''I see how they handle nuclear material out there. I think there is no better place to put it,'' says Tom Burke, 44, a computer specialist at the facility. But James Ellis, 76, says the federal government hasn't given enough guarantee that the plutonium will ever leave. ''I agree 100% with the governor about that,'' says Ellis, who worked for 13 years as a chemical operator at Savannah River. Hodges, a Democrat who faces a tough re-election in November, trumpets his fight in TV ads. But in Jackson, his earlier promise to lie in the street to block shipments turned him into a punch line. ''We have a name for the governor here: Speed Bump,'' jokes Patty Baldy, 32. Hodges' supporters say the Bush administration is pushing to remove the plutonium from Rocky Flats to boost the re-election of U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard of Colorado, a Republican. In Jackson, residents say they trust the expertise at Savannah River. It was originally created as one of two U.S. spots to manufacture plutonium. Some 34 million gallons of radioactive sludge are stored in underground tanks. Bringing in more plutonium to convert to nuclear fuel could mean more jobs. ''You've got a lot of people here who wish the governor would shut his mouth,'' Ellis says. ''They're afraid the government will get mad and shut the whole process down.'' /Tue Jul 2, 1:23 PM ET/ - (USA TODAY) Copyright © 2002 USA TODAY , a division of Gannett Co. Inc . Copyright © 2002 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 33 DOE says Hodges dispute not stalling cleanup funds ledgerenquirer.com - The ledgerenquirer home page Posted on Wed, Jun. 26, 2002 *JACOB JORDAN* *Associated Press Writer* *AIKEN, S.C. - *The Savannah River Site is the only major nuclear installation in the nation that hasn't been told how much it will receive in federal cleanup funds, and some say that might be because of Gov. Jim Hodges' ongoing dispute with the U.S. Energy Department. But DOE spokesman Joe Davis said Wednesday that the cleanup funds and the dispute over plutonium shipments are two unrelated issues. The government has allocated all but $40 million of the $800 million set aside to speed cleanup of federal nuclear-weapons installations. But Davis said as much as $300 million could be added to the fund. Officials at SRS are getting public input before a final accelerated cleanup plan is submitted to DOE. The environmental plan outlines actions to cleanup SRS by 2025. "We're still waiting to hear from Washington on a final amount that's going to be provided to Savannah River," said Joe Pescosolido, DOE's chief financial officer at SRS. But it's unclear when that announcement may happen. Pescosolido said the delay is "a paperwork process." The plan that's being discussed right now would require about $250 million in fiscal 2003, he said. "It's pretty clear to me that the moneys for the cleanup program are eventually going to be announced," Pescosolido said. But an official with Washington Group International, the parent company of Westinghouse Inc. which operates SRS, says the budget and planning process has been slowed by the plutonium shipments dispute. Ralph DiSibio, president of the Energy and Environmental Business Unit of Washington Group International in Aiken, said he doesn't think the delay by the DOE has been out of revenge, but can see its hesitation. "I'm sure the Department of Energy will look very cautiously at additional funding or expanded projects for a state whose governor is not very accepting of the policies of the department," DiSibio told The Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle. Hodges relations with the DOE have been strained over the past year and got worse when the governor sued Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and the DOE on May 1. Hodges lost his case to delay shipments in federal court June 13, but has appealed to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court in Virginia, which will hear the case July 10. After Hodges lost in U.S. District Court in Aiken, he declared a state of emergency and sent state police to SRS to prevent any shipments from entering the site. But the DOE asked the court to declare Hodges' actions illegal and judge Cameron Currie banned the governor from physically blocking the shipments June 18. Vincent G. Moscardelli, a political scientist at the University of Massachusetts, said Hodges defiance of the DOE - especially in an re-election year - may have postponed an announcement indicating whether SRS would receive any money from the cleanup fund. "I think it's clear that something has delayed it," Moscardelli said. Both parties are playing politics with this issue, but there are enough Republicans from South Carolina and Georgia that won't let the Hodges dispute effect federal funding at SRS, he said. But Moscardelli said he wouldn't put it past the Bush administration to try to possibly damage Hodges' credibility by delaying funds. The DOE said March 6 it intended to use more than half the funds to cleanup the Hanford facility in Richland, Wash. Other announcements followed, the last coming May 31. Breaking News ***************************************************************** 34 Fire this morning at BNFL project Story last updated at 12:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 * by Paul Parson * Oak Ridger staff Workers in a building at the Oak Ridge K-25 site were evacuated early this morning due to a fire, according to BNFL Inc. officials. The incident happened around 5:12 a.m. in a workshop in the K-33 building. According to information from BNFL, the building was evacuated and all personnel were accounted for. No injuries or harmful substance releases were reported. The incident is currently under investigation, and the cause of the fire was not made available. BNFL, which employs around 900 workers, signed a six-year contract with DOE in August 1997 to work on buildings K-33, which totals 2.8 million square feet; K-29, 586,880 square feet; and K-31, 1.4 million square feet. /Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or pparson@oakridger.com ./ All Contents ©Copyright/ The Oak Ridger / ***************************************************************** 35 Nevadans rap 1998 Abraham letter June 27, 2002 *By Benjamin Grove >* LAS VEGAS SUN WASHINGTON -- Nevada lawmakers say a 4-year-old letter written by then-Sen. Spencer Abraham unveils a hypocritical attitude about nuclear waste transportation. Abraham, now Energy Secretary, wrote to his predecessor, former Secretary Bill Richardson in August 1998, on behalf of constituents in St. Clair County, Mich., referencing a DOE plan to ship plutonium through the county on its way to a site in Canada. In the letter, Abraham writes that the community's elected officials and local residents were not familiar with the plan, and he demands a public hearing in the county. "To not do so would be irresponsible and offensive to Michigan residents," Abraham wrote. Nevada lawmakers are irked that four years later, Abraham as Energy Secretary has formally approved a plan to bury the nation's nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain without holding public hearings in countless communities -- including major cities -- that lie on truck and train routes that would be used to ship nuclear waste to Nevada. "This is the height of hypocrisy," Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said. "Today he says that all (shipments) can be done safely. But obviously, nothing has changed since he wrote this letter on Aug. 27, 1998 and June 26, 2002. We still have the same concerns and worries that were expressed in his letter. Why is it OK to ship waste through every state but Michigan?" The Energy Department held several hearings about Yucca Mountain outside Nevada in which transportation issues were discussed, Energy spokesman Joe Davis said. There is plenty of time before shipments would be made to Yucca to hold more hearings and prepare emergency responders, Davis said. "We've got eight years to work with the states and local governments along the routes," Davis said. Still, it's clear Abraham as Energy Secretary is not showing the same concern about waste transportation that he did as a Michigan senator, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said. "If he had been serious about it, he would have followed up," Reid said. "As Secretary, he certainly hasn't done anything about it." Abraham reminds Rep. Berkley, D-Nev., of former New Hampshire governor John Sununu who once objected to waste being buried in that state, and is now a pro-Yucca lobbyist, Berkley spokesman Michael O'Donovan said. "When it comes to their own communities they are opposed to transportation of nuclear waste, and yet when it serves their political agendas, they are the most rabid pro-Yucca advocates in the country," O'Donovan said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 36 Lost Fuel Rods Prompt Fines *AmeriScan: June 26, 2002* *WATERFORD, Connecticut,* June 26, 2002 (ENS) - Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. could be fined $288,000 for losing two nuclear fuel rods at the Millstone Unit 1 nuclear power plant in Waterford. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) proposed the fine Tuesday for Dominion's violations of NRC regulations regarding the fuel rods. Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO), the former operator of Millstone Station, informed the NRC in November 2000 that two fuel rods were unaccounted for. The company was conducting a spent fuel pool inventory when it determined the fuel was missing. A subsequent investigation by NNECO concluded that the fuel most likely had been cut into segments and sent to a low level radioactive waste facility along with other irradiated reactor hardware sometime between March 1985 and December 1992. Last fall, the NRC conducted an inspection to review the results of the company's investigation, and agreed with NNECO's conclusions. The NRC also concluded that there are now adequate controls to account for all of the spent fuel at Millstone - aside from the missing rods. The NRC found no evidence to support the possibility of that the rods were stolen. The very high radiation level of the material would have made theft difficult and dangerous, the agency said. Since Dominion is now the operator of Millstone Station, it will be held responsible for the misplaced fuel rods. "Notwithstanding the fact that there was no realistic threat, past or present to the public health and safety, the loss of highly radioactive fuel rods is unprecedented and is a very significant violation," wrote NRC Region I administrator Hubert Miller in a letter to Dominion. Dominion was cited for two violations, one based on inadequate management of the spent fuel rods, and the other for not reporting their loss promptly. The NRC decided to triple the base penalty of $96,000 for the penalties because of the "unprecedented nature of the loss of highly radioactive material and to further emphasize the importance of adequate accounting of irradiated fuel at nuclear power reactors," Miller said. Because of the radiological controls that are in place at all of the possible locations of the missing fuel, the NRC believes there is no current threat to public health and safety. * * * Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2002. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 37 Brian Fraser's Adventures in Energy Destruction *Copyright © 2002 by Brian Fraser. All rights reserved. updated 6-20-02g Currently, the United States is constructing a nuclear waste facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. It will cost $57 billion (not including cost overruns) and serves only to STORE radioactive waste instead of neutralizing it. The waste must be transported by rail from 103 reactors, most of which are on the east coast. Transporting such extremely dangerous material from locations all over the country has raised serious safety concerns, especially since the events of September 11, 2001. And the storage site will have to be defended against intrusions and accidents for thousands of years. (see Nevada's Nuclear Waste Project Office at http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/ ) On-site neutralization of radioactive waste at the power plant would make a lot more sense if the option were in fact available. Currently it is not. Scientists generally believe that radioactive decay rates are remarkably constant and that they cannot be changed by a simple, inexpensive process. The discovery of "cold fusion" in 1989, however, changed all that. It became clear that radioactive decay rates could be affected by ordinary electrolysis. This led some scientists to propose that a process be developed for disposal of radioactive waste. Dr. G.H. Miley, for example, wrote U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Energy Research Initiative (1999), Proposal No. 99-0222, "Scientific Feasibility Study of Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENRS) for Nuclear Waste Amelioration". The proposal was actually accepted, but some of those "institutionalized, atherosclerotic precision mound builders" that I talk about, later killed the project. Apparently, this was just too big a mound for them to leap over. (You can read a short summary at http://www.altenergy.org/4/ine-99/valone/valone.html* *) What we now need is more public awareness and support for the idea that neutralizing radioactive waste at the power plant is in fact feasible. In Issues I have suggested that even a highschool chemistry student could build an apparatus to demonstrate the basic principles. If our kids are doing it, then the universities and national labs will see their way clear to get this show on the road. Uncle Sam can tell them: BFUncleSam6.jpg (22079 bytes) You don't need official permission from any governmental agency to demonstrate the basic principles of neutralizing radioactive waste that are described in the picture essay below. You just need enough courage to annoy a few authority mongers like those that were around a couple thousand years ago. "And they said to Him, "By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority to do these things?" --Mark 11:28,/ NKJ/ *My Equipment and Methods* First, I needed a Geiger counter, one that I could hook up to a computer The RM-60 Radiation Monitor from Aware Electronics (http://www.aw-el.com/) met my needs very well. It has a Geiger-Mueller tube that has an alpha sensitivity of 2.5 MeV, 80% at 3.6 MeV, a beta sensitivity that is 35% at 50 KeV, 95% at 300 KeV, and a gamma & X-ray sensitivity of 10 KeV. The unit can be hooked up to a PC and the software handles the radiation counting. The files can also be converted to a Comma Separated Variables (.CSV) list and imported into an Excel spreadsheet for more extensive data analysis. The user manual was also very informative and a pleasure to read. Second, I needed some radioactive waste to play with. It turns out the stuff is pretty hard to get J. But actually I wouldn't want it anyway. It is just too dangerous to have around. I needed something a lot safer. It turns out thorium will work quite well. So will uranium. Therefore I bought some thorium and uranium nitrates from a chemical laboratory supply house (no NRC license is needed for these items in small quantities). Thorium 232 (_90 Th^232 ) has a half-life of 14 billion years. That is short enough to make a sensitive Geiger counter crackle vigorously, but long enough to be very safe for careful experiments, the main danger being inhalation of the dust. Uranium 238 (_92 U^238 ) has a half-life of 4.5 billion years and uranium 235 (_92 U^235 ) has a half-life of 0.7 billion years. The latter isotope represents less than 1% of natural uranium, but as you can see from the half-life, it is about six times more radioactive than the 238 isotope. Both isotopes are significantly more radioactive than thorium and would be useful in advanced experiments. All isotopes decay into "daughter products" which in turn are radioactive. The decay results in the "thorium decay series" and the "uranium decay series". Radioactive series eventually terminate in a stable, non-radioactive nuclide like an isotope of lead or bismuth. rw1_e.jpg (39562 bytes) These are the basic materials and tools required for these experiments. The yellow crystals in the plastic bag are uranium nitrate hexahydrate, but most experiments can be done with the safer thorium nitrate tetrahydrate. The RM-60 counter connects with a computer through the serial cable. Third, I needed some fixtures to facilitate radiation counting. The fixtures would ensure uniformity and repeatability, which in this kind of research are extremely important. The bulk of the work in fact consists of hours and hours (or several days) of radiation counting. Running the reaction cell is only a minor part of the effort. Counts must be done both on electrodes as well as the liquid contents of the cell. The scheme that seemed to work best for measuring the liquid portion was constructed from microscope slides that had an SAE 3/8 inch metal washer epoxied to them. The hole in the washer is slightly smaller in diameter than the aperture of the Geiger tube. I take the liquid I am going to process and make a set of "before" slides by putting 4 drops of the liquid into the hole in the washer and then fast evaporating it in an oven (about 200F). I repeat this until the hole has a total of 12 drops per slide (the hole will only hold 4 drops at a time). I usually do three slides as a set. Then I count each in the counting fixture in sequence, (slide #1, then #2, #3). Then I re-count each one until a total of three passes have been done on each slide. This gives me an idea of slide-to-slide sampling uniformity (about 6%) and measurement repeatability on any particular slide (about 2%) After the reaction cell is turned off, I make a similar set of "after" slides with the same technique. Electrolysis uses up a little bit of the water and some may have to be added to bring the cell back to the original dilution (less the 36 drops for the "before" samples) so that a valid comparison can be made. Also, the liquid may have a radioactive precipitate in it and so the liquid must be well stirred before taking samples. The idea, of course, is to compare the before and after samples to see how the radioactivity has been affected by the electrolytic process. Both the intensity (counts above background level) and the shape of the decay curve are critical things to measure. You'll see some examples later. After I am done "counting the slides" I cover the washer with a piece of cellophane tape, place the slide in a little plastic soap box (the kind used for travel) with the other slides, and store the box in a safe place. This is a precaution against contaminating my surroundings with radioactive dust. fix1_d.jpg (69592 bytes) The slide counting fixture helps to position the geiger tube directly over the hole in the washer which contains the radioactive material. Slides are labeled with run number, whether they are before or after the run, and the slide number. Computer file names also include a measurement pass number (such as R6B-S2P1.RAD). No other slides or radioactive materials should be near the counter during a counting process. Unneeded slides are normally stored in a little plastic soap box and kept in a safe place away from the counter. Monitor_c.jpg (110931 bytes) This is what the computer monitor looks like during counting (an electrode in this case). At the far right side of the screen, the blue bar shows that 235 counts have been received in one Time Base Unit (one minute in this case). The display scrolls leftward as counting continues (usually for days). Electrolyzed radioactive materials often show periodic variations in the bar graph display, as well as in the data plots. Fourth, I needed an electrolytic reaction cell and a power source to run it. I designed the cell shown in the photo while I was walking around in a hardware store. It is basically an ordinary Ball wide-mouth canning jar mounted between two blocks of wood that have been coated with marine epoxy. Liberal amounts of silicon seal are used for cushioning or sealing. The electrodes are 1/8 inch diameter stainless steel rods, which each go through 3/16 inch stainless steel tubes. This allows the electrodes to be removed for counting, cleaning, safe storage, or using a different type of metal for the electrode such as tungsten. The cell is typically run with 1 gram of thorium nitrate tetrahydrate dissolved in 150 ml of distilled water. It may be electrolyzed with alternating current (AC) or direct current (DC). The threaded rods and nuts are part of a "positive control" scheme intended to keep this ungainly contraption in one piece when it is being moved around; this reduces the likelihood of inadvertently splashing hot, radioactive liquids or dropping the glass jar. The clamp nuts are removed before the cell is energized. Little sand bags (not shown) are placed on top to keep the lid sealed to the jar (the center area of the lid has been cut out with an electrolytic etch technique that uses salt water and a car battery charger). Reactor_c.jpg (81122 bytes) This is my general-purpose electrolytic reaction cell. It has a provision for a reflux condenser that allows higher power levels to be investigated without boiling off the electrolyte. It is placed inside a 5 gallon plastic bucket before power connections are made. tung1_d.jpg (13701 bytes) This is a ground tungsten TIG welding electrode that has been partially sheathed in glass and silicon rubber sealant. It is made by injecting the glass tube half-full with sealant, closing off the full end with a finger, and pressing the electrode through it from the other end, causing the sealant to extrude around the electrode. The green marking on the right end means that this electrode is pure tungsten. A red marking would mean 2% thoria alloy, yellow means 1% thoria, blue means 3%, brown means zirconia. Lanthanated and ceriated rods are also available. Tungsten does not corrode as easily as stainless steel. It is also useful in experiments requiring cathodes of high atomic weight. Before a run, the cell is placed inside a 5 gallon plastic bucket and anchored with another sandbag at the base. The bucket is intended to confine glass shards if the cell explodes during operation (electrolysis will generate potentially explosive combinations of hydrogen and oxygen). The clear packaging tape around the jar will also help to reduce the mess. A hole in the lid allows the cell to be connected to an air-cooled reflux condenser, which is just a four foot piece of CPVC pipe. It is open to the atmosphere at the top end and merely condenses any steam generated by the cell during operation at higher power settings. The vinyl tubing, which connects the pipe to the cell, has some stainless steel scouring pad loosely strung through it to demist any vapors from the liquid boiling below it. There is also a small view port which is covered with plexiglass. Bathtub_b.JPG (68554 bytes) And yes, I run it in the bath tub (on top of a couple of car floor mats). I like having a wall and a door between me and something that could explode. The bathroom does not have pedestrians or inquisitive cats walking through it either. And the power comes from an outlet protected by a Ground Fault Interrupter (GFI) which should keep me from getting electrocuted if, in a moment of thoughtless inattention or complacency, I do something stupid. The cell is powered by an old Superior Electric Powerstat. This is an autotransformer that can supply 0 to 140 volts AC at 15 amps (very overpowered for what I am doing). A small electric outlet box is wired so that a "load limiter" can be connected in series with the reaction cell. In this case the limiter is just a photo light bar with a couple of high wattage bulbs. In case of a bad electrical short, the lamps on the light bar will light up. This keeps the equipment from being damaged, the wall circuit breaker from popping open (and killing the computers on the same circuit), and me from becoming a nervous wreck. Another box contains a full-wave bridge rectifier in case I want to run the cell on DC. The cell power requirement at high voltage is estimated offhand to be 30-50 watts. As you may deduce from all the above photos, the basic equipment shown is very primitive and built from spur-of-the-moment designs and junk box parts. It is nevertheless sufficient for proving that radioactive half-lives can be shortened from billions of years to a matter of hours by a quick and simple process. *Background Counting* For my nuclear physics amusement, I bought a 3^1 /_8 ounce container of Morton Salt Substitute from the grocery store and put it in front of the RM-60 counter. This salt _/substitute/_ contains mostly potassium chloride instead of the usual sodium chloride. Potassium has a couple of stable isotopes that form the bulk of natural potassium: potassium 39 ( 93.26%) and potassium 41 (6.73 %). But there is also an unstable isotope, potassium 40, with a half-life of 1.25 billion years (more radioactive than uranium 238). Fortunately, it has an abundance level that is 0.0117 percent (one-hundredth of one percent) that of natural potassium. Nevertheless, its activity can be seen with a sensitive radiation counter. When I put the Morton Salt Substitute in front of the RM-60 counter, it registered about 30 microRoentgen/hr. Is this radioactivity enough to worry about? To keep things in perspective, you need to know that the average background radiation in our everyday environment is about 5 to 25 microRoentgens/hr. It comes mostly from dirt, rocks, bricks, radon gas, and cosmic rays. Inside a jet at 30,000 feet the background might reach 300 microRoentgens/hr. Overall, the average American gets a cumulative radiation exposure equivalent to 10-20 chest X-rays per year. I measured the salt substitute inside a concrete building, where the background is about 19 microRoentgens/hr. The salt shaker therefore contributes only about 11 microRoentgens/hr above background. This is really not enough to worry about, not even if you have hundreds of these things in your coat, hundreds of them in your bed, thousands of them in your house. (and if you are _/that/_ fond of salt substitute, you probably have _/other/_ problems you need to worry about!) The point, of course, is that we are continually bathed in a sea of very weak radiation. It unavoidably adds a "background" that must be taken into account when performing sensitive radiation measurements. I regularly take background readings on the fixtures that I use in my experiments, and then analyze the data in an Excel spreadsheet and plot it: bkgrnd1.jpg (29385 bytes) The count level, 19 microRoentgens/hr, from the fixture is essentially the same as that for the room in general. This shows that neither the RM-60 nor the counting fixture has been contaminated with stray radioactive dust. Note also that the curve is flat (albeit noisy); the background is essentially constant with the passage of time. We will later see that this observation is critically important for interpreting radiation measurements on materials that have been in the reaction cell. *My Early Experiments* First, I did a couple of shakedown runs to locate equipment problems and calibrate my level of nervousness. I used common baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) as the electrolyte. The Powerstat gave me the most trouble. When I set the dial to zero and plugged it in, the circuit breaker at the main panel would pop open. I was left in the dark, and of course the computers crashed too (they were unavoidably on the same circuit). It popped the breaker in every outlet I tried, except for the particular /_one_/ outlet that I used when I tested it originally! I got around the problem by adding a twenty foot extension cord and turning off a few lights. Later, during a run at higher power settings, the Powerstat would start sparking, hissing, and generating ozone. I had to take the thing apart, clean it up, and realign the rotor with the windings. After that it worked fine. The load limiter, a simple light bar used for photography, had a little surprise too. It has a 500 watt bulb and a 300 watt bulb. During a run, the 300 watt bulb would start glowing first. I thought, "This is crazy. They are acting like they are connected in series." I had forgotten that years ago I had replaced the original on/off switch with an on/off/on DPDT switch, and I wired it for a series-start, parallel-run to extend the filament life. It was now in series and so I simply switched it to parallel. I also cranked up the voltage as high as it would go to see if the cell could be run in the incandescent electrode regime. I was barely able to get the center electrode to incandesce. It would emit little sparkles of yellow light (due to the sodium) and make a hash sound on the AM radio that I laid across the extension cord. (My /ad hoc/ noise filter, consisting of a ceramic capacitor and a couple of toroids was not very effective.) I was trying to avoid the incandescent mode for the first several runs, and so when I heard the hash unexpectedly, I turned down the power, but the noise did not stop. I traced the noise to a fluorescent light that had decided to go bad that day. Later, there was more noise, but this time it was apparently a motor in a vacuum cleaner. The power line was actually very noisy. I could not rely solely on the radio to detect incandescent mode (looking directly at a jar that has hydrogen, oxygen, and a sparking electrode is not my idea of a safe experience!) Suffice it to say that practice runs can save you a lot of grief, especially if you are going to be using radioactive materials. Finally, I did a run where I decided to collect data. The cell ran on thorium nitrate, alternating current, and stainless steel electrodes. After about a half hour, I took the cell apart. I noticed that the curved electrode had a thin layer of glittering, copper colored substance on it. Tiny metallic-looking whiskers were also visible. I decided to place the electrode in front of the counter and see what happened while the liquid portion cooled down. The counter showed that the electrode had significant radioactivity. With this realization, I began to feel kind of depressed. The cell was supposed to get rid of the radioactivity and it clearly had not accomplished that. I laid down for a few minutes to collect my thoughts. I woke up about two hours later. By then the counts per minute had decreased noticeably from about 40 to 30. I knew something significant had happened. Thorium has a half-life of 14 billion years, but now I was watching something decay in just a couple of hours! When I plotted the data, a discernable decay curve showed up: Run4Elect_a.jpg (25363 bytes) The graph shows that the emission rate starts out around 40 counts/minute (equivalent to 40 microRoentgens/hr on the RM-60) then seems to increase briefly, then decays in the pattern of an exponential curve (basically as expected), except that there seems to be some bursty, sawtooth effects as the emission rate approaches the background level (20 counts/min). Although the radioactivity was not gone, it was clearly /_going_/, and it was not going to take billions of years either (the passage of 5 half-lives reduces the radiation by ^1 /_2 5 or to 1/32 of the original; 10 half-lives would be less than one-thousandth). Later I ran a cell that contained the brown sludge from the previous run. This was, in effect, my own "radioactive waste" and I just wanted to get rid of the stuff somehow. This time I used direct current along with stainless steel electrodes. The center electrode was the cathode. On runs with AC the center electrode acquired a shiny, electropolished look (industrial electropolishing is done with alternating current). But this time the center electrode came out black. I decided to put it in front of the counter and see what happened. Here is the plotted data: centrode1.jpg (27285 bytes) This one was even more of a surprise. The counting began 8 minutes after the electrolysis was shut off. The emission rate starts out at about 150 counts/min and then steeply /_increases_/ instead of decreases. It goes up to about 270 and then very slowly tapers off, again in somewhat of a sawtooth fashion. The counting was terminated after about 130 hours. After I plotted the data, I wished that I could have seen the first 8 minutes! This leads to a working hypothesis that the electrolytic process converts thorium 232 to numerous daughter products. These are radioactive and are neutralized (in parallel) just like the thorium is, as long as the cell is operating. But when the cell is shut off, nothing neutralizes the existing daughter products. A complete radioactive "decay series" then emerges. The short-lived products cause the radiation to increase initially but after they "cook off", the longer-lived ones cause the decay curve to flatten out, although still trending downward. The results seem to be very similar to those in an experiment by Goddard, Dash, and Frantz done with uranium. They used 10 mg samples and a 3 minute counting window with matched Geiger-Muller tubes: "Previously, it has been reported that nuclear transmutation reactions are accelerated when radioactive elements are subjected to low-level electric fields during electrolysis of aqueous electrolytes. . . . Our research investigated the codeposition of U_3 O_8 and H on Ni cathodes, using an acidic electrolyte and a Pt anode. Then, the radiation emitted by the electroplated U_3 O_8 was compared with radiation emitted by unelectrolyzed U_3 O_8 from the same batch. . . . The electroplated U_3 O_8 initially produced ~2900 counts in 3 min (April 17, 2000). This rose sporadically in steps to 3700 counts in 3 min on May 11, 2000, and it remained relatively constant at this level until the . . . measurements ended on June 8, 2000. The unelectrolyzed U_3 O_8 from the same batch emitted radiation at a much lower rate, ~1250 counts in 3 min, and this remained almost constant over the entire period of measurement." (G. Goddard, J. Dash and S. Frantz, "Characterization of Uranium Codeposited with Hydrogen on Nickel Cathodes", /Transactions of the American Nuclear Society/, *83*, 376-378 (2000) ). Later they did gamma ray measurements and these showed that, overall, the electrolyzed sample was 1.7 times more gamma emissive than the unelectrolyzed sample. Of course I still wanted to know what was happening with the copper-colored sludge. The precount slides on unprocessed thorium nitrate tetrahydrate typically show the following pattern: r6b_1.jpg (31321 bytes) Note that the counts are around 50 and that the trend of the plot is flat. This is exactly what you would expect. Something that has a half-life of 14 billion years is not going to show a noticeable change in decay rate in several hours. There is no obvious sawtooth pattern either; I had worried that the cycling of the air conditioner could somehow show up on the graphs. Post counts on the copper-colored sludge looked like the following: R7B-S1P1-2.jpg (36946 bytes) Here the radioactivity starts out between 50-60 counts/minute (higher than the original 50) but after 1000 minutes has decayed to between 50-40, and at 2500 minutes has decreased to about 40. (During the blank range I was counting a different slide.) A week later the average had dropped to 38. There is still quite a bit of radioactivity present, and it is not decaying as fast as desired. Clearly though, it /_was_/ affected by the electrolytic process, and in a manner similar to the electrode. After the run with AC and stainless steel electrodes, the liquid looked something like iced tea with copper paint stirred into it. The liquid had tiny, iridescent particles that looked like metal flecks of copper (the same stuff that I saw on the electrodes). They were fascinating to watch as they were slowly swept around in the thermal currents of the slowly cooling liquid. Copper is a transmutation product that has been seen in these kinds of cells. But I had my doubts that this was copper. There was an awful lot of it. If it got there by transmutation, its presence would represent the release of a lot of energy, but none was apparent. Did it all go off as neutrinos (which do not interact with the environment and produce heat)? Very unlikely. And I could _/see/_ the particles. That meant they must be at least 40 microns in diameter (the limit of unaided vision), and if they were that big and made of metal, they should be settling out of the liquid a lot faster. After several hours, the particles had settled out and I removed the "supernatant liquor" with a modified turkey baster. I scooped out a sample of the sludge and dried it on a microscope slide. It looked just like a blob of fine, glittery copper particles: BrownSlide_b.jpg (70199 bytes) But it was non-conductive. It could not be copper. (I really don't know what it is. My best guess would be a mixture of thorium and ferric hydroxides, the latter coming from corroded stainless steel electrodes). "Wherever the tree falls, there it lies." ¾Ecclesiastes 11:3 *Tempted to try it yourself?* Students might ask "Can I do this experiment as part of a highschool science project?" And teachers might view it as a possible project in an honors program. So I am sure such questions will come up. Here are some things to consider. Remember that one of my purposes here is to show that radioactive decay rates can be affected by a simple electrolytic process, and that this suggests a way of neutralizing radioactive waste that should be promptly and vigorously investigated. I am really not so much interested in students doing these experiments as I am in having parents realize "If my kid can do it, why can't the Department of Energy do it? Why should I have tens of thousands of tons of radioactive waste being shipped through my state? Why should we spend $57 billion on STORAGE of radioactive waste if there might be a way to neutralize it right at the power plant?" As I have explained above, the obstacles to this research are more social and political than technical. The popular press has convinced people, through irresponsible journalism, that this is "junk science". Consequently, universities won't touch it for fear of public criticism and loss of prestige and funding. The government isn't going to listen until they hear that mom and dad are convinced that this kind of research is worthwhile. Nevertheless, if you decide to try this experiment as a science project, you will of course need adult sponsorship* and professional supervision from your teacher. Your teacher will probably have several suggestions. One will undoubtly be to use only hardware that is specific to the purpose of the experiment. The equipment in the illustrations is intended for multiple purposes and can be simplified /_if you copy the essential principles, not the equipment._/ For instance, you can use a nine volt battery for the power supply. This is strongly recommended and will greatly improve safety and reduce equipment complexity. You should also use much less thorium nitrate. If you want to use AC, use a doorbell transformer or one of those little plug-in transformers (the AC type) and give careful attention to electrical safety (including shields, fusing, grounding, GFI protection, and power ratings). You'll need well-shielded and physically stable counting fixtures, and some rudimentary skills with data analysis software like Microsoft Excel. Your teacher might arrange to have operating cells and counters in a locked display cabinet, and might want to handle all radioactive material himself, instead of letting a student do it. Remember that teachers always want to know "What are you going to learn from doing this?" Be prepared with a list of answers (review relevant material in Issues ). And finally, PUBLISH YOUR FINDINGS on the Internet (please send me a link) and explain why they are important. (*in many states it is probably unlawful for people less than 18 to work on radioactive materials. Check your state laws and proceed appropriately) Also, expect a little hysteria when proposing experiments of this type. Parents and teachers are not generally aware that our environment contains radioactive materials like thoriated mantles in the gas lamps that might light your street, thoriated tungsten rods that are used in welding, monazite sand sometimes used in pottery, the tiny amounts of americium in smoke detectors (don't mess with it!), the potassium 40 circulating in your own body, and the equivalent of the 10-20 chest X-rays Americans get every year from ambient radiation. When a clerk at the photo shop saw the photo with the cans of thorium and uranium nitrate (above), I ended up having a little unscheduled talk with the police after I drove home from church. The labels visible in the photos had words like "nitrate", "radioactive", "may cause cancer", "Oxidizer. May cause fires", and so forth. They did not understand the rest of the photos either, and just wanted to know what I was doing. The next day (Monday), there was a lot of publicity about the arrest of a suspect in a radiological bomb ("dirty bomb") plot. I was actually glad that the police had already talked to me. When people have questions and concerns, try to deal with them as God deals with Christians: "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all men generously /and without reproach/ . . ." (James 1:5). And some words of advice from a guy in government, namely, King Solomon: "He who keeps a royal command experiences no trouble, for a wise heart knows the proper time and procedure" and "If a ruler's temper rises against you, do not abandon your position, because composure allays great offenses." (Ecclesiastes 8:5 and 10:4). "By forbearance a ruler may be persuaded, And a soft tongue breaks the bone." (Proverbs 25:15) Keep a cool, patient head, and maybe those around you will too. And remember . . . It's an /_adventure_! /Be careful, but enjoy the wonder! *Low Voltage Electrolysis* allcent6.jpg (44831 bytes) A different method was used to collect data for Run 6. The counter was started as a background counter and then the electrode was placed in the electrode counting fixture directly after the run and while the counter was already operating. The delay to get data was only 2 minutes instead of the usual 8. As expected, the electrode radioactivity increases with time. Later, the RM-60 was moved from the electrode fixture to the slide fixture. Counts on the dried liquid sample imply that quite a bit of the thorium did not plate out and is still in the liquid. The RM-60 was then transfered back to the electrode counting fixture. This scheme helps to reduce any effects of geiger tube warm up or software initialization. ***************************************************************** 38 Nuclear waste crash could kill 1,200 in Chicago June 27, 2002 Nuclear waste crash could kill 1,200 in Chicago *By Benjamin Grove >* LAS VEGAS SUN WASHINGTON -- As many as 1,228 people in Chicago could die of cancer within one year of a nuclear waste shipment accident, according to a new report that analyzed an accident scenario in 20 cities. The study, which used the same accident scenario model for each city, ranked the cities in order of where an accident could cause the most harm. Chicago ranked first, followed by Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles. The report did not apply an accident scenario to Las Vegas. The report was compiled using Energy Department models and released today by the Environmental Working Group, the Washington-based research organization that launched a nuclear waste shipment website -- www.mapscience.org -- earlier this month. "This is what the (Energy Department) should be talking about -- we shouldn't have to be providing people with this information," Environmental Working Group vice president Richard Wiles said. "We apply these accident models to each city. The DOE doesn't do that. Before we can commit to Yucca, we have to talk about these things." The group's efforts are aimed at raising public awareness about the federal plan to ship the nation's most radioactive nuclear waste to Nevada's Yucca Mountain for permanent burial. The Senate is likely to vote on the plan early next month, which would mark the project's final congressional approval. The new report, "What if ... Nuclear Waste Accident Scenarios in the United States," is available at: www.mapscience.org/plumes. Energy Department officials have long said that high-level nuclear waste has been shipped for years, with only minor accidents, none of which resulted in radiation releases. DOE officials, along with nuclear industry and Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials, say the robust, lead-lined steel containers used to ship waste do not crack, even when dropped or burned. "We can ship waste safely and securely," Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis said. "Anyone who suggests otherwise is just trying to scare people." Energy Department and industry officials have said Nevada officials and environmentalists are using scare tactics as part of their broader goal to drum up opposition to the Yucca project. A waste shipping accident is extremely unlikely, said Mitch Singer, spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute. "Even if there is an accident these casks are well-protected and it would not result in a release of radiation," Singer said. One radiation expert said the Environmental Working Group's fatality figures were probably not accurate predictions. "If you use your imagination and don't rely on accurate probability factors, I guess you could come up with some of those numbers," said Bernard Cohen, physics professor at the University of Pittsburgh. "But these casks are tested and designed to be extremely durable." Davis stressed that waste shipping information and accident scenarios are outlined in the DOE's environmental impact statement for Yucca Mountain. But Environmental Working Group officials have said the DOE buried data in the massive Yucca impact statement. They say their website allows users to get a clear picture about where waste will be shipped and how an accident could affect their city. "We see a pattern here with the DOE, we think, deliberately underplaying information," Environmental Working Group president Ken Cook said. Their report used an accident scenario model developed by Energy Department scientists at the nation's national laboratories. A train shipment accident was used for 14 cities; a truck shipment for six cities. In each of the accidents, the truck or train strikes a heavy object at a speed between 30 and 60 miles per hour, under average weather conditions on a clear day. Weather patterns, including wind speeds, were factored for each city. The accident is considered one of "moderate severity," not a worst case scenario, according to the report. In each of the accidents, the body of the cask is not punctured. But cesium escapes from a crack in a broken seal, accompanied by a modest fire that burns for a few hours. Radioactive cesium particulates are released, which ultimately gives people cancer, according to the report. The report compiles statistics for latent cancers and population exposed. Cities with the most severe results: Chicago (349,352 people exposed to cesium, 1,228 latent cancer fatalities); Washington, D.C. (314,250 exposed, 1,080 fatalities); Los Angeles (223,942 exposed, 896 fatalities); Minneapolis (175,884 exposed, 669 fatalities); Atlanta (207,240 exposed, 659 fatalities). Environmental Working Group officials chose a spot at random within the cities to apply the accident model, in most cases avoiding the most populated city centers. They stressed that the report is merely a snapshot of a possible accident. A real accident could be more severe, or less severe, than what is contained in the report, based on where the accident occurs, its severity, time of day, and weather patterns. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 39 Execs urge lawmaker to vote for nuke dump* RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL By Ellyn Ferguson Gannett News Service 6/26/2002 11:17 pm WASHINGTON ? Executives with a company that owns nuclear power plants in Illinois, Pennsylvania and New Jersey met with Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin on Tuesday to urge him to vote for the creation of a national storage site for spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain. Exelon Corp. officials accompanied several mayors, three state senators, community and union leaders in the session with Durbin, D-Ill. Durbin, who is seeking re-election this year, has not said publicly how he will vote when the Senate takes up Yucca Mountain, which is expected after their Fourth of July break. Illinois, home to 14 commercial nuclear power plants, has more spent fuel stored than any other state. Durbin has said he wants nuclear waste moved out of Illinois but has questioned whether Yucca Mountain would be environmentally safe. Elizabeth Moler, a senior vice president in Exelon?s Washington office, said the meeting was designed ?to underscore from a group of his constituents that it?s not just Exelon Corp., but also a large number of people in the state who support passage of the resolution on Yucca Mountain.? Exelon has a big stake in Yucca Mountain. The company, which is headquartered in Chicago, has six power stations in Illinois, three in Pennsylvania and one in New Jersey for a total of 17 nuclear reactors that represent 20 percent of the U.S. nuclear industry?s generating capacity, according to the company?s Web site. The company currently stores spent fuel at its plants but has had to find off-site storage for one plant and will run out of capacity at its Byron, Ill., plant in 2011, Nesbit said. The visit to Durbin?s office came a day after Exelon placed a full-page ad in the Capitol Hill publication Roll Call calling on Durbin and Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, R-Ill., to back the Nevada site. The ad was an extension of a print ad campaign the company started in several Illinois newspapers last month, Exelon spokesman Craig Nesbit said. Fitzgerald already intends to vote for Yucca Mountain, according to his spokesman, Brian Stoller. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal , a Gannett Co. Inc. Newspaper. Use of this site signifies agreement to our terms of service (updated 08/01/2001). ***************************************************************** 40 What a waste Guardian Unlimited British Nuclear Fuels is to be broken up, forcing taxpayers to cover the huge costs of reprocessing and storing radioactive waste *Paul Brown, environment correspondent Thursday June 27, 2002 The Guardian * The dismemberment of British Nuclear Fuels will be announced by the government in a few days. This will leave the taxpayer to pick up the bill for dealing with 50 years of accumulated waste, and the profitable parts of the company will be privatised. BNFL, which employs more than 10,000, is expected to announce a set of financial results on the same day which will confirm that the company is bankrupt. The bill for dealing with the waste exceeds £38bn, more than it can ever hope to generate in revenue. Not that much will change quickly at Sellafield in Cumbria, the heart of the company's operation, where spent fuel from British and overseas nuclear reactors is reprocessed in two giant works. Unlike most bankrupt organisations, the nuclear industry cannot be closed down. The reprocessing technology developed 50 years ago to provide plutonium and uranium for the UK's nuclear weapons programme is well past its usefulness for that purpose. The country no longer needs this material, but there is no other easy other way of disposing of the fuel and the old Magnox reprocessing works will have to continue until all the power stations are dismantled. For the newer Thorp works, opened only in 1993, the economic argument for closing would appear stronger. BNFL has large contracts with utilities in Germany, Japan and with British Energy to reprocess fuel and the company claims it is still a money-earner, although critics disagree. At the heart of the problem is the failure of the industry and successive governments over 50 years to deal with nuclear waste. No depository exists for high and intermediate level waste and the most dangerous has been held in liquid form in ageing waste tanks, vulnerable to accidents and more recently to terrorist attack. So alarmed have the regulators become that they have placed limits on how much more waste can be produced, which means cutting back production. BNFL, which thought it could manage the problem by turning the heat producing liquid into safer glass blocks by a process called vitrification, has never made the technology work properly, and as a result has had to curtail its reprocessing activities. The business plan of 2000 is in disarray, and promises made to overseas customers of completing initial contracts for the Thorp reprocessing in 10 years cannot be kept. Cost overuns are kept secret. All this is becoming more embarrassing for the government. Last November it was told that the liabilities of BNFL exceeded its assets and it could not legally be allowed to continue in business in its current form. In November Margaret Beckett, the environment secretary, told the Commons that a new government quango called the Liabilities Management Authority (LMA) would be set up to sort out the waste problem. As part of the package all BNFL's assets including the reprocessing works would be transferred to the LMA, and the management side of the business would form a separate company, which ultimately could be privatised. BNFL would then charge a fee for managing the activities at Sellafield and elsewhere while the taxpayer picked up the bill for the waste. Since November in public the nuclear industry has been gung-ho about its prospects, talking about building a new generation of six or maybe 12 power stations to replace the ageing ones that are closing down. But behind this rhetoric a closer inspection of the waste problem by ministers has shown escalating bills. In the past, because the bill for waste would not be incurred for five, 10 or even 50 years the cost of clean-up or disposal could be discounted by accountants. Now that the stations are closing and the clean-up must begin, this cannot continue. Current estimates put the bill for the taxpayer at £1.8bn a year for at least the next 20 years - no small headache for the Treasury. And, unlike past administrations, this one cannot avoid the problem. Under the Ospar Convention, the Europe-wide pollution agreement, the government promised to steadily reduce nuclear discharges from Sellafield into the Irish sea until there are virtually none by 2020. This would involve the early closure of the BNFL's magnox reactors so the fuel can be unloaded and reprocessed and the works closed by 2012. Already five Magnox stations are shut and the closing dates others brought forward by as much as seven years. Beyond this the future of the newer Thorp reprocessing plant has also to be decided. The key question for the government and the LMA is whether BNFL, privatised or in state ownership, should be allowed to continue managing the newer reprocessing plant and whether the plant is as profitable as it claims. So far BNFL's pleas of "commercial confidentiality" have kept the public from finding out how the sums really add up - but with an ever growing bill for clean-up, will the LMA be given enough teeth to find out how much all this is really costing the taxpayer? paul.brown@guardian.co.uk *Special report* Britain's nuclear industry *Interactive guide* Nuclear reprocessing *Graphics* Nuclear map of Britain US nuclear map *Useful links* British Nuclear Fuels Ltd Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament HSE nuclear glossary UK atomic energy authority National Radiological Protection Board World Nuclear Association ***************************************************************** 41 UK: CALDER HALL FORCED TO CLOSE NEXT YEAR The Whitehaven News *The Full Story...* CALDER Hall, the world's first industrial-scale nuclear power station, will close for good next March - three years sooner than expected. All four of the Sellafield electricity-producing reactors have been out of action for the past six months because of investigations into potential problems. The enforced shutdowns have been costing BNFL an estimated £30,000 per day for each reactor. Calder and its sister, Chapelcross in Scotland, are both closing early. There will be no compulsory redundancies. Both stations still need staff for decommissioning work and generous severance terms are expected to be on offer to anyone who wants to leave. Chapelcross, at Annan, will close from March 2005 - three years ahead of time. BNFL had decided on a 2006 Calder Hall closure, but the new chief executive, Norman Askew, said he has no choice but to bring it forward because the ground-breaking station can no longer pay its way. But Cumbrian anti-nuclear group Core claims the real reason for BNFL's change of heart is the on-going investigations at Calder Hall to see whether the station might face the same problem which has blighted Chapelcross. This is to do with radiation-induced graphite shrinkage associated with the chargepans which are used to guide the highly-radioactive used fuel rods into place. Core spokesman Martin Forwood said: "Why can't BNFL call a spade a spade? "The reactors, well beyond their sell-by date, are called out and were unlikely ever to come back on line. "The principal reason is clearly the costly and physically difficult problem of the chargepans." Mr Askew said: "This is a tough but necessary commercial decision. "I have always said we would continue to run these pioneering work-horses of the nuclear in-dustry while they remain safe and economic. "They are still safe but the electricity prices have fallen significantly and to a level that makes them uneconomic. "We do not see this fall in price recovering in the next few years and thus we can no longer justify running the plants." Although jobs will have to go, Copeland MP Jack Cunningham is satisfied no one will be forced off the payroll. "I am assured there will be no compulsory redundancies and those who wish to will be able to transfer to other jobs on the site," he said. Mr Askew said: "We have nearly 800 people working at the two sites and we will help them all through this period of uncertainty so that they can make sound plans for their personal futures. "There will be jobs to do at the power station for years to come but inevitably staff numbers will fall. "There will be good opportunities for different jobs at Sellafield and other BNFL sites but for those who leave we will do all we can to ensure fair treatment and to support them on their way." The closures could provide a spur to the government to replace the old Magnox power stations with modern nuclear reactors. Greenpeace, however, is calling for offshore wind farms to replace them. Energy campaigner Emma Gibson said: "They can be built quickly and would provide cheap, clean electricity without the risk of nuclear accidents and without producing radioactive waste." The huge task of decommissiong cannot start until the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate give formal consent. ***************************************************************** 42 D'OH NO!: Character won't help in Yucca fight Thursday, June 27, 2002 * By STEVE TETREAULT * STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU *WASHINGTON -- *Nevada leaders looking for celebrities to help them fight the Yucca Mountain Project approached a most singular figure associated with nuclear power. D'OH! Homer Simpson, the bumbling underling who flirts with catastrophes while working at a fictional power plant in "The Simpsons," was briefly considered to play some role in the state's bid to derail the proposed Nevada nuclear waste repository. It was only a fleeting courtship. An inquiry to the show's producers was rejected, as are all bids to tie Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa and Maggie to social, political and charity causes, said a spokeswoman for creator Matt Groening. "Our policy has been from the beginning that we don't allow the Simpsons to be used for any charity, cause, or organization, no matter how good it is," said Antonia Coffman, executive consultant on "The Simpsons." Tessa Hafen, a spokeswoman for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Homer Simpson's name came up in March when staff members were brainstorming for ideas to counter the nuclear power industry's support for the proposed repository. Former Reid aide Nathan Naylor made the calls to Hollywood. Although somewhat gimmicky, Reid might have approved using the character, Hafen said. "We were looking at all different avenues," Hafen said. Entertainment lawyers said they were not surprised at the rejection since "The Simpsons" generates millions in profits for Fox Television and the last thing the network needs is to associate a popular character with real-life controversy that could lose ratings and advertising dollars. "Proprietors of entertainment products stay light years away from political disputes. It's just not a sensible thing to do," said Roger Schechter, a law professor at George Washington University. Even if owners were agreeable, it would have cost Nevada some sum for permission, he added. One anti-nuclear activist daydreamed Wednesday about what might have been. "I have a perfect image of an ad where Homer Simpson is driving a nuclear waste truck," said Lisa Gue, policy analyst at the Public Citizen Critical Mass Energy and Environment Project. Gue said Public Citizen had a similar idea several years ago and sought a connection with Groening, but the group's letter was not answered. The nuclear power industry has learned to live with the Simpsons, even after the time when Bart and Lisa found a three-eyed mutant fish in the river next to the power plant. At a real plant "you don't have a guy in the control room eating donuts and pushing buttons," said Mitch Singer, spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute. "It's not a meltdown-a-minute scenario. "Those opposing Yucca Mountain have reached the depths of desperation," Singer added. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 43 UK: LOCAL TORY LEADER CALLS FOR NEW CALDER HALL The Whitehaven News *The Full Story...* *LOCAL TORY LEADER CALLS FOR NEW CALDER HALL* SELLAFIELD should be top of the list for a new nuclear power station, says Copeland Council's Tory leader, Mike Graham. It was Coun Graham who first made the call last year when Copeland was being hard hit by factory closures. Now with Calder's closure accelerated by three years he said: "As one door closes surely it's time for another to open. The energy requirements of the UK are increasing and these needs must be met, particularly for future generations. "New nuclear plants are the only answer to provide this energy and efforts must now be made to build new ones. "I hope that with Sellafield being a world leader in nuclear energy coupled with the high level of community support it has enjoyed over many years it would be top of the list for the site of a new nuclear build." Despite BNFL's "no compulsory redundancy" assurance, Coun Graham said: "The fact remains there will be over 200 less jobs. I am asking BNFL to be absolutely honest in the numbers to be lost. There is bound to be a knock-on indirect effect through income not being spent in West Cumbria. Efforts must then be made to secure more work in Copeland." ***************************************************************** 44 UK: £5M WORK ON VISITORS CENTR The Whitehaven News *The Full Story...* *£5M WORK ON VISITORS CENTRE* A £5 million renovation project of a local tourist attraction opens its doors to the public for the first time tomorrow. The Sellafield Visitors Centre, one of Cumbria's most popular tourist attractions, closed recently and has undergone a massive renovation, with a brand new exhibition, Sparking Reaction, now taking centre stage. The exhibition has been produced by The Science Museum, of London, which has had complete control. The views of anti-nuclear groups such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are represented in an attempt to give visitors both sides of the nuclear debate. nFull story and picture: page 3 Earlier date for by-pass THE Lillyhall-Distington by-pass scheme has been brought forward by three years. Copeland Council leader George Usher told the full council on Tuesday that contracts would be awarded in November and a start made in June 2005. "It means that because of all our efforts we have succeeded in bringing it forward three years," he said. But the council is still battling to try and stop the de-trunking of another big part of the A595 south of Sellafield. "If we could get the county council on our side we will stand a better chance," he said. ***************************************************************** 45 SELLAFIELD VISITOR CENTRE OPENS AFTER £5M REVAMP The Whitehaven News *The Full Story...* SELLAFIELD Visitors Centre re-opens its doors tomorrow after a massive £5million refurbishment. The attraction, once acc-used of brainwashing young people on the subject of nuclear power, has a brand new Sparking Reaction exhibition, which will be run independently by the Science Museum, London. Although owners BNFL have footed the huge bill, it has given the Science Museum full control of what to say in the hard-hitting interactive exhibition. BNFL hopes that in doing so it can give visitors the opportunity to make up their own minds about nuclear energy. The views of Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are among those expressed in the exhibition. Museum spokesman Ste-phen Bromberg said: "The work has not been influenced by BNFL or any other person or organisation. "It is not our role to say whether nuclear power, nor any other scientific development for that matter, is good or bad but to present information that enables visitors to understand better the range of issues and views and to allow them to draw their own conclusions." BNFL's director of corporate affairs, Philip Dew-hurst, is confident that the previous best figures of 120,000 visitors per year will be surpassed. It is also hoped that in linking the visitors centre to other such museums in other areas they can increase visitor numbers, both to the visitors centre and West Cumbria. The focal point of Sparking Reaction is an Immersion Cinema - Europe's first and one of only seven screens in the world. It enables visitors to make decisions regarding the energy needs of an imaginary country and also allows them to build and operate their own nuclear power stations. It also examines other options for electricity generation, with visitors finally voting for their best option. There are also other displays and several opportunities for visitors to interact, with special displays and interactive points for the under sevens. Sparking Reaction, will be open from April to October (10am to 6pm) and November to March (10am to 4pm). ***************************************************************** 46 Nuke waste: It's coming to your neighborhood! *Wednesday, July 03, 2002 * Local News (Shrapnel) From sea to shining sea, nuclear waste is coming to your neighborhood, America. So, what are you going to do about it? That's what David Allen of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group wants to know. U.S. PIRG on June 25 released a report titled, "Radioactive Roads and Rails: Hauling Nuclear Waste Through Our Neighborhoods." Among PIRG's findings: A shitload of high-level nuclear waste, 77,000 tons of it, could end up passing through thousands of American neighborhoods as it makes its way to its final resting place - the proposed Yucca Mountain repository in Southern Nevada. In the words of the PIRG report, that's "more than 105,000 truckloads of nuclear waste [which] could travel our roads and highways, throughout 44 states, over the course of four decades." Or, in the words of Allen, "Transportation of nuclear waste is a huge risk for the entire nation, but mostly for Las Vegas," he said. "We're talking about shipments of nuclear waste every three and a half hours for 38 years." The release of the PIRG report is intended to shake up the masses who think the Yucca Mountain project is strictly a "Nevada issue." A common refrain heard among the environmentalist groups present at the PIRG news conference on Tuesday was, "We're all in this together." "Our task is to energize Nevadans to reach out to those folks who are outside of the state," said Dan Geary, Nevada spokesman for the National Environmental Trust. By reaching out to other states, the hope is that more of the general public will wake up to the fact that some of our top "elected" officials, such as George W. Bush and "Tricky" Dick Cheney, are bedfellows with the nuclear power industry and, thus, are doing all they can to fool the public into thinking a Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository is a good idea based on sound science. Oh, and let's not forget, U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham said transporting and storing 77,000 tons of nuclear waste 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas is something about being patriotic and something else about deterring terrorism. But as Allen is fond of saying, "Best-case scenario, these shipments are like rolling X-ray machines, worst-case scenario, these shipments are mobile Chernobyls." /-David Hare/ /dhare@lvpress.com/ *Haunted Huntridge may soon come back to life* The Huntridge Theatre's new owner, Eli Mizrachi, has applied for a banquet hall license with the city of Las Vegas' Business Licensing Department. According to the department's director, Jim DiFiore, the license would allow Mizrachi to lease or rent out the historic venue for various events. "I don't anticipate any problems getting the license," said Mizrachi, who applied for the license on June 20. "At this point, we've pretty much cleared every major hurdle." The final hurdle, Mizrachi said, is a June 26 fire code inspection. The result of the inspection was not available prior to /CityLife's/ press deadline. If the license is approved, Mizrachi indicated that he plans to host comedy shows, acoustic events and other "low-decibel shows" at the Huntridge. According to Mizrachi, the license would limit the volume and size of the events. The Huntridge opened in 1944 and was used as a movie theater until 1990. After being closed for a year and a half, it reopened in 1992 as a concert hall. The building has not been used since Mizrachi bought it in January. /-Matt O'Brien/ /obrien@lvpress.com/ /Shrapnel is a weekly roundup of Nevada-related news briefs. To submit story ideas or provide feedback, contact Jimmy Boegle at 871-6780 ext. 344 or jimmyb@lvpress.com./ *Copyright 2002 Las Vegas City Life* ***************************************************************** 47 Moving nuclear waste Sci/Tech > Environment from the June 27, 2002 edition Nuclear waste is routinely transported around the US. But shipments are expected to climb rapidly, raising questions about safety. By Peter N. Spotts | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor In the 1930s, Eastman Kodak Co. began to hear complaints that some of the X-ray plates it sold to hospitals were arriving hopelessly fogged. A quick check showed that laborers had loaded boxes of plates onto the same boxcar that carried the containers of radium. *Related stories:* *06/27/02* Choosing routes, testing safety *06/27/02* Waste storage gets few volunteersz *monitortalk:* Thus was born what may be the earliest shipping requirement for nuclear materials: Do not ship radium in a boxcar used for shipping X-ray film. "It was the shortest regulation in history," quips Bob Jefferson, a nuclear-materials transportation consultant. Today, nuclear materials routinely travel across the country ? and around the world. These materials are subject to stringent shipping and security measures. But concern about them ? particularly about the highly radioactive waste from nuclear-power plants ? has grown with the prospect that waste shipments will become more frequent if a permanent repository is built, as many expect. Those concerns have intensified following Sept. 11. And some states are getting more vocal about having nuclear materials on their turf: Recently, South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges unsuccessfully attempted to block waste shipments into his state. These shipments have moved around the US from a range of sources, from the Three-Mile Island clean-up and research reactors overseas to spent fuel and other high-level waste from US Department of Energy reactors and the US Navy. While some shipments have been involved in accidents, since the early 1960s none has led to a release of radioactivity or to radiation-related illnesses or deaths, state and federal regulators note. Credit goes to the shipping containers, Mr. Jefferson says. Many products, ranging from radio-pharmaceuticals to home smoke detectors, which contain low-level nuclear materials, can be shipped in cardboard boxes. The most dangerous materials, such as the high-level waste from nuclear-power plants, get more-deft handling. Spent reactor fuel is loaded into stainless-steel casks weighing from 60 to 120 tons. Casks are lined with materials including depleted uranium that keep radiation inside the cask. The design philosophy, Jefferson says, is, "you can't trust humans." Casks are designed to withstand a 30-foot fall onto a hard surface such as concrete. A cask must withstand temperatures of 1,440 degrees F. for 30 minutes. (A blaze in a Baltimore tunnel exceeded those temperatures for longer than that in 2001, although engineers point out it's unlikely such materials will be shipped over routes currently off-limits to hazardous limits.) A fractured cask must be leakproof when immersed in three feet of water for eight hours. Newer casks must remain leakproof for eight hours at depths of 100 feet. And a cask must withstand a three-foot fall onto a steel post to simulate an accident that could puncture a cask. Driving next to a truck and cask on the highway, or standing on the shoulder while one whizzes by, yields a brief dose of radiation indistinguishable from what humans are naturally expose to every day. By one estimate, a pedestrian watching a truck pass receives a dose equivalent to eating two extra bananas a year. Bananas contain traces of radioactive potassium. However, critics point out that the US has never conducted the full range of structural-integrity tests on full-sized casks, analysts say. Instead, one-quarter to half-scale models have been tested. And Nevada state officials say there are so many uncertainties surrounding transportation of waste that it's tough to gauge potential effects or to plan for emergencies. Next year, the US Nuclear Regulatory Agency is planning full-scale tests.. Over the past four decades, the United States has sent the vast majority of some 3,000 shipments of spent nuclear fuel across the nation's highways and railways. (Some has traveled by barge.) That number is set to skyrocket when a permanent repository is scheduled to open, perhaps by 2010. According to the US Energy Department, the number of shipments could grow to between 15,000 and 45,000 at that point. The amount depends on whether the material is trucked, or shipped by rail in larger canisters. To some, the likelihood of a serious accident will rise along with an increase in shipments. Nevada officials doubt enough rail access is available, forcing more casks onto trucks. They say shipments could number as high as 100,000. Others, however, note that worldwide, the flow of high-level radioactive waste already has run into the tens of thousands of tons. "Over the history of this industry, more spent fuel has been shipped internationally than will be shipped to Yucca Mountain," says Jack Edlow, who heads Edlow International, a nuclear-materials transport company. The shipments have moved "safely and securely, without the loss of a single life." Some of these international shipments come from foreign research reactors, whose owners have sent spent fuel to the US for disposal under the Atoms for Peace program. Many other shipments originate in countries whose laws and policies governing the use of nuclear energy require that spent reactor fuel be recycled. Not every country has reprocessing facilities, however. Japan ships its fuel to France for recycling, as do several European countries. Britain also reprocesses nuclear fuel. Russia reprocesses some of its spent fuel, and is deciding whether to market itself as a host for an international commercial nuclear-waste repository. Reprocessing has had a checkered history in the US. It yields plutonium, which can be used as reactor fuel. Following India's explosion of a nuclear device in 1974, the US grew concerned about the likelihood plutonium could be diverted to build weapons. And the large number of shipments to and from reprocessing plants could be vulnerable to theft or sabotage. In 1977, President Carter banned civil reprocessing in the US. President Reagan lifted the ban in 1981, but by then reprocessing had lost its economic luster. Last year, President Bush recommended the government put renewed focus on reprocessing. TOM BROWN - STAFF Copyright © 2002 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 48 Choosing routes, testing safety Sci/Tech > Environment from the June 27, 2002 edition By Seth Stern The Department of Transportation picks routes for transporting hazardous radiological materials. It assesses risk based on accident rates, transit time, population density, and traffic. *Related stories:* *06/27/02* Moving nuclear waste *06/27/02* Waste storage gets few volunteersz *monitortalk:* For waste traveling by truck, interstate highways or connecting bypasses and beltways that avoid cities are preferred. Some shipments may go by rail or barge. No final routes have been selected for shipments to Yucca Mountain, Nev., but proposed routes pass near 109 cities of 100,000 people or more. Spent nuclear fuel is shipped by licensed private companies and regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Governors are notified, and once on the road, shipments are tracked by satellite, and crews must check in by phone every two hours. Shipments entering heavily populated areas must be escorted by an armed police officer in a separate vehicle or two escort vehicles with armed occupants. Security is far tighter during transport of nuclear materials used in producing weapons. Heavily armed agents of the National Nuclear Security Administration drive convoys of armored tractors and cargo carriers and their escort vehicles. These agents, who often have served with military special forces, undergo three years of training, according to a recent court filing by NNSA official Everet Beckner. Additional agents and equipment have been added to each convoy since Sept. 11. All travel information is classified. Such precautions do little to mollify critics, who say convoys are likely to be terrorist targets. Antitank weapons, they note, could penetrate casks of spent fuel, turning them into roadside "dirty" bombs. "One has to consider a whole range of attack scenarios," says Edward Lyman of the Nuclear Control Institute. "More than a single armed state-police car may be needed." But Robert Jefferson, a former Sandia National Laboratory nuclear engineer and now a consultant, notes that over the years, the government has undertaken at least eight classified tests to see how well the casks would hold up under "the most likely attack modes." One set of tests, leaked to the public, involved using armor-piercing charges against a shipping cask with walls 10 to 14 inches thick. The engineers used a demolition charge, Mr. Jefferson says, which packs more punch than those used in antitank weapons. In the initial test, "we blew a hole in it and determined that as much as 1 percent of the contents could get out," he says. But from a clean-up and "dirty bomb" standpoint, what counts is the form the released material takes. Aerosol is the most lethal. So they ran the test again in a "big steel bottle" with filters to capture particles roughly 10 microns across or smaller. About 0.03 percent of the released material emerged in a readily dispersible aerosol form. If that were released in New York's Times Square at rush hour, "in a population that expects from 30,000 to 100,000 cancers during the next 30 years, they would have produced one-half of an additional cancer," he says. He and other experts agree that there is no room for complacency when shipping nuclear materials. SOURCE: US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY For further information: ? Yucca Mountain Project DOE ? Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office ? Nuclear Waste Route Atlas Environmental Working Group ? Just How Secure Is a Nuclear Waste Truck? Moscow Times Please Note: The Monitor does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window. ? *Visit the Monitor Web Directory : sites we like.* Copyright © 2002 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 49 Senate Compromises on Defense Bill *Las Vegas SUN <../>* June 27, 2002 WASHINGTON- The Senate moved to complete work on a $393 billion defense bill after going on record that any extra money that might be found for the Pentagon should go to fighting terrorism rather than boosting spending on a national missile defense system. The compromise on missile defense satisfied Republicans who said it gave President Bush the authority to restore cuts in the program made by the Senate and Democrats who contended that they had made clear that the nation's top military priority must be stopping another terrorist attack. On Thursday the Senate was to vote to cut off debate and move to passage of the defense bill, which approves, but does not pay for, defense programs in fiscal 2003 starting Oct. 1. The House, which passed its version of the defense bill earlier with full funding for missile defense, on Thursday was to take up a $355 billion bill that details spending for the 2003 fiscal year. The Senate defense bill, crafted by the Armed Services Committee, cuts the administration's $7.6 billion request for missile defense by $814 million. Democrats, who control the committee, shifted that money to shipbuilding and security for nuclear facilities, arguing that it still left more than enough to move ahead with research and development of a national missile shield. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., who heads the subcommittee that oversees missile defense, said the Pentagon still has $4 billion from money approved for fiscal 2002 but never used. But Sen. John Warner, R-Va., the top Republican on the committee, said the Pentagon would have an extra $800 million this year because of a lower-than-expected inflation rate and proposed giving the president the power to use that for missile defense or other homeland security needs. Republicans and the White House said the proposed cuts would seriously undermine the program just as the Pentagon was beginning work on its first rudimentary defense system in Alaska. Missile defense, an idea championed by President Reagan, is a priority of President Bush, who has withdrawn the United States from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that banned missile defense systems. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, speaking at a Pentagon news conference, said the cuts would be "particularly destructive of the entire missile defense program." He said the cuts were targeted at key elements of the program, including testing of missile interceptors against decoys. The Democratic alternative to Warner's proposal, put together by Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., states that the highest priority of the nation should be preventing terrorist attacks, and that any extra funds should go first for that purpose. But it also gives the president the option to spend more on missile defense if he chooses to ignore the Senate. North Korea, one of the countries cited by the Bush administration as posing a long-range missile threat, could attack the United States far more accurately and cheaply with a truck bomb or an envelope of anthrax, Levin said. The administration, said Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., has "warned us about crop dusters, gasoline trucks, shoe bombers, dirty bombers. ... More money for ballistic missile defense won't make any of them more preventable." Warner said he believed the compromise would remove a threatened presidential veto over the missile defense cuts, and that any savings found from lower inflation would "indeed go in large measure to missile defense." Resolution of the missile defense issue still leaves several conflicts with the White House. The Senate approved an amendment, which could cost billions, guaranteeing full retirement pay to veterans who also receive disability compensation, raising one veto threat. The Senate also voted to overturn a six-year-old policy, supported by the administration, that bans privately funded abortions at military hospitals overseas. The House and Senate must still resolve differences between their two bills before sending the defense package to the president. --- The Senate bill is S. 2514. On the Net: Congress, bill text: http://thomas.loc.gov/ All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 Faslane to house new nuclear submarines Scotsman.com Thu 27 Jun 2002 The choice of Faslane as the base for up to four Astute class nuclear submarines will be welcomed by the 5,000 employees there. /JASON BEATTIE/ THE Ministry of Defence confirmed yesterday that the new Astute class nuclear-powered submarines would be based at the Faslane naval base, safeguarding 5,000 jobs. The Scotsman revealed exclusively last month the MoD had decided to berth the first and second batches of the submarines at the Clyde naval base rather than at the English port of Plymouth. Three Astute submarines, armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles, were ordered by the MoD in 1997 at the cost of £750 million each to replace the Swiftsure class. The first, HMS Astute, is due to come into service in three years? time, with a second tranche of two and possibly three submarines expected to follow. Announcing the decision, Adam Ingram, the armed forces minister and MP for East Kilbride, said Faslane had been chosen after an extensive review of requirements. In a statement, the MoD said: "With a planned life of 25 years for each submarine, this decision commits the navy to maintaining its historic presence on the Clyde, and safeguards long-term job prospects for many of the base?s 5,000 employees." The two of the first batch of three submarines, HMS Astute and HMS Ambush, are under construction in Barrow-in-Furness and are expected to come into service by 2006. Faslane, currently home to the Swiftsure and Vanguard class submarines, had been locked in fierce competition with Devonport, Plymouth, over which site would become the permanent base for the state-of-the-art Astutes. Helen Liddell, the Scottish Secretary, said the decision was a recognition of the skills and dedication shown by those employed in the defence industry in Scotland. "The decision to base the Astute class submarines at Faslane with an estimated service life of 20 years, alongside the existing Vanguard class, will provide job security for most of the 5,000 employees. "Defence workers in Scotland can take great satisfaction from this. The decision reflects their high levels of skill and dedication and the value for money this brings to the tax payer." ©2002 scotsman.com ***************************************************************** 51 Councillors oppose building of new nuclear submarines at Faslane Inside Dunbartonshire *Lennox Herald * Thursday, 27 June 2002 * *THE proposed building of more nuclear submarines at Faslane has been met with fierce opposition from councillors. * Labour councillor James Flynn asked a meeting of West Dunbartonshire Council to support the naval base management in trying to gain a contract to build Astute submarines. The Bonhill East councillor also called on the council to write a letter to the prime minister welcoming such work on the Clyde. Councillor Jim Bollan blasted the idea, saying: "The last thing we need on the Clyde is more nuclear weapons, these additional submarines along would be capable of killing millions of people. "We are debating on money for schools yet the cash is falling out of the Government's pockets to build dangerous submarines. This is the hypocrisy. "The NHS needs more funding - we are told to go to the private sector. Council housing stock needs billions of pounds of investment - we are told to go to the private sector. "Only when we come to weapons of mass destruction is there plenty cash available." Twelve councillors, including council leader Dany McCafferty, voted for an amendment to the proposal. He said: "We do not want more nuclear weapons there, and we recognise that most Faslane workers do not want to work with nuclear weapons, they want conventional jobs." Labour group leader Andy White claimed that the council was turning its back on the Faslane workers by opposing the submarine proposals. He said: "The leader of this council said he would do everything to protect the jobs of the people at Faslane. "He has ran away from that commitment. This is work that could protect and enhance the jobs that are at Faslane." Fellow Labour councillor Connie O'Sullivan added: "If we don't support this the people of the base will never forgive us." Concerns over the health of West Dunbartonshire residents were expressed by Haldane councillor Margaret McGregor. She worries that Faslane nuclear discharge poses serious cancer risks. Councillor Mary Campbell warned that the base could still be a target for terrorists. "Almost every day I read about threatened terrorist attacks - the most threatened place in this area is Faslane. "We all feel for the people who work there but at what risk?" ***************************************************************** 52 NUCLEAR FEARS SPARK PROTEST OVER REFITS 09:00 - 26 June 2002 A protest is planned by the anti-nuclear pressure group CND in Plymouth to highlight concerns over the controversial refit of Trident nuclear submarines at Devonport. Thousands are expected at the October event which will start from the Hoe and go through the city to the Dockyard, and then to Devonport Park for a rally. It comes as peace campaigners of the Nuclear Free Coalition, of which CND is a member, are to meet on Tuesday, July 2, at the Guildhall. The event, "Trident in Devonport: Cause for Concern?", will cover issues surrounding nuclear safety. Two plans regarding nuclear safety in Plymouth are currently being drawn up. One is on-site for safety on the base, and one is off-site, which will be created by Plymouth City Council and other agencies after the Health and Safety Executive approves the on-site plan. Invitations to the July 2 meeting have gone to the city council, including the emergency planning officer, police, naval base commander, DML, headteachers, residents' associations, health authority, and Environment Agency. Starting at 7pm, a presentation by independent nuclear expert John Large will be followed by questions. Meanwhile, CND met police in Plymouth yesterday to ensure the protest in October runs smoothly. CND campaigns worker Patrick Van den Bulck said: "CND has always made a point of co-operating fully with the police." Copyright Contact us ***************************************************************** 53 G-8 to Help Russia Dismantle Weapons *Las Vegas SUN <../>* June 27, 2002 KANANASKIS, Alberta- The United States and its wealthy Group of Eight allies agreed Thursday to spend up to $20 billion over the next decade helping Russia dismantle stockpiled dangerous weapons and pledged billions of dollars in new support to Africa. President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin sealed the 10-year pact on Russia, the newest G-8 member, in their one-on-one talks as an economic summit of the world's industrial powers drew to a close. Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien announced the agreement on Africa following discussions with the presidents of four African nations and U.N. Secretary-Geeral Kofi Annan. "We have acted collectively to make sure that globalization benefits all and no continent is left behind," Chretien said. The agreement on Africa offers increased aid and foreign investment to countries in Africa who are willing to eliminate government corruption and pursue free market reforms. The G-8 joint action plan on Africa will also support creation of an African peacekeeping force by 2003 as part of an effort to deal with the protracted conflicts in Congo, Sudan and Angola. The action plan also committed the G-8 countries to working towards a goal of earmarking 50 percent of their promised increases in foreign aid in coming years to Africa. The Bush administration has pledged to increase foreign aid by $5 billion annually and the 15-nation European Union has committed to an increase of $7 billion annually. World leaders meeting at a remote Canadian Rockies resort said that the agreement to provide up to $20 billion in support for Russia's efforts to safeguard its weapons stockpiles was driven by concerns that the materials could fall into the hands of terrorists. "The attacks of Sept. 11 demonstrated the terrorists are prepared to use any means to cause terror and inflict appalling casualties on innocent people," the G-8 leaders said in a joint statement announcing the Russia agreement. The statement said the summit nations were launching "a new G-8 global partnership against the spread of weapons and materials of mass destruction." The statement said the wealthy nations would explore canceling some of Russia's old Soviet government debts and the debts of other countries willing to devote the money saved to accelerate efforts to safeguard materials that could be used by terrorists. According to a senior U.S. official, Putin told Bush that Russia would abide by a series of conditions under which the United States and leaders from Europe, Japan and Canada would put up the money. The leaders had reached tentative agreement Wednesday on the money issue, but their aides negotiated late into the night and Thursday morning over Russia's obligations to the monitoring provisions. Russia agreed to provide its new G-8 partners access to disposal sites, such as facilities where nuclear submarines are dismantled, the official said. Moscow also has ensured adequate auditing and oversight authority to its partners. The agreement builds on a long-standing U.S. program supporting the decommissioning of Russia's nuclear weapons, a program that the Bush administration sought to trim back in its first budget to Congress last year. The money to safeguard Russia's nuclear and biological stockpiles is part of a broader campaign to increase cooperation between the United States and Russia on international issues such as nuclear proliferation. Bush and Putin recently agreed to reduce their nuclear stockpiles. In Thursday's talks, the pair committed their countries to a united fight against terror. "Unfortunately, terrorism is of a global nature," said Putin. "... Joint efforts are essential if we want to be successful in this fight." Bush called Putin "an ally - a strong ally in the war against terror and his actions speak louder than his words." But talk here was also preoccupied with Bush's three-day-old Middle East peace plan and his allies' hesitance to embrace the United States position that an independent Palestine is only possible if Palestinians replace Yasser Arafat as their leader. Bush, as he opened meetings with Putin in a small windowless room, said: "I'm very pleased with the response to my proposal on the Middle East. The response has been very positive." Meanwhile, Putin's foreign policy adviser, Sergei Prikhodko, reiterated the Russian view: "We must work with the leadership in place, including Arafat." Putin heads home to Moscow having finally won Russia full-fledged membership in the elite G-8, made up of the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. Russia was placed in the rotation to serve as host for a summit for the first time in 2006. The G-8 leaders also pondered how to offer assurances to global financial markets, which were sent tumbling Wednesday with WorldCom Inc.'s announcement that it had disguised $3.8 billion of expenses. Putin said Bush, in the summit's private meetings, paid a lot of attention to corporate accounting scandals, reassuring counterparts that his administration would investigate and prosecute wrongdoers. "For me and my other colleagues it was very important to listen to the president's opinion because under the circumstances of the globalized community and world, a lot depends on the state of the U.S. economy these days," Putin said. The remote mountain location 65 miles west of Calgary sharply reduced the number of anti-globalization protesters, a marked and mostly peaceful contrast from last year when thousands of demonstrators violently clashed with police in Italy. The agenda for the final summit session was discussion of a new aid compact with impoverished African countries. The world's wealthy nations would provide billions of dollars in new aid and corporate investment to African nations who promise to root out government corruption and pursue free-market reforms. --- On the Net: Canadian summit site: http://www.g8.gc.ca All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 54 *G7 to fund Russian arms control* Thursday, 27 June, 2002, 21:29 GMT 22:29 UK Russian SS19 ballistic missile Work to destroy Russian missiles is behind schedule Leaders of the main industrialised nations have agreed to pay Russia up to $20bn towards protecting or dismantling its weapons of mass destruction. The 10-year deal is aimed at denying militants potential access to nuclear and chemical weapons materials. * Ex-Soviet arsenal * 150-200 tons of weapons-grade plutonium 7-800 tons of weapons-grade uranium Estimated 16,000 stored nuclear weapons, including nuclear landmines and shells It was finalised at a one-to-one meeting between US President George W Bush and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin at the G8 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada. A statement announced the formation of a "global partnership against the spread of weapons and materials of mass destruction". Mr Bush described Mr Putin as a "strong ally in the war against terror". "His actions speak louder than his words," he said. Mr Putin said for his part that joint efforts were essential if the fight against terror was to succeed. *Wide reach* Russia will be the initial focus of attempts to stop proliferation and address nuclear safety issues, but help may be extended to other former Soviet states. Vladimir Putin (L) with George W Bush The US and Russian Presidents sealed the deal in one-on-one talks The aid will go towards decommissioning weapons, safeguarding nuclear and biological stockpiles, securing nuclear reactors and, particularly, keeping dangerous materials away from militants. The statement said priority concerns were to: * Destroy chemical weapons * Dismantle decommissioned nuclear submarines * Dispose of nuclear material * Employ former weapons scientists The US will raise up to $10bn over 10 years and the other $10bn will be contributed jointly by Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. The money may come in the form of debt relief as well as grants. Russian ICBM carrier Russia retains a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons Although making large-scale nuclear weapons requires a high degree of expertise, there are fears that militants could scrape together sufficient supplies of radioactive material to produce a small, crude, yet devastating bomb. The leaders said the 11 September attacks had shown that militants were "prepared to use any means to cause terror and inflict appalling casualties on innocent people". So-called dirty bombs could be manufactured by simply wrapping small amounts of radioactive material in conventional explosives. The plan had been revealed on the first day of the G8 Summit, but there was plenty of last-minute negotiating on the final details. © MMII | News Sources | Privacy * ***************************************************************** 55 The Pasko Case Gregory Pasko, an investigative journalist who worked for the Pacific Fleet's newspaper, was arrested on 20 November 1997 by the FSB and charged with high treason for his writing about the nuclear safety issues in the Russian Pacific Fleet. Jump to section The Arctic Nuclear Challenge Supervisory Appeal May Be Pasko's Last Chance *MOSCOW - After a devastating blow to the case to free Grigory Pasko ? whose four-year sentence for treason was upheld Tuesday on appeal by the Supreme Court?s military collegium ? Pasko?s lawyers cautiously announced on the following day that there may yet be one more avenue to secure his freedom. * Pasko's lawyers Anatoly Pyshkin and Ivan Pavlov do not surrender. photo: Vladislav Nikiforov Charles Digges , 2002-06-27 12:28 A so-called supervisory appeal to a higher judicial entity ? an option particular to the Russian legal system ? would allow Pasko?s defence team to file a complaint with Supreme Court Chairman Vladimir Lebedev, or one of his deputies, asking the chairman to look into the legality and foundations of yesterday?s decision. If Lebedev accepts the appeal, it would be passed to the presidium of the Supreme Court where 15 judges would hear the appeal in court and the verdict would be decided by a vote. ?It?s our last chance to cancel the [December] verdict, and it?s not big,? said Ivan Pavlov in an interview following a press conference where he and Pasko?s two other lawyers, Genry Reznik and Anatoly Pyshkin, announced their intention of filing the supervisory appeal, or */nadzornaya zhaloba/*, as it is called in Russian. ?Where the desire for an appeal depends on the accused and his lawyer, the supervisory appeal depends on the desire of the Chairman of the Supreme Court, or one of his deputies,? Pavlov said. According to Pavlov, the Supreme Court?s presidium would have precisely the same options before it that the military collegium had: either to leave the December verdict against Pasko untouched ? as happened Tuesday ? or nullify the verdict and set him free. Pavlov said that the review process for the appeal, once it is submitted to Lebedev, would be relatively short ? perhaps a month and a half. But all of this is contingent on whether the Supreme Court chairman is willing to even look at the brief which Pasko?s lawyers began preparing during an impromptu meeting, attended by Bellona Web, in a spare room immediately after the press conference. Doling out assignments to one another and discussing new approaches, the lawyers said they wanted the appeal to reach Lebedev soon. Pasko, a 40-year-old former reporter for the military Boyevaya Vakhta newspaper of the Russian Pacific Fleet, was sentenced to four years? imprisonment on Dec.25, for allegedly intending to pass classified information on navy manoeuvres to Japanese media. The conviction was based on two now abolished Defence Ministry decrees ? Decree No.10, which barred military personnel from fraternizing with foreigners and Defence Ministry decree No. 55, which was a broad vague list of items considered to be state secrets. Decree No. 10 was abolished by the Supreme Court in May and No. 55 was declared at the same hearing not to have the force of law, and thus not a legal foundation for prosecution. Environmental protection and human rights groups, such as Bellona, the US-based Sierra Club, the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights and Amnesty International said the conviction was motivated by a series of exposes he did about the Russian navy?s illegally dumping nuclear waste in the Sea of Japan. Many of these groups also consider the Pasko verdict to be revenge for the 1999 acquittal of Bellona?s Aleksandr Nikitin, a former sub-captain turned environmentalist who blew the whistle on the Northern Fleet?s negligence with its nuclear waste. For contributing to a Bellona report on this, Nikitin battled treason charges for almost five years, but was eventually exonerated. For the Lebedev appeal, Pasko?s lawyers agreed that much of the political content of their original presentation ? such as harassment by the FSB ? should be eliminated. Instead, Reznik said the new brief should focus on the two recently abolished Ministry of Defence decrees that landed Pasko in jail on Dec. 25. Since the December conviction rested on the prosecution?s assertion that Pasko /*intended*/ to give notes to Japanese journalists, Reznik said that the appeal should strike, among other places, on this point. ?If espionage is the handing-over of materials, then there is no connection [to that] here,? said Reznik. ?There are possessors of secrets, and that?s one thing ? a spy is a passer of secrets,? he said. It is arguable, in fact, that, in light of the watered-down Defence Ministry decree No. 55, Pasko was ever in possession of anything that could be considered a state secret. Pavlov, Reznik and Pyshkin also plan to enlist the help of Federation Council Speaker Sergei Mironov, who publicly spoke out against the Dec. 25 verdict. But Mironov, at the time, also discussed the idea of a pardon, which Pasko and his lawyers categorically oppose. One of the risks of the appeal to Lebedev, Pavlov pointed out, is that it could wind up back in the hands of the Supreme Court?s military collegium. But it is a risk the lawyers think is worth taking. Otherwise, as Academician Alexei Yablokov, who heads Moscow?s Non-Governmental Center for Ecological Policies in Russia, Pasko may have only foreign outcry to rely on. ?He could get help in the form of pressure from France and Germany particularly, with whose leaders [Russian President Vladimir] Putin has good relations,? Yablokov told Bellona Web. Then again, as evidenced by Putin?s documented unfamiliarity with the case, Yablokov suggested, the president?s minions could be keeping him out of the loop. ?This has all happened because the security services have thrown their resources in the wrong direction,? said Yablokov. ?The next step [for the Pasko case] is international help.? Publisher: Bellona Foundation , President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway Menu system java script courtesy of Peter Belesis at the Dynamic HTML lab . [ (c) BELLONA -- Reuse and reprint recommended provided source is stated ] ***************************************************************** 56 RUSSIAN DEFENCE MINISTER TO EXAMINE NUCLEAR TEST GROUND AT NOVAYA ZEMLYA Jun, 27 2002 *14:32 2002-06-27 * Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov will examine the Central Nuclear Test Ground at Novaya Zemlya. On Thursday, Sergei Ivanov set out for the site from Arkhangelsk. According to the Minister, he plans to examine personally the Novaya Zemlya test ground, which is the only nuclear test ground Russia had at its possession after the collapse of the Soviet Union. "We will examine its present state, consider its problems and servicemen's living conditions, as well as decide what should be done to ensure the test ground's proper operation," Sergei Ivanov told journalists the other day. At the same time, the high-ranking official emphasised that Russia had no plans to resume nuclear tests in spite of US unilateral withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. © RIAN Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU ". When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, reference to Pravda.RU should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coinside with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors. ***************************************************************** 57 THE KURSK MYSTERY IS NEVER TO BE UNVEILED Jun, 26 2002 *16:31 2002-06-26 * Our always-sad Minister for Science and Industry Ilya Klebanov announced the conclusions of the governmental committee: the Kursk nuclear cruiser sank because of the torpedo explosion. The tone, in which it was said, did not suppose any objections or any other formulation, at least publicly. However, Klebanov’s information did not dissipate numerous rumors or questions, it actually agitated them. The version about the torpedo explosion existed almost two years ago, but why did it blow up? Why did the chief managed to move almost the entire crew to other compartments of the sub before the second explosion took place? This is the most sensitive point, which has been harassing not only sailors, but also millions of people all over Russia. There are a lot of talks about the mystery of the Kursk, and there is nothing to stop them: people think that the sub sank because of the collision with another submarine. These talks will never fade out, even in a hundred years, taking into consideration the fact that the government is doing everything for that with its silence, or statements of half-truth. A colleague of mine from the newspaper /Rossiyskaya Gazeta/ Alexander Yemelyanenkov tried to find out the details two days after the message from Minister Klebanov, and here is what came out of it. “The chief engineer of the central design bureau Rubin, Igor Baranov, who was in charge of the construction works of the Kursk and other subs of the project, is a member of the governmental committee. We contacted him yesterday evening, hoping to get a qualified comment, but Igor Baranov thanked us for our attention and offered to content ourselves with what Minister Kelbanov said. The chief engineer did not expose the “awful” military secret either: was there anyone from the investigating group of the Office of the Military or General Prosecutor at the session of the committee yesterday? Searching for the answer to this question, we directly addressed to the Office of the Military Prosecutor - nothing followed. Then we went to the PR department of the Office of the Prosecutor General, and they offered us to contact the Military Prosecutor of the Northern Navy, Vladimir Mulov. We called him, but it turned out that Major-General Mulov was on vacation, but his deputy, Pavel Vodinsky, did not hurry to hang up the phone, to our great surprise: “I have heard about the St.Petersburg committee from you only. No one invited us there, no one informed us about it, or asked for any materials. “And who ordered to stop the works in the first compartment?” – “We definitely have not set forth such an initiative.” “Military men say that there is nothing to retrieve anymore.” – “This is not true. There are other things to retrieve, and there is a need in that. But who asks about it? We were indignant with the reproach about the fact that investigators were avoiding comments. If there is a need in a detailed interview – we are not refusing from that, but there should be a permission obtained.” “Was there a letter from the Prosecutor General to the president with a request to support the arguments of the investigation? – “Yes, there was. The Prosecutor General repeatedly stated that the act of the governmental committee was nothing more but a document in the file.” It seemed to me that our conversation was over on an optimistic point. He said that the fact that the governmental committee was finishing its work did not at all mean that the investigation was over with too. However, as we can see, there is a strong contradiction to the investigation. The cowardice of officials and military men is capable of burying any openness. *Vitaly Cherkasov PRAVDA.Ru Volgograd Translated by Dmitry Sudakov* Read the original in Russian: http://www.pravda.ru/main/2002/06/26/43263.html Printing version you may discuss the article in our forum Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU ". When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, reference to Pravda.RU should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coinside with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors. ***************************************************************** 58 WORLD'S LARGEST SUBMARINE LAUNCHED IN SEVERODVINSK TODAY Jun, 26 2002 *15:49 2002-06-26 * Russian Minister of Defense Sergey Ivanov took part in the ceremonial launching of world’s largest strategic purpose cruiser of the “Shark” class (this is “Typhoon” under NATO classification) at the Sevmashpredpriyatiye enterprise in the northern city of Severodvinsk. This enterprise repairs and upgrades systems and mechanisms of nuclear submarines. The unique repair of the submarine lasted for twelve years because of insufficient financing. In addition, the repair can be included in the Guinness Record Book as a very non-traditional one. It was originally planned to cut the submarine, then an idea appeared to turn it into a submarine ore carrier to transport ore to Norilsk. It was also suggested to store it until better times. It seems that better times are coming gradually for the Russian fleet. The “Typhoon” itself was included in the Guinness Record Book at beginning of the 1980s. Its total displacement makes up about 33,000 tons; it carries 24 ballistic missiles capable of being launched underwater. Six submarines of this kind were constructed in Severodvinsk. The sub launched today is the oldest of its kind: it is already more than twenty years old. The unique sub was a response to the US’s construction of the “Ohio” nuclear submarine with 24 ballistic missiles on board. However, the “Typhoon,” constructed at Russia’s famous design bureau Rubin under the guidance of famous designer Spassky, surpassed the “Ohio”: The “Typhoon” is still the largest submarine in the world. The Minister of Defense arrived in Severodvinsk together with other long-expected guests: Russian Minister of Economic Development and Trade German Gref, Minister of Nuclear Power Alexander Rumyantsev, Director of the Shipbuilding Agency Vladimir Pospelov and General Staff leadership. Are the guests really long-expected? The visit is very important for Sevmashpredpriyatiye, because the officials who arrived in Severodvinsk are authorized to negotiate the settlement of governmental debts to the Russian Center of Nuclear Shipbuilding (the enterprise is the core of the Center). The debt of the Ministry of Defense to the Center is enormous. For example, about a half billion rubles have not been paid for the newest submarine, the “Gepard.” The ebt of the ministry for the repair of the “Typhoon” has not yet been estimated, as the enterprise performed works practically at its own expense. *We will publish an exclusive interview of our PRAVDA.Ru correspondent with Minister of Defense Sergey Ivanov in the near future. * *Vitaly Bratkov PRAVDA.Ru* *Translated by Maria Gousseva* Read the original in Russian: http://pravda.ru/main/2002/06/26/43271.html *16:31 THE KURSK MYSTERY IS NEVER TO BE UNVEILED * Our always-sad Minister for Science and Industry Ilya Klebanov announced the conclusions of the governmental committee: the Kursk nuclear cruiser sank because of the torpedo explosion. The tone, in which it was said, did not suppose any objections or any other formulation, at least publicly More details ... *15:49 WORLD'S LARGEST SUBMARINE LAUNCHED IN SEVERODVINSK TODAY * *PRAVDA.Ru correspondent Vitaly Bratkov reports from Severodvinsk:* Russian Minister of Defense Sergey Ivanov took part in the ceremonial launching of world’s largest strategic purpose cruiser of the “Shark” class (this is “Typhoon” under NATO classification) at the Sevmashpredpriyatiye enterprise in the northern city of Severodvinsk More details ... *12:53 RUSSIAN FLEET BEREFT OF FUTURE * The only school training warrant officers for nuclear submarines of Russia’s Northern fleet was closed in the northern city of Severodvinsk (the Arkhangelsk region). Graduates of the school always served and do now in practically all of Russia’s fleets. The Severodvinsk school was closed for a really common reason, lack of financing More details ... *20:14 US TORTURE OF JOHN WALKER LINDH EXPOSED AS FRAME-UP CONTINUES * Defense attorneys for John Walker Lindh filed documents describing how, after barely surviving atrocities that claimed the lives of hundreds of his companions, the so-called “American Taliban” was tortured while the FBI wrangled statements out of him in violation of his Fifth Amendment right not to be a witness against himself. The new filings are for a crucial hearing on July 15 to determine whether statements made by Lindh after his capture with an Afghan Army unit will be suppressed or allowed into evidence at trial. More details ... Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU ". When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, reference to Pravda.RU should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coinside with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors. ***************************************************************** 59 Mossad chief: Israel must foil regional nuclear arms plans Wednesday, July 03, 2002 Tamuz 23, 5762 Israel Time: 09:54 (GMT+3) By Amir Oren , Ha'aretz Correspondent Israel cannot spare any effort to foil, prevent or delay the attainment of weapons of mass destruction by countries like Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lybia, the head of Israel's Mossad said yesterday. Speaking to a meeting of NATO's North Atlantic Council in Brussels yesterday, Mossad director, Ephraim Halevy, warned that radical Islamic terrorism as a whole, and suicide attacks in particular, pose a "formidable threat" to NATO member states whose "Muslim communities are rapidly developing and increasing in numbers and influence." Halevy took the opportunity to harshly criticize Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, who he says signs "an agreement with a view to violating it the moment circumstances would permit." The Palestinian leader is also maintaining his "traditional link" with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, said Halevy. The head of Israel's secret intelligence agency urges "appropriate behavior" be a condition for any entity aspiring for nationhood and sovereignity. The meeting took place behind closed doors, and lasted for some three hours, beyond the time originally allocated. U.S. Ambassador to NATO, Nicholas Burns quoted from President George W. Bush's speech from Monday, reiterating American support for Israel's right to defend itself, and speaking of the U.S. Administration's duty to its ally. The European ambassadors also spoke with sympathy for the Israeli victims of terror and demonstrated understanding for Israel's operation against terrorism, though they also spoke of the need for a political horizon. Participants at the meeting said it was an important opportunity for Israel to present its position, to convince foreign governments of the pressing need for global cooperation in the fight against terror, as well as fathoming European opinions. The most senior participant at the meeting was NATO's secretary-general, Lord George Robertson, with chairman of the military committee, Italian Admiral Guido Venturoni, also in attendance. Israel's contingent was headed by its envoy to NATO and European Union bodies, Harry Kney-Tal. After Halevy's presentation, Brigadier General Eival Gilady of the General Staff's planning branch presented the military aspects to battling terrorism. Yesterday's meeting was part of NATO's annual round of political consultations with seven Mediterranean and North African countries, with this year's talks focusing on terrorism. Halevy told the council that Mossad believes, despite the denials of the Iranian defense minister, that Iran is investing heavily in developing long-range missiles, with a range even beyond that of its Shihab-3, which is believed to have a range of 3,000 kilometers. He said Iran is researching and developing "missiles with longer ranges, which could reach Europe and in the future, even North America." He said he had "no reason to offer for this entry into such long-range development," nor did he know who and what the potential targets would be. In addition, said Halevy, Iran is developing "weapon-grade nuclear capabilities," though he quickly added, "for obvious reasons, I will not detail our information on this sensitive issue." Halevy pointed out that this activity coupled with Iran's investment in delivery systems "should be a subject of constant attention of everyone of us in this hall." Iran's adherence to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), Halevy believes, is nothing more than "a cover for the construction of a dual purpose civilian infrastructure which could be converted very speedily into production capabilities of large quantities of VX [gas]." In addition, Tehran is also carrying out research and development on biological warfare, according to the Mossad chief. As to the dangers posed by Saddam Hussein, Halevy said one must assume Iraq had been trying to acquire nuclear capabilities ever since the United Nations' monitoring team was expeled in 1998. "As you know, on the eve of the Gulf War, Iraq was on the verge of obtaining nuclear capability. They were months away from producing fissile material," he told the officials. "We have clear indications that this has been and is their unswerving desire ... We have partial evidence that they have renewed their production of VX and possibly Anthrax. As to delivery systems, we have sufficient evidence to affirm that they are sparing no effort to preserve their residuary capabilities and to augment them with new ones." Turning his attentions to Syria, Halevy said Israel had been "following [their] acquisition and subsequent production of North Korean type Scud B, C and D missiles." He added most of the warheads are conventional, but "the Syrians also have B and C capabilities with relevance to surface-to-surface missiles." In addition, the Syrians have also produced Sarin (GB) nerve agents and are studying manufacturing VX nerve agents. Halevy urged those present to keep a close eye on Libya, "which is developing long-range missiles with North Korean support," reminding them also that "Libya has often been mentioned as a country striving to achieve nuclear capability." A significant part of Halevy's lecture was devoted to terrorism. Suicide attacks, that had once been "a marginal phenomenon characterizing the approach of a small extreme segment of society," is, according to the Mossad chief, "rapidly evolving into a quasi-legitimate form of combat, encouraged and abetted at leadership level in the Palestinian camp." The attacks on New York, Washington and Jerusalem are all "the fulfillment of a modus operandi motivated not only by its professional utility, but no less by its ideological and religious probity." "The more these act become prevalent," he warned, "the more the chance this will become a potent and prioritized weapon in future confrontations." Halevy then called for "terrorism as a whole and suicide bombings in particular" to be recognized as a "form of war" which must be outlawed and prohibited by international law. All those involved in such activities, or those who condoned them, "must be placed outside the pale of justice." Halevy said he hoped "the days of rogue states and authorities acting as masters, not only of their own destiny, but also of yours and ours, must be numbered." The Palestinian Authority was place alongside Syria, Iran and Iraq on his list of "host countries" which facilitate terrorist and suicide bombings. Halevy told the council how "Arafat has placed the theme of the suicide bomber - the martyr - the /shaheed/ - at the top of his priorities." The reforms promised by the Palestinian leader are nothing more than "swift window dressing moves." He also warned of Iran's increasing support for terrorism, and its growing influence over the PA, with the Karine A arms ship affair serving as a prominent example. In closing, Halevy said terrorism and suicide bombings can only be practiced if "there is a safe haven for training, planning and the procurement of weaponry." He said states and individual leaders have responsibility for what goes on in areas under their control. "Ultimately," said Halevy, "the international community will have no option but to force them to be accountable. Otherwise, the whole international system of nation-states exercising their sovereignty over land and people will be in jeopardy." © Copyright 2002 Ha`aretz. All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 60 $5.3 billion needed for Hanford cleanup, report to DOE says This story was published 6/27/02 *By John Stang Herald staff writer* The federal government needs to budget $5.3 billion to expedite Hanford's tank waste glassification project, Harry Boston told Department of Energy headquarters during his last few weeks as project federal manager. His report drew skepticism and a rebuke from Jessie Roberson, DOE's cleanup czar. Roberson saw the $5.3 billion as a 33 percent increase from almost $4 billion in the project's costs. To her, that figure was significantly out of line with current budget plans. "I am disappointed by your assessment that the estimated cost of this project is now as high as $5.3 billion, or over 33 percent above a baseline ... approved less than a year ago," Roberson wrote June 6. Boston replied that she was comparing apples and oranges, the cost increase actually is 19 percent, and $5.3 billion is needed to ensure the project can speed up to meet federal and state goals. "It appears that your memo is comparing inconsistent cost elements," Boston replied on June 12. He argued the costlier but expanded complex is consistent with Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's call to conduct nuclear cleanup faster and cheaper. The Herald obtained, from outside of DOE channels, the three memos the two exchanged on May 21, June 6 and June 12 about the new cost predictions for the project, which is to encase some of Hanford's most dangerous radioactive wastes in glass logs for safe storage. The memos show drastic differences between them in how the project's long-term budget should be mapped out. Neither of them could be reached Wednesday for comment. Boston left DOE last Friday for a new job with Fluor Corp. The huge job would start converting 53 million gallons of radioactive wastes in underground tanks into glass. Bechtel National was hired to build the complex and to get it operating at full speed by Jan. 31, 2011. The Tri-Party Agreement, the pact governing Hanford cleanup, requires full speed glassification to be under way by Dec. 31, 2009. All tank wastes are to be glassified by 2028. The cost-estimate dispute apparently kicked into high gear when Boston wrote Roberson on May 21 that Bechtel had revamped its project costs, calculating the basic cost would increase from $3.965 billion through 2011 to $4.442 billion through 2010. Bechtel's idea is to spend more money sooner, but finish the project faster to save cash in the long run. That theoretically would enable Hanford to glassify the most radioactive 10 percent of its tank wastes by 2013 instead of by the current deadline of 2018. The revamped plans also envision a glassification complex that would be easier to expand after 2010 than the original design. Boston's May 21 memo noted that neither the $3.965 billion nor the $4.442 billion estimate includes fees DOE is to pay Bechtel for its work, nor do they include contingency money. Boston proposed adding $600 million in contingency money, partly to guard against Bechtel falling short on cost-cutting. It also appears Boston expected Bechtel to earn about $260 million in fees through 2010. He contended Bechtel's revamped approach -- if it survives DOE's review -- likely would reduce the glassification complex's lifetime costs and ensure it meets all Tri-Party Agreement deadlines. Roberson's June 6 letter made clear she was unhappy with the increased cost estimates, contending that he indicated in March that the project was close to its original budget. And she wrote that Boston's recommendation does not meet DOE's approved budget. She also wanted details on why costs increased, why the increase was not forecast earlier, what improvements would come with the new proposal and what Tri-Party Agreement deadlines would be jeopardized by current plans. Boston replied that factors increasing the project's basic costs included adding a simulator, modifying lab designs, adding emergency response planning, complying with new environmental and quality control regulations, adding office and training facilities and adding materials for start-up work. He also noted the two-year discrepancy in deadlines between Bechtel's contract and the Tri-Party Agreement. And he noted the existing plan means DOE would miss its legal deadline and might endanger the 10-percent-glassified-by-2018 deadline. This is the second time DOE has faced increased glassification budget costs. The first was in 2000 when Bechtel predecessor BNFL Inc. increased its estimate for the work from $6.9 billion to $15.2 billion. DOE promptly fired BNFL and hired Bechtel. *Reporter John Stang can be reached at 582-1517 or via e-mail at jstang@tri-cityherald.com.* *Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.* ***************************************************************** 61 Plutonium-laced liquids converted to safer powder This story was published 6/27/02** *By John Stang Herald staff writer* All 1,126 gallons of plutonium-laced liquids at Hanford's Plutonium Finishing Plant have been converted to a much safer powder. That drastically reduces the chances of the plutonium accidentally reaching criticality and unleashing an uncontrolled burst of radiation. And the PFP appears to be on schedule to finish baking that powder into an even safer form and storing it in specialized cans by a July 31 deadline, said George Jackson, Fluor Hanford's vice president for nuclear materials stabilization. The PFP's mission is to convert 4.4 tons of plutonium mixed within 19.6 tons of scrap into safer forms by May 2004, with the idea that the entire complex will be cleaned up and demolished by 2009. The scrap plutonium has existed as liquids, different types of powders, alloys, metal chunks and in a form similar to plastic that's called polycube. The plutonium-laced liquids have been considered the most dangerous of the different forms because liquids are most susceptible to going "critical" -- meaning an uncontrolled chain reaction that could release a potentially fatal dose of radiation. A criticality occurs when the right radioactive materials are in the right shapes, concentrations, masses and conditions. Liquids are much harder than solids to keep in safe shapes and concentrations. The United States has had 22 criticality incidents in its history, and 21 involved radioactive liquids, Jackson said, citing a Los Alamos National Laboratory report. Two of those incidents -- both involving liquids -- occurred at Hanford. In 1951, a plutonium solution went critical in a lab chamber beneath a long-gone farmhouse near the old White bluffs townsite. No one was exposed. In 1962, an overflowing plutonium solution was sucked into the wrong tank at the PFP, causing a burst of radiation that exposed three workers -- none fatally. Fluor converted the plutonium-laced liquids into safer forms by precipitating plutonium-laced particles from the fluids, then baking those particles in furnaces until they turn into a safer powder. Then the powder is stored in containers in a PFP vault, awaiting eventual shipment to the Department of Energy's Savannah River, S.C., site for disposal. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, a watchdog advisory panel to DOE, originally set a July 31 deadline to have all the plutonium fluids converted into powder and stored in the vault. Technical problems caused DOE to predict the job would be done in October. But Fluor successfully found another method to bake and store the final plutonium powder in time to meet the original deadline, said Kent Smith, Fluor's PFP deputy manager. "The entire work force embraced what we tried to do and did it very well," Jackson said. In a related matter, DOE recently allocated an extra $3 million to the PFP project, which is enabling the PFP's staff to do more preliminary work on the eventual cleanup and demolition of the PFP buildings. Originally, demolition was supposed to be done by 2016, but DOE and Fluor took steps to bump that completion date up to 2009. *Reporter John Stang can be reached at 582-1517 or via e-mail at jstang@tri-cityherald.com.* *Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.* ***************************************************************** 62 Thyroid study fails to find Hanford link Saturday, June 22, 2002 Scientists discern no increase in thyroid disease due to radiation releases Related stories *Karen Dorn Steele * Staff writer RICHLAND -- A controversial study of Hanford's Cold War radiation releases has found no association between iodine-131 releases and increased thyroid disease in 3,440 people exposed as children. The scientists behind the Hanford Thyroid Disease Study have spent another $1.5 million over the past three years to answer criticism of their work by the National Academy of Sciences. The study has cost taxpayers $19.5million. In their final report released Friday, they say the conclusions they reached in their 1999 draft study still stand. The study's findings don't mean that individuals living near Hanford weren't harmed by Hanford's invisible radiation clouds, said Dr. Thomas Hamilton, an endocrinologist and one of three lead scientists at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. "For this population under these conditions, we didn't see a relationship between iodine 131 and thyroid disease. That doesn't mean iodine 131 doesn't cause thyroid disease," Hamilton said. "If there is an increased risk of thyroid disease, it is too small to observe," said Paul Garbe of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which hired the Seattle team for the study. Iodine 131 was released from Hanford's weapons plants in the 1940s and '50s. Winds carried it to vegetation eaten by cows and goats. It was passed on to the sensitive thyroid glands of children when they drank milk. The 12-year study of people in seven Eastern Washington counties found 19 cases of thyroid cancer, 249 noncancerous thyroid nodules, 267 people with hypothyroidism or auto-immune disease and 34 with Graves Disease, which results in an overactive thyroid. But the study team said the rates of thyroid disease in the Hanford downwinders is apparently no greater than those in the general population. However, worldwide data on thyroid disease incidence are spotty, making that comparison less certain, according to a summary of their work. The researchers identified more than 5,000 people who were born between 1940 and 1946 to mothers who lived in Benton, Franklin, Adams, Walla Walla, Okanogan, Ferry and Stevens counties. They located 4,877 people, of whom 527 had died. Some 3,440 agreed to participate. The participants were asked to provide detailed information about the food and milk they consumed and where they lived from 1944 to 1957, the years of the most significant Hanford releases. They also attended a medical clinic, where they were examined for thyroid disease. The study compared people thought to have received high radiation doses with others with smaller estimated doses, said Scott Davis, Fred Hutchinson's principal investigator. If there had been a Hanford effect, they would have found more thyroid disease in the high-dose group. But they didn't, Davis said. The study also found an unexplained higher-than-normal infant death rate among the group. The deaths were from birth defects and problems late in pregnancy or in the first week after birth. But none of that increase was due to thyroid disease and some of the deaths occurred before Hanford's radioactive iodine releases began, Davis said. In an interview Friday in Richland, the Fred Hutchinson team admitted it made mistakes during the release of the draft study in Richland in January 1999. At that time, the study hadn't been peer-reviewed by the National Academy, which later faulted the scientists for exaggerating their main finding of no radiation effect and failing to disclose the study's uncertainties. The NAS also said the study design was sound, but the way the results were communicated wasn't. The study's release triggered an angry reaction from Hanford downwinders, who said they'd been dismissed and betrayed. "We gave an impression that people didn't have thyroid disease, didn't suffer and weren't exposed," Hamilton said. The scientists have tried to frame the issues differently in the final report. "We've tried to consider more carefully what the (study's) limitations are," Davis said. "It's frustrating for people that epidemiology can't address an individual's disease," he said. In response to the NAS critique, the CDC spent $340,000 for professional communications help from Ogilvie and Mather, a New York public relations firm. The CDC also convened "focus groups" in the Tri-Cities to discuss how to communicate the study results. The scientists also devoted months to the NAS' scientific critiques, reviewing whether the study was statistically robust and checking possible underestimates of the radiation does. They also reviewed the dietary information on what downwinders consumed as children that was used to help estimate their radiation doses. Due to the extensive NAS critique, the study's peer review was "much more thorough" than is typical, Garbe said. The government study was mandated by Congress after Hanford officials admitted for the first time in 1986 that they had released substantial amounts of radiation while making plutonium for nuclear bombs. It was the first to locate and examine people living in the path of radiation emissions from a U.S. weapons production site. Other civilians who have been studied include Japanese atomic bomb survivors at Hiroshima and Nagasaki; residents of the Marshall Islands exposed to H-bomb tests; Utah schoolchildren showered with fallout from nuclear bomb tests in Nevada; and Ukrainian children following the 1986 explosion of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor. A link between iodine 131 and thyroid disease has been found in those studies, where people were exposed to a mix of internal and external radiation. Hamilton, who studied radiation damage to residents of the Marshall Islands, said in 1999 that he was shocked the Hanford study hadn't detected a radiation effect. The study team carefully reviewed its work to see whether they'd missed a dose response, Hamilton said this week. Hanford's releases were different from the other sites studied worldwide, he said. At Hanford, the radiation doses were exclusively from iodine 131, were smaller, and the exposure was more drawn out, he said. "It was probably for that reason we didn't find thyroid disease," he said. The study results can be seen on the CDC Web site at www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation. ?Karen Dorn Steele can be reached at (509) 459-5462, or by e-mail at karend@spokesman.com ***************************************************************** 63 DOE cleaning up 'Boneyard/Burnyard' Story last updated at 11:53 a.m. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 * by Paul Parson * Oak Ridger staff "Boneyard/Burnyard" sounds like the perfect title or setting for a scary movie. However, it's actually the name given to a waste disposal site near Bear Creek Road, west of the Y-12 National Security Complex. The "Boneyard" portion of the name refers to abandoned equipment and non-combustible construction material that was left on the site and that eventually resulted in surface contamination. The "Burnyard" refers to the fact that various combustible materials were burned there in unlined trenches. Once the trenches were filled, they were covered with dirt and compacted. Department of Energy officials said the site also includes an area for disposal of hazardous chemicals, which was capped in 1989. Jason Darby, the project's manager, stated that the "Boneyard/Burnyard" represents more than 70 percent of "uranium flux to Bear Creek," adding that the cleanup project should remove the source of that contamination. Waste from Y-12 plant operations was burned and buried at the site between 1943 and 1970. Several interim actions were implemented to reduce the mass of uranium and mercury in shallow groundwater and surface water that empties into Bear Creek. One example was the hydraulic isolation of the waste area by diverting shallow ground water around it. "This is a heavily contaminated site, and I'm glad to see it being cleaned up," said Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee. Her organization closely monitors DOE's environmental activities. Gawarecki said because there aren't any populations threatened by the site, it was fairly low priority until DOE decided to locate the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility partially on it. The "Boneyard/Burnyard" cleanup project is the first to use the recently opened waste facility. "The need for access to that waste cell is really what is driving the cleanup," Gawarecki said. "As far as I know, it's basically a 'muck and truck' project -- dig up the soil (and any buried debris) and relocate it to the waste cell. That's pretty low tech, but effective in this case." In fact, cleanup of the "Boneyard/Burnyard" includes excavation of about 36,000 cubic yards of waste material with the highest concentrations of uranium contamination and disposal of that material in the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility. The excavated areas will be backfilled with clean soil, according to DOE. However, not all the excavated material will be taken to the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility. Material with lower levels of contamination that is not in contact with groundwater (about 27,000 cubic yards) will be excavated, consolidated onsite, and covered with a low-permeability engineered clay cap. After excavation and capping are completed, DOE officials said there are plans to restore a stream channel that flows into Bear Creek that was blocked while the work was being done. In addition, the site will be graded to improve drainage and vegetation will be re-established. Excavation and back-filling of the "Boneyard/Burnyard" are expected to be completed by mid-November, and the site restored by the end of January 2003. "We are always pleased to see DOE making progress in cleaning up contaminated sites," Gawarecki said. Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or pparson@oakridger.com. All Contents ©Copyright/ The Oak Ridger / ***************************************************************** 64 Students make DOE-related documents 'understandable' Story last updated at 11:55 a.m. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 photo: community Members of the Roane County High School writing team were, left to right: Katie Monroe, Lloyd McDonald, Erik Seaman, Erica Stanley, James Hall, Kristin Baksa, Alan Knauth, Linda Choate, Jonathan Hagy, Ryan Burton, Chabli Balcom, Darren Langley, Brent Dooley, Ben Herwehe, Jacob Platfoot and Elijah Hixson. /-- Photo Submitted/ from staff reports Two area high school classes recently finished a set of "student friendly" documents that will be used to educate their peers on long-term environmental stewardship. Nita Ganguli's advanced-placement science students at Oak Ridge High School completed a summary of the Oak Ridge Reservation Stakeholders Report on Stewardship, Volume I. At Roane County High School, Kristin Baksa's advanced-placement science students drafted a summary of the companion document, the Oak Ridge Reservation Stakeholders Report on Stewardship, Volume II. The original reports were written by the Oak Ridge Stewardship Working Group in 1998 and 1999 to foster public understanding of the roles and responsibilities involved in maintaining an active stewardship program for the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Reservation. The Stewardship Working Group was sponsored by the Oak Ridge Site-Specific Advisory Board -- a federally appointed citizen's panel that provides advice and recommendations to DOE on its Oak Ridge environmental management program. photo: community ----- The Oak Ridge High School writing team consisted of, from left to right: Nita Ganguli, Jenna Carignan, Lorien Gilbert, John Trujillo, Elise Watson, Kathleen Padgett, Jasmine Kline and Rebecca Xiques. Not pictured are Jessie Foster and Bonnie McBride. /-- Photo Submitted/ The SSAB asked the classes to write the summaries as a way of getting the word out to students about stewardship. Even though the original reports were written by citizens of the community, the documents were still considered to be above the heads of many young people. The summaries, which run 10 pages, were written with student vocabularies in mind. The summaries will be distributed to area middle schools and high schools this fall as part of an educational resource kit to help teachers introduce the concept of environmental cleanup to their students. The summaries will also be available on the SSAB Web site at www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ssab or by calling the SSAB office at (865) 241-3665. Baksa said that by summarizing the document the students were forced to think about stewardship and to be aware of what's going on in the community. "I think it created a desire in many of the students to become more involved," Baksa said. "We had a couple of students who expressed an interest in participating on the SSAB Stewardship Committee next year." Ganguli's class had a similar "eye-opening" experience writing their document. "Working on the summary made the whole subject of environmental cleanup less abstract for the students," Ganguli said. "It also made them realize that it would be up to them one day to take responsibility for their community and for stewardship of the environment." Stewardship is acceptance of the responsibility and the implementation of activities necessary to maintain long-term protection of human health and the environment from hazards posed by residual radioactive and chemically hazardous materials. Awareness of stewardship has increased throughout the nation in recent years. As the environmental cleanup at DOE's facilities has progressed, it has become apparent that removal of some contaminants will be too risky or costly to undertake. Some hazardous materials will remain in place for many years, and in the case of certain long-lived radioisotopes, virtually forever. Stewardship addresses how people and the environment will be protected from these hazards, by what organizations or entities, and for how long. The SSAB has been working to increase ties with area students since 1999 when the board added its first student representative. Each year since then, the board has seated one student from Oak Ridge High School and another, selected on a rotating basis, from a high school in the surrounding area. All Contents ©Copyright/ The Oak Ridger / ***************************************************************** 65 Historic Y-12 calutrons producing stable isotopes: future unstable Story last updated at 11:53 a.m. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 Dick Smyser: Historic Y-12 calutrons producing stable isotopes: future unstable * In times of a war on terrorism, should the United States shut down its only facility for the production of stable isotopes? Further, improved relations with Russia notwithstanding, should the United States close this facility and, as a consequence, be dependent on Russia for future supplies of these valuable nuclear-related materials useful for everything from heart therapy to explosive detection? The facility in question is Oak Ridge's Isotope Enrichment Facility located within the Y-12 plant area. Its future is much in doubt for a variety of reasons but chiefly because its funding is about to cease. It has also become physically out of place within the plans to modernize the Y-12 plant area, clean up its environmental problems and intensify its security. Nor is our nation's ability to manufacture these isotopes all that will be lost if the Y-12 production complex is lost. Gone also will be the last remaining operating calutrons in Oak Ridge, calutrons being the devices that produced the first enriched uranium which fueled the first atomic bomb dropped on Japan in August 1945 bringing World War II to an end. Nine buildings at Y-12 housed 1,152 calutrons, conceived by nuclear pioneer E.O. Lawrence and named for his laboratories at University of California at Berkeley. All 1,152 were operated intensely during the early months of 1945. Mostly young women, some of them still in high school, sat on stools stoically recording precisely timed readings from dials that confirmed the electromagnetic separation of the precious U-235. After that initial production in the critical summer of '45, most of the calutrons were shut down as the gaseous diffusion process for uranium separation proved more efficient. But one array -- "racetrack" as they were called -- in one of those original nine Y-12 buildings has been maintained and operated ever since for the production of these widely used isotopes. Examples: Rubidium 87, for geopositioning and setting the atomic clock; strontium 88, for treatment of bone cancer; technetium 99m, the isotope used in heart therapy, and nickel 63, a stable isotope useful in explosive detection devices. * * * W. Scott Aaron talked about "The Untimely Death of the Oak Ridge Calutrons" at the Friends of Oak Ridge National Laboratory monthly luncheon/lecture Wednesday of last week at the Oak Ridge Unitarian Universalist Church. For 26 years he's been overseeing this lone U.S. stable isotopes production, packaging and shipment facility, which, though located at Y-12, is part of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Known officially as the Isotope Enrichment Facility and located in Y-12 area Building 9204-3, there 45 employees have operated 16 calutrons, colossally fewer operators per calutron than required in 1945. (Actually there are 30 calutrons at the facility but only 16 have been involved in production.) Still, despite the much higher efficiency here, Russia has been producing and selling the same isotopes significantly cheaper since 1999. Actually the Y-12 area facility hasn't been producing isotopes since 1998. Instead, it has been drawing on its $250 million inventory of 252 stable isotopes derived from 58 different elements -- sellling, packaging and shipping them. And doing this all with the International Standard Organization's (ISO) seal of approval, something the Russian-produced isotopes do not have. Sales prices for some recent shipments have ranged from $16 million to $80,000 per gram. The local facility has also been a training location and only recently had U.S. State Department personnel among its trainees. * * * Bureaucratic tensions and environmental concerns are also factors that could lead to the shutdown here. If the Y-12 area facility is closed, a major environmental cleanup will be required. Who will be responsible for its costs within the DOE: the DOE's nuclear energy division, within which the facility now functions, or DOE's environmental management operations, which the facility would become part of if the decision is to shut down? The action that will destroy the calutrons is the draining of the oil crucial to their operation. Once this happens, Aaron says, they are history. But couldn't they be replaced at some other location without the complications that the Y-12 location now has? Possibly, Aaron said, but at a hefty price. One Belgian firm estimated replacement cost at $150 million. The facility, of course, has major historic preservation significance. A delegation from the President's Advisory Commission on Historic Preservation was scheduled to inspect the facility this week but the visit has now been put off until July. It's a dilemma, Aaron concedes. Whatever the decision, there are major complications. Some have looked at all the factors and concluded that it would cost less in the long run to keep the facility operating, despite the Russian competition. Sentiment among some of the FORNL audience was that U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp should be urged to take action. The prospect of U.S. being dependent on Russia to supply these isotopes should get congressional attention. The future of the facility has been under question for years now, Aaron said. "The situation keeps changing. Every alternative has complications," he said. As of his FORNL talk last week, the outlook for continued production was not good. Historic preservation is another matter. "But it's not over yet," Aaron said.-- RDS /Richard D. Smyser is founding editor of The Oak Ridger. He can be reached by e-mail at rdsandmps@aol.com ./ All Contents ©Copyright/ The Oak Ridger / ***************************************************************** 66 ORNL nabs 3 research awards Story last updated at 10:28 a.m. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 * by Paul Parson * Oak Ridger staff Oak Ridge National Laboratory's shining scientific reputation just got a little more luster. Ron Walli, an ORNL spokesman, said the lab has won three R&D 100 Awards from R&D magazine, which annually recognizes the 100 most significant innovations of the year. ORNL now has the national lab-leading total of 112 since the awards began in 1963 and is second only to General Electric. Available figures show that the top-ranked institutions through 2001 include General Electric Co., 164 awards; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 86; NASA Glenn Research Center, 83; Los Alamos National Laboratory, 79; and Argonne National Laboratory, 77. ORNL's honors were for the following processes or inventions: * Spiral Notch Torsion Test -- A portable system that tests fracture toughness and the strength of materials, including ceramics, composites, polymers, carbon foam and concrete, to be used in designs. This system is expected to help engineers set limits in structural designs so that certain materials are not used in conditions unsuitable to the strengths of that material. This project was developed and jointly submitted by Jy-An Wang, ORNL's Nuclear Science and Technology Division; Ken Liu, ORNL's Metals and Ceramics Division; and Inventure Laboratories of Knoxville. * Defect Source Identifier -- Automated Image Retriever (DSI AIR) -- This software tool solves manufacturing problems in semiconductor fabrication environments. It works by comparing images of a product defect against hundreds of thousands of historical images that are maintained in a data management system. This technology is expected to allow a single engineer to quickly and accurately locate and resolve costly manufacturing problems, replacing a team of engineers conducting time-consuming manual data search and analysis. This project was developed and jointly submitted by Ken Tobin, Tom Karnowski and Regina Ferrell, all from ORNL's Engineering Science and Technology Division, and Applied Materials of Santa Clara, Calif. * Any Source, Any Position Fluid Handler (ASAP) -- This technology is expected to translate into significant cost savings for pharmaceutical companies and researchers testing and developing new drugs. This process allows for the high-speed transfer of small volumes of liquid between source and target. This project was developed and submitted jointly by Mitch Doktycz, ORNL's Life Sciences Division; Steven Hicks, ORNL's Engineering Science and Technology Division; and Innovadyne Technologies of Santa Rosa, Calif. /Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or pparson@oakridger.com ./ All Contents ©Copyright/ The Oak Ridger / ***************************************************************** 67 ISU wins $11,000 to study nuclear energy *06-24-2002* FRONT PAGE Idaho State University has been awarded a federal grant of more than $11,000 to research nuclear energy. The money is part of the U.S. Department of Energy´s program to fund enhancements of the control systems at university reactors nationwide. The department is also funding 22 reactor-sharing grants that enable the reactors to act as educational centers. The university will use $7,000 of its grant for reactor upgrades and $4,300 for reactor sharing. ?It is critical to the energy needs of our nation that nuclear energy play a significant role,? Sen. Larry Craig said. ?Programs such as these at ISU are of great benefit to the training of future nuclear engineers and the education of the public on the positive attributes of nuclear energy.? ? Statesman staff Edition Date: 06-24-2002 ***************************************************************** 68 NASA reactors take final voyage The Plain Dealer *Ohio News* 06/27/02 *John C. Kuehner* Plain Dealer Reporter Sandusky - The final destination for two nuclear reactors at NASA's Plum Brook Station will be landfills in Utah and South Carolina. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration will start later this summer to clean up and demolish the reactors, which have been shut down since 1973, when the federal government cut NASA's funding. In the coming months, carefully orchestrated wrecking crews will start to remove equipment, pipes and other easily accessible systems from the contaminated areas of the three-building research complex. "It's not just going in with a wrecking ball," said Keith Peecook, senior project engineer. "It's a little more surgical in nature." NASA expects the cleanup to take five years and cost $160 million. In the 1960s, research at the sprawling 6,400-acre complex outside Sandusky represented a bold new step by NASA as it started to reach into space. Scientists sought to create nuclear-powered rocket engines that would withstand the journey to Mars or power a colony on the Moon. From 1961 to 1973, scientists studied the effects of radiation on different metals and fuels, bombarding them with neutrons. This changed the mechanical and physical properties of the material, Peecook said. The reactor was the third licensed test reactor in the country when it was built in 1958. About two years later, NASA built a smaller, mock-up reactor, which allowed scientists to shake down experiments before they went into the larger reactor. "They could predict things with their slide rules, but they didn't have the advanced modeling we have today," said Timothy J. Polich, the project manager. Nuclear fuel was removed in 1973. Water and vent lines were capped. Early on, NASA thought research would resume, but money was never set aside. Cleaning up never became a priority for funding. Consultants made cleanup recommendations in 1978 and 1984, but the work was delayed. Five years ago, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission decided it would not extend the "possess-but-not-operate" reactor license, which had expired, and pushed NASA into cleanup. About 100 truckloads of radioactive debris will be hauled to landfills in Utah and South Carolina. Uncontaminated material such as concrete will be buried in place. The land will be cleaned up to the highest possible level - so a family could live there, grow crops and drink the water and graze animals, Peecook said. To reach this Plain Dealer reporter: jkuehner@plaind.com, 216-999-5325 © 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. © 2002 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 69 Radioactive drilling tool lost on Padre Island Tuesday, July 02, 2002 By STEVE TAYLOR The Brownsville Herald AUSTIN ? A petroleum exploration company whose controversial gas drilling operations dominated a hot South Texas political race earlier this year has lost radioactive equipment in a well on Padre Island. Corpus Christi-based BNP Petroleum Corporation made five unsuccessful attempts to recover the Schlumberger logging tool after it became stuck in the La Playa No. 1 well in Kleberg County last January. The La Playa well is not located on Padre Island National Seashore, which is supervised by the National Park Service. The company requested approval from the Texas Railroad Commission (TRC) to abandon the tool and has since followed state rules and buried it under 300 feet of red-dyed cement, 10,500 feet below ground. "We are aware of the incident and as far as we know the company is complying with the Texas Administrative Code dealing with abandoned logging tools," said Bob Free, deputy director for emergency response and investigations at the Texas Bureau of Radiation Control "We do not know how dangerous the tool is because we do not have much data on it. Obviously, if it were a radioactive source that someone could pick up it would be very dangerous. It could cause radiation burns and sterility." BNP is co-owned by Barbara Canales-Black, the Corpus Christi attorney who was defeated by McAllen lawmaker Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa in the state Senate District 20 runoff election in April. Canales-Black?s husband, Paul Black, is president of BNP. Calls to the company were not returned Wednesday. Bowen Waters, BNP?s engineering vice-president, notified Fermin Munoz, TRC?s Corpus Christi division director, of the lost radioactive source in a letter dated Feb. 4, 2002. Waters said that as well as plugging the logging tool with 300 feet of red dyed concrete, which is used as a warning sign for future drilling operations, his company would "install a whipstock on top of the plug to prevent any accidental re-entry of the well." A whipstock is like a cone-shaped reinforcement that stops a drill entering a plugged area. Waters also told Munoz that his company was continuing production at La Playa by sidetracking around the abandoned tool. He said that when the well was abandoned, BNP would place a marker at the surface warning of the lost radioactive source. Schlumberger, the makers of the logging tool, are a global power in oil and gas technology. Calls to the group?s Edinburg and Corpus Christi offices were not returned Wednesday. BNP, along with corporate partners in Australia, Canada and Japan, has secured exclusive oil and gas lease options covering 36,000 acres on Padre Island. Scott Taylor, BNP?s vice-president, said the company has scheduled "an aggressive drilling campaign over the next several years" that could produce $3.4 billion in total revenue. The company has been dogged by controversy since it became known that Canales-Black, the company?s former legal adviser on regulatory affairs, went to Washington to lobby for favorable environmental rules regarding the endangered piping plover bird. The bird, a small, pale-covered North American shore bird that winters on Padre Island, is one of 13 endangered species found on the island. The criticism intensified when Canales-Black threw her hat in the Democratic primary ring for the District 20 seat being vacated by retiring state Sen. Carlos Truan. *The Brownsville Herald* 1135 E. Van Buren Brownsville, TX 78520 956-542-4301 1-800-488-4301 The entire content of BrownsvilleHerald.com, including its logotype, are fully protected by copyright and registry and cannot be reproduced in any form for any purpose without written permission from The Brownsville Herald. © 2000 The Brownsville Herald ***************************************************************** 70 *WNA NEWS BRIEFING 02.26 | 19 - 25 June 2002* News Briefings are a weekly news update, prepared by the WNA, on all aspects of the nuclear energy industry. A weekly summary of international news relevant to the nuclear energy industry. *[NB02.26-1] US: Cameco has agreed to acquire the Smith Ranch* uranium in-situ leach (ISL) mine and various other ISL properties in Wyoming from Rio Algom, a subsidiary of BHP Billiton. The mine includes a 2 million pound U3O8 (769 tU) annual capacity mill, together with proven and probable uranium reserves of 27 million pounds U3O8 (10 385 tU), as of 31 December 2001. In exchange for Smith Ranch and the other ISL properties, Cameco has agreed to assume the decommissioning liabilities associated with the mine, estimated at US$11 million, and to purchase some US$6 million of Rio Algom's uranium inventory. Cameco has already secured forward sales for more than 900 000 pounds U3O8 (346 tU) of Smith Ranch production at prices 'substantially above the current long-term price indicators'. Smith Ranch will be operated by Power Resources Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Cameco that currently operates the nearby Highland ISL mine and plant. The agreement will complete BHP Billiton's exit from the uranium business, in line with its programme of divesting non-core businesses. /(Cameco, 19 June; FreshFUEL, 24 June, p3; Mining Journal, 21 June, p453; see also News Briefing 00.41-15 <../nb00/nb0041.htm#NB00.41-15>)/ *[NB02.26-2] UK: BNFL announced that its two oldest Magnox nuclear power plants* - Chapelcross and Calder Hall - will close some three years earlier than originally planned. The four Calder Hall reactors will now close in March 2003, as opposed to 2006, while the four Chapelcross units will 'complete a progressive shut down by no later than March 2005', as opposed to 2008. BNFL said it had reached the decision to close the plants earlier because of the continuing low prices in the wholesale electricity market. The reactor's relatively low output but high overheads have made the plants' operation uneconomic. All other larger Magnox reactors will operate to their existing planned lifetimes, 'subject to them continuing to remain safe and economic'. /(BNFL, 21 June; see also News Briefing 02.14-10 )/ *[NB02.26-3] The US Department of Energy (DOE) has signed an agreement with USEC* Inc whereby both parties make long-term commitments that will ensure stability for the US uranium enrichment industry. The DOE commits to work with USEC in its development and deployment of an advanced centrifuge uranium enrichment plant, as well as supporting USEC as the executive agent under the US-Russian high-enriched uranium (HEU) agreement. USEC commits to deploy an advanced enrichment plant by 2010-11, to operate its Paducah plant at a minimum production level of 3.5 million SWU annually until the new plant enters production, and to maintain certain DOE property that could serve as a site for an advanced plant. USEC will also order and take delivery of low-enriched uranium (LEU) derived from 30 tonnes of Russian warhead material under the remaining 12 years of the 'Megatons to Megawatts' programme. USEC has confirmed its commitment to the SILEX enrichment development programme, which is expected to be ready for deployment in 2007. The day after the USEC-DOE agreement was reached, the US State Department and DOE jointly announced approval of a new long-term contract with Russian executive agent Tenex for low-cost LEU under the HEU deal. The US and Russian governments approved the implementation of new, flexible market-based pricing terms for the remainder of the 'Megatons to Megawatts' programme. Market-based pricing will take effect in January 2003. /(USEC, 18 June; FreshFUEL, 24 June, p1; Silex Systems, 20 June; Silex Annual Report, 2001; Nuclear Market Review, 21 June, p3; see also News Briefings 02.25-6 and 02.09-2 )/ *[NB02.26-4] Australia's uranium mines will be subject to a Senate inquiry* that is expected to report by December 2002 on the regulatory monitoring and reporting regime that governs environmental performance at these facilities. The inquiry is the third such review into uranium mines in the past five years and will focus on Energy Resources of Australia's (ERA's) Ranger mine and Jabiluka site as well as Heathgate Resources' Beverley mine and Southern Cross Resources' Honeymoon project. /(Nuclear Market Review, 21 June, p2)/ *[NB02.26-5] Australia: WMC Ltd is investigating an expansion at its Olympic Dam project*, which could raise annual uranium production to 25-30 million pounds U3O8 (9616-11 539 tU). Company officials said WMC plans to initiate a feasibility study of such an expansion in 2002, but any decision to proceed would be years in the future. /(Mining Journal, 21 June, p456; FreshFUEL, 24 June, p5; see also News Briefing 00.43-3 <../nb00/nb0043.htm#NB00.43-3>)/ *[NB02.26-6] Russian nuclear fuel manufacturer TVEL has signed a protocol with Czech* power utility CEZ to provide nuclear fuel for delivery during 2002-2006. The agreement is estimated to be worth some US$200 million. /(FreshFUEL, 24 June, p6; see also News Briefing 99.03-18 <../nb99/nb9903.htm#NB99.03-18>)/ *[NB02.26-7] Belgium: The issue of phasing out nuclear energy will be discussed* at a meeting of the cabinet on 28 June. The draft phase-out law would result in the first nuclear reactor closing in 2015 (Doel-1) and the last unit being retired in 2025 (Tihange-3). A positive vote by the cabinet would send the draft law to parliament for ratification. /(FreshFUEL, 24 June, p5; SpentFUEL, 24 June, p4; see also News Briefing 02.10-1 )/ *[NB02.26-8] Switzerland: The lower house of parliament - the National Council* - rejected two government-inspired proposals that would introduce operating lifetime limits of 30-40 years for the country's five nuclear power plants. The council also voted to reject government proposals that the new nuclear energy law include a ban on reprocessing spent fuel once existing contracts have expired. The Swiss Association for Atomic Energy (SVA) said the outcome of the decision is not definitive, as the session ended before many items relating to the full nuclear energy bill could be discussed and voted on. Both houses of parliament will have to vote again on the bill. /(NucNet News, 219/02, 21 June; Ux Weekly, 24 June, p3; see also News Briefings 01.10-15 <../nb01/nb0110.htm#NB01.10-15> and 01.50-11 <../nb01/nb0150.htm#NB01.50-11>)/ *[NB02.26-9] Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) launched its Advanced CANDU Reactor* (ACR-700), which, it claims, represents the lowest-cost design of new generation reactors and real competition for gas-fired technologies. The new design departs from traditional CANDU technology in that it features light water cooling and has a compact core fuelled with slightly enriched uranium oxide. The capacity of the ACR-700 is approximately 700 MWe, but AECL is currently working on a 1000 MWe model, the ACR-1000. AECL has requested a pre-application review of the design from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), as well as initiating the international licensing process. /(NucNet Insider, 43/02, 19 June; AECL, 24 June; see also News Briefing 01.48-3 <../nb01/nb0148.htm#NB01.48-3>)/ *[NB02.26-10] The US Department of Energy (DOE) has selected three private sector partners* - Dominion Energy, Entergy and Exelon - to participate in the next stage of its 'Nuclear Power 2010' initiative. All three companies have recently confirmed their desire to participate in the early site permit (ESP) process. The announcement confirms the next stage in the development of the initiative - designed to share the cost of submitting formal applications to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for early site approval - following the establishment of a 'public-private partnership' scheme earlier in 2002. (NRC) /(NucNet News, 222/02, 25 June; see also News Briefing 02.11-3 )/ *[NB02.26-11] US: Entergy has asked the Vermont Public Service Board to reconsider* the conditions it has imposed on Entergy's purchase of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. The board has required any money left over after the plant's decommissioning is returned to consumers. However, Entergy would like to be allowed to keep 50% of any money remaining from the US$300 million decommissioning fund. Entergy would like the board to reach its decision by 12 July. /(Ux Weekly, 24 June, p4; see also News Briefing 02.25-9 )/ *[NB02.26-12] Canada: The New Brunswick Public Utilities Board has reserved* its decision on the proposed C$850 million (US$553 million) refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear power plant. NB Power wants the refurbishment to be performed by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL). However, AECL will only refund C$187 million (US$122 million) of the cost if the refurbishment fails to work. Critics of the deal say it is unsatisfactory and that the contract should contain better guarantees. The refurbishment would allow the plant to continue operating for 25 years more after 2006. /(Ux Weekly, 24 June, p5; Nuclear Market Review, 21 June, p2; see also News Briefing 02.10-9 )/ *[NB02.26-13] Japan: A reduction in the number of mandatory tests performed* at new reactors is being considered by the Japanese government. The move could help the country's reactors become more efficient. Inspections are currently required every 13 months at each reactor. However, by 2004, Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency could drop the overall requirement and allow each reactor to be considered on an individual basis. /(Ux Weekly, 24 June, p4; see also News Briefing 02.24-14 )/ *[NB02.26-14] Taiwan: The government is being urged to create a 'special agency'* to take responsibility for establishing a final repository for low-level waste (LLW). Proposals by Taiwan's Atomic Energy Council (AEC) call for a 'special agency, similar in structure to a private company', to take over responsibility for the project from utility Taipower. Taipower has been criticised for failing to find an acceptable and appropriate location for a final repository for the country's LLW and for lack of progress in removing material currently in temporary storage at Orchid Island. /(NucNet News, 217/02, 19 June; see also News Briefings 99.44-5 <../nb99/nb9944.htm#NB99.44-5> and 02.21-15 )/ *[NB02.26-15] US: Nuclear power reactors are highly unlikely to be penetrated* by a hijacked commercial airline like those used in the 11 September attacks, according to the preliminary findings of a study conducted by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). The study was requested by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). Steve Floyd, NEI senior director of regulatory reform, said the containment vessel would hold up because planes flying low enough to strike a facility cannot be controlled at a speed fast enough to penetrate the concrete. The study also showed that spent fuel storage vaults at nuclear power plants would be protected from direct aircraft crashes because their walls are 'typically even thicker than reactor containment walls'. /(NucNet Insider, 46/02, 20 June; Nuclear Energy Overview, 24 June, p3; see also News Briefing 01.45-1 <../nb01/nb0145.htm#NB01.45-1>)/ Previous News Briefing NB02.25 /All news and views are those of the publications cited, whose staffs have undertaken the research to enable this compilation for WNA members. We refer readers to those publications for fuller details./ ***************************************************************** 71 U.S. renews travel warning for South Asia United Press International By Anwar Iqbal From the International Desk Published 6/26/2002 8:08 PM WASHINGTON, June 26 (UPI) -- The United States renewed its travel warning for India and Pakistan Wednesday, urging U.S. citizens not to travel to the region and those already in both countries to leave. The new warning comes after recent terrorist attacks in Pakistan and despite a reduction in border tensions between the two nuclear powers over Kashmir. In a statement issued in Washington, the State Department noted that the very high level of tension between India and Pakistan that existed at the end of May and the beginning of June "has subsided somewhat." Nonetheless, military mobilization along the border "remains in place," says the warning while reminding U.S. citizens that "the risk of renewed high levels of tension cannot be ruled out." "Therefore, the department recommends that American citizens defer all but essential travel to India" and those who do "should carefully monitoring existing conditions." On May 31, the State Department had authorized the departure of non-emergency personnel and all eligible family members from the U.S. Embassy and consulates in India. The decision irked India and a government spokesman in New Delhi described the move as "unjustified," adding that there was no threat to U.S. citizens in the country. Despite India's protest the State Department said Wednesday that those Americans who left India on May 31, "remain out of the country and the U.S. Embassy and consulates continue to operate with only emergency personnel." The warning also urges Americans not to visit the border areas and be vigilant in other areas as well. "Terrorist groups, some of which are linked to al Qaida and have previously been implicated in attacks on Americans, are active there as well, and have attacked and killed civilians," the State Department statement said. The travel warning for Pakistan, however, has a more urgent tone, "strongly urging American citizens to depart the country." The warning follows a string of attacks on U.S. and Western targets in Pakistan and warns of "continued threats" of further attacks. On June 14, a car bomb attack against the U.S. Consulate in Karachi resulted in the death of 12 Pakistani citizens outside the consulate building. In March, an attack on worshippers at a church service in Islamabad killed two Americans and injured several others, and in January an American journalist in Karachi was kidnapped and brutally murdered. "There is a growing possibility that as security is increased at official U.S. facilities, terrorists and their sympathizers will seek less well-protected targets. These may include facilities where Americans are generally known to congregate or visit, such as clubs, restaurants, places of worship, schools, or outdoor recreation events," the State Department warned. As a result of these concerns, the Department ordered the departure of non-emergency personnel and family members of the Embassy and Consulates in Pakistan on March 22. "As Operation Enduring Freedom defeats al Qaida strongholds in Afghanistan, some al Qaida members have fled to Pakistan and other countries. This, coupled with the presence of indigenous sectarian and militant groups in Pakistan, requires that all Americans in or traveling through Pakistan take appropriate security measures," the State Department said, warning that "events in the Middle East also increase the possibility of violence." *Copyright © 2002 United Press International. All rights reserved.* ***************************************************************** 72 The Kremlin readily supported the US-led war on terror BBC Thursday, 27 June, 2002, 12:49 GMT 13:49 UK *Analysis: Russia's place in G8* The Moscow's Kremlin By Stephen Dalziel BBC Russian affairs analyst line The decision by the G8 to hold its summit in Russia in four years' time is being heralded in Moscow as an indication that Russia is now a fully-fledged member of the world economic community. However you twist the figures, technically Russia is not one of the world's top eight developed economies But the fact that the G8 is also preparing to give Russia $20 billion to help dispose of its weapons of mass destruction suggests that the country still relies more on aid than do the other members. However you twist the figures, technically Russia is not one of the world's top eight developed economies - which is what the term "G8" is supposed to mean. It does not even come in the top ten. But, geographically, Russia is the biggest country in the world. And its legacy from when it was a part of the Soviet Union means that it still has a huge nuclear arsenal. *From G7 to G8* These factors have meant that Russia has gradually been growing closer to what used to be called the G7 ever since the then Soviet President, Mikhail Gorbachev, made the first overtures to the organisation in the late 1980s. Russian President Vladimir Putin The G8 decision is big boost for President Putin G7 became G7 plus one, then G8. But the crash of the rouble in August 1998 saw a swift return to G7. The recovery made by the Russian economy since then, though, has seen a growing acceptance by the G7 to bring Russia into the fold. And in the past year, politics has played a huge part. The readiness with which the Kremlin signed up to the international war against terrorism has led to an expectation of some sort of payback from the West. *Huge boost* In recent weeks, both the European Union and the United States have granted Russia the recognition that its economy can now be deemed "a market economy". That neatly paved the way for Russia to be considered a full member of the G8, sidestepping the technicality of the Russian economy not being the world's eighth largest. Granting Moscow the right to host the summit in 2006 is a huge boost. But giving the Kremlin $20bn over the next 10 years to deal with its weapons of mass destruction underlines that economically Russia still owes much to the West. © MMII | News Sources | Privacy * ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************