***************************************************************** 04/28/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.108 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: Environmentalists meet at Lake Whitney to discuss alternatives 2 New N-plants said needed to save GDP NUCLEAR REACTORS 3 Chernobyl – everlasting concern of Ukraine 4 Temelin nuclear plant in Czech Republic reconnected to power grid 5 Chernobyl victims remembered NUCLEAR SAFETY NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 6 US: Nuclear Road to Nevada 7 US: Evanston casts a wary eye on N-waste route 8 US: Utah desert tribe sees future in nuclear waste 9 Taiwain: The withering of Orchid Island 10 US: Don't waste Nevada 11 US: LETTERS: How to humanize Nevada 12 US: VOTE TO OVERRIDE VETO (44) 13 US: Editorial: The score: politics 41, science 6 14 US: Benjamin Grove: Nevadans busy with more than Yucca 15 US: Tax Nuclear Waste 16 US: The West, Nuclear Waste And National Responsibility 17 UK: SF campaign seizes on Sellafield 18 US: Republicans say plutonium bill is ready 19 US: Shipment blockade bill ready, GOP says 20 UK: 'Shut Sellafield campaign is election issue' 21 US: The 'There' of Yucca Mountain 22 US: In harm's way: Is Yucca Mountain a Utah fight? 23 US: Yucca Mountain is still best bet 24 US: Don't let East add to Utah's legacy of nuclear misery NUCLEAR WEAPONS 25 Osama 'makes nuclear bomb' 26 Iraq poses nuclear threat: claim 27 U.S. official admits past secret nuclear pact with Japan 28 US: A radioactive "dirty bomb" could be headed for your neighborhood OTHER NUCLEAR 29 Energy bill overwhelmingly approved by the Senate 30 Boxer Statement On the Senate Energy Bill ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Environmentalists meet at Lake Whitney to discuss alternatives to nuclear power By RICHARD L. SMITH Tribune-Herald staff writer WHITNEY  Wind and other renewable energy resources could be used to replace nuclear power in Texas, say environmental activists. The environmentalists met Saturday at Lake Whitney State Park to discuss ways to eliminate nuclear energy in Texas and to develop ways to keep the state from becoming a nuclear dumping ground. Those attending also learned about pollution and potential dangers from nuclear power. "We want to form a statewide network and develop a strategy of phasing out nuclear power and using instead clean Texas wind power and we plan to work with our legislature to accomplish that goal," said Erin Rogers, grassroots outreach coordinator of the Austin-based Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club and several other organizations and individuals sponsored the conference which brought participants from throughout Texas and New Mexico. Rogers also said there is a lot of pressure on state leaders to open a nuclear waste dump in Texas. She said environmental groups will lobby state legislators to keep such sites out of the state. Texas has bountiful clean energy thanks to its size and diverse climate, said Molly Rooke with the Sierra Club. The state leads the nation in renewable energy potential, she said. Texas leads the nation in solar power potential and is second nationally in wind power potential. "We can produce 10 percent of the nation's electricity with wind power alone," Rooke said. The wind already produces more than 1 billion watts of electricity at more than 10 wind farms in the Panhandle and West Texas. There are estimates that about 250 billion watts could be produced in Texas using the wind. Speakers at the environmental conference pointed out the hazards from nuclear power that these sustainable resources, such as wind power, could replace. Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear fusion expert and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Takoma Park, Md., said the nuclear waste from both uranium mining and power plants pollute about 40,000 sites in the United States. The radiation from the waste is harmless until humans come into contact with it. "It's like cobra venom, it's not dangerous until you get bit. (Radiation) isn't dangerous until it gets into your body," Makhijani said. Most radioactive waste, about 95 percent, comes from spent fuel at nuclear power plants such as TXU Electric's Comanche Peak plant near Glen Rose, he said. That spent fuel also could be a terrorist target. "These things are extremely vulnerable to terrorist attacks," Makhijani said. "An attack on this could result in a major catastrophe." Diane D'Arrigo, an anti-nuclear activist and project director for the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington, D.C., said nuclear waste that could be transported through Texas also poses a danger. She said trucks and railroads could make more than 4,000 trips through Texas over a 30-year period to transport nuclear waste to a proposed nuclear dump in Nevada . The shipments would primarily be from nuclear plants on the East Coast. The highways that would be used would include interstates 10 and 20 and portions of Interstate 35. President George W. Bush selected Yucca Mountain, a volcanic ridge in the Nevada desert, in February as the national repository for spent nuclear fuel. The state of Nevada has fought attempts to bring 77,000 tons of radioactive waste into the state for permanent burial. The fight is now in Congress, where the U.S. House voted to overrule Nevada's rejection of the waste dump. Nevada officials are now taking the battle to the U.S. Senate. D'Arrigo said the casks that would carry the radioactive waste to Yucca Mountain contain amounts of radiation that exceed one of the bombs dropped on Japan in World War II. Those casks are also vulnerable to terrorist attack. "Each cask holds more radiation than the Hiroshima bomb," she said. "Putting it on roads and rails is ridiculous." Associated Press contributed to this story. Richard L. Smith can be reached at 757-5745 or at rsmith@wacotrib.com. © 2002 Cox Newspapers, Inc. ***************************************************************** 2 New N-plants said needed to save GDP Daily Yomiuri On-Line Yomiuri Shimbun The electric power industry has warned in an estimation, obtained by The Yomiuri Shimbun, that the country's gross domestic product will contract if it cannot go ahead with plans to build new nuclear power plants early this century. Electric power utilities in the country are now constructing three new nuclear power plants and plan to install 16 others, mostly targeted for completion in the 2010s. The Central Research Institute (CRIEPI) of the Electric Power Industry estimated that if the country was only able to build three of the planned plants in addition to those under construction, the GDP would shrink by as much as 347 trillion yen in real terms over an 18-year period from 2008. The projected contraction of the GDP is based on the possibility that the industry will face increased costs in combatting carbon dioxide emissions as a result of the economy's increased dependence upon thermal power generation, according to the estimation. CRIEPI, the Tokyo-based think tank of the electric-power industry, expects the country to experience an electricity shortage of 41.1 million kilowatt-hours in fiscal 2025 if it only completes six new nuclear power plants in the first quarter of the century. The same scenario predicts a 12 percent increase in CO2 emissions, as the electric power scarcity presumably would be offset by increased thermal power generation. The Kyoto Protocol on climate change requires Japan to have reduced CO2 emissions in 2025 by about 10 percent from the 1990 level as part of a worldwide fight against global warming. If carbon taxes are placed on coal, oil and natural gas consumption, prices of petroleum products, electric power and gas are likely to soar two to six times, making steel and other industrial sectors that heavily consume energy less competitive, CRIEPI said. If such a situation eventuated, the country's GDP would shrink by 29 trillion yen in fiscal 2025 alone. The think tank said the government should come up with a concrete policy regarding future nuclear power generation with a view to enabling the country to make viable both the liberalization of the power utility market and the construction of new nuclear power plants. About one-third of the country's electric power supplies currently come from nuclear power plants. Copyright 2002 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 3 Chernobyl – everlasting concern of Ukraine Pravda.RU ¹ Apr, 27 2002 16 years is the age when people receive passports in Ukraine. Chernobyl tragedy reached the age of first human maturity. People who was born at that terrible night fall already in love. Though, the disaster has not retreated yet. Chernobyl as well as the whole neighbourhood are still radioactive. Half-value period of the most dangerous radioactive elements, according to the scientists, makes about 300 years. The tragedy took place at 1.24 (local time), April 26, 1986. At that time, in the fourth energy block of Chernobyl atomic power station, as a result of a series of thermal explosions, the reactor was destroyed and radioactive substances penetrated into environment. According to the experts, the total output of radioactive matters made 50 million curies, what is equal to 500 explosions of A-bomb which was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. 500,000 square km of Ukrainian territory was polluted. In the country, there are 3.2 million of the catastrophe’s victims, including about 1 million children. They have a higher level of breath organs and thyroid gland’s illness, than in average in Ukraine. Though, Chernobyl became dangerous for Ukraine not that year, when the tragedy happened, but when in the USSR RSMK-1000 reactor was constructed and four reactors of the kind were established in Chernobyl station. This model of reactor was built only in the USSR, and it was aimed for obtaining plutonium used in nuclear weapon, while electric power was only a kind of by-product. The reactor was designed for 30 years of exploitation. Moreover, technical peculiarities of its construction (which was not aimed for obtaining electric power) make it especially dangerous. The technology itself is risky. So, sooner or later the tragedy should have happened. Since the station was set going, everybody who worked there and population of neighbouring territories lived in everlasting danger. And this danger is still present, while at least one reactor of the king works. In the destroyed power block of the station, non-controlled chain reactions started. As a result, radioactive americium is being segregated, which penetrates into subsoil waters through cracks in the sarcophagus. The leadership of Chernobyl zone and of the Ministry of Fuel and Energy state there is no danger. Though… Dnepr River carries radionuclides over big territories, while Pripyat River is a spontaneous radioactive depository, Ukrainian academician Dmitry Grodzinsky supposes. The scientist states that slit of Pripyat and Dnepr rivers and of Kiev Sea are polluted with strontium. The leader of Chernobyl zone, Vladimir Kholosha supposes the academician’s statement to be without reason. According to him, Pripyat river’s water contains 10 times less nuclides than the norm, so it could be drunk. Vladimir Kholosha says that after 1996, protecting dams were build on Pripyat River and Kiev storage pool, so radionuclides settled in so-called bottom snares. While the destroyed reactor of the atomic station, according to the specialists, does not pollute environment. So, who is right? This question concerns now many people not only in Ukraine, but in Byelorussia and in Russia too. In 1986-1987, about 600,000 people participated in liquidation of the catastrophe’s consequences. 200,000 of them got higher dozes of radiation. Now, they need specialized medical assistance during the whole their lives. Of 3.2 million of people (including 942,000 children) who were subject of the tragedy, about 170,000 people died within 10 years, while more than 4,000 people died because of the Chernobyl tragedy’s consequences. About 3,000 of them are liquidators. April 26, at 1.24 (local time), at the Memorial burial mound of Chernobyl’s victims in Kiev, flowers were laid by leaders of the city administration. In the morning, the leadership of Ukraine laid flowers on the monument. Alexandr Gorobets PRAVDA.RU Kiev Translated by Vera Solovieva Read the original in Russian: http://pravda.ru/main/2002/04/26/40389.html [http://pravda.ru/main/2002/04/26/40389.html] PRAVDA.Ru UN to turn Chernobyl into tourist Mecca? PRAVDA.Ru Vladimir Mikheyev: Danger equivalent to 500 Chernobyl ... PRAVDA.Ru Yuri Solomatin: The truth about Chernobyl problem ... pravda.ru ***************************************************************** 4 Temelin nuclear plant in Czech Republic reconnected to power grid Monday, Apr. 29, 2002 April 28, 2002 Temelin nuclear plant in Czech Republic reconnected to power grid PRAGUE (AP) -- The disputed Temelin nuclear power plant near the border with Austria was reconnected to the Czech Republic's power grid, an official said Sunday. A spokesman for the plant, Milan Nebesar, said workers connected the plant's first unit to the power grid on Sunday morning. The reactor, which is now running at about 40 per cent of capacity, was expected to reach full output within the next couple of days. The reactor was restarted on Wednesday after a two-month shutdown for a technical inspection that revealed faulty turbine valves, which were replaced. Tests on the first unit of the 2,000-megawatt plant -- based on Russian design and upgraded with U.S. technology -- started in November 2000. Commercial power production is expected by the end of 2003. Preparatory work on the plant's second unit is expected to be completed next week, Nebesar said. That unit's reactor should be started next month, he said. The Temelin power plant, just 60 kilometres north of the border with Austria, has been a source of friction between the two countries for the last two years. The Czech government insists the plant is safe, but Austrian politicians repeatedly have demanded its shutdown. [http://www.canoe.ca/copyright.html] © 2002, ***************************************************************** 5 Chernobyl victims remembered [http://thestar.com.my/] KIEV: Ukraine and Belarus appealed to the world on Friday not to forget Chernobyl and its victims who still need help 16 years after the world’s worst nuclear disaster spewed clouds of radioactivity across much of Europe. Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma, Prime Minister Anatoly Kinakh and other officials laid flowers at a symbolic burial mound here, paying tribute to those who died after Chernobyl’s reactor four exploded on April 26, 1986. The government urged in a state newspaper human and financial support for the people involved in the clean-up – so-called liquidators – and other victims. –– Reuters Copyright © 1995-2002 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd (Co No ***************************************************************** 6 Nuclear Road to Nevada April 28, 2002 Nuclear Waste on the Highways (April 21, 2002) o the Editor: Re "Nuclear Waste on the Highways" (editorial, April 21): Let the country be forewarned: what awaits is a potential nightmare if we allow the Energy Department and the nuclear power industry to ship high-level nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain. Over a 30-year period, we can expect and make emergency preparations for several hundred accidents in any of 43 states, at a cost to local and state governments of billions of dollars. Worse yet, what if there is a terrorist strike? Our worst nuclear nightmares would be realized, creating an American Chernobyl. A disaster could affect an area of about 40 square miles with contamination. Many would die. A local economy would be shattered. Cleanup in an urban area could cost $2 billion. Is it really worth it? OSCAR B. GOODMAN Mayor Las Vegas, April 25, 2002 Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 7 Evanston casts a wary eye on N-waste route Sunday, April 28, 2002 By Michael Janofsky The New York Times EVANSTON, Wyo. — This is a town that has always kept America moving. Pioneer trails appeared in the early 1800s, followed by the Pony Express, stagecoaches, railroads and then a major interstate highway. Now, on any given day, as many as 50 freight trains and 5,000 trucks rumble by, headed toward one coast or the other. People here in Wyoming's far southwestern corner say they have not thought much about what passes through Evanston on I-80 and the Union Pacific rail lines. But like many Americans living near other tracks and highways, they are starting to think about it now that the Bush administration has approved a plan to ship high-level radioactive waste to southern Nevada for disposal at Yucca Mountain. "I can't say it's come up in many conversations I've had around town," said Evanston's mayor, William Davis. "But people know about it. They're starting to learn." Until now, the fight over Yucca Mountain has been waged largely in Nevada. Its governor, Kenny Guinn, a Republican, has filed a "notice of disapproval" that by law vetoes the project. But Congress can override the veto and is set for debate starting in May. In a broader effort to convince Americans that the Yucca Mountain project is a bad idea, Nevada's two senators — Harry Reid, a Democrat, and John Ensign, a Republican — along with a coalition of environmental groups, are expanding the campaign to cities and towns along the routes that the government proposes using to move the waste. The government says shipments from 131 temporary storage sites in 39 states could start as early as 2010. With a fund of $4 million approved by the Nevada Legislature and several million more from Clark County, Nev., and from private donations, the state has begun advertising on television stations and in newspapers around the country to argue that the shipments would be vulnerable to accident and terrorist attack. The first television commercials appeared earlier this month in Burlington, Vt. Additional efforts are under way in other states. In Utah, the State Elections Office has approved a request by Utahans for Radioactive Waste Control that it accept signatures for a ballot initiative that would forbid transporting nuclear waste through the state. Utah's two major interstates, 15 and 80, offer a direct route to Yucca Mountain. According to the Energy Department's own report, the shipments would move through 43 states, 109 cities with populations of more than 100,000 each and thousands of smaller places like Evanston, a town of some 11,500. Though no advertisements from the Nevada effort have yet appeared in Evanston's chief paper, the twice-weekly Uinta County Herald, residents say they are beginning to contemplate trains and trucks carrying casks of spent nuclear fuel through town: What if a truck overturns? What if a train derails? What if terrorists attack? "I think it's a terrible idea," said Linda Heltzel, a former teacher who runs a coffee shop in town. "States should keep their own waste. Nevada's only getting it because they don't have enough people to vote against it. But we're a throwaway society, so we always want to put it someplace else." Others were less concerned, in part because the routine of life in Evanston already includes other hazardous materials whizzing through by truck and rail, some to the Energy Department's low-level-waste disposal site in New Mexico, and the occasional accident in the nearby oil and gas fields. "I'm not going to lie awake at night worrying about trains and trucks having an accident," said Wayne Knopf, a retired college administrator. Joe Davis, a spokesman for the Energy Department, said nuclear material has been moving along America's highways and rails for 30 years without a fatal accident, a harmful release or a terrorist attack. "With our track record," he said, "people shouldn't get too excited." © 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 8 Utah desert tribe sees future in nuclear waste NewsOK.com 2002-04-28 By Rich Vosepka Associated Press Writer SKULL VALLEY, Utah -- For 150 years, the Goshute Indians have scratched a poor living in Utah's West Desert while watching their ancient homeland overrun by white encroachment and industrialization. Now, the small, impoverished tribe has found what it thinks is a great way to survive and prosper. Some members want to generate big money by storing much of the nation's spent nuclear reactor fuel on the reservation for up to 40 years. Utah's non-Indian population is aghast, and the Utah Legislature has passed laws to block the effort. But the tribal sovereignty that federal law recognizes limits the state's ability to veto the plan. And the tribe has few other economic options. In his 1872 book "Roughing It," Mark Twain called the Goshutes a wretched tribe living in a repulsive landscape. Time hasn't brought them much prosperity. They are a desert tribe. Goshutes traditionally survived in western Utah by ranging over a vast area in small groups, gathering pine nuts, tracking game and making use of virtually everything that grows in the desert. Those skills make for thin soup today. But waste storage could bring as much as $3.1 billion to the 124-member tribe if the waste storage facility operates for 40 years. Even the head of Utah's Indian Affairs office said he isn't sure what else the Skull Valley Goshutes can do with their 18,000-acre reservation if the nuclear waste dump is killed. "There's a lot that could have been done, but not now that the area's been polluted. They either join in the (pollution) process or they wither away and die," said Forrest Cuch, director of the Utah Division of Indian Affairs. If they succeed, it won't be the first time the tribe has gotten its way, despite the government. In 1864, President Lincoln signed a law ordering all American Indians in Utah to relocate to the Uintah Valley, 170 miles to the east of the Goshutes' turf, in terrain vastly different from their desert hunting and gathering grounds. The Goshutes refused. They stayed in the Skull Valley, about 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. The fight between the Goshutes and Utah's government is part of a bigger nuclear debate. In March, President Bush approved a plan that would make Yucca Mountain in Nevada the nation's permanent dump for spent nuclear fuel. The Goshutes and a group of nuclear utilities want to store the stuff in Skull Valley while the Nevada site is built. For up to 40 years, high level waste would sit in 16-foot-high, concrete-and- steel casks on the reservation. The plan is now undergoing review by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. The board will make a recommendation to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission this fall. It will be up to NRC to decide on a permit for the storage dump. A lawsuit over the issue is moving through federal court, but it is not expected to slow the NRC's decision. The Goshutes aren't strangers to society's toxic byproducts; disposal and storage facilities are their neighbors. The military stores and destroys chemical weapons nearby at the Tooele Army Depot and incinerator. Dugway Proving Ground tests countermeasures to biological weapons near the reservation. And low-level nuclear waste already is stored at Envirocare, about 20 miles away. But high-level nuclear waste, which stays deadly for as long as 10,000 years, shouldn't be kept in Utah, Gov. Mike Leavitt said. State officials worry that trains transporting the waste could be attacked by terrorists, or that an accident would expose people to radiation. They also have suggested that the waste site would be vulnerable to plane crashes. Air Force F-16s frequently fly over the site on the way to a nearby bombing range. The nuclear industry dismisses the fears, saying the casks could withstand nearly any kind of impact. Leavitt also is defending Utah's anti-nuclear laws in federal court after the Goshutes and the utilities sued. No one denies that the Legislature passed these laws to block the plan. But the issue is the extent of Goshute sovereignty. Indian sovereignty is an evolving legal concept, but it has its roots in the historical status of Indian tribes as separate nations, recognized by Congress, and entitled to nation-to-nation relations with the U.S. government. Today, tribes are not treated as equals by the federal government. But their special status is respected, and they generally are not subject to state taxation or regulation. Sovereignty is the legal concept that allows tribes to operate casinos on their reservations, even in states that forbid gambling. © 2002, Produced by NewsOK ***************************************************************** 9 Taiwain: The withering of Orchid Island The Taipei Times Online: 2002-04-28Sunday, April 28th, 2002 PHOTO: GAVIN PHIPPS, TAIPEI TIMES After decades of Sinicization, scrapes with the military, unemployment, poor housing, gawking tourists and nuclear waste, Orchid Island's much-maligned residents maintain a tenuous relationship with their northern neighbor By Gavin Phipps STAFF REPORTER Recent demonstrations outside the Legislative Yuan by residents of Orchid Island demanding the removal of nuclear waste barrels have once again propelled the often overlooked island to the forefront of the news. Along with over 100,000 barrels of nuclear waste buried at the island's southernmost tip, Orchid Island, or Lanyu (ÄõÀ¬) as it's known in Chinese, is also home to some 3,200 people. Most of the residents are of Yami ancestry (¶®¬ü±Ú) -- a once warrior-like tribe that made its living raiding coastal villages and breaking heads as far a field as Fujian Province. While legislators and politicians continue to ponder the radioactive dilemma under the glare of the media spotlight, there remains a dearth of solutions to Lanyu's many other long-term problems -- many of which arose long before TaiPower shipped its first barrels of radioactive refuse to the 45.7km2 island in 1982. Unlike the hands-off approach taken by the Japanese, under whom Lanyu became a research area for native flora and fauna, successive governments in Taiwan have meddled with the island's delicate equilibrium -- meddling that has usually resulted in politicians wishing they could simply sweep Lanyu under the carpet. Hand-crafted boats used by Yami fishermen, above, are hewn from 27 pieces of wood. Grafitti blasting the presence of nuclear waste on Orchid Island, top left, is scrawled on the pillar at the entrance to the waste site. "It's always the same. Politicians come here, look around, say some nice words, gawk at the polluted waters and smile," said a rather irate Chou Yi-chung (©P¸q©¾), diving instructor and island guide. "They are here, but they're not really here. They only have one eye open the entire time and can't wait to leave. It's all face. They don't really care about the people or the island. This has happened so often that I think sometimes they wish we didn't exist." With the exception of a naval salvo targeted at one of the island's statuesque off-shore rock formations -- an attack ordered by a shortsighted Japanese naval ensign who mistakenly took the rock for a US battleship -- the mayhem of World War Two passed by the people of Lanyu. Some folks couldn't care less about pollution. A Lanyu resident shows off the catch of the day. The problems began quite shortly thereafter, however. Six years after Chiang Kai-shek's army fled to Taiwan, the KMT subjected the island's native population to a sinicization program. Scores of recently arrived mainlanders were shipped to Lanyu in a despotic attempt to wrest control of the island from its Yami population. Needless to say, the idea proved incredibly unpopular with the locals who resented the government's assumption that interracial marriages would lead to peace, love and understanding. What the program led to instead was years of drunken brawls and racial hatred. "When my father came here, there was a lot of resentment towards the program," recalled Chou Hai-an (©P®ü¦w), a life-long Lanyu resident of mixed parentage and proprietor of one of the island's few restaurants. "But when you think about it, recently arrived mainlanders who were sent to Lanyu such as my father had quite a lot in common with the native population in the sense that both were considered outcasts. After all that's why they were sent here." Anti-Central Government sentiment increased in 1966, when the government passed a decree that ordered the islanders to dismantle their traditional underground homes and build concrete housing instead. The program lasted for over 20 years and it wasn't until 1980 that the Central Government reversed the decree and the Yami were once again free to choose their style of abode. To coincide with the forced redevelopment program, the KMT decided to allow private citizens to visit the island and the very first camera-toting tourists arrived in 1967. Lack of financial support and the pace at which the Central Government was demanding local residents redevelop led to shoddy construction work, however. To cut costs, builders used vast amounts of sand in the cement, which meant that large numbers of buildings collapsed very shortly after completion. Even today, the island is littered with half-finished, abandoned residential buildings. Unfortunately the problem of shoddy workmanship continues even today. A large number of buildings built within the last five years were done so in a rather slap-shot manner and fell well below the standard deemed safe for habitation or commercial use. One of the largest examples of this is the Lanyu Fine Arts Center (ÄõÀ¬¤â¤uÃÀ«~®i°â¤¤¤ß) in Hongtou village, which was completed but never put to use and is now on the verge of collapse. "Obviously it was a good idea. The arts and handicraft mart would have been great for the village. It would have given people jobs, acted as a way to tell the outside world who we are. And tourists might possibly have come and spent some money there," explained Sinan Likdem (Á©M­^), the leader of the resident association on Orchid Island. "But when it was finished, inspectors came and said it was poorly constructed. If there had been sufficient funds and a genuine act of government support, I'm sure it would have opened." It's not only the island's buildings that have been plagued with problems. Sections of the island's single road are also in an appalling state of disrepair and look as if they will remain so for the foreseeable future. "Parts of the road have become very dangerous. With increased traffic, I guess it's only a matter of time before there is a horrific accident," stated local artist, Sikang Chai (Á±d°]). "The problem with the roads, however, is that certain people in the local government don't want to improve them because they reckon if development takes place like it has on Green Island, then we'll be swamped by tourists. It's a pretty backward way of thinking if you ask me." While problems continue to plague many of Lanyu's civil construction projects, it is now illegal for non-island residents to purchase land or property on Lanyu. This is something many see as vital in ensuring that not only the island's culture remains intact, but that the land remains in the hands of its native population. "It's pretty much impossible for outsiders to buy land here. The empty land that is safe to build on is usually owned by more than one person. Areas of about 600m by 600m can be owned by nine or 10 people," said Chou, who built both his and his parents' houses several years ago. "So it would hardly be kept secret if an outsider purchased land here. And then legal action could be taken." While Chou Hai-an's parents enjoy the comforts of four concrete walls and a roof, not all of Lanyu's growing elderly population is as fortunate. As head of the residents' association, Sinan Likdem's tasks are becoming increasingly focused on the island's elderly residents. "There are about 300 elderly people who need constant care on the island. Of these, roughly 20 have no immediate families here. We bring food, bathe them, cut their hair and clean their homes for them," Sinan said. "It's obviously quite saddening. We face an uphill battle as more young people leave the island and we don't get much of a budget from the government." The falling number of youngsters opting to remain on Lanyu has also made a dent in the island's culture. Once a crucial part of the Yami calendar and prelude to the Yami harvest festival, the Flying Fish Rite (­¸³½²½) was traditionally a coming of age for young men, whose position in society was, quite literally, based on the size of their catch. The greater the number of flying fish caught, the greater a man's acceptance by the sea and his peers and his ability to support a family. All of which meant that the chap who actually caught the most fish was himself considered a pretty good catch by the the island's females. Long ago, Yami men clad in loin-cloths and donning silver helmets and gold breastplates would smear the blood of a recently sacrificed chicken on the rocks and yell "return flying fish" at the tops of their lungs before heading out to sea in the early evening. The men of Lanyu continue to craft the boats from 27 different pieces of wood cut from a live tree and venture out into the darkness to catch flying fish. The eye-catching Yami thong, helmet and breastplate are no longer part of the regalia, however. Traditional garments have been replaced by sports wear in the form of short pants,T-shirts and baseball caps. Not that it's any surprise that the dress code is somewhat different today, as many of today's fishermen are part-timers. Working for Taipower or any one of the handful of engineering companies based on the island during the day, they then take their boats out into the blackened waters at night to catch enough fish for their families. Once taking to the seas in their famed hand-crafted and brightly painted wooden boats under the gaze of family and friends, the part-time fishermen nowadays paddle out under the glare of television crews and with a wallet freshly filled with crisp bills. While Taipei Times politely declined to pay the NT$1,000 one elderly resident demanded for an interview, not all of the nation's media are so inclined. On a recent trip to the island, an ETTV (ªF´Ë·s»D) cameraman, who declined to be identified, readily admitted to having paid a total of NT$2,500 in order to secure interviews over a two-day period. Tourists are also often expected to fork-out a couple of hundred dollars for the pleasure of capturing locals on film. Those who don't cough-up the cash and snap away regardless run the risk of local ire, especially in villages located on the islands' less-developed east coast. "On one hand, I can understand it. After all, the island is our home and not a zoo and people should respect that. But then as there is little opportunity for older people to earn money by charging a minimal fee for a picture they are in some sense simply trying to survive," said local librarian Ho Lan-ing (­JÄõ·ë). "And you have to remember that many of the elderly people see outsiders and immediately think they have lots of money." Despite its mounting social problems, Orchid Island has managed to rid itself of one, often bloody, dilemma: that of drunken altercations with the military. Lanyu was considered such a backwater posting that the military ensured that only the most troublesome and natty draftees were stationed on the island. "There were fights all the time. You'd see the soldiers getting drunk off base and knew there was going to be trouble, especially if a group of locals were drinking anywhere within earshot of them," Chou recalled. "Local resentment got so bad that the troops finally refused to leave the bases on their own. Going out at night became a no-no if you were a soldier and didn't want to get beaten-up." Animosity and resentment of the troops continued until 1980, when, having become virtual prisoners in their own bases, the soldiers were withdrawn from the island. Not that the short-lived Taiwan military presence was a total waste of time. The scores of rundown and abandoned military installations that lay scattered along the island's coastal road now double as convenient shelters for the multitude of mountain goats that also call the island home. Two years ago, the island's lack of military presence led to talk of autonomy for Lanyu and its native Yami peoples. Following a decade of Yami lobbying for self-governance, the Presidential Office, under the leadership of then recently elected President Chen Shui-bien (³¯¤ô«ó), signed a document that promised "a new partnership between the Aborigines and the administration in Taiwan." "There was talk of some kind of autonomy a couple of years ago, but like so many things here, nothing has come of it and we're still here waiting," Chou said. "I think it's a dream, but I could see the island run as an autonomous part of Taiwan in the future. We wouldn't be reliant on a Central Government to do things. So things would probably work properly, roads would get fixed and so on." To date, little has come of the declaration signed by Chen on Lanyu in 2000. While the Central Government may have forgotten about it, many locals remember it very well. "It's just another broken promise by the Central Government. They promised to deal with nuclear waste and that's still here. They promised to repair roads and houses and those problems are still evident," Chou said. "The declaration was just another idea thought up to keep the people of Lanyu quiet." Although residents such as Chou welcome autonomy, some residents remain wary. Serious questions concerning the future of the island's children have left a large number of Lanyu's already much-maligned residents with yet another dilemma. "I hold meetings with the children and their parents regularly and ask the question `In 10 years, where do you see Lanyu?'" said Hsu Chun-yuen (®}¬K¶é), headmaster of Tonghsing Elementary School (ªF²M°ê¥Á¤p¾Ç). "Nobody ever answers. Which I seriously think is because they know that if the island is to develop, it needs a healthy population, but they are also aware that the island is not a place where their children have much of a future. It's all quite frightening, really." This story has been viewed 254 times. URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2002/04/28/story/0000133770] Copyright © 1999-2002 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 Don't waste Nevada Illustrations by F. Andrew Taylor Merc readers against Yucca Send us an e-mail with your name and a one-sentence explanation of why you oppose Yucca Mountain and we'll publish them in an upcoming issue. Submissions to ataylor@lasvegasmercury.com [ataylor@lasvegasmercury.com] . Thursday, April 25, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Mercury Get involved now in the fight against Yucca Mountain--your state needs you BY GEOFF SCHUMACHER MERCURY ESPN anchor Chris Berman relishes the upset. Noting all the naysayers who had declared a favorite unbeatable, only to be beaten, he concludes, "That's why they play the game." Yucca Mountain can be seen the same way. While there's a rising murmur of inevitability among Nevadans concerning the federal government's plan to bury 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste 90 miles from Las Vegas, many of us aren't ready to concede defeat. After all, the U.S. Senate hasn't voted yet--and probably won't until July or later. It's clear that certain senators--those in hock to the nuclear power industry--strongly favor dumping nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain and will vote to override Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn's April 8 veto of President Bush's plan. But a number of senators support Nevada's stance and others remain undecided. And so the game is under way. Nevada's congressional delegation--Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign and Reps. Shelley Berkley and Jim Gibbons--have taken the lead in lobbying their congressional colleagues to reject the dump. Environmental groups in Nevada and across the country have joined forces against Yucca. And Nevada citizens, the third leg of the opposition, are contributing money and contacting members of Congress. The odds appear long. Some estimate Nevada needs to secure 15 more Senate votes to achieve the 51 needed to avoid a veto override. But the underdog hasn't lost until time expires. And despite its underdog status, Nevada stands a chance simply because its case against Yucca Mountain is so strong. Despite the incessant coverage that Yucca Mountain has received in Nevada news media since the mid-1980s, the issue is still largely unknown across the country. Just now, as the national media pick up the story and give it prominent play, citizens are becoming aware of the government's plan to make tens of thousands of shipments of deadly radioactive waste through at least 43 states to Nevada. Just now they are becoming aware that an accident or terrorist attack involving a truck or train carrying nuclear waste could occur in their community. Just now they are learning that Yucca Mountain is not at all an ideal spot to store nuclear waste, that the mountain north of Las Vegas is highly susceptible to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, that the mountain is porous, raising the specter of radiation leaking into the groundwater, that the Department of Energy is unprepared to safely store the high-level waste for 10,000 years. In his "notice of disapproval," or veto message, Gov. Guinn noted the array of question marks associated with Yucca Mountain: "The scientific uncertainties of the Yucca Mountain project are so numerous as to defy enumeration. Attempting to count them all, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently identified 293 unresolved technical issues in nine critical areas. Though the DOE dismisses these as trivial, perfunctory or problems that will be solved `as we go' over the next 300 years, their mere specification belies this claim." These issues appear to be resonating as Nevada spends hundreds of thousands of dollars running television commercials in targeted states hoping to swing the senators representing those states to Nevada's side. Late last week, Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords, who previously expressed support for Yucca Mountain, indicated the ads are having a softening effect on his position. "Legitimate questions remain about [Yucca Mountain]," Jeffords said after the commercials started running in his state. Jeffords' statement does not mean he will change his mind and vote with Nevada. But it does show that applying political pressure, through TV ads, phone calls, letters, e-mails and faxes, remains an effective method to force political change. But the nuclear industry and its allies are lobbying, too, and they have more money. Former Nevada Gov. Bob List recently chased a fat paycheck to the dark side, and he's taking every opportunity to urge Nevadans to sell out like he did. He promises a pot of gold if Nevada gives up its fight against Yucca. List has a blatantly misleading message. He's suggesting that billions of dollars will come to Nevada if it stops fighting Yucca Mountain and embraces the project. But the money he's talking about is that which would be spent to build and operate the repository--nothing more. In other words, Nevada will get the billions either way. So the right thing to do is fight. Review-Journal columnist John L. Smith wrote last week that Nevadans will have to get motivated if they want to win this battle. "Wars are not won from the La-Z-Boy," he said. Quoting Eric Dezenhall, a "veteran crisis manager and...image specialist," Smith's advice to Nevadans was: "Get off your derrieres, pick up a bullhorn and go after the nuclear industry and its Washington harem as if your life depended on it. Don't wait for a political savior to emerge, or you'll wait forever." The purpose of this special issue of the Mercury is to give our readers--100,000 strong--some tools to work with if they want to help stop Yucca Mountain. We provide half a dozen good ways to get involved, from sending letters to fence-straddling senators to donating money to volunteering time to anti-nuclear organizations. Perhaps the most innovative and effective way to make a difference is to convince family members, friends, business associates, church members, fraternal organization brethren and anybody else living in other states to make their views known to their elected representatives. There's a big difference between a Missouri senator, say, receiving a generic-sounding letter from somebody in Nevada and his getting a personal letter from a constituent in his home state. It's essential to let senators know that opposition to Yucca Mountain isn't just emanating from Nevada. Just ask South Carolina, which has threatened to deploy highway patrol troopers to prevent the Energy Department from shipping tons of plutonium through the state. Gov. Jim Hodges has vowed to lie down in the road if necessary to stop the shipments. Many Nevadans share those sentiments. But time is running short. It's time to move beyond mere sentiments and get in the game. ***************************************************************** 11 LETTERS: How to humanize Nevada Sunday, April 28, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal To the editor: John Smith's April 17 column ("Humanizing Yucca Mountain fight won't work until humans speak up") struck a nerve with me because I've been mulling over a parallel analogy that goes something like this ... In line with what Mr. Smith wrote, there are 49 other states in this nation that perceive Nevada not only as a geographic wasteland, but as a cultural wasteland as well. As such, why would anyone in any other state have any misgivings about moving toxic waste from their own backyard to a vacuous area on the map called Nevada? They wouldn't ... unless they realized that Nevada today comprises a diverse population of more than 2 million people full of life, creativity, expression and talent. Not coincidentally, these four qualities equate in my mind to the arts. In response to Mr. Smith's query, I believe there is no quicker or more persuasive way to humanize Nevada than through the arts. Nevada's arts community is burgeoning statewide. Unfortunately, not nationwide ... yet. Do I think that a really good cowboy poem would change the perception of, say, a Pennsylvania steelworker? Maybe not. Do I think a touring photography exhibit featuring the wild horses of Nevada would make a Nebraska farmer think twice about his image of our state? Probably. Do I believe having the Las Vegas Philharmonic playing behind Andrea Bocelli in Denver (it did) would convince a Colorado businesswoman that not all residents of our city live on the Strip? Yes. Most importantly, do I believe if supported and exported consistently that Nevada arts, taken in their entirety -- dance, visual, musical, literary, dramatic, etc. -- will humanize our beautiful state and its residents in the minds of those forming critical life-and-death opinions concerning the transportation of nuclear waste? Absolutely! The No. 1 objective in politics and public relations is to define yourself before your opponent does. Gov. Kenny Guinn and our state legislators, along with our county and municipal governments, have demonstrated strong support for the arts community across the board. And to make significant strides, they need the additional grass-roots support that only citizens like us can provide. So, here's my plea: Go out today and visit a museum, attend a performance, encourage a child to express himself or herself artistically and, if you can, donate a dollar to promote culture and arts in Nevada. It's been said that art is the interpretation of life. It follows that Nevada art is largely the interpretation of life in Nevada. We can and must work together to leave no room for costly misinterpretation. TIM QUILLIN LAS VEGAS The writer is president Nevada Arts Advocates. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 12 VOTE TO OVERRIDE VETO (44) SENATE VOTING PLANS The Review-Journal in recent weeks asked U.S. senators whether they will vote to override Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of President Bush's recommendation to bury the nation's nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain. Here is how they responded: REPUBLICANS: 1. Wayne Allard of Colorado; 2. George Allen of Virginia; 3. Robert Bennett of Utah; 4. Christopher Bond of Missouri; 5. Susan Collins of Maine; 6. Larry Craig of Idaho; 7. Michael Crapo of Idaho; 8. Mike DeWine of Ohio; 9. Pete Domenici of New Mexico; 10. Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois; 11. Bill Frist of Tennessee; 12. Phil Gramm of Texas; 13. Charles Grassley of Iowa; 14. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska; 15. Jesse Helms of North Carolina; 16. Tim Hutchinson of Arkansas; 17. James Inhofe of Oklahoma; 18. Jon Kyl of Arizona; 19. Richard Lugar of Indiana; 20. John McCain of Arizona; 21. Frank Murkowski of Alaska; 22. Pat Roberts of Kansas; 23. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania; 24. Jeff Sessions of Alabama; 25. Richard Shelby of Alabama; 26. Bob Smith of New Hampshire; 27. Olympia Snowe of Maine; 28. Craig Thomas of Wyoming; 29. Fred Thompson of Tennessee; 30. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina; 31. George Voinovich of Ohio; 32. John Warner of Virginia. DEMOCRATS: 1. John Edwards of North Carolina; 2. Bob Graham of Florida; 3. Ernest Hollings of South Carolina; 4. Herbert Kohl of Wisconsin; 5. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana; 6. Carl Levin of Michigan; 7. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas; 8. Zell Miller of Georgia; 9. Patty Murray of Washington; 10. Ben Nelson of Nebraska; 11. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan. INDEPENDENT: 1. Jim Jeffords of Vermont. VOTE TO UPHOLD VETO (20) REPUBLICANS: 1. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado; 2. John Ensign of Nevada. DEMOCRATS: 1. Daniel Akaka of Hawaii; 2. Max Baucus of Montana; 3. Joseph Biden of Delaware; 4. Barbara Boxer of California; 5. Maria Cantwell of Washington; 6. Kent Conrad of North Dakota; 7. Tom Daschle of South Dakota 8. Dianne Feinstein of California; 9. Tim Johnson of South Dakota; 10. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts; 11. John Kerry of Massachusetts 12. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland; 13. Jack Reed of Rhode Island; 14. Harry Reid of Nevada; 15. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia; 16. Paul Sarbanes of Maryland; 17. Charles Schumer of New York; 18. Robert Torricelli of New Jersey. UNDECIDED (25) REPUBLICANS: 1. Sam Brownback of Kansas; 2. Jim Bunning of Kentucky; 3. Conrad Burns of Montana; 4. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island; 5. Thad Cochran of Mississippi; 6. Mike Enzi of Wyoming; 7. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky; 8. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. DEMOCRATS: 1. Evan Bayh of Indiana; 2. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico; 3. John Breaux of Louisiana; 4. Robert Byrd of West Virginia; 5. Jean Carnahan of Missouri; 6. Tom Carper of Delaware 7. Max Cleland of Georgia; 8. Jon Corzine of New Jersey; 9. Mark Dayton of Minnesota; 10. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut; 11. Richard Durbin of Illinois; 12. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin; 13. Tom Harkin of Iowa; 14. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut; 15. Bill Nelson of Florida; 16. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota; 17. Ron Wyden of Oregon. NO RESPONSE (11) REPUBLICANS: 1. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire; 2. Orrin Hatch of Utah; 3. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas; 4. Trent Lott of Mississippi; 5. Don Nickles of Oklahoma; 6. Gordon Smith of Oregon; 7. Ted Stevens of Alaska. DEMOCRATS: 1. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota; 2. Hillary Clinton of New York; 3. Daniel Inouye of Hawaii; 4. Patrick Leahy of Vermont. -- REVIEW-JOURNAL Sunday, April 28, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Survey: Project has big support Those in favor of dump have lead in Senate By TONY BATT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Those who want to store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain hold a commanding lead in the U.S. Senate, a Review-Journal survey of senators shows. Both chambers of Congress soon will vote on whether to override Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of President Bush's recommendation to bury the nation's nuclear waste in Nevada. Nevada officials acknowledge they will lose big in the House, and are focusing their efforts on trying to muster a majority in the Senate. But with the vote still about two months away, a survey of senators shows supporters of the Yucca Mountain Project are only a few votes shy of the 51 they need. A total of 89 senators responded to inquiries the Review-Journal made in recent weeks via phone, e-mail and in person. Of those, 44 senators said they will vote to store nuclear waste in Nevada. One of the senators who failed to respond is Minority Leader Trent Lott, who has publicly stated his support for the proposal. That means 45 senators say they want a repository at Yucca Mountain, located 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Just 20 of the senators who replied to the survey said they will vote to keep nuclear waste out of Nevada. Another 25 senators said they remain undecided. Lott, R-Miss., was among 11 senators who did not respond to the survey, which was conducted between April 8 and Thursday. Many of the senators interviewed said they already have been lobbied by Nevada Sens. John Ensign and Harry Reid. Stuart Rothenberg, a prominent Washington political analyst, said Nevada may be outgunned on this issue. "I can't imagine Reid and Ensign being able to succeed," he said. "The problem is, I don't see much sway they can have on other members of the Senate, who frankly are relieved that their states aren't going to get (nuclear waste)." Eric Herzik, a political science professor at the University of Nevada, Reno, said he does not think the state's voters expect Reid and Ensign to prevail. "I really don't think there is great pressure on them to win as long as voters believe they are making the good fight against long odds," Herzik said. Reid and Ensign have characterized the Senate vote as an uphill fight. Both have kept a tight lid on their internal vote counts. Reid questioned the validity of the Review-Journal survey. He declined to be interviewed, but said through spokesman Nathan Naylor he already has commitments from 30 of his fellow Democrats. Ensign, who has been lobbying Republican colleagues in half-hour sit-down sessions, also disputed the results. "I think this is way off base because so many senators are still undecided," he said. Ensign said his lobbying efforts have yielded recent successes that he would not detail. The only Senate Republican to publicly say he will join Ensign in opposing Yucca Mountain is Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado. Ensign said he is hopeful of winning more support when the Republican policy caucus allows him to make a Yucca Mountain presentation in the next few weeks. Mitch Singer, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the major pro-Yucca lobby group, said his organization also would not discuss its head counts. Reid and Ensign have been aided by former White House chiefs of staff John Podesta and Ken Duberstein in seeking ways to marshal votes in the Senate. Additionally, the senators have been exploring Senate rules for advantages in possibly delaying the vote. In February, Bush recommended that 77,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel and other highly radioactive wastes be stored at Yucca Mountain. Guinn vetoed that decision in April. Majorities in the House and Senate must override the governor's veto for the Yucca site to become final and for the DOE to begin preparing a repository license application. The Senate is expected to vote between late June and late July. The House will vote in about two weeks. The last time the Senate voted on a nuclear waste bill, in April 2000, senators sided 64-35 to speed development of the Yucca Mountain repository. The Review-Journal survey indicates the Bush administration and the nuclear power industry need only a few votes to prevail on the issue this year. It also suggests Reid and Ensign have their work cut out for them as they try to turn around pro-Yucca senators and rally the undecideds to Nevada's viewpoint. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said he supports locating a repository at Yucca Mountain. "I plan to vote for it, unless Ensign puts me in a stranglehold," Roberts said. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, cited several reasons for supporting the repository. "(She) believes Yucca Mountain is an environmentally safer place to store nuclear waste than the banks of Maine's Sheepscot River, where Maine Yankee (nuclear power plant) is located, and Yucca is also more secure from terrorist attacks," spokeswoman Felicia Knight said. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., said the drive to force nuclear waste on Nevada sets a bad precedent. He plans to vote to kill the project. "Nevada today, Montana tomorrow," Baucus said through a spokeswoman. James Thurber, a political science professor at American University, has written about the 1987 legislation that singled out Nevada as a possible location to store the nation's nuclear waste. He said the authors of the veto override process made sure to make it almost impossible for Nevada to prevail if the matter ever made it to the Senate floor. "When I interviewed the people who dropped Washington (state) and Texas out of the bill and left Nevada, they laughed and said, `It's 98-2 time,' " Thurber said. "They meant there are 98 senators who don't care about this issue and two who do because their state will get the nuclear waste." Britt Faulstick of the Stephens Washington Bureau contributed to this story. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 13 Editorial: The score: politics 41, science 6 Las Vegas SUN April 26, 2002 WEEKEND EDITION: April 28, 2002 On Thursday the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved Yucca Mountain as the site for a nuclear waste repository in a 41-6 vote. On the same day, Science magazine reported that politics have dominated the site selection and that science "continues to be only a marginal consideration." The article should be a wake-up call for anyone out there who still believes the government's line that "science" will determine Yucca Mountain's fate. A Yucca vote by the full House is expected within two weeks. All indications are that the nuclear industry's lobbying budget and President Bush's pro-Yucca political view will once again prevail. Eminent scientists have for years warned about the safety of Yucca Mountain, but it's the politicians fronting for the nuclear industry who wield the influence. The Science magazine authors, one from the University of Michigan and the other from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote that Yucca Mountain "... is based on an unsound engineering strategy and poor use of present understanding of the properties of spent nuclear fuel." Nevertheless, many House members, especially those who have nuclear power plants in their districts, want to get rid of the waste no matter how dangerous the transportation or how unsafe the mountain. They say on-site storage po ses security risks for power plants, but with the U.S. nuclear industry generating 2,000 tons of waste a year, nuclear powe! r plants will always have on-site storage. Obviously, the nuclear industry's big campaign contributions and glad-handing lobbyists have more influence on House members than even the government's own scientists and analysts. Science magazine noted reports by three federal agencies -- the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste, the General Accounting Office and the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board -- that all found serious flaws in the scientific and technical reports so far produced about Yucca. The nation's hope lies with the U.S. Senate, which should listen more to these scientists and less to the mouthpieces for the nuclear power industry. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 14 Benjamin Grove: Nevadans busy with more than Yucca April 26, 2002 Benjamin Grove covers Washington, D.C., for the Sun. He can be reached at [grove@lasvegassun.com] or (202) 628-3100, Ext. 269. WASHINGTON -- Nevada lawmakers in the last few weeks have focused on a swirl of action in Congress on Yucca Mountain, as a final vote draws near on the nuclear waste project. But Nevada's four-member delegation is quietly working on a slate of other issues. Here's a sampling of what else your lawmakers are up to: + As the U.S. intelligence community scrambles to recruit operatives and position them worldwide, the House and Senate Intelligence Committees are wrestling with a complex web of anti-terrorism issues. At the center of some of these closed-door debates is Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., chairman of the Intelligence Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence. Gibbons spends about 12 hours a week in secretive "Intel" meetings, as the members call them. He spent most of the afternoon Wednesday talking over the U.S. effort to play catch-up in the spy business. One topic was aligning the nation's universities and agencies to educate a new generation of speakers skilled in a variety of dialects, he said. "You can't just take a 6-1 guy, who looks like a white American (and) who doesn't speak Pashtun or Farsi, and put him in an al-Qaida camp," Gibbons said. With a growing list of reports about alleged terrorist activity, the committee labors under pressure. It takes time to train linguists and recruit foreign ones. And Gibbons noted there is a big difference between interpreters and experienced interrogators. Novice linguists at Camp X-ray in Cuba are struggling to question evasion-trained al-Qaida and Taliban suspects, the Washington Post reported last week. "The detainee is in full control," a Guantanamo Bay linguist told the Post. "He's chained up, but he's the one having fun." The Intelligence panel is sifting through complex budget requests from an "alphabet soup" of agencies like the FBI, CIA and DIA, Defense Intelligence Agency. Gibbons can't disclose numbers, but it's a sure bet Intel will be recommending a boost for some of those agencies in the next round of budget battles. Gibbons will be among those leading the charge. + Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi has agreed to meet with Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., on May 8 to talk over her ambitious proposal for a new Southern Nevada veterans hospital, Berkley said. Berkley sent Principi a letter Monday explaining that Southern Nevada veterans need a hospital of their own for better outpatient clinic services, more beds for long-term care and more access to specialty services, including certain surgeries. The 6-year-old Mike O'Callaghan Federal Hospital at Nellis Air Force Base doesn't offer enough services, Berkley argued. And the crumbling Addeliar Guy III Ambulatory Care Clinic, a primary care center for veterans, is being shuttered for repairs. "The fact that the ceiling is literally falling down on the heads of my veterans demonstrates to me that we have got an opportunity here," Berkley said. But hospitals aren't cheap and the VA Department since the mid-1990s has focused more on its outpatient clinics. The last new VA Hospital, built in Detroit in 1991, cost $266 million, a VA spokeswoman said. For the 2003 fiscal year, Principi has asked Congress for just $194 million for all major construction projects in his vast health network, including 163 hospitals and more than 800 clinics. Principi's department should consider closing half-full hospitals in the East to pay for newer ones where veteran populations are growing fastest, specifically Arizona, Florida and Nevada, Berkley said. That would be highly controversial, but Berkley insists, "It sounds like common sense to me." + Sens. John Ensign, R-Nev., and Harry Reid, D-Nev., have had little free time as they try to round up 51 votes against the Yucca Mountain project in the Senate, where the vote could be close. Much of the pressure is on Ensign to corral GOP senators. But last week Ensign also joined an effort to make low-income housing more affordable. He co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Paul Sarbanes, D-Md., that renews a Federal Housing Administration program lowering FHA loan down payments. Reid, the No. 2 Senate Democrat and majority whip, has been focusing Senate attention on environmental issues and re-asserting himself as a vocal critic of President Bush. "The desert of Nevada is not just for dumping things," Reid said at a pre-Earth Day event in which he slammed Bush for a variety of anti-environmental moves, including his Yucca Mountain endorsement. Reid also directed much of the action on the Senate floor during a six-week debate on a sweeping energy bill, and he helped broker a deal to include tax credits for renewable energy producers as part of the package. The renewable energy legislation should pave the way for new wind, solar and geothermal (heat from the earth) power plants in Nevada, Reid said. By the time the Senate passed the bill 88-11 on Thursday, some of the renewable energy incentives had been watered down, but others remained intact. The bill must be reconciled with a House version. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 15 Tax Nuclear Waste The Salt Lake Tribune Sunday, April 28, 2002 I was elated to hear about the initiative to impose a tax on imported radioactive waste. After all, if we can't stop this waste from coming in, and there is going to be a risk to the people of Utah, the people ought to realize some gain from it. Of course, those that receive the profit say that there is no risk involved. That's the best news I've heard yet. If that is the case, why don't they keep the waste right where it was generated? Or do they think that they can ship all the hazardous waste to a place where the people are powerless or gullible enough to accept it? I agree, that if everything is done right forever, and we are lucky, the risk is minimal, but when profits are involved, and corners can be cut to increase those profits, and politicians can be bribed, cheating will be done as it has been in the past. Please tell me that none of our politicians accept money from the hazardous waste disposal industry. Where did I hear, "Oh yes, but it didn't affect my vote." Now we are faced with a counter-initiative which claims that this is a target tax is against one industry, that this will open the door to special taxes on other industries, and other businesses are worried. What other businesses? Please tell us. That is a frivolous scare tactic aimed at our paranoia. The initiative is not a threat against all businesses. It is simply a measure to gain compensation to the people of the state for accepting a risk they cannot avoid. Look at the huge profits other states receive by imposing taxes on exported mineral resources. Isn't that a target tax? I believe in checks and balances. If our tax on imported nuclear waste turns out to be too high, then other states may decide to compete with us for the profit and honor of being the country's nuclear waste depository. But what is also possible is that we Utahns will be so receptive that the higher powers will decide to ship the stuff in from foreign countries. I can see what is coming. Just prior to the upcoming vote, we will be hit with a massive advertising campaign telling us how unfair and unjustified this tax is. The tactic here will be to blame it on the hated environmentalists. It's also possible that a few politicians could be bought, who will try to put a stop to the initiative. ARNOLD LIEBERMAN Murray © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune ***************************************************************** 16 The West, Nuclear Waste And National Responsibility The Salt Lake Tribune -- Sunday, April 28, 2002 BY JIM MATHESON In the late 1970s my father, Utah Gov. Scott M. Matheson, puzzled over an alarming number of cancer deaths among our family and friends in southern Utah. His hometown of Parowan saw 85-90 cancer deaths a year -- an extraordinary rate for this predominantly Mormon population that neither smoked nor drank. Over and over he read "cancer" on death certificates of family members -- more than 50 aunts, uncles and cousins. Dozens of atom bombs bigger than the one dropped on Hiroshima were detonated at the Nevada test site between 1951 and 1963. The West was chosen because as long as winds were blowing east, the fallout avoided big cities and traveled over sparsely populated Nevada and Utah towns. I remember my father telling me about how people in southern Utah would watch the sky light up from the nuclear tests, and how southern Utahns supported the program because they were strong patriots who believed in their country and trusted their government. The federal government told us we were safe. The federal government knew we were at risk. Children under 19 in 1953 in Washington County would have a sevenfold increase in deaths from acute leukemia. In 1961, the U.S. Public Health Service sent workers to Utah with instructions to look into adverse health effects among the citizens of Washington County. The findings were suppressed until 1979. That is when my father began asking questions about what the government knew. He filed Freedom of Information Act requests, sought money for research, and called on Washington to accept responsibility for the harm it had knowingly inflicted on its own citizens. On Sept. 27, 1990, Congress acknowledged the federal government's responsibility when it passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), authorizing payments to dead and dying victims of the government's deception. On Oct. 7, 1990, my father died at age 61 from a cancer called multiple myeloma. Thousands of citizens throughout the West continue to get sick and die from radiation exposure-caused illnesses. Today, the West is again a target. Its wide-open spaces, huge tracts of federally owned land and rural character make Nevada's Yucca Mountain and Utah's Skull Valley appear "ideal" places to store our nation's nuclear waste. Utah could see nuclear waste delivered to the Goshute Indian Reservation in Skull Valley as soon as 2004; Nevada's Yucca Mountain could receive shipments sometime early next decade. Nevada and Utah have no nuclear power plants and generate none of the waste. The simple fact of the matter is that Eastern states want to dump their waste on the West. Those who say "the waste has to go somewhere" and Utah and Nevada are merely exhibiting the 'Not-in-my-backyard' attitude ignore important scientific, security and fairness issues. The fact is Utah and Nevada have paid dearly for their patriotism and trust during the Cold War. As one cancer victim puts it, "We were told to build bomb shelters to protect our families from the Russians, when our own government was bombing us from just 130 miles away." Enough is enough. Why should these two states bear the burden of a waste stream generated by the rest of the country? The current storage solution involves shared responsibility. Indeed, on-site nuclear storage is the result of technological breakthroughs that simultaneously allow nuclear power plants to operate while ensuring public safety. Above-ground, dry cask storage is used less than an hour's drive from Washington, D.C., at the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant. Even though millions of people live in the vicinity, there's no outcry over its presence. What is the compelling reason to move the waste now? Advancements in technology have produced dry-cask storage of spent nuclear fuel. Over four decades, we've produced 43,000 tons of nuclear waste. It sounds like a big number, but thanks to the advent of dry-cask storage, it could all be stored on a space 140 feet by 140 feet by 10 feet high. Yet we in the West are told the nation is running out of storage space. Moreover, additional technological developments may yield a better disposal option than what is known today. Added to the myth of dwindling storage space is the new reality since Sept. 11 that requires us to think about what used to be unthinkable. What analysis has been done regarding a possible terrorist threat once 108,544 truckloads, or 18,900 rail shipments, of spent nuclear fuel rods are added to our nation's transportation corridors? Millions of Americans live and work along those transportation corridors. The trail leading up to today's decision to dump nuclear waste on the West is a path of broken promises, deceit and cover-up by government officials whose assurances ring hollow in a land wearied by the fight. Wallace Stegner called the West "the native home of hope." We can do better as a nation than to impose on it a legacy of mistrust and despair. Rep. Jim Matheson represents Utah's 2nd Congressional District. © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune ***************************************************************** 17 UK: SF campaign seizes on Sellafield online.ie : News online.ie 27 Apr 2002 Sinn Fein today seized on the Sellafield nuclear waste complex issue as they stepped up their first general election campaign since senior members of their party took executive positions in Northern Ireland. The party is set to boost their single-seat representation in the Dail after nominating a record number of candidates for the May 17 poll. Opinion surveys have indicated prospects of increasing their strength, though Sinn Fein efforts could be harmed by the continuing controversy over alleged IRA activity with rebel groups in Colombia. Today both Sinn Fein chairman Mitchel McLaughlin and Northern Ireland health minister Bairbre de Brun were on the campaign trail in the neighbouring Leinster divisions of Wicklow and Wexford. Mr McLaughlin went on the attack over Sellafield - and urged a joint British-Irish bid to force the closure of the Cumbrian facility. Yesterday the issue prompted a mass postcard protest in London, spearheaded by Ali Hewson, wife of rock group U2 lead singer Bono. The 1.3 million cards, sent to British Prime Minister Tony Blair, pressed for the closure of Sellafield in line with long-standing demands by successive Governments. Today Mr McLaughlin condemned what he called a "grossly offensive dismissal" of the postcard move by British minister Brian Wilson. The Sinn Fein man said: "This was a powerful expression of the concerns of the Irish people regarding Sellafield, and it is highly arrogant of Brian Wilson to summarily dismiss our concerns. "Sellafield is the most serious and immediate danger to all the people of Ireland and Britain - a potential Chernobyl in our midst. "It has an appalling safety record and British Nuclear Fuels Limited has repeatedly lied and deceived about the safety of the plant. "I take this opportunity to call for a united effort by people on both sides of the Irish Sea to have Sellafield shut down. The plant endangers the lives of people in Britain as much as in Ireland. "We must deploy people power to get rid of Sellafield." ***************************************************************** 18 Republicans say plutonium bill is ready Savannah NOW: Local News - 04/28/02 By Jeffrey Collins The Associated Press COLUMBIA, S.C. -- U.S. Rep Lindsey Graham says all he needs is Gov. Jim Hodges approval and he can get a deal through Congress nearly guaranteeing plutonium shipped from Colorado won't stay in the state indefinitely. A spokesman for the Democratic governor says he appreciates the bipartisan effort led by the Republican representative. But Jay Reiff says some details still must be worked out with the U.S. Energy Department before Hodges supports Graham's bill. The legislation would fine the federal government $1 million a day starting in 2011 if at least 1 ton of the weapons-grade plutonium has not been made into fuel for nuclear reactors at the Savannah River Site. The government would have to move the plutonium or speed up the conversion to stop the fines. The penalties would be capped at $100 million a year. The fines would start again in Jan. 1, 2017 if all the plutonium is not converted. The penalties would continue at the same rate and with the same cap until all the nuclear material is out of the state. Graham, who was flanked by fellow Republicans Lt. Gov. Bob Peeler and South Carolina House Speaker David Wilkins, said Saturday that he felt that fellow state delegation member and Democrat U.S. Rep John Spratt would support such a bill. The Energy Department also likes the bill, spokesman Joe Davis said. "We hope they can get the governor to sign on to it," he said. All the bipartisanship is fine, Reiff said, but the governor still isn't completely ready to sign off on the proposal. Hodges, who has vowed to lay down in the streets to stop plutonium from entering South Carolina, wants nothing shipped from Rocky Flats facility in Colorado until the agreement passes Congress and is signed by the president. Graham said with the support of Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., that could happen by the end of May, but Reiff said he expects it to be closer to the middle of the summer. The Energy Department says it can start shipping the plutonium on May 15, although Graham said he expects the agency will delay shipments by at least a week if his deal moves forward. Hodges also disagrees with when the fines should start, and he wants better assurances the deal can pass through the Senate, Reiff said. "This is not a done deal, but we've made progress," Reiff said. Graham said he had been meeting with the governor and other Republican and Democratic leaders throughout the weekend trying to hammer out the agreement. Graham, who is running for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the retiring Thurmond, said Hodges was right in his stance in wanting a binding agreement to guarantee the plutonium would leave the state in some form. Peeler, who is running for the GOP gubernatorial nomination to face Hodges in November, and Wilkins agreed and urged the governor to take the last step and sign on to the compromise. "Political grandstanding doesn't get anything done, but political leadership does," Wilkins said. Hodges had state troopers and transport police practice blocking a tractor trailer trying to enter SRS on Monday. Copyright 2002 Savannah Morning News. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 19 Shipment blockade bill ready, GOP says Augusta Georgia: Metro: 042802 metro 12 @ugusta COLUMBIA - U.S. Rep Lindsey Graham says all he needs is Gov. Jim Hodges' approva for him to get a deal through Congress nearly guaranteeing that plutonium shipped from Colorado won't stay in the state indefinitely. --> Shipment blockade bill ready, GOP says Web posted Sunday, April 28, 2002 [http://wire.ap.org/] COLUMBIA - U.S. Rep Lindsey Graham says all he needs is Gov. Jim Hodges' approva for him to get a deal through Congress nearly guaranteeing that plutonium shipped from Colorado won't stay in the state indefinitely. A spokesman for the Democratic governor says he appreciates the bipartisan effort led by the Republican representative. But Jay Reiff says some details still must be worked out with the U.S. Energy Department before Mr. Hodges supports Mr. Graham's bill. The legislation would fine the federal government $1 million a day starting in 2011 if at least 1 ton of the weapons-grade plutonium has not been made into fuel for nuclear reactors at Savannah River Site. The government would have to move the plutonium or speed up the conversion to stop the fines. The penalties would be capped at $100 million a year. The fines would start again Jan. 1, 2017, if not all the plutonium is converted. The penalties would continue at the same rate and with the same cap until all the nuclear material is out of the state. Mr. Graham, who was flanked by fellow Republicans Lt. Gov. Bob Peeler and South Carolina House Speaker David Wilkins, said Saturday that fellow state delegation member and Democrat U.S. Rep John Spratt also plans to support the bill. The Energy Department also likes the bill, spokesman Joe Davis said. "We hope they can get the governor to sign on to it," he said. All the bipartisanship is fine, Mr. Reiff said, but the governor still isn't completely ready to sign off on the proposal. Mr. Hodges, who has vowed to lie down in the streets to stop plutonium from entering South Carolina, wants nothing shipped from Rocky Flats facility in Colorado until the agreement passes Congress and is signed by the president. Mr. Graham said that with the support of Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., that could happen by the end of May, but Mr. Reiff said he expects it to be closer to the middle of the summer. The Energy Department says it can start shipping the plutonium May 15, although Mr. Graham said he expects the agency will delay shipments by at least a week if his deal moves forward. Mr. Hodges also disagrees with when the fines should start, and he wants better assurances the deal can pass through the Senate, Mr. Reiff said. "This is not a done deal, but we've made progress," Mr. Reiff said. Mr. Graham said he had been meeting with the governor and other Republican and Democratic leaders throughout the weekend trying to hammer out the agreement. Mr. Graham, who is running for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the retiring Mr. Thurmond, said Mr. Hodges was right in his stance in wanting a binding agreement to guarantee the plutonium would leave the state in some form. The Augusta Chronicle. ***************************************************************** 20 UK: 'Shut Sellafield campaign is election issue' Irish Newspapers ALI: Delivers card to No 10 Ali Hewson challenges political parties and battles with UK energy minister THE Shut Sellafield group is now set to challenge political parties to make the issue a central part of their General Election agendas, it emerged last night. Buoyed by the success of the protest campaign which saw more than 1.5m postcards posted to 10, Downing Street, and also to Prince Charles the aim is now to keep the momentum going in Ireland in the run-up to voting day on May 17. Last night, Ali Hewson who hand-delivered her own postcard to Tony Blair's residence described the reaction to the campaign as "incredible". She told the Sunday Independent: "It goes to show how strongly Irish people feel about the issue and the dangers of Sellafield." The result has been particularly rewarding because the Broadcasting Act meant that the campaign could not be promoted on radio or TV. Ms Hewson said: "If more than 1.5 million people in Ireland have called on the British government to shut down Sellafield, it is a challenge to Irish political parties to make sure they make it an election issue." Ms Hewson also strongly dismissed a claim by British energy minister Brian Wilson that the campaigners were "emotive" about the issue. She said: "If he is saying we are emotional about about the health and safety of our children, then yes, we are guilty. Our feelings and worries are based on real concerns." Bono's wife also accused the British minister of being "pedantic" for saying she had admitted she realised Sellafield could not be closed down. She said: "We want the reprocessing activities stopped. We want them to stop bringing nuclear waste there from all over the world." In a statement, Mr Wilson declared: "The most irresponsible thing that anyone could do with Sellafield would be to shut it down." He added: "The shared interest of the British and Irish peoples is that Sellafield should be run to the highest standards of safety and regulation." The Shut Sellafield postcards delivered to 10 Downing Street bore an image of a human eye beside the words: "Tony, look me in the eye and tell me I'm safe." Ms Hewson said after delivering her card: "A report commissioned by the European Parliament has said Sellafield has the potential to be 80 times more hazardous than Chernobyl. We are taking all the risks and yet we do not have a say in this." Meanwhile, several hundred postcards with an image of a radioactive shamrock had arrived at St James's Palace, a spokeswoman confirmed. However, the palace said Prince Charles would not be commenting on the campaign as it was a political matter. FRANK KHAN © Copyright Unison ***************************************************************** 21 The 'There' of Yucca Mountain April 28, 2002 COMMENTARY How can people back East justify putting a nuclear waste dump in the Nevada desert? By GEOFF SCHUMACHER, Geoff Schumacher is editor and publisher of the Las Vegas Mercury. When I was in sixth grade, we moved from Las Vegas to a remote outpost about 80 miles to the north that didn't really have a name when we arrived but later was dubbed Crystal, Nev., though it's best known as the site of the Cherry Patch Ranch brothel. Many people are familiar with small-town life in southern Nevada, whether it's Mesquite or Pahrump or Boulder City. Those places are nothing like Crystal. Crystal was--and still is--about as far removed from civilization as you can get while still having electrical power and gravel roads. This was before cell phones, so we didn't have a phone (I think there was one at the brothel--for emergencies only). Our mailbox was 15 miles away in Lathrop Wells, so we didn't check it every day. We planted a rickety mobile home on a couple of acres of scrub desert and ran the swamp cooler constantly to ward off the Mojave heat. We shared this patch of desert with about 30 or 40 other odd folks who were attracted to the sparse population and low, low land prices. We slowly adapted to this lifestyle. My brother and I explored the east end of the Amargosa Valley on our bikes, ran away from rattlesnakes, shot baskets on an uneven dirt court, raised chickens that a neighbor lady ended up turning into dinner. We went to school 25 miles away in Pahrump, which required a car ride of several miles just to reach the bus stop on the highway. But what I remember most about our life in Crystal was how quiet it could be. When you went to sleep at night, it was dead silent, except for the occasional coyote yipping in the distance. It wasn't the quiet you experience after midnight in suburban Las Vegas, where there's always that discernible electrical hum of urban existence and the inevitable whine of a distant motorcycle. It was pure silence. I've been unable to experience that quiet ever since. I listen for it often, but it's elusive. Pahrump and Reno and Las Vegas, where I have lived for the past 20 years, have seemed incredibly loud to me. I often think about Crystal in the context of the fight over Yucca Mountain, where the Department of Energy wants to bury 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste. For one thing, Crystal isn't far from Yucca Mountain, and the aquifer from which it draws water surely would be among the first contaminated with deadly radiation if Yucca Mountain were to spring a leak. But the main reason Crystal comes to mind is that dump supporters often refer to Yucca Mountain as being a wasteland only suitable for a nuclear waste dump. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, in recent House testimony, described Yucca Mountain as being in "the middle of nowhere." I take those comments personally. First of all, there is an assumption that "the middle of nowhere" is deserving of less consideration than more populated locales. In fact, a strong case can be made that "the middle of nowhere" should receive more consideration, offering a profound experience that can be attained in a rapidly dwindling number of places in the world. Second, it assumes that the relatively small number of people who do live in the area are deserving of less consideration than the large numbers of people congregating elsewhere. How can such a moral equation be justified? It's the same assumption, by the way, that led to thousands of people in eastern Nevada and southern Utah being exposed to cancer-causing radiation blown downwind from above-ground nuclear tests in the 1950s. Finally, there is the assumption that the Nevada desert is an appropriate place for a waste dump. This is an outdated value judgment by people back East, a judgment suggesting that if only Nevada were covered with trees and grass and lakes and rivers it would be excluded from consideration for the dump. In fact, the desert contains its own wonders and ecological merits that are no more or less valuable to the world than the lusher attributes of the East. There are dozens of ways to see Yucca Mountain as a mistake, a government boondoggle of massive proportions. But in my own head, I think about it in the context of those silent nights in Crystal, where you could always hear yourself think. Copyright 2002 Los Angeles Times ***************************************************************** 22 In harm's way: Is Yucca Mountain a Utah fight? Sunday, April 28, 2002 Evanston casts a wary eye on N-waste route By Jerry Spangler Deseret News staff writer © 2002 Deseret News Isolated in the barren Nevada desert northwest of Las Vegas, Yucca Mountain, for most Utahns, is far out of sight and further out of mind. Barren hills surround Yucca Mountain. Eighty to 90 percent of the nuclear waste bound for the site would pass through the Wasatch Front. Laura Rauch, Associated Press But Nevada officials are issuing a clarion warning: If Yucca Mountain is approved by Congress as the ultimate repository for the nation's nuclear waste, Utah stands directly in harm's way, perhaps more than any other state. "Make no mistake about it, high-level nuclear waste will be traveling by truck and by rail through the heart of Salt Lake City," said U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. Tens of thousands of heavy trucks laden with the deadliest waste known to man, creeping one by one down I-15 at 35 mph through the heart of the Salt Lake Valley on their way to southern Nevada. Six trucks a day, each with police escorts, every day for 38 years. In fact, 80 to 90 percent of the nuclear waste bound for Yucca Mountain will pass through the Wasatch Front. Some 80,000 truck shipments and 16,000 rail shipments, Reid said. "The question is not if there will be an accident, but when and where," he said. "Salt Lake City is the crossroads of the West. . . . I would be willing to bet there will be an accident there." Reid and Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn are leading a fight in Congress to block Yucca Mountain. But a House committee overwhelmingly approved the Yucca Mountain plan last week, and a full House vote on the repository will likely happen later this week or early next week. The selection is expected to pass. The Senate will take up the issue later in the spring, even as Nevada mounts a last-ditch effort to block the repository. What solidarity? But Nevada officials are not counting on Republican members of Utah's congressional delegation to support their opposition, despite what Reid says are enormous risks to Utah. Workers file into Yucca Mountain near Las Vegas. Nevada wants Utah to join its fight against Yucca Mountain as the repository for the nation's nuclear waste. Lennox McLendon, Associated Press "Why the Utah congressional delegation is not on our side is mind-boggling," Reid said. "We have always tried to help Utah (in its own fight against nuclear waste in Tooele County), and why they are not helping us is beyond my ability to understand." But they should be, Reid warns, noting that Nevada's fight to keep nuclear waste out is also Utah's fight. A revised environmental impact statement for Yucca Mountain — tagged by President Bush for 77,000 tons of the nation's spent nuclear fuel rods — made some subtle changes in transportation routes that will direct about 75 percent of all waste shipments west on I-80, down Parleys Canyon to I-15 and then south down the Wasatch Front. Most of the remaining nuclear waste will go to Yucca Mountain via rail — through Utah. There has been scarcely a peep of opposition to the plan from Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt, who is locked in his own battle to keep nuclear waste from a "temporary" storage site in Tooele County. "I believe there is a need for a permanent solution, and I know the permanent solution is not Utah's West Desert," Leavitt said. "My primary objective is that waste not come to Utah's West Desert." Leavitt would not say whether he supports or opposes Yucca Mountain as a permanent solution to the nation's nuclear-waste problem, only that "we have some interests in common with Nevada, and there are other interests where we may diverge." He says he has talked with Guinn about Yucca Mountain. The two governors agree on some points, and they have agreed to disagree on others. "He understands my position," Leavitt said, refusing to offer specifics. But Nevada officials and their activist allies in Utah who are involved in the Yucca Mountain battle are piqued at the Utah governor, especially considering his many statements before the Western Governors Association that "the West will not be the dumping ground for the nation." "I guess he meant that Nevada wasn't part of the West," said Utah anti-nuclear activist Steve Erickson, director of the Citizens Education Project. Leavitt's perceived lack of commitment has not gone unnoticed in Nevada, where newspaper editorials have sharply criticized the Utah governor for using his political muscle to kill a resolution in the state's Legislature that would have expressed solidarity with Nevada in its fight against nuclear waste. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., addresses the demonstrators at the rally. Reid says the Utah delegation's lack of support for Nevada's fight against the repository is "mind-boggling." Dennis Cook, Associated Press "I did not feel it was appropriate at this point to formalize a position on Yucca Mountain," Leavitt said. "It was not the time to debate it." But with Congress poised to take final action on Yucca Mountain in the next couple of months, when is the right time for Utah to weigh in? "Not now," Leavitt said. "It is a complex mix of technical, legal and political factors, and we are doing the best we can to position Utah to protect ourselves. That is our first priority." Delegating responsibility While Leavitt is choosing his words carefully, Republicans in Utah's congressional delegation have historically supported Bush and the Yucca Mountain proposal. Political insiders say Republicans are standing in solidarity with their Republican president, making the issue purely partisan. And they point to $30 million in campaign contributions by the nuclear-power industry over the past 30 months to sway congressional opinion on both sides of the political aisle. Sen. Bob Bennett said Friday he is undecided but leaning toward supporting the Yucca proposal. Rep. Chris Cannon did not return calls. Heather Barney, spokeswoman for Sen. Orrin Hatch, said Utah's senior senator remains committed to Yucca Mountain "but adamantly opposed to temporary storage in Skull Valley." That despite the fact Hatch has accepted campaign contributions from nuclear-power utilities involved with the Skull Valley project. Hatch believes the billions spent studying Yucca Mountain demonstrate the site is an appropriate repository, and he believes the waste can be transported safely. "Sen. Hatch and Sen. Bennett are both reasonable men, and it is reasonable to support Nevada's opposition to Yucca Mountain," Reid said. "There is still room for them to change their minds." One Republican who has shifted his position is Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Utah, who isn't convinced yet that Yucca Mountain is the ultimate solution, and he is more than a little concerned about the transportation risks that put Utah in harm's way. "Until more is known about transportation, long-term safety and a final plan for Yucca Mountain, I think we as Utahns should stand in opposition to nuclear waste carried to or through Utah," Hansen said. Rep. Jim Matheson, Utah's only Democrat in Congress, says the state's congressional delegation should be shouting with one voice that Utah and Nevada should not and will not be a dumping ground for the nation's most toxic wastes. "There's no question Utahns ought to be concerned about the transportation of that waste, and so should the 100 million other Americans living along the routes," he said. Not only is there a risk of catastrophic accident with no experience on how to respond, but there is now the risk of terrorism. "Since Sept. 11, we have to think about what was once unthinkable," Matheson said. Matheson would not speculate on why most of his colleagues oppose nuclear waste in Tooele County but not at Yucca Mountain. That contradiction is all the more glaring considering that the two proposals, he believes, are tied at the hip. Then add to the mix the government's long history of lying to Western states about the dangers of nuclear byproducts — what Matheson calls "a legacy of mistrust and despair." "The fact is Utah and Nevada have paid dearly for their patriotism and trust during the Cold War," he said. "Enough is enough." Permanent solutions Leavitt may not be openly supporting Nevada, but at least one member of his staff — Dianne Nielson, executive director of the Department of Environmental Quality — is warning that Utahns should be concerned about Yucca Mountain and its unavoidable link to a "temporary" waste dump on Goshute tribal lands in Skull Valley. Why? Simple mathematics, she said. According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the nation currently has a stockpile of about 46,000 tons of nuclear waste from power plants, and it is increasing by about 2,000 tons a year. The Department of Energy predicts the amount of waste generated will drop as nuclear-power plants are decommissioned, but there will be at least 105,000 tons of power-plant radioactive waste by 2045. Yucca Mountain will have a capacity to take only about 63,000 tons (additional space is also reserved for about 14,000 tons of military nuclear waste). That leaves about 42,000 tons of nuclear waste without a permanent home. It is not coincidence, Nielson said, that the Skull Valley site will have a capacity of 40,000 tons — roughly the leftovers that won't fit inside Yucca Mountain. "A lot of people presume that if Yucca Mountain is built, the (Skull Valley) facility won't be needed," Nielson said. But by 2045, Yucca Mountain will be full, and "there will be 42,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel rods with no other place to go except to Utah. And there will be nothing temporary about it." Private Fuel Storage (PFS), a consortium of nuclear-power utilities, says it needs the Skull Valley facility to store 40,000 tons of waste, but only until a permanent solution is built at Yucca Mountain, which longtime PFS project manager Scott Northard formally endorsed Wednesday in an op-ed article published in the Deseret News. The consortium has a 20-year lease with the Skull Valley band of Goshutes, and it has a second 20-year option. The PFS proposal calls for 40,000 tons of spent fuel rods to be transported by railroad to Goshute tribal lands where they will be stored in above-ground casks — unlike Yucca Mountain, where the waste would be deposited deep inside the mountain. Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn On Thursday, Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham said the nation needs Yucca Mountain because, in part, it would be much safer than storing waste in above-ground canisters at Skull Valley — the first hints from the Bush administration that temporary storage in Utah may not be the preferred solution. However, Abraham also said that without Yucca Mountain, the waste would probably be shipped to temporary sites, like Utah. As Leavitt suggests, why not just leave the waste where it is? "I think that is a preposterous assertion on its face," Abraham said, asserting the nation will not tolerate nuclear waste near major metropolitan centers and waterways. "It isn't going to happen that way," he said. "You're going to have the shipping and the transportation to sites like the one being proposed on the Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah." The Atomic Safety Licensing Board is currently in Salt Lake City conducting the final round of hearings on PFS's license application. It has already ruled that PFS does not need to examine the transportation risks associated with that project, unlike the Yucca Mountain proposal that underwent a detailed examination of transportation risks. Conjoined twins Nevada officials say there is a certain irony in Utah's failure to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Nevada in the nuclear-waste fight. Not only has Nevada offered its technical expertise to Utah over the years, but Nevada has been fighting the battle longer and the opposition is much better organized and funded — resources that could benefit Utah far more in a unified effort. They also point to the remarkable similarities between the two opposition strategies. Both states are challenging the safety of nuclear-waste transportation, both states are challenging the scientific studies that support the proposed location of the waste facilities in desert locales near major metropolitan areas, and both states are using all their limited congressional muscle to block the proposals in Washington. Both states cite the detrimental impact of the proposals to state and local economies, to real-estate values and tourism, and to wildlife and water. And both are using the argument the waste is safer left where it is now, at nuclear-power plants across the country, rather than risking accidents and terrorist attacks that could jeopardize millions along the transportation routes. Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt "About the only difference," said Erickson, "is that Yucca Mountain has the potential for volcanic activity. They both share the same potential for earthquakes and groundwater contamination." So why aren't the Utah and Nevada politicos working together? "That is a question everyone in Nevada wants to know the answer to," said Bob Haldstead, who once advised Utah Goshutes opposed to the Skull Valley plan and is now working with the Nevada delegation to try to block Yucca Mountain. Utahns have mixed feelings about the entire nuclear-waste problem. Opposition to the Skull Valley proposal remains high, at 79 percent in a recent Deseret News/KSL-TV poll conducted by Dan Jones & Associates. While Utahns clearly don't want the waste in their own back yard, the poll found that 52 percent of Utahns strongly or somewhat agreed with Bush's decision to store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain; only 24 percent were opposed. Erickson believes that Utah "support" for Yucca Mountain will turn around once people realize the transportation risks involved and that 90 percent of all Yucca-bound waste will come through Utah — most along the Wasatch Front. "People just don't realize that sending the waste to Yucca Mountain means sending it to and through Utah," Erickson said. Erickson may be right. Utahns are clearly worried about the dangers of nuclear-waste shipments, according to the Deseret News/KSL-TV poll that found that 77 percent were very or somewhat concerned about railroad shipments of waste (the poll did not address truck shipments, which are inherently riskier). "Utahns ought to be worried about high-level waste transportation to and through Utah regardless of where it is going," Nielson said. So why, then, is the state not actively campaigning against Yucca Mountain? Nielson said the more immediate threat is Skull Valley, and the state has focused all its attention on stopping PFS. "The gorilla in our case is PFS," she said. "We are certainly watching Yucca Mountain, but the first train wreck is PFS. We are afraid of that, literally." E-mail: spang@desnews.com © 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 23 Yucca Mountain is still best bet Sunday, April 28, 2002 Deseret News editorial The push to make Yucca Mountain in Nevada a permanent nuclear waste disposal site gained momentum earlier this week. A House panel, by a 24-2 margin, approved a resolution to override Nevada's rejection of the site. The resolution also calls for the proposed Yucca Mountain facility to accept 77,000 tons of waste over 24 years, beginning in 2010. The House is expected to approve the measure next week. Approval in the Democratic-controlled Senate is expected to be harder to obtain. Regardless of the political battles, the Yucca Mountain site needs to be approved as a permanent repository for the nation's nuclear waste. That's a far better option than the construction of temporary sites, such as the one that is proposed for the Skull Valley Indian Reservation in Utah's west desert. The Yucca Mountain plan would place the waste, mostly used reactor fuel rods from commercial power plants, into volcanic rock 950 feet below the surface of the Nevada desert, a solution that has been backed in scientific circles for more than 40 years. And while there is concern — particularly among those who oppose the plan — regarding transporting the waste across the country, history suggests there is no reason for alarm. For decades, tons of high-level nuclear waste have crossed the United States without incident. A permanent repository for the nation's nuclear waste is now a critical need because of the attacks by terrorists on Sept. 11. It would be a lot easier to guard one site than the numerous ones that are scattered throughout the United States. Storing waste where it is produced is fine for the short-term, but most of the sites — many of them power plants and research reactors — were not designed as storage facilities. As waste accumulates, those facilities become attractive targets for terrorists. The debate over where to store nuclear waste has gone on long enough. Even with approval and assuming the Department of Energy succeeds in securing a license for the facility from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, no waste is expected to be shipped to Yucca Mountain before 2010. To have to wait longer due to political infighting puts the nation needlessly at risk. © 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 24 Don't let East add to Utah's legacy of nuclear misery Sunday, April 28, 2002 By Rep. Jim Matheson Deseret News staff writer In the late 1970s my father, Utah Gov. Scott M. Matheson, puzzled over an alarming number of cancer deaths among our family and friends in southern Utah. His hometown of Parowan saw 85-90 cancer deaths a year — an extraordinary rate for this predominantly Mormon population that neither smoked nor drank. Over and over he read "cancer" on death certificates of family members — more than 50 aunts, uncles and cousins. Dozens of atom bombs bigger than the one dropped on Hiroshima were detonated at the Nevada test site between 1951 and 1963. The West was chosen because as long as winds were blowing east, the fallout avoided big cities and traveled over sparsely populated Nevada and Utah towns. I remember my father telling me about how people in southern Utah would watch the sky light up from the nuclear tests, and how southern Utahns supported the program because they were strong patriots who believed in their country and trusted their government. The federal government told us we were safe. The federal government knew we were at risk. Children under 19 in 1953 in Washington County would have a sevenfold increase in deaths from acute leukemia. In 1961, the U.S. Public Health Service sent workers to Utah with instructions to look into adverse health effects among the residents of Washington County, Utah. The findings were suppressed until 1979. That is when my father began asking questions about what the government knew. He filed Freedom of Information Act requests, sought money for research and called on Washington to accept responsibility for the harm it had knowingly inflicted on its own citizens. On Sept. 27, 1990, Congress acknowledged the federal government's responsibility when it passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), authorizing payments to dead and dying victims of the government's deception. On Oct. 7, my father died — at age 61 from a cancer called multiple myeloma. Thousands of citizens throughout the West continue to get sick and die from radiation-exposure-caused illnesses. Today, the West is again a target. Its wide-open spaces, huge tracts of federally owned land and rural character make Nevada's Yucca Mountain and Utah's Skull Valley appear "ideal" places to store our nation's nuclear waste. Utah could see nuclear waste delivered to the Goshute Indian Reservation in Skull Valley as soon as 2004; Nevada's Yucca Mountain could receive shipments sometime early next decade. Nevada and Utah have no nuclear power plants and generate none of the waste. The simple fact of the matter is that Eastern states want to dump their waste on the West. To those who say "the waste has to go somewhere" and Utah and Nevada are merely exhibiting the "not-in-my-back yard" attitude ignore important scientific, security and fairness issues. The fact is Utah and Nevada have paid dearly for their patriotism and trust during the Cold War. As one cancer victim puts it, "We were told to build bomb shelters to protect our families from the Russians, when our own government was bombing us from just 130 miles away." Enough is enough. Why should these two states bear the burden of a waste stream generated by the rest of the country? The current storage solution involves shared responsibility. Indeed, on-site nuclear storage is the result of technological breakthroughs that simultaneously allow nuclear power plants to operate while ensuring public safety. Above ground, dry cask storage is used less than an hour's drive from Washington, D.C., at the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant. Even though millions of people live in the vicinity, there's no outcry over its presence. What is the compelling reason to move the waste now? Advancements in technology have produced dry cask storage of spent nuclear fuel. Over four decades, we've produced 43,000 tons of nuclear waste. It sounds like a big number, but thanks to the advent of dry cask storage, it could all be stored on a space 140 feet by 140 feet by 10 feet high. Yet we in the West are told the nation is running out of storage space. Moreover, additional technological developments may yield a better disposal option than what is known today. Added to the myth of dwindling storage space is the new reality since Sept. 11 that requires us to think about what used to be unthinkable. What analysis has been done regarding a possible terrorist threat once 108,544 truckloads — or 18,900 rail shipments — of spent nuclear fuel rods are added to our nation's transportation corridors? Millions of Americans live and work along those transportation corridors. The trail leading up to today's decision to dump nuclear waste on the West is a path of broken promises, deceit and cover-up by government officials whose assurances ring hollow in a land wearied by the fight. Wallace Stegner called the West "the native home of hope." We can do better as a nation than to impose on it a legacy of mistrust and despair. Jim Matheson represents Utah's 2nd Congressional District. © 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 25 Osama 'makes nuclear bomb' news.com.au - 28 April 2002 By MICHAEL BEACH A SENIOR al-Qaida lieutenant has told American interrogators Osama bin Laden is close to making a crude nuclear bomb. He has also said terrorists are planning to attack US banks and shopping centres. Pakistani forces captured al-Qaida strategist Abu Zubaydah and seized his personal diary a month ago. After recovering from gunshot wounds to his leg, he has been undergoing interrogation by the CIA and slowly releasing information about al-Qaida activities. "Some of what he says is hard to confirm or deny, but other information is proving to have some accuracy," a source told the New York Times. Zubaydah is a 31-year-old Saudi-born Palestinian who speaks English. He is believed to have been in charge of al-Qaida terrorist operations and to have overseen the training of the terrorists who carried out the September 11 attacks in New York and Washington. In the past week, US authorities have issued two "unsubstantiated" terrorist alerts based on information from Zubaydah. The first suggested banks were in danger. That was followed by a general warning that supermarkets and shopping malls could be targeted. Zubaydah also told his interrogators that bin Laden was planning to make a so-called "dirty bomb". Such bombs combine standard explosives with radioactive material and are capable of spreading poisonous gases over a wide area. The 300 Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners at Camp X-Ray in Cuba will soon move out of the chain-link cells that prompted an outcry from human rights groups, and into more solid structures with indoor plumbing. Officials at the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay said relocating the captives into the new Camp Delta prison was imminent. Sunday Times (WA) ***************************************************************** 26 Iraq poses nuclear threat: claim [http://www.news.com.au/] Visit our 28 April 2002 IRAQ may already have or is close to obtaining the capacity to use a crude nuclear weapon against its foes, a US lawmaker warned today. During an interview with CNN's Novak, Hunt and Shields program, House International Relations Committee Chairman Henry Hyde was asked whether US military action against Baghdad would be justified because of its ties deadly September 11 suicide attacks or because it has the capacity, or almost the capacity, to deliver crude nuclear weapons right now. "I think possibly the second is true, because the inspectors -- the UN inspectors have been out of the country for over three years," Hyde responded. The Illinois Republican said he was convinced Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had the money to undertake such a project as well as scientists who could provide the know-how. "I would not rule out at all that he has, or nearly has, these weapons that we cannot let him acquire," Hyde said. AAP ***************************************************************** 27 U.S. official admits past secret nuclear pact with Japan Japan Today Japan News - News - Monday, April 29, 2002 at 08:30 JST WASHINGTON A former senior U.S. government official admitted during a recent interview that the United States made a secret deal with Japan when negotiating the reversion of Okinawa that gave the U.S. permission to bring nuclear weapons into Okinawa in case of an emergency. Morton Halperin, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense and a key player in the negotiations between the U.S. and Japan over the reversion of the Okinawa islands, said in the interview with Kyodo News that the secret pact was necessary to guarantee the security of U.S. forces. The agreement was struck with Tokyo "with the full support of (the) joint chiefs (of staff)," Halperin said, and was aimed at expediting the reversion of Okinawa to Japanese rule and the removal of nuclear weapons from the islands. Halperin said the possibility of an extraordinary crisis that required a U.S. nuclear response could not be ignored, and said the secret agreement was phrased in a manner that the Japanese government could accept and understand. Halperin also said he could have convinced the Joint Chiefs of Staff to allow Japan to reassume control of Okinawa even without the secret deal, but said, "It would have cast a shadow on the negotiations" over the reversion. "I thought it was a reasonable balance between domestic and political interests of Japan and domestic and political interests of the U.S.," said Halpernin, who now serves as a senior fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations. After serving as deputy assistant secretary of defense under President Lyndon Johnson, and as a member of the National Security Council under President Richard Nixon, Halpernin said he supported allowing Okinawa to revert back to Japan, and tried to win over U.S. forces reluctant to relinquish control in the region. Halperin also expressed concern over the alleged revelation of the secret deal by Kei Wakaizumi, a late Japanese secret envoy of Prime Minister Eisaku Sato, in 1994. "I regret it came out. I'm not sure why my friend Wakaizumi decided to release it," he said, adding he thought "the agreement would remain secret for a long time...enough to accomplish its purpose." The secret deal was allegedly struck between Tokyo and Washington in November 1969, and Wakaizumi is thought to have disclosed its existence in May 1994. Okinawa was put under U.S. rule after World War II, and did not revert back to Japanese control for nearly 27 years. The reversion was officially agreed to on May 15, 1972. zWhile the Japanese government and the Foreign Ministry have consistently denied the existence of such a deal, there are people in the U.S. who have acknowledged the secret pact. (Kyodo News) ***************************************************************** 28 A radioactive "dirty bomb" could be headed for your neighborhood Loose Nukes / [http://www.sfgate.com] [vhaddock@sfchronicle.com] Sunday, April 28, 2002 American officials say a top al Qaeda field commander has just bragged to interrogators that his network now knows how to cook up a radiation-spewing "dirty bomb" and could smuggle it into the United States. If you're still sleeping soundly knowing that, consider this: Nearly five pounds of highly enriched uranium missing from a research reactor in the former Soviet Union years ago remains unaccounted for. And if it's unsettling to think nobody knows the whereabouts of a chunk of hazardous material, it's even more unnerving in the post-9/11 world to imagine the alternative: Someone does. It wouldn't be the first time radioactive material passed into the possession of someone with ill intent. There was the U.S.-made nuclear fuel rod smuggled from a reactor in the Congo - Italian mafiosos were arrested for trying to peddle it to an intermediary for a Middle Eastern buyer. There were the Chechen rebels who planted a container holding the cesium-137 core of a medical device in a Moscow park and then tauntingly alerted Russian reporters. And there was the Texas petroleum engineer convicted of pilfering licensed radioactive cesium pellets from his job site, slipping them into socks and putting them between his 11-year-old son's legs - leaving him burned and sterilized. The frightening reality is that it is a mystery how much radioactive material goes missing worldwide every year. But missing material anywhere is a threat to everyone everywhere - as evidenced by the 1,000 American customers who bought La-Z-Boy recliners manufactured with Brazilian steel accidentally contaminated with low levels of radioactivity. (The chairs were swiftly recalled.) Shocked at the lapses - and determined to force greater accountability - three researchers at the Institute for International Studies on the Stanford University campus have transformed themselves into loose-nuke sleuths. They have just announced creation of the world's most comprehensive database to track missing, stolen and recovered radioactive material globally. Their Database on Nuclear Smuggling, Theft and Orphan Radiation Sources logs some 850 incidents from the past decade - everything from radioactive trash cavalierly tossed out by a cancer clinic to weapons-usable plutonium and uranium smuggled out of the dismantled Soviet Union. Terrorism quickened the pulse of the project. Although most experts regard Osama bin Laden's boast of nuclear capability as a bluff, they're more willing to believe al Qaeda field commander Abu Zabaydah's claim to his interrogators that the group can build a "dirty bomb" out of the kind of radioactive material available in clinics, colleges and the like. Rigged with ordinary explosives and then detonated, such a device could shower an area with radioactive contamination. It -ouldn't truly be a weapon of mass destruction, but it would cause mass disruption - and probably mass hysteria. "Within the United States, you're losing track of radioactive material literally every other day. Every other day. And controls here are among the highest in the world," says Austrian nuclear physicist Fritz Steinhausler, who fostered the database as a visiting professor at Stanford. He notes that the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission lists an average of 200 radiation sources that are stolen, lost or abandoned within the country every year. Some countries -don't even have a central register of radioactive materials - and thus no way of tracking their whereabouts. Kazakstani researcher Lyudmila Zaitseva spends her days perusing databases, government records, technical journals and newspapers to pick up cases and assess their credibility. She then enters them into a database that categorizes incidents 21 ways: by material, type of incident, perpetrators, origin, presumed destination and intended use, etc. Her conclusion: Accounting, protection standards and border detection capabilities have been so weak in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere that the database probably lists only a fraction of the incidents that occur every day somewhere around the globe. Some 650 of the incidents she's established to date involve nuclear smuggling. "Right now, law enforcement is picking up only about 10 to 30 percent of other illicit contraband" such as smuggled drugs or conventional arms, says Zaitseva. Extrapolating, "we calculate that what (radioactive material) is being detected as missing or stolen is probably 10 to 30 percent of what's really gone. So much goes unreported, so much we simply don't know about." And clearly, when the missing merchandise is this "hot," what we don't know can hurt us. Still, individual countries are loath to admit their snafus to the world. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports 18 cases of nuclear trafficking in the past decade involving small amounts of plutonium or enriched uranium - virtually all from the former Soviet Union - but each time material was seized, accounting logs at the plundered facilities indicated that nothing was missing. Thus far only one country has fully cooperated to provide information to the Stanford database - although the researchers -won't say which one. The United States -hasn't yet complied. Information on cases in closed societies like China is virtually nil. Estimates put the world stock at hundreds of tons of plutonium and highly enriched uranium (it becomes weapons-grade only if highly enriched). A small nuclear bomb conceivably could be fashioned from less than 50 pounds of highly enriched uranium, or from a sample of plutonium small enough to fit inside a Coke can. "Those seeking to acquire nuclear material will go wherever it is easiest to steal, and buy it from anyone willing to sell - and the terrorists of Sept. 11 have demonstrated global reach," says George Bunn, a veteran U.S. arms control negotiator, now a Stanford professor and the third member of the new database triad. To the lay person, the words "terrorist" and "nuclear bomb" together may conjure visions of a mushroom cloud like that over Hiroshima, but most experts consider such a fear unwarranted. The bulk of known smuggled material is not close to weapons-grade. Some of the peddled plutonium has been extracted from trace amounts in overseas home smoke detectors. Even potent nuclear material is unusable or uncontrollable outside the hands of a fairly sophisticated bomb-builder. And security at the old Soviet sites -isn't as lax as it was, say, a decade ago, when a thief outside a "secure" shipyard near Murmansk squeezed through a fence hole and used a hacksaw to cut the padlock on a container of nuclear submarine fuel - absconding with almost 30 pounds of enriched uranium. Mikhail Kulik, chief investigator of the incident, reported there were no alarm systems, no lights and few guards. "Even potatoes," he concludes, "are probably much better guarded today than radioactive materials." Law enforcement officers have seized more than 80 pounds of missing Russian uranium and plutonium since the Soviet Union crumbled. Some volatile stockpiles have been relocated to more secure sites in the West, and the United States has spent millions to help upgrade facilities there by bricking up windows, installing motion detectors and the like. Even so, only a third of former Soviet stockpiles have been secured - meaning that in some quarters the old Soviet Union retains its nickname as the "Home Depot" of nuclear bomb shopping. Nor is there any shortage of alienated, underpaid nuclear scientists there - and plant workers and guards protecting materials worth millions earn the equivalent of $200 a month. Russia's nuclear security system, which suited a police state, is more vulnerable now. That was made glaringly apparent in 1998, when a local police official in the Chelyabinski region took credit for cracking a conspiracy to swipe more than 40 pounds of weapons-usable uranium. "That one was serious because it was a group of people probably working inside the nuclear facility - the Russians still -won't say which facility - and the quantity of material involved was so great," says Scott Parish, senior research associate at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, whose database on nuclear materials in the Soviet Union is a prime source for the Stanford database. "The Russians probably -didn't intend for the world to learn about the incident," he added, noting that his Moscow sources say Russian authorities called the police official on the carpet for blabbing. While authorities recently have reported fewer theft attempts and seizures of nuclear material, perhaps thieves are getting more clever or redirecting their supply routes to the Middle East and Central Asia, where detection is less likely. Just weeks ago, an intelligence report to the CIA warned that nuclear material inside Russia remains vulnerable. It noted several incidents such as the day last year when U.S. investigators found a storage site fence gate open and unguarded. "The truth of the matter is, we are not very sure of how much should be there," says Steinhausler. He noted the old Soviet system was " 'You account for it, you seal it, and you forget it.' But if you had fraud committed years ago, you may be guarding an empty container." Nor is the United States' own nuclear stock truly secure. The White House cut 93 percent of a recent Energy Department request for $380 million to better safeguard nuclear weapons and waste - ignoring Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's letter warning that "failure to support these urgent security requirements is a risk that would be unwise." But even the patchy security at nuclear facilities is more rigorous than at the millions of businesses and research organizations around the globe that use and store radioactive materials for sterilizing equipment, disinfecting food, treating cancer and finding fuel deposits. In recent days, that fear drove an unprecedented international air, ground and road search in the woods in the former Soviet Georgia - a weak state menaced by Muslim extremists - for two flashlight-sized containers of radioactive strontium-90. The radioactive material was encased in small power generators that vanished from an abandoned military base. The frenzied search began after lumberjacks in a snowy forest near the Black Sea stumbled upon one of the missing containers in December. Unaware, they warmed their bodies next to its heat - and are now fighting to survive radiation burns. At last, the other canisters were found and, as of last week, secured. The Federation of American Scientists recently offered Congress some disturbing scenarios. One example: What if the amount of cesium just discovered abandoned in a North Carolina scrap yard had fallen into the clutches of terrorists who exploded it with TNT near the National Gallery in Washington? "Materials that could easily be lost or stolen from U.S. research institutions and commercial sites could easily contaminate tens of city blocks at a level that would require prompt evacuation and create terror in large communities even if radiation casualties were low," Henry Kelly, the federation's president, testified. "Since there are often no effective ways to decontaminate buildings that have been exposed at these levels, demolition may be the only practical solution" - devastating in, say, midtown Manhattan or downtown San Francisco. Other experts are more skeptical about terrorists' propensity to concoct a dirty bomb. Parish says even someone volunteering to die instantaneously in a flame of martyrdom might be more squeamish about exposure to the agony of radiation sickness. Still, nobody argues for dismissing the threat. But forget terrorism for a moment. Even without it, the world ought to worry about the amount of radioactive material floating around, ready to trigger accidents that wreak havoc on health and the environment. The Stanford database lists more than 80 cases in which villains like that Texas father used, or attempted to use, radioactive material to commit murder, injury, blackmail, fraud and the poisoning of food and water supplies. Even more common are incidents of orphaned radioactive sources, which often aren't reported missing and simply turn up in scrap yards or the woods - often with tragic results. Perhaps the most harrowing illustration is the case of Goiania, Brazil. In 1987, scavengers sold a junkyard operator a canister from an abandoned cancer clinic's radiotherapy machine. He pried open the top and discovered vivid blue granules that "glowed" in the shade. As news spread, the neighborhood was enchanted with the mysterious substance. Children dabbed it on their faces like carnival glitter. One man even applied the "magic dust" to his penis to enhance his sexual prowess. It was radioactive cesium-137. More than 100,000 people were tested for exposure, 249 of them were found to be contaminated, four people died and, at the time, much of the rest of Brazil viewed Goiania as a leper colony. "The level of effort devoted to securing and accounting for stocks of even a few kilograms of fissile material should be even higher than that devoted to protecting stores of millions of dollars worth of cash, gold or diamonds," Stanford's Bunn maintains in a recent scientific article. "This is manifestly not the case at many facilities in many countries today. Indeed, a strong case can be made that the essential ingredients of nuclear weapons should be protected roughly as rigorously as nuclear weapons themselves are," as a committee of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences recommended in 1994. Although the 1980 Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials sets international standards for transportation between countries, it says nothing about what countries do with nuclear material within their borders. Reformers say that's got to change. They also advocate drastically better site security, interdiction efforts and stiffer penalties for the theft, illegal possession or transfer of plutonium or enriched uranium - typically only a few years in prison - to make the crime comparable to treason and murder. The terrorist attacks, Bunn says, made it apparent that "the costs and risks of failing to act are far higher than the costs of acting now." E-mail Vicki Haddock at [vhaddock@sfchronicle.com] . ©2002 San Francisco Chronicle   Page D - 1 ***************************************************************** 29 Energy bill overwhelmingly approved by the Senate Sunday, April 28, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Reid, Ensign both vote for legislation that would increase conservation STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Senate last week overwhelmingly approved an energy bill that would increase conservation, setting up a potential conflict with the House, which has approved legislation calling for more production of oil, gas, coal and nuclear power. The 88-11 vote capped weeks of debate over the direction of the nation's energy policy. The Senate bill includes provisions to expand the use of renewable fuels, and also gives incentives to domestic oil and gas producers. Critics of the Senate bill ran the gamut from environmentalists to energy industry lobbyists. Environmental groups say the bill did not go far enough to encourage conservation, while oil and gas producers were disappointed the bill did not allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Democrats, who drafted much of the plan, called the legislation a good compromise that goes further on conservation than a corresponding House version. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., voted for the bill. Amendments fail Before final passage of the energy bill, the Senate defeated an effort to cut gasoline consumption. The amendment, by Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., would have required the Department of Transportation to set rules to reduce fuel consumption by 1 million barrels a day by 2015. Carper argued it was a compromise between an earlier effort to set automobile fuel economy standards and a proposal asking the department simply to study the issue. Carper's amendment was rejected, 57-42. Reid voted for Carper's amendment. Ensign voted against it. Ethanol still in bill By 69-30, the Senate rejected an effort to eliminate ethanol as a gasoline additive. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., inserted the ethanol provision earlier in the energy bill debate. Daschle's proposal would require states to triple ethanol usage by 2012, while phasing out a chemical in gasoline that is contaminating groundwater. Farm states such as South Dakota stand to benefit, since ethanol is made from corn. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said the ethanol provision would cause higher gas prices in states that do not grow corn. Schumer, joined by Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and California Democrats Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, accused Daschle of playing politics to appease farm states where close races are expected in November. Reid voted to keep the ethanol provision. Ensign voted against it. INS changes The House voted to dismantle the Immigration and Naturalization Service and split the agency into two bureaus to carry out immigration and enforcement responsibilities separately. The 409-9 vote reflected growing frustration in Congress about the agency's inability to crack down on illegal immigration, particularly since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The plan would create two new entities: one responsible for border security and enforcement, and the other to deal with immigrant services. The INS most recently came under fire when the agency notified a Florida flight school that student visas had been approved for two of the Sept. 11 hijackers who took pilot lessons at the school. The school received the notices six months after the attacks. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., and Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., voted for the bill. Enron accounting The House approved legislation to tighten oversight of accounting firms, responding to the scandal resulting from the financial collapse of the giant energy company Enron. The measure was approved by a wide margin, but not before efforts to make it even tougher failed. Rep. John LaFalce, D-N.Y., offered a substitute plan creating a new federal agency to audit public companies. LaFalce's proposal would have barred accounting firms from performing internal audits or designing financial information systems for its audit clients. LaFalce noted auditors from the Arthur Andersen accounting firm are alleged to have hid off-the-books transactions that benefited Enron's corporate officers, and ultimately led to the energy company's bankruptcy. Opponents of the amendment dismissed it as a big government solution. The House rejected LaFalce's amendment, 219-202. Berkley voted for the amendment. Gibbons voted against it. Food stamps The House voted 244-171 to restore food stamps for residents who have lived legally in the United States for at least five years. The vote aimed to resolve differences in the House and Senate versions of a comprehensive farm bill. The Senate bill included the food stamp provision, but the House version did not. Democrats, who largely supported the food stamp provision, argued legal immigrants who are struggling to make ends meet should have access to the federal payments. Republicans argued the food stamp program must be toughened to require recipients to work in order to be eligible for food stamps. Lawmakers voted mostly along party lines. Democrats said they wanted a vote on the record to reflect support for legal immigrants. House Republican leaders accused Democrats of using the issue for political gain. They noted the vote does not bind House members who are negotiating differences with the Senate on each chamber's version of the farm bill. Berkley voted for the food stamp measure. Gibbons voted against it. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 30 Boxer Statement On the Senate Energy Bill U.S. SENATOR BARBARA BOXER | CALIFORNIA April 25, 2002 I am voting against the Energy Bill because it is a bad bill for California and the nation. The bill includes an ethanol mandate for California that will raise gas prices. Cleaner air for California can be achieved without this mandate. Ethanol has been given a liability waiver if there are adverse consequences from its use. I tried to eliminate this waiver but lost on a 42-57 vote. We already know that ethanol may spread plumes of harmful chemicals, such as benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene. So this is a dangerous waiver. The Energy Bill does not do enough to protect consumers from another electricity crisis. I worked to include a measure in this bill that would have guarded against future market manipulation by companies like Enron by increasing oversight of the electricity market. Companies would be far less likely to gouge consumers if these additional protections were in place, but the Senate refused to pass this vital measure. Also, I am disappointed that the Senate walked away from reasonable fuel economy standards and stronger air conditioner efficiency standards, which are so important to our environment and to lessening our dependence on foreign oil. The "good guys" have had few wins. We were able to keep the provision of the bill to provide tax credits for alternative energy sources and alternative fuel vehicles. And we defeated an attempt to open the Alaska Wildlife Refuge to drilling, for which I am very thankful to the grassroots of California for all their efforts. But drilling in Alaska did get 46 votes, and I am concerned that with the bill passing the Senate, drilling in Alaska may not be dead in the conference committee. In conclusion, the bill does more harm than good for the people of California. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************