***************************************************************** 10/31/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.281 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Brownouts, blackouts as cheap power fizzles out* 2 Pentagon aide plans nuclear talks in Korea, Japan 3 UK: Energy watchdog backs new trading agreements 4 Germany and U.S. Tentatively Ease Chill in Relationship 5 Russia Leery of N. Korea's Nuke Info 6 US: TVA cuts debt $20M more than expected 7 India: Tackle illegal nuke tech transfers: PM tells N-powers 8 US: Lawmakers Want N. Korea Punished 9 3 Nations Oppose Hasty Iraq Action 10 N-power institute fails to report 120 bil. yen profits 11 India opposes transfer of nuclear technology 12 Iraq rips into U.S. 13 US: Apollo program for energy? 14 Russia's new nuclear threat 15 Energy watchdog backs new trading agreements 16 In change of course, Russia expresses dissatisfaction over 17 Japan, North Korea talks clouded by bitterness 18 Pentagon aide plans nuclear talks in Korea, Japan 19 `NK Should Disarm or Be Disarmed¡¯ NUCLEAR REACTORS 20 US: TVA hopes distributors can help fund nuclear restart 21 US: Tennessee Valley Targets?* 22 US: Thought the Nuclear Power Industry was Dead? Guess again. The Bu 23 US: Anti-nuke groups plan increased efforts to close VY 24 US: Corporate Restructuring to Protect Nukes from Liability 25 US: NRC to Hold Public Meetings in Mississippi on the Early Site 26 US: NRC wants more data on nuclear plants 27 US: TVA hopes distributors can help fund nuclear restart 28 UK: Nuclear chimney being demolished 29 Pickering nuclear plant renovation faces financial meltdown, 30 US: Activists Claim They Could Have Damaged Nuke Plants NUCLEAR SAFETY 31 'TRICKED' ISLANDERS SUE UK FOR MILLIONS 32 US: Needed: Stricter Control of Nuclear Material 33 UK: MP leads fight for A-bomb survivors NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 34 US: Low Radioactive Levels At Old BWXT Landfills * 35 India: Vajpayee declares open waste immobilistion plant 36 Nearly 30 tonnes of nuclear contaminated ground soil found in Moscow 37 SA: Radioactivity in Mooi River 38 US: Neb. Appeals Ruling in Nuke Lawsuit 39 US: Voters face radioactive waste issue Tuesday 40 US: Utah: Initiative 1 debate heating up 41 US: Voters face radioactive waste issue Tuesday 42 US: Initiative 1 debate heating up 43 US: Initiative 1 really won't help schools - Opinion - 44 US: Utah: Initiative would affect only low-level waste - 45 US: Nuclear waste case should go to a jury, not judge, say lawyers 46 US: Utah: A Matter of Waste 47 US: *Nuclear Waste Shipments Planned to Travel through East TN* NUCLEAR WEAPONS 48 US: Hydrogen Bomb: Half a century later 49 India: PM inaugurates BARC facilities 50 Bush Urges Blix on Iraq Disarmament 51 NK May Conduct Nuclear Test : Japanese Media 52 Presidential CTR Re-Certification Likely to be Required Every Three 53 Operation for unloading nuclear fuel from Kursk submarine to start F 54 Air Force's nuke test weathermen kept watch in Pacific in '50s 55 Washington, Tokyo and Seoul to discuss fate of 1994 nuclear 56 South Korea tells North to move on nuclear issue - US DEPT. OF ENERGY 57 Lie-detector screening to stay in nuclear labs 58 Proposed plutonium pit facility triggers strong response at 59 Plutonium project fuels debate in South Carolina 60 Should Ultrak Guard U.S. Nuclear Labs? 61 Confusion the word in DOE whistleblower case 62 Environmental lab thrives in niche market - OTHER NUCLEAR 63 First glimpses inside an anti-atom* ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Brownouts, blackouts as cheap power fizzles out* The Globe and Mail /globeandmail.com By MURRAY CAMPBELL Thursday, October 31, 2002 ? Page A7 About 8,000 people were crowded into the ice rink of Berlin, Ont., that October night in 1910 when the premier of the day, James Whitney, pulled a switch to illuminate light bulbs that spelled out: "For the people." That was how it started. Sir Adam Beck had championed the cause of cheap power by taking on the robber barons who made millions by controlling the supply of electricity. And Ontario prospered in large measure because of the abundance of low-cost power provided by the Ontario Hydro-electric Power Commission he created. But the dreams of that night in Berlin (now called Kitchener) have soured. The province's electricity market is in a shambles. Consumer prices are going through the roof and there are predictions that this situation will only get worse as demand outstrips supply and brownouts and blackouts loom. The Ernie Eves government is wearing this issue like a cheap suit and, indeed, seems to have intensified the turmoil with its decision to introduce competition into the electricity market last May. But this was a crisis that was decades in the making as Ontario Hydro (the successor to HEPC) grew like Topsy and came to monopolize the generation and transmission of electricity. Hydro's love affair with nuclear-generated electricity, which began nearly 40 years ago, is the catalyst of today's difficulties. Nuclear power proved to be complicated and expensive and, as a result, Hydro became burdened with debt. A price freeze instituted nearly a decade ago added to this debt so that by 1998 Hydro had accumulated $38-billion in red ink. Mike Harris thought the private market so loathed by Sir Adam was the solution to his woes. He broke up Ontario Hydro into several pieces. Electricity would once again be traded on the open market and distributed by a private company. The privatization of Hydro One (the transmission company) was halted by a court and became a tragicomedy centering on the regal habits of its president, Eleanor Clitheroe. But that is a sideshow compared to what has been happening on the retail market in the past six months. After initially dipping, prices have gone up and up. The government bravely argued for a long time that this was the result of a hot summer -- which meant expensive U.S. power had to be imported -- but this argument has been made a little less vigorously in recent days. Demand has fallen back to where it was in the spring, but consumers (in almost every place but Toronto) are paying prices 60 per cent more than they did then. The howls of anger heard across Ontario will also resonate in a few months in Toronto, where the local utility has decided it has no choice but to pass on spot-market prices if it wants to remain solvent. The situation can only get more grim as long as demand outstrips domestically produced supply. Some 4,600 megawatts of nuclear power (about one-fifth of yesterday's provincewide demand) were removed from the grid in the late 1990s to allow for the refurbishment of reactors at Pickering and Bruce. It will take years for this juice to come back -- if it comes back at all. The government reckons demand for electricity will grow by 3 per cent a year, but there are no new power plants under construction. Indeed, a New York company, Sithe Energies, this week shelved plans to build two 800-megawatt natural-gas power plants in the Toronto area because it didn't like the look of Ontario's market. To add to the misery of higher electricity prices, there are stark warnings of power interruptions next summer. The government, as it waits for the magic of the market to appear, seems frozen about what to do. Most days, its leaders appear content to throw back at opposition leaders whatever they might have said about the electricity market in the past. Energy Minister John Baird has looked out of his league in dealing with his chief tormentor, Liberal Sean Conway (who has forgotten more about hydro issues than most MPPs know). Just months before an election call, the proverbial stuff has hit the fan. The only question is whether there will be enough power to run the fan. mcampbell@globeandmail.ca © 2002 Bell Globemedia Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 2 Pentagon aide plans nuclear talks in Korea, Japan About AlertNet 31 Oct 2002 13:45 WASHINGTON, Oct 31 (Reuters) - A senior Pentagon official will visit Japan and South Korea next week to discuss North Korea's nuclear weapons program and other issues in the region, U.S. defense officials said on Thursday. The officials told Reuters that Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith would depart Washington on Sunday or on Monday. Feith will talk with top officials in Tokyo and Seoul about rising tensions on the Korean peninsula sparked by Pyongyang's admission this month that it was conducting a secret program to enrich uranium that could be used to build nuclear weapons. The U.S. officials did not discuss details, but one said Feith was also likely to exchange views on U.S. plans to hold Defense Consultative Talks with China in Beijing later this year or early next year. Those talks were put on hold after the April collision last year between a Chinese fighter jet and an a U.S. Navy reconnaissance plane over the South China Sea. Despite recent calls from Pyongyang for direct talks with Washington, the United States has ruled out negotiations with the North Koreans until they dismantle the uranium enrichment program. But the United States has also said it wants a peaceful solution and is maintaining contacts with the North through its U.N. mission. ***************************************************************** 3 UK: Energy watchdog backs new trading agreements FT.com By Andrew Taylor, Utilities Correspondent Published: October 31 2002 4:00 | Last Updated: October 31 2002 4:00 The introduction of new electricity trading arrangements, blamed by some generators for the collapse of two of Britain's biggest electricity companies, yesterday received heavyweight backing from the International Energy Agency. The Paris-based agency, the energy watchdog of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, said the rules introduced last year were an "effective government response" to resolve previous "market imperfections". Robert Priddle IEA executive director, said: "The government has shown it is ready to respond promptly when faced with market imperfections or unanticipated developments." Launching its review of UK energy policy, the IEA said: "Recent turmoil in the UK energy market does not detract from the remarkable achievements in the sector since the early 1990s. "The UK's pioneering role in electricity market reform has allowed it to reap the benefits of free and open markets. Retail prices have dropped 30 per cent in real terms since 1990 and the market is truly competitive, with 38 rival companies vying for business at the wholesale and retail levels." The introduction of the new trading arrangements "should further improve the market and has already achieved the goal of substantially reducing wholesale electricity prices". New rules were introduced after Ofgem, the UK energy regulator, said arrangements had allowed generators to manipulate the market. High prices had encouraged generators to build gas-fired power stations; the UK has 25 per cent more generation capacity than necessary to meet peak demand in an average winter. But a 40 per cent fall in wholesale prices since 1998, has left operators facing heavy losses. The government and the regulator have resisted pressure to modify the trading rules. Ministers last month granted British Energy, the nuclear generator and the country's biggest electricity producer, a £650m emergency loan facility to allow it more time to negotiate a financial rescue and prevent it going into administration. The European subsidiary of TXU, the US energy group, last week sold its UK electricity and gas retail supply business to Eon of Germany in a deal worth £1.6bn. The subsidiary, which is struggling to avoid administration, has several long-term power purchase contracts it negotiated when prices were higher. © Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2002. "FT" ***************************************************************** 4 Germany and U.S. Tentatively Ease Chill in Relationship The New York Times October 31, 2002* *By STEVEN R. WEISMAN* WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 ? Germany and the United States struggled today to get past an unusual period of estrangement prompted by Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's recent re-election campaign, in which he assailed President Bush's policies on Iraq. But even as Secretary of State Colin L. Powell met with the German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer ? in a session delayed after several American rebuffs to German entreaties for a meeting ? the administration dealt the Germans another snub: a refusal to invite Mr. Fischer to the White House. In Germany, Mr. Schröder and Mr. Fischer possibly did not make their job easier. In a speech in Parliament earlier this week, the chancellor declared, "We will not take part in a possible war against Iraq." In the same session, Mr. Fischer asked the Parliament, "Does making Iraq a priority really make sense? I say no." Today Mr. Fischer did not repeat his opposition but rather stressed his support of the United States' effort to get inspectors to return to Iraq to search for evidence it was producing nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. Opinion about Mr. Schröder's behavior, and how to respond to it, is divided within the administration. Officials said its policies were guided, however, by the personal anger of Mr. Bush over Mr. Schröder's campaign, and over one of the ministers in his cabinet, who compared Mr. Bush's tactics to those of Hitler. It was that remark that prompted Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to say the German-American relationship had been poisoned. The minister was asked to resign, but Mr. Bush has smoldered with resentment, according to administration officials. He declined to make a congratulatory telephone call to Mr. Schröder when he was re-elected, and after a visit was finally arranged for Mr. Fischer, it did not include a stop at the White House. Speaking before reporters this evening, Mr. Fischer and Secretary Powell indicated that they had failed to bridge their one essential difference over possible military action. But both sides sought today to lower the temperature surrounding their discussion of that issue, and to emphasize others on which they agree. "If there are differences and turbulences, we will discuss these problems inside the family," said Mr. Fischer. Secretary Powell added: "We don't pretend there are no rough spots. There are rough spots." The latest snub was picked up in the German press, which noted that on his previous trips, Mr. Fischer visited Vice President Dick Cheney or Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser. A White House official did not deny that a snub was intended, saying only that Secretary Powell would report on his discussions with Mr. Fischer at a later date. Earlier this week, Secretary Powell told a group of European journalists that Germany and the United States had gone through "some turbulent times in recent weeks." But he said that he and others were just going to have to "get over it." Among the issues the two countries are dealing with are Germany's assumption of responsibilities for peacekeeping in Afghanistan, and its cooperation with the United States on admitting seven new nations to NATO next month. In addition, Germany and the United States have scheduled discussions on joint military cooperation and the establishment of a new rapid deployment force based in Europe, an idea proposed by Mr. Rumsfeld. Such talks may be difficult because Mr. Rumsfeld refused to meet the German defense minister last month. Some administration officials, dismayed at what they consider to be Mr. Bush's petulant behavior on Germany, say they are worried that the estrangement could undercut cooperation on these and other issues. They also point out that Germany will be joining the United Nations Security Council as a temporary member next year and that the United States will need its cooperation on Iraq, whether or not there is a war. One prominent outsider, former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger, wrote a long op-ed article that appeared in today's Washington Post in which he described German-American relations as seriously troubled and said that the administration should try to improve the atmosphere. "Germany is too important to Europe and the Atlantic relationship to let policy be based on recrimination," he said. At his meeting with reporters, Mr. Fischer seemed to go out of his way to smooth things over, praising Secretary Powell many times and thanking the United States for its role in rescuing Germany from disaster after World War II, and again helping in its reunification more than a decade ago. "We will never forget what the United States has done," he declared. One question left unresolved was whether Mr. Bush would have a one-on-one meeting with Mr. Schröder at a NATO summit meeting in Prague next month. Secretary Powell was noncommittal, saying that all of NATO's leaders would have a chance to see one another. The Germans make no secret of their desire to have such a session. ***************************************************************** 5 Russia Leery of N. Korea's Nuke Info Guardian Unlimited | World Latest | Thursday October 31, 2002 4:00 PM MOSCOW (AP) - In a sharp change of course, Russia on Thursday accused North Korea of being insufficiently forthcoming about its alleged nuclear weapons program, the Interfax news agency reported. The United States said earlier this month that North Korean officials acknowledged they had a nuclear weapons program during talks with visiting Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly in Pyongyang on Oct. 3-5. A U.S official then went to Russia to present Moscow with evidence of the alleged uranium enrichment program. Moscow reacted with caution, saying it would like to independently check the information before making any definite conclusions. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov said that Moscow had received an explanation from the North Koreans, Interfax reported. But he said it was insufficient. ``There is some ambiguity in the statements by North Korean representatives,'' Losyukov was quoted as saying in an interview with the news agency. ``In our view, such ambiguity is very dangerous because it leads to mutual suspicions and can negatively affect the situation on the Korean peninsula.'' But Losyukov said that the United States, too, had to present its position more clearly, ``insofar as the Russian side has not yet received any convincing evidence of the existence of such a program.'' He said that North Korea, through diplomatic channels, had provided its version of the talks with Kelly and that there was no public admission that North Korea had continued its uranium enrichment program. Losyukov added that it was unclear whether such an admission had been made in the meeting with the American, saying it was ``probably expressed as neither admission nor denial.'' Pak Ui Chun, North Korea's ambassador to Moscow, said Thursday that the United States had broken earlier agreements with Pyongyang by declaring it part of an ``axis of evil'' along with Iran and Iraq, freeing his nation of any previous obligations, Interfax reported. Despite warmer relations with the United States, Russia has maintained close ties with North Korea - which President Bush has dubbed part of an ``axis of evil'' because of its alleged efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction and sponsorship of international terrorism. North Korean leader Kim Jong Il visited Russia in August for the second consecutive summer. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 6 TVA cuts debt $20M more than expected By Rebecca Ferrar, News-Sentinel business writer October 31, 2002 TVA exceeded projections in cutting its $25 billion debt, discussed its employee bonus system and reported operation and production records at several plants in a briefing simulcast to 13,467 employees Wednesday. The agency slashed debt by $120 million in 2002 - $20 million more than expected - and the goal for 2003 is to cut the debt by $75 million. "The achievements and progress we've made reflect your commitment to our leadership standard, which is to achieve excellence in our business performance and public service," TVA Chairman Glenn McCullough Jr. said during the briefing on finances for the year ending Sept. 30. The briefing was simulcast across seven states and to employees in Washington, D.C. TVA established goals for employees at the start of 2002 that will be used to make cash awards of 4 percent to 6 percent of their pay. Those goals include reducing injuries, improving the delivered cost of power, improving water quality and reducing power interruptions. The performance pay will cost $44 million and is not available to TVA executives, who qualify for bonuses based on their performance. TVA board members are excluded from receiving bonuses. TVA ended the fiscal year with $73 million in net income even though the agency had 3 percent less operating revenue, according to unaudited year-end financial results. For 2003, TVA projects $7 billion in revenue and $63 million in net income. Ike Zeringue, TVA chief operating officer, reported on progress in restarting Unit 1 of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in northern Alabama. As part of the $1.8 billion restart to be completed in 2007, TVA expects to spend $353 million this year. About 900 employees are working on the Browns Ferry site, mostly doing engineering work, a force that is expected to grow to 2,200 in 18 months, Zeringue said. Upon completion, the plant will be staffed by 150 to 200 employees. "We are on schedule and we are on budget," Zeringue said. "By the time Browns Ferry is on line, we will need the generation from that facility." Board members had nothing new to report on efforts by Charles River Associates of Boston, a firm hired to identify companies interested in providing private financing to help pay for the Browns Ferry restart. David Smith, TVA chief financial officer, said he expects recommendations from Charles River by January. All three board members, McCullough, Bill Baxter and Skila Harris, reported on various aspects of the agency's progress during 2002. The three outlined the agency's goals for 2003: • Continue the agency's clean-air program with $528 million in spending to add pollution control equipment at TVA's 11 coal-fired plants. • Cut the $25 billion debt by $75 million. Continuing to keep interest payments at 21 percent of TVA's debt or less - the lowest since 1997. That's still $1.433 billion in interest payments. • Improve water quality on the Tennessee River. • Continue economic development efforts. • Continue Browns Ferry recovery efforts. "We will accomplish all that with no increase in rates," McCullough said. Baxter called TVA's performance in economic development in 2002 "pretty darn good." He said economic development is "TVA's core historic mission. We've got to deliver low-cost electricity." TVA, working with distributors, state and local officials, helped create or retain 48,000 jobs in 2002, Baxter said. And the agency provided technical and financial assistance to projects throughout the valley that "leveraged" more than $855 million in new investment in the region. During 2003, economic development goals include recruiting "big-ticket" projects to the region and working with existing companies to help them expand. Harris reported on TVA efforts to balance providing reliable, affordable power with protecting natural resources. She said TVA spent $44 million to improve water quality in water below the dams, which includes things such as taking steps to add oxygen to the water. TVA has improved water quality along 300 miles of the river system, she said. TVA also worked with marinas to improve operations, such as preventing erosion, and continued its $12 million reservoir operations study on improving uses of the Tennessee River. She said TVA expects to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from its coal plants by 85 percent by the end of this decade and to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by 75 percent by 2005. Other achievements TVA cited during 2002: seven coal plants set records for continuous operation, and Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 2 and 3 set a worldwide record for production. Rebecca Ferrar may be reached at 865-342-6357 or ferrarr@knews.com. Copyright 2002, Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 7 India: Tackle illegal nuke tech transfers: PM tells N-powers Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, October 31, 2002 Mumbai, Oct 31. (PTI, UNI): Asserting India's nuclear doctrine of "minimum credible deterrence", Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee today asked the "high priests of non-proliferation" to look around and tackle the clandestine and illegal development and transfer of nuclear and missile technologies". "We have been transparent about our nuclear weapons programme and the reasons for our nuclear testing in May 1998 are well known", Vajpayee said while addressing the scientific fraternity at the foundation day function of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) here. Appealing to developed nations to dispel any misconception about the country's nuclear weapons programme, Vajpayee said atomic energy in India should be seen as an "engine of growth and progress and not through prism of nuclear weapons". Vajpayee told the advanced nuke nations that "instead of targeting countries which have played by the rules, they should tackle the illegal transfer of nuclear and missile technology". Stating that "we have been denied techonologies and products on the unfounded suspicion that they might be applied to a weapons programme", Vajpayee said "these technology-denial regimes have irritated us, they have retarded our progress". "However, these denials did not stop us and brought out the best in us", the Prime Minister, who spent a day at the BARC, said after dedicating to the nation several new nuclear facilities across the country through remote control. Vajpayee also invited foreign collaboration in nuclear power sector. "We welcome participation of other countries in the major projects," the Prime Minister said. [letters@thehindu.co.in] with full postal address --> The Hindu Group: Home [http://www.hinduonline.com/] Copyright | ***************************************************************** 8 Lawmakers Want N. Korea Punished Las Vegas SUN October 30, 2002 ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON- Five lawmakers urged President Bush on Wednesday to punish North Korea for continuing its nuclear weapons program and said he should take diplomatic and economic steps to encourage a change of government in the communist country. A letter asks the Bush administration to say whether it has stopped providing fuel oil to North Korea under a 1994 agreement. The United States has been providing 500,000 metric tons of fuel oil to North Korea in return for its renunciation of nuclear weapons. Those shipments "should be permanently terminated," said the letter from Sens. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., Jesse Helms, R-N.C., Bob Smith, R-N.H. and Reps. Chris Cox, R-Calif., and Ed Markey, D-Mass. The administration has not said if it will halt the shipments. The letter asks whether the United States will urge Japan and South Korea to stop providing money for the construction of two light-water reactors designed to replace North Korea's plutonium-producing reactors. It also encourages the United States to "work aggressively with its allies to prepare for a future beyond the current Stalinist regime" in North Korea. "We see no viable alternative given the proven failure of subsidizing North Korea and of relying upon that country's promises, as well as the regimes continued deplorable treatment of the North Korean people," it said. Among its suggestions were ending all subsidies, increasing Radio Free Asia broadcasting and granting temporary asylum for North Koreans fleeing the country. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 9 3 Nations Oppose Hasty Iraq Action Las Vegas SUN October 31, 2002 By EDITH M. LEDERER ASSOCIATED PRESS UNITED NATIONS- The U.S. demand for speedy U.N. action on Iraq has run into strong opposition from Russia, France and China, who want Washington to change a draft resolution and eliminate any license for the United States to attack Baghdad on its own. The three veto-holding Security Council members want to ensure that Iraq is given a chance to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors before any military action is authorized - and they're now waiting to see what the United States and Britain are going to do to address their concerns. After a third meeting council session Wednesday on the U.S. proposal, Russia's deputy U.N. ambassador Gennady Gatilov said Moscow still has "quite a number of problems" with the U.S. draft, centered on the automatic authorization to use force. The opposition has stymied the Bush administration's hopes to quickly push a resolution through the world body. In Washington, Secretary of State Colin Powell said debate would likely be concluded toward the end of next week. The Security Council only got the U.S. draft on Oct. 23 and the three sessions since then gave all 15 members the opportunity to go over it line by line and suggest changes. U.S. and British diplomats said the views of the council will now be studied carefully, ministers will continue talking, and there will be a response - but when it will come and whether it will meet Russian, French and Chinese demands remains to be seen. "Don't expect any immediate action," said Britain's U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock. "There is going to be no precipitate rush to a conclusion." China's Ambassador Wang Yingfan said he expected the United States and Britiain to come back with revisions. "I don't know what kind of progress in the end we'll have," he said. France's U.N. Ambassador Jean-David Levitte said everyone knows Paris' position, but "frankly we don't know where the U.S. is" now on the issue of authorizing force. The U.S. and British consultations on possible changes to the U.S. draft, coupled with Friday's handover of the Security Council presidency from Cameroon to China and next Tuesday's U.S. election, have pushed back the Bush administration's timetable for a U.N. vote. On Wednesday, Powell stressed that Washington would not accept a resolution that limited U.S. freedom of action on Iraq. "There is nothing that we would propose in this resolution or we would find acceptable in a resolution that would handcuff the president of the United States in doing what he feels he must do," Powell said, reiterating the administration's view that the U.S. Congress has already given its authorization for U.S. action against Iraq. But the administration also wants the United Nations to support a resolution that strengthens inspections, warns Iraq of "serious consequences" if it fails to cooperate, and declares that Iraq is still in "material breach" of its obligations to get rid of its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs. In an effort to win support, Washington signaled a readiness this week to make some minor concessions involving a new weapons inspection regime. These were welcomed, but the United States has yet to find a solution to the critical issue of the automatic use of force. Russia's U.N. ambassador, Sergey Lavrov, said Tuesday it isn't the words "material breach" or "serious consequences" that's at issue but their context and the meaning it implies. In the case of the U.S. draft, Gatilov said Wednesday Russia still has concerns that references to "material breach" could trigger an attack on Iraq. He stressed that any assurances from the United States and Britain that this is not the case must be in the draft resolution. Diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Washington could be willing to offer such assurances privately. At Wednesday's council meeting, diplomats said many nations also objected to an introductory paragraph recalling U.N. resolutions adopted after Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait which authorized member states "to use all necessary means" to oust Iraqi troops and restore Kuwait's freedom. There were concerns this could trigger new military action if Iraq failed to cooperate. The search for an Iraq resolution began on Sept. 12 when President Bush challenged world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly to deal with Iraq's failure to comply with resolutions demanding the elimination of its weapons of mass destruction or stand aside as the United States acted. On Wednesday, Bush hosted chief weapons inspectors Hans Blix of the United Nations, and Mohamed ElBaradei of the International Atomic Energy Agency, at the White House - two days after they told the Security Council that Iraq should be warned it will face consequences if it doesn't cooperate. Blix told Associated Press Television News that Bush made clear he was categorically committed to ensuring the success of weapons inspections and wanted to make sure that Iraq could not engage in in any "cat and mouse play" with inspectors. The Iraqi Foreign Ministry denounced the meeting, calling it "a strange and unprecedented move" to "put pressure on the U.N. to adopt the aggressive resolution which distorts facts and adds more conditions." All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 10 N-power institute fails to report 120 bil. yen profits Daily Yomiuri On-Line Yomiuri Shimbun The Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute failed to declare about 120 billion yen in profits over three business years up to March 2000, it was learned Tuesday. The institute, a public corporation administered by the Education, Science and Technology Ministry, has revised the tax declaration at the regional taxation office. However, no penalty taxes have been levied against the institute because the public corporation has been posting massive deficits recently, losing 130 billion yen in fiscal 2001 alone. The institute, based in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, deals with public sector projects, including development of technologies to recycle spent nuclear fuels, such as plutonium and uranium. Copyright 2002 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 11 India opposes transfer of nuclear technology : National News : IndiaExpress.Com 18.55 IST 31st Oct 2002 By IndiaExpress Bureau Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee on Thursday made an impassioned plea to the ‘high-priests of non-proliferation’ to tackle clandestine and illegal development and transfer of missile and nuclear technology. Mr. Vajpayee also asked the developed nations to give up their misgivings about India’s nuclear weapons programme. Atomic energy in India should be seen as an "engine of growth and progress and not through prism of nuclear weapons". The Prime Minister’s remark came at the inauguration of various facilities at a function at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) in Mumbai on its foundation day. Mr. Vajpayee invited foreign nations to join in the nuclear power programme in India to realize the objective of reaching 20,000 MW by 2020, as "nuclear power is the most environment friendly form of energy". The "country's nuclear power programme has entirely different development objective,” said the Prime Minister, adding that every co-operation project in nuclear power would be open to international safeguards. Emphasizing India's nuclear doctrine of "minimum credible deterrent", Mr. Vajpayee said "reasons for India conducting nuclear tests in May 1998 are well known". Lavishing praise on the country’s nuclear scientists, Mr. Vajpayee said: "Our nuclear weapons programme was developed indigenously and did not violate any of India's international obligations". Mr. Vajpayee lashed out at the developed nations over objectives of Kyoto protocol on climate change. "It is truly ironic that we are lectured on our moral obligations to clamp down on emission while being denied international technology co- operation for the alternative, which can achieve this without penalizing our development." He urged Indian scientists and engineers to continue on the path of innovation and invention, which have taken the country's atomic energy programme to this advanced stage. The Prime Minister expressed the hope that the Fast Breeder Reactor can be commercially exploited soon. ***************************************************************** 12 Iraq rips into U.S. CNEWS - News Ticker World - Iraq rips into U.S. Thu, October 31, 2002 DUSAN STOJANOVIC BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraq on Thursday denounced U.S. President George W. Bush's meeting with the chief U.N. weapon inspectors, saying it was part of an American campaign to pressure the U.N. Security Council into adopting a resolution hostile to the Iraqi government. The Iraqi Foreign Ministry said Bush's meeting Wednesday with chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, was "a strange and unprecedented move" to "put pressure on the U.N. to adopt the aggressive resolution which distorts facts and adds more conditions." "We urge the Security Council to stop the pressure exerted on this two U.N. officials and to call on the two officials not to bow to U.S. demands," the ministry said in a statement. Upon his return to New York, Blix said Bush had assured him and ElBaradei of full support and that the president wanted to make sure "there is no cat-and-mouse game" with Iraq if inspections are resumed in Iraq after a four-year lapse. The Bush administration wants the Council to support a resolution that strengthens inspections, warns Iraq of "serious consequences" if it fails to cooperate, and declares that Iraq is still in "material breach" of its obligations to get rid of its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs. The Foreign Ministry statement repeated denunciations of the United States in the government-controlled media, which said Iraq was ready to defend itself against American "aggression." "We tell Bush: if you decide to commit a new aggression against our country, we are ready for you whether you come under an Anglo-Saxon cover or any other cover, in winter or summer, before or after the elections," said al-Thawra newspaper in a front page editorial. The English language Iraq Daily denounced the U.S. demands for speedy U.N. action on Iraq, which has run into strong opposition from Russia, France and China, who want Washington to change a draft resolution and eliminate any license for the United States to attack Baghdad on its own. The three veto-wielding Security Council members want to ensure that Iraq is given a chance to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors before any military action is authorized - and they are now waiting to see what the United States and Britain are going to do to address their concerns. "The tussle" over 'the anti-Iraqi' resolution was an indication of the weaker countries' efforts to try to hold Washington to accept international rules and norms," the Iraq Daily said in a commentary. It said that "the American attempt to rule the world" triggered the deadly Sept. 11 attack in New York last year, and warned of new such terrorist actions in case Washington fails to "respect the international code of morality and conduct." "The tortuous journey of the anti-Iraq resolution is a solitary early warning signal of the disasters that lie ahead should America persevere in its new empire-building exercise," the daily said. Al-Jumhuriya daily blasted George Bush's speech earlier this week in which he said that President Saddam Hussein "has made the United Nations look foolish," warning that the U.S. would act alone in case the Security Council fails to adopt the new resolution. "Bush is trying to project his follies on to the United Nations when he undermines and speaks in a scornful way of the international body because the Security Council members have refused to give a blank check to the U.S. aggressive war plans on Iraq," the newspaper said. "Bush thinks that the Security Council should be respected only if it authorizes and implements the aggressive resolutions against world countries," it said, adding:" According to Bush's concept, foolishness occurs when world countries reject U.S. demands to attack Iraq." [http://www.canoe.ca/home.html] | We welcome your [http://www.canoe.ca/Help/feedback.html] [http://www.canoe.ca/copyright.html] © 2002, CANOE, a division of ***************************************************************** 13 Apollo program for energy? [MSNBC.com] Study in Science looks at pathways to carbon-free emissions [Image: Satellite with solar panels] Orbiting solar arrays like those that power the International Space Station could technically make electricity, convert it to microwaves and then beam it to Earth. But a new study estimates that to produce just a third of world demand would require 660 arrays in space, each the size of Manhattan. Miguel Llanos Oct. 31 — Is it feasible to replace fossil fuels with cleaner sources of energy? A new study concludes that it could be done with enough “political will” and what the lead researcher described as a global effort pursued with the same urgency as the Apollo space program. Europe is showing that will, recently embarking on a massive investment program in hydrogen and fuel cells. But the researchers didn’t see a similar push in the United States. THE TEAM of 18 scientists and engineers from colleges, government and even Exxon Mobil looked at energy in terms of this challenge: how to stabilize emissions of carbon dioxide, a gas that many scientists fear is warming the Earth by trapping heat. CO2 is a building block of nature, but the burning of fossil fuels has led to sharp increases in CO2 levels over the last century. “If Earth continues to warm, people may have to turn to advanced technologies for solutions,” the authors wrote in their study, published Thursday in the journal Science. They looked at several alternative sources of energy, including solar, wind and nuclear power. They even took a new look at a 1970s idea: launching satellites that would provide solar power. ‘NEW INDUSTRIES’ SOUGHT The scientists didn’t rule out any of the sources and said what’s “urgently needed” is more research and development to create breakthroughs. “The bottom line is that we are going to need an international effort pursued with the same urgency as the Manhattan Project or the Apollo space program,” Martin Hoffert, the lead author and a New York University physicist, said in a statement accompanying the study. SURVEYING PATHWAYS [Energy map of america] The world’s power consumption is about 12 trillion watts, with 85 percent of it from fossil fuels. The researchers concluded that in order to stabilize CO2 emissions by 2050 while allowing economic growth at its present pace would require producing 30 trillion watts using energy that does not emit CO2. The study surveyed the field of non-carbon energy and found obstacles that require more R. Among them: [*] Nuclear fission: Besides the issue of disposal of radioactive waste, traditional nuclear power is limited by the finite amount of uranium fuel on Earth. The proven reserves of uranium would last between six and 30 years if nuclear fission was used to make 10 trillion watts of power, about a third of what will be needed by the end of the century, the study found. [*] Nuclear fusion: A safer, cleaner route to nuclear power could be to fuse atoms. Scientists are near a “break-even” point where as much energy is produced as is expended, but given funding shortfalls a breakthrough “cannot be relied on” to stabilize CO2, the researchers said. [*] Solar power on Earth: This could meet U.S. power needs — if there were panels covering 10,000 square miles. To make the equivalent of 10 trillion watts would require panels covering 85,000 square miles, the study found. That’s an area larger than the state of Kansas. The nation has a long way to go: The total number of solar panels shipped from 1982 to 1998 would be enough to cover just two square miles. “A massive (but not insurmountable) scale-up is required” to get the equivalent of 10 trillion to 30 trillion watts, the study said. [*] Space solar power: Revisiting a NASA idea, the researchers noted that more solar energy can be gathered via satellites than on Earth, where clouds and the constant spinning reduce efficiency. Orbiting solar arrays could make electricity, convert it to microwaves and then beam that energy to a ground antenna where it would be converted back to electricity. But to generate 10 trillion watts would require about 660 solar power arrays, each about the size of Manhattan, in orbit about 22,000 miles above the Earth. Launch costs would be “high,” the scientists wrote, but with adequate research investments space solar power “could perhaps be demonstrated in 15 to 20 years and deliver electricity to global markets by the latter half of the century.” [*] Wind power: These systems are becoming cheaper to operate, but because they tend to be in rural areas their longer distance to consumers means more electricity is lost as it moves along wires. “Such networks need to be re-engineered,” perhaps using cooled superconducting cables that retain more electricity, the scientists said. [*] Hydrogen energy: Hydrogen does not exist in pure, natural reservoirs and has to be extracted from a fossil fuel or water in order to power fuel cells, which store energy much like a battery. The study found that more carbon dioxide and less energy is produced by the extraction of hydrogen than by burning a fossil fuel directly. Extracting hydrogen from water using solar or wind power would get around the CO2 problem, the study said, but doing so “is not yet cost effective.” EUROPE SEES HYDROGEN FUTURE Hydrogen and fuel cells have caught the attention of the European Commission, where governments recently agreed to put up $2 billion for research over the next four years — up from $120 million over the last four. Engine-eering MSNBC Interactive • Compare the inner workings of the internal combustion engine and a fuel cell using "proton exchange membranes" “We thought that it was the right time to risk money,” EC President Romano Prodi said Monday. “You need an enormous quantity of money to start,” he added. “The threshold is very, very high.” “The most difficult job will be to prepare regulations, incentives, how to invent the system, because at this moment we don’t have an example to follow,” Prodi said. Hydrogen fuel cells are being developed to power standalone generators as well as vehicles, but a key obstacle is how to distribute the hydrogen to users. Prodi said the first task would be to agree on a distribution network. Environment news Keep up with environment news: MSNBC's special section is updated regularly • Click here to bookmark Environment News And before going ahead with any one system, Prodi said, governments would encourage small-scale production and experiment with small-scale distribution to avoid backing the wrong technology. In the United States, a hydrogen lobby that includes Shell Oil last month urged the U.S. government to invest $5.5 billion in hydrogen over 10 years. The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report. ©2002 Microsoft Corporation ***************************************************************** 14 Russia's new nuclear threat Asia Times [http://wetrack.it/oilcareer/af.cgi?113] Central Asia By Brad Glosserman VLADIVOSTOK, Russia - Hundreds of nuclear submarines float quietly at their berths throughout the Russian Federation. The end of the Cold War has not ended the threat posed by these sleek, gray, killing machines. Today, however, concern focuses on the environmental risks created by the decommissioning of these submarines. The disposal of their spent fuel and other forms of radioactive waste is a major environmental challenge for Russia and the entire region. International cooperation has played a critical role in the decommissioning process, but considerably more help is needed. Concerned governments will primarily contribute desperately needed funds; Russia can provide expertise and manpower, but first it must provide the basic infrastructure - most important, the rule of law - that will permit those resources to be put to their intended use. The Soviet Union built nearly 250 nuclear submarines, never contemplating how they would be taken out of service. The fleet was bequeathed to the Russian Federation, which has struggled, largely unsuccessfully, with obsolescence. Old age, arms control treaties and budget shortfalls have forced the Russians to pull a growing number of the submarines out of service. Currently, 190 nuclear powered submarines are scheduled for decommissioning. Seventy-six submarines have had their reactors unloaded, 21 have been dismantled and another 55 are waiting to be decommissioned. Forty-two reactors are still loaded with fuel, some of which have been removed from the submarines. The numbers are both confusing and unreliable. At a recent conference(1) hosted by Russia's Ministry of Atomic Energy (MINATOM), attendees huddled regularly to compare figures and find out what the real numbers were. The above statistics represent the consensus view. Despite the confusion, one thing is painfully clear: the number of subs to be decommissioned is far greater than Russia's ability to deal with them. Speaking at the MINATOM conference, A I Yunak, chief of technological safety of the armed forces of the Russian Federation, was explicit, "The recycling capacity of the navy ship repair yards and civil industry are low and do not meet the recycling rate." There is, he underlined, "the impossibility of timely recycling". The numbers bear him out. By 2010, 131 submarines will still be waiting to be decommissioned. In the meantime, the subs sit at their berths, with their hulls rusting. There are many dangers: In addition to the risk of "a loss of buoyancy" (in plain language, they sink, which has happened to a couple of the subs), they tempt hard-pressed locals who steal anything that can be resold. Several incidents have already been reported and a few serious mishaps narrowly averted. Although the theft of nuclear materials is possible, it is unlikely. The greater danger is a radiological accident during the decommissioning process, which is long and complex. It involves moving the subs to a central facility, offshore defueling, storing the spent nuclear fuel and the wastes generated during that process, and the eventual removal and disposal of all wastes associated with decommissioning. No link in the chain is secure. Even the train lines needed to move materials from the Zvezda Far Eastern Shipyard in Bolshoi Kamen, a couple of hours north of Vladivostok, which is the chief recycling facility for Russia's Pacific Fleet, are in disrepair. In addition to the "ordinary" risks, there are three submarines with damaged reactor cores that need special care in recycling. Russian experts have highlighted "a number of urgent problems" in the decommissioning process. The train lines are one bottleneck, as is the lack of storage facilities on land and on water for low-level wastes. A critical concern is the service vessels used to prepare the submarines for decommissioning. According to Russian sources, six of these "floating shops" are damaged and "of grave concern". "The equipment used in unloading and transportation operations is worn and needs overhaul, which has become one of the reasons of radioactive substances released into the environment in spent nuclear fuel unloading." Extensive use has turned these ships into "radiation hazardous objects". They are now part of the problem, and need to be recycled as soon as possible. Russia estimates that the total cost of decommissioning the Pacific Fleet submarines is about US$3.9 billion; $60 million is needed for this year alone. The international community has been helping. The US provides some funds, but that assistance has been limited to strategic submarines: attack subs that don't carry intercontinental ballistic missiles are not covered. The US, Russia and Norway cooperate in the Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation Program, which addresses spent fuel nuclear and waste management and storage. As the name suggests, it has focused on submarines located in the Arctic, which excludes the Far East region. The International Atomic Energy Agency and NATO have cooperated with Russia in dismantling nuclear powered submarines and storing the spent fuel. Recognizing that dumping radioactive waste is a threat to its own environment, the Japanese government has provided funds too. Unfortunately, only one project has materialized over the past decade: the construction of Landysh, or Suzeran, a floating facility to process low-level liquid wastes. At the MINATOM conference, Japanese and British officials expressed in unusually blunt language their frustration over the difficulties in helping the Russians. Diplomats explained that they had money, but that they needed legal guarantees before they could commit funds and these were not forthcoming. "We are not satisfied with the slow pace of implementation," complained one Japanese participant. The failure to move forward exacerbates the problems: not only does it increase the risk of an accident, but Zvezda, and facilities like it, are losing expertise as skilled individuals leave the region to find employment elsewhere. That means that when the money comes through, it may be too late. In addition to tackling the nuclear waste problem directly, scientists from the Cooperative Monitoring Center (CMC) of Sandia National Laboratories, have proposed that the Zvezda site be monitored for radioactive emissions. CMC, in cooperation with the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific, provides similar data at its nuclear energy transparency web site (www.cscap.nuctrans.org). That project is part of an ongoing attempt to create new norms of transparency regarding nuclear energy in the Asia-Pacific region. Russia, along with the US, Japan, Korea and Taiwan contributes real-time data on radiation emissions from various nuclear facilities. John Olsen, a senior scientist at Sandia and the author of the project, believes that Japan should have a natural interest in supporting the program, especially since it could be effected by radiation emissions during the decommissioning process. Russia is rightfully concerned about the submarine decommissioning problem, and has expressed both an understanding of the need and desire for international assistance to deal with this issue. To their credit, Russia's neighbors and other concerned governments have signaled their willingness to help. It is up to Moscow to lay the foundation for long-term collaboration. (1)"Ecological Problems in Nuclear-Powered Submarines Decommissioning and the Development of the Nuclear Power in the Region," September 16-20, 2002, Vladivostok, Russia. Brad Glosserman is director of research for the Pacific Forum CSIS http://www.csis.org/pacfor/ (e-mail pacforum@hawaii.rr.com ) and he recently visited Vladivostock and the Zvezda shipyard. Used by permission. Oct 31, 2002 [http://www.wsicorporate.com/business.asp?id=5292] Copyright Asia Times Online, 6306 The Center, Queen’s Road, Central, Hong Kong. ***************************************************************** 15 Energy watchdog backs new trading agreements [http://www.ft.com] Energy & mining [http://news.ft.com/industries/energy] / BP [http://news.ft.com/industries/energy] Print article | Email By Andrew Taylor, Utilities Correspondent Published: October 31 2002 4:00 | Last Updated: October 31 2002 4:00 The introduction of new electricity trading arrangements, blamed by some generators for the collapse of two of Britain's biggest electricity companies, yesterday received heavyweight backing from the International Energy Agency. The Paris-based agency, the energy watchdog of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, said the rules introduced last year were an "effective government response" to resolve previous "market imperfections". Robert Priddle IEA executive director, said: "The government has shown it is ready to respond promptly when faced with market imperfections or unanticipated developments." Launching its review of UK energy policy, the IEA said: "Recent turmoil in the UK energy market does not detract from the remarkable achievements in the sector since the early 1990s. "The UK's pioneering role in electricity market reform has allowed it to reap the benefits of free and open markets. Retail prices have dropped 30 per cent in real terms since 1990 and the market is truly competitive, with 38 rival companies vying for business at the wholesale and retail levels." The introduction of the new trading arrangements "should further improve the market and has already achieved the goal of substantially reducing wholesale electricity prices". New rules were introduced after Ofgem, the UK energy regulator, said arrangements had allowed generators to manipulate the market. High prices had encouraged generators to build gas-fired power stations; the UK has 25 per cent more generation capacity than necessary to meet peak demand in an average winter. But a 40 per cent fall in wholesale prices since 1998, has left operators facing heavy losses. The government and the regulator have resisted pressure to modify the trading rules. Ministers last month granted British Energy, the nuclear generator and the country's biggest electricity producer, a £650m emergency loan facility to allow it more time to negotiate a financial rescue and prevent it going into administration. The European subsidiary of TXU, the US energy group, last week sold its UK electricity and gas retail supply business to Eon of Germany in a deal worth £1.6bn. The subsidiary, which is struggling to avoid administration, has several long-term power purchase contracts it negotiated when prices were higher. Home [http://www.ft.com] World [http://news.ft.com/world/] | ***************************************************************** 16 In change of course, Russia expresses dissatisfaction over Pyongyang's explanations of nuclear program JUDITH INGRAM, Associated Press Writer Thursday, October 31, 2002 (10-31) 07:33 PST MOSCOW (AP) -- In a sharp change of course, Russia on Thursday accused North Korea of being insufficiently forthcoming about its alleged nuclear weapons program, the Interfax news agency reported. The United States said earlier this month that North Korean officials acknowledged they had a nuclear weapons program during talks with visiting Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly in Pyongyang on Oct. 3-5. A U.S official then went to Russia to present Moscow with evidence of the alleged uranium enrichment program. Moscow reacted with caution, saying it would like to independently check the information before making any definite conclusions. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov said that Moscow had received an explanation from the North Koreans, Interfax reported. But he said it was insufficient. "There is some ambiguity in the statements by North Korean representatives," Losyukov was quoted as saying in an interview with the news agency. "In our view, such ambiguity is very dangerous because it leads to mutual suspicions and can negatively affect the situation on the Korean peninsula." But Losyukov said that the United States, too, had to present its position more clearly, "insofar as the Russian side has not yet received any convincing evidence of the existence of such a program." He said that North Korea, through diplomatic channels, had provided its version of the talks with Kelly and that there was no public admission that North Korea had continued its uranium enrichment program. Losyukov added that it was unclear whether such an admission had been made in the meeting with the American, saying it was "probably expressed as neither admission nor denial." Pak Ui Chun, North Korea's ambassador to Moscow, said Thursday that the United States had broken earlier agreements with Pyongyang by declaring it part of an "axis of evil" along with Iran and Iraq, freeing his nation of any previous obligations, Interfax reported. Despite warmer relations with the United States, Russia has maintained close ties with North Korea -- which President Bush has dubbed part of an "axis of evil" because of its alleged efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction and sponsorship of international terrorism. North Korean leader Kim Jong Il visited Russia in August for the second consecutive summer. The San Francisco Chronicle ***************************************************************** 17 Japan, North Korea talks clouded by bitterness Some progress, but 2 sides remain at odds [http://sfgate.com] Some progress, but 2 sides remain at odds Howard W. French, New York Times [chronfeedback@sfchronicle.com] Thursday, October 31, 2002 --> Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia -- Japan and North Korea ended two days of negotiations Wednesday, angrily talking past each other on issues that each side depicts as the major obstacles to normal relations. Japan's insistence on visits by immediate relatives of people kidnapped by North Korea beginning in the late 1970s drew a strong rebuke from North Korean delegates. In much the same spirit, Tokyo said there was no question of long-promised economic aid to its impoverished neighbor until the abduction issue and concerns about North Korea's nuclear weapons program are resolved. Despite the deep divide, the two sides were able to claim modest progress by agreeing to establish a panel to discuss security issues beginning next month. It was unclear, however, whether North Korea would agree to discuss nuclear weapons in such a forum. In response to the urgings of the United States, Washington's two main East Asian allies, Japan and South Korea, have recently demanded that North Korea abandon efforts to produce highly enriched uranium. The North's nuclear program, which violates a 1994 weapons control agreement, had been conducted in secret, until the country was confronted with U.S. intelligence last month and forced to acknowledge its activities. Since then, the Bush administration has strongly urged Japan not to grant economic aid to North Korea until it consents to the verifiable dismantlement of its uranium program. The sudden emergence of the nuclear issue, aired by Washington after the first high-level visit by an official from the Bush administration to Pyongyang earlier this month, has dramatically upended regional expectations of a quick honeymoon between Japan and North Korea. The two countries are bitterly estranged neighbors that have never had diplomatic relations, and their rapprochement offered each side something it wanted badly. For Japan, the expected result was a dramatic political reward for Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and a rare taste of diplomatic autonomy from its U.S. ally. For North Korea, the stakes were an expected windfall of $10 billion in assistance, offered in settlement of the nation's grievances over colonial atrocities committed by Japan between 1910 and 1945. Washington's insistence that its allies withhold economic cooperation from North Korea until security concerns are resolved had removed Japan's principal form of leverage at the talks in Malaysia, causing North Korea to take a harder line on the abduction issue, while urging the United States to negotiate with it directly. "If the Americans will help our country and promise not to attack us, we can solve the nuclear problem," Pak Ryong Yon, the chief North Korean delegate, said at the conclusion of the talks. After refusing to discuss the nuclear issue at all Tuesday, the North Korean delegation urged Japan on Wednesday to come up with a package solution to normalization, implying large amounts of financial assistance. ©2002 San Francisco Chronicle.   Page A - 10 ***************************************************************** 18 Pentagon aide plans nuclear talks in Korea, Japan Reuters AlertNet - 31 Oct 2002 13:45 WASHINGTON, Oct 31 (Reuters) - A senior Pentagon official will visit Japan and South Korea next week to discuss North Korea's nuclear weapons program and other issues in the region, U.S. defense officials said on Thursday. The officials told Reuters that Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith would depart Washington on Sunday or on Monday. Feith will talk with top officials in Tokyo and Seoul about rising tensions on the Korean peninsula sparked by Pyongyang's admission this month that it was conducting a secret program to enrich uranium that could be used to build nuclear weapons. The U.S. officials did not discuss details, but one said Feith was also likely to exchange views on U.S. plans to hold Defense Consultative Talks with China in Beijing later this year or early next year. Those talks were put on hold after the April collision last year between a Chinese fighter jet and an a U.S. Navy reconnaissance plane over the South China Sea. Despite recent calls from Pyongyang for direct talks with Washington, the United States has ruled out negotiations with the North Koreans until they dismantle the uranium enrichment program. But the United States has also said it wants a peaceful solution and is maintaining contacts with the North through its U.N. mission. ***************************************************************** 19 `NK Should Disarm or Be Disarmed¡¯ KoreaTimes [KoreaTimes National] Is there any other way to deal with North Korea? This is a question that has vexed policymakers and scholars in Seoul and Washington in the past. Even now, this question is gaining relevance, as Pyongyang is believed to be resorting to brinkmanship of a new kind to press their case to the South Korea-United States alliance, having confessed to running a nuclear weapons program. Currently, the situation is as follows. Early this month, the North told a senior U.S. official of its secret program to enrich uranium, a procedure that can lead to building an atomic bomb. The U.S., whose foreign policy is pillared by non-proliferation, reacted strongly, accusing the Stalinist country of violating the 1994 Agreed Framework, in which Pyongyang promised to freeze its nuclear activities in return for the provision of safer nuclear reactors and heavy fuel oil to ease the North¡¯s power shortages for the intervening years. The eight-year-old pact specifically regards Pyongyang¡¯s plutonium acquisition from its small reactor prior to 1994. Then, Seoul, Washington and Tokyo held a three-way summit in Los Cabos, Mexico this week, issuing a joint statement calling on Pyongyang to give up its new nuke program, promising economic benefits in return. It was a remarkable show of unity. A couple of things have complicated the already-complex issue. Just before the trilateral summit, Pyongyang proposed a non-aggression pact with U.S., giving the impression that it was trying to sideline Seoul to open direct lines of communication with Washington, as it typically did in the past. On the other hand, Washington repeatedly made clear that it wouldn¡¯t talk to Pyongyang, unless it first gave up its nuclear program. Stuck between Washington and Pyongyang, Seoul is trying hard to keep itself involved in whatever deal will emerge in order not to repeat the North¡¯s nuclear crisis in the early 1990s. President Kim Dae-jung wants to retain a say in the decision-making process directly affecting the country¡¯s fate, as he did at the height of his Nobel Peace Prize-winning ``Sunshine Policy¡¯¡¯ of engaging the communist state. As things stand now, it seems hard to find common ground between the two opposing sides. Plus, Seoul has yet to move itself to the center and play a decisive role in the resolution of the North Korean problem. According to some scholars, the current situation could change quickly should the way of handling it be modified and U.S. President George W. Bush¡¯s take on the situation as an eventual opportunity does make sense. ``What Seoul and Washington are doing right now is trying to plug a round hole with a square brick,¡¯¡¯ said Lee Jeong-seok, a North Korea specialist at the Sejong Institute. He said that a careful look at the statement made by Pyongyang calling for a North Korea-U.S. non-aggression pact has few references regarding its economic situation. ``It was a plea to ensure its survival,¡¯¡¯ he said. ``Still, Seoul and Washington are offering economic benefits for its nuclear stand-down.¡¯¡¯ Lee said that it was important to see the others¡¯ positions more clearly and predicted that the situation would change, as the two sides overcome an initial stage of their ``who will blink first¡¯¡¯ game and make adjustments accordingly. Others, however, see it from a different perspective. ``Pyongyang has resorted to a wolf-crying brinkmanship once too often,¡¯¡¯ said another North Korea expert. ``Few would be ready to give the benefit of the doubt to the Stalinist country now.¡¯¡¯ He said that it was time for the North to disarm itself or face the prospect of being disarmed. Another variable is how solid the three-way unity will prove to be. As shown in its first round of normalization talks, Tokyo raised an issue over Pyongyang¡¯s nuclear problem, being faithful to their trilateral agreement. Although Seoul has called on Pyongyang to dismantle its nuclear program, there is a great deal of potential for a different view. President Kim twice in two weeks warned against scrapping the Agreed Framework, while Washington has not bothered to hide its intention to quit it, as it said that Pyongyang had already done so. The problem with an alternative policy would be that it should be very delicately handled or could be interpreted as the sign of a schism. ÀԷ½ð£ 2002/10/31 17:47 ***************************************************************** 20 TVA hopes distributors can help fund nuclear restart 2002-10-31 by Jennifer Hodson of The Daily Times Staff The Tennessee Valley Authority's plans for 2003 involve working to restart one unit of the Browns Ferry nuclear reactor in Alabama and continued investment in environmental initiatives -- projects which TVA hopes its distributors can help fund. TVA has sent out letters to distributors in an attempt to gauge interest in a discounted energy unit plan, which would allow distributors with readily available capital to purchase power in advance in exchange for a discount. TVA Director Bill Baxter said the pay-in-advance plan could not possibly fund the entire Browns Ferry project -- estimated to cost $1.8 billion over a five-year period -- but would have an impact. ``So we're seeing what the level of interest is, and we'll go forward,'' he said at a press conference Wednesday. Alcoa City Manager Mark Johnson said Alcoa Electric is considering TVA's offer. While the city does not have the extra capital to invest in the plan -- extra capital is reserved for emergencies, he said -- the city is talking with Cumberland Securities about the possibility of issuing bonds to purchase power in advance. A spokesperson for Maryville Electric was not available for comment. Also Wednesday, TVA announced its employees will receive a cash reward ranging from 4 to 6 percent of their pay for achieving performance goals set at the beginning of the fiscal year. President and Chief Operating Officer Ike Zeringue said the employee-bonus program comes with a $44 million price tag, but employees were responsible for ``well over $100 million'' in efficiency improvements. ``This program is paying for itself time and time again,'' he said. ``We tie compensation to performance.'' For fiscal year 2002, TVA reported $73 million in net income, despite generating 3 percent less operating revenue than projected. TVA Chairman Glenn McCullough Jr. said the drop in revenue was the result of an unusually mild winter and the overall economic downturn. This drop, however, was offset by high summer temperatures and an ability to purchase power at a cheaper rate, he added. The delivered cost of power in 2002 was 4.07 cents per kilowatt-hour, and Chief Financial Officer David N. Smith predicted that cost to be 4.12 cents in 2003. No rate increase However, TVA plans no rate increase in the coming fiscal year. Total revenue for 2002 was $6.8 billion from the sale of 160 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity. Also in fiscal year 2002, TVA reduced its debt by $120 million -- $70 million more than projected -- for a total of $2.5 billion since 1997. Interest expense reached its lowest level in 12 years. TVA also continued its work to reduce sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. Director Skila Harris said TVA has cut sulfur dioxide emissions by 73 percent since 1976 and cut nitrogen dioxide emissions by 50 percent since 1995. She said TVA has committed to investing an average of almost $1 million per day over the next decade to further reduce polluting emissions. Materials All materials Copyright © 2002 Horvitz Newspapers. The Daily Times 307 East Harper Ave. Maryville, TN 37801 *or* PO Box 9740, 37802-9740 Phone: 865-981-1100 Fax: 865-981-1175 ***************************************************************** 21 Tennessee Valley Targets?* Story by Mike Dello Stritto on Wed, Oct 30th 2002 (10:23 PM) It's a called tritium. It's a radioactive form of hydrogen, used to increase the nation's nuclear arsenal. It hasn't been made in 14 years, but now it's back, under orders from the president... / It'll be Sequoyah and Watt's Bar now producing something besides energy. The nuclear reactors will now be used to make the tritium for nuclear weapons. There's no question of if-- or when-- only, can those from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission calm the fears of those who live here. "I think it's disgusting that you all want to participate in this," acitvist John Johnson says. Some are more outspoken than others, but all 50 people at the Rhea County Welcome Center are here for answers. "I'm concerned about it being harmful to the property values, to the recration value we have there. We fish quite a bit," Theresa Brown told NewsChannel 9. "I don't care if it's a done deal. I'm still going to speak out," Johnson said. Johnson and 13 others are here with a group called Earth First. They're worried about not an accident, but being victims of a terrorist attack on new Tennessee Valley targets. "Thanks a lot for putting terrorist targets in our backyard," Johnson tells the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "The fact that there's tritium being made here, we don't believe, going to make these plants any more vulnerable," Herb Berkow of the NRC tells NewsChannel 9. The *TVA* and Nuclear Regulatory Comission promise the tritium won't make Watts Bar and Sequoyah any more dangerous for those who work there or live nearby. That promise is falling on some deaf ears here. "Liars, scammers, and hypocrites. You're disgusting and you've abducated your moral responsibility. And you need to step back and wash your hands of this project," Johnson screams to officials gathered in the welcome center. This is a project already four or five years in the making. By now, all agencies involved have jumped through all the bureacratic hoops and tritium production is expected to start in 2005. By the way, this will be the only place in the country producing the material. Copyright © 2000-2001 WTVC NewsChannel 9, Chattanooga ,TN ***************************************************************** 22 Thought the Nuclear Power Industry was Dead? Guess again. The Bush Administration is Breathing New Life into Commercial Nukes. CorpWatch By Karl Grossman Special to CorpWatch October 23, 2002 Last month, nuclear industry executives and U.S. government officials got together in Washington, D.C. for a conference called "The Nuclear Renaissance"-- a gathering boosting a comeback of commercial nuclear power in the U.S. "Renaissance" has replaced "revival" as the word being used by nuclear proponents in the U.S. and around the world to describe their desired recovery of the nuclear industry. There has not been an order of a new nuclear power plant in the U.S. since the 1979 Three Mile Island accident shattered public trust in nuclear technology. The 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster damaged confidence in atomic energy worldwide. But the nuclear industry and its allies in government are back for a "renaissance." In March 2003 there will be a Nuclear Renaissance Forum in Chicago sponsored by the nuclear plant manufacturers Framatome and Westinghouse. A few days before last months Washington meeting, the World Nuclear Association Annual Symposium in London featured a session on "Nuclear Renaissance." Russia and the US have teamed up to launch a new 'Atoms for Peace and Prosperity' Program. -- Dr. Andrei Gagarinski, Kurchatov Institute, Russia At the session, Dr. Andrei Gagarinski, director of international affairs at Russias Kurchatov Institute, said his atomic research facility had teamed with the U.S. Department of Energy-owned Sandia National Laboratories to put together "a new Atoms for Peace and Prosperity Program." The program was considered at President George Bushs summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in May, according to Gagarinski. In the U.K. in August, Robin Jeffrey, chairman of British Energy, called for a "nuclear renaissance" telling the British Nuclear Engineering Society that "working in partnership [we can] create a financial and commercial framework for a programme of new build." Nuclear Globalization Meanwhile, as it prepares for its hoped-for "renaissance," the nuclear industry has globalized: * British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. has purchased Westinghouse (the worlds largest reactor manufacturer) and ABB/Combustion Engineering (itself the product of an earlier merger of the Swedish ABB and the U.S. corporation Combustion Engineering). * Siemens, the largest reactor builder in Germany, and Framatome, with a monopoly on construction of French reactors, announced their intent to merge most aspects of their nuclear businesses. * General Electric (the world's second largest reactor manufacturer after Westinghouse) joined with Mitsubishi to build new atomic plants in Japan. * Minatom, the giant Russian state-owned nuclear entity, is moving to build new nuclear plants in Russia and internationally. A handful of giant multinational energy corporations are positioning themselves to become "the robber barons of the 2lst Century," says Michael Mariotte, Executive Director of the Nuclear Information & Resource Service/World Information Service on Energy-Amsterdam (NIRS-WISE Amsterdam). Mariotte added that "perhaps no industry is embracing globalization quite so fervently," in a field "where the stakes are highest, where the threats to all life are most at risk." Paul Gunter, head of the organizations Reactor Watchdog Project, who attended the "Nuclear Renaissance" conference in Washington, said rather than a renaissance, what is involved is "a relapse into the failed nuclear energy policy" of the past. George W. Bush: Nuclear President "If you set aside Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, the safety record of nuclear is really is good." -- Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill The "renaissance" also now comes with what Mariotte says "may be the most ardently pro-nuclear power presidency in U.S. history." The Bush administrations stance on nuclear power is aggressive and minimizes the dangers of atomic technology. As Bushs Secretary of Treasury Paul ONeill has told The Wall Street Journal, "If you set aside Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, the safety record of nuclear is really is good." The administration struck a close working relationship with the nuclear industry well before taking office. Its energy "transition" advisors included: * Joseph Colvin, president of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the lead nuclear industry-funded trade group. * J. Bennett Johnston who as a senator was a leading pro-nuclear power figure in Congress and now runs a consulting firm that assists the nuclear industry. * Thomas Kuhn, president of the Edison Electric Institute and former head of the American Nuclear Energy Council, forerunner of the NEI, and a friend of Bush going back to their days at Yale Representatives of four U.S. utilities involved with nuclear power. Two weeks after being sworn in, Bush set up a "National Energy Policy Development Group" and appointed Vice President Dick Cheney as its chairman. Its members included ONeill and Andrew Lundquist, who also coordinated the energy "transition" team was named executive director. "The National Energy Policy Development Group supports the expansion of nuclear energy in the United States as a major component of our National Energy Policy," declared the group's report, issued ten weeks later. "America," said Bush in unveiling the plan, should "expand a clean and unlimited source of energy: nuclear power." This National Energy Policy whose recommendations were discussed at length at the Nuclear Renaissance conference - would substantially increase the use of nuclear power in the U.S. both by building new nuclear power plants many on existing nuclear plant sites, and extending the 40-year licenses of currently operating plants by another 20 years each. Nukes: Exception to the War on Terrorism? Some observers might think the September 11th terrorist attacks -- and the reported plans by Al Qaeda to strike at U.S. nuclear plants -- might hold up plans for a "nuclear renaissance." But Richard A. Meserve, chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), struck positive notes at the Nuclear Renaissance conference at which he was a keynote speaker. The NRC was created in 1975 to impartially regulate nuclear power replacing the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, which Congress deemed to be in conflict of interest being set up to both promote and regulate nuclear power. "First, the physical protection at nuclear power plants was strong before September 11th. I am aware of no other industry that has had to satisfy the tough requirements that the NRC has had in place for a quarter of a century," stated Meserve. "Secondly, there have been no specific credible threats of a terrorist attack on nuclear power plants since September 11th," he added. "Third" Meserve concluded, "in light of the events of September 11th, the NRC has recognized the need to reexamine past security strategies to ensure that we have the right protections in place for the long term." "The agency could not have presented the situation farther from the truth," noted Gunter of the Reactor Watchdog Project. "Before September 11th, the industry and NRC were mired in an endless dialogue on security deficiencies and the rising cost of safeguarding nuclear power plants" he said. And federal security exercises conducted since 1991 led to "failing grades" half the time, according to Gunter. Gunter said that after the September 11th attacks, the NRC closed down its formal security exercise program. "The vulnerability of attacks from the air and the water were never evaluated," he explained. "Contrary to Dr. Meserves remarks, nuclear power plants remain both structurally and programmatically vulnerable to sophisticated and premeditated acts of terrorism," according to the head of the watchdog group. Corporate Welfare Also making a presentation at the "Nuclear Renaissance" conference was Westinghouse Vice President for New Plants Ernie H. Kennedy who described "the post-TMI phase" for the nuclear industry as a "collapse of new plant orders, cancellation of existing orders" and "sharply increasing O&M [operation and maintenance] costs." But, he said, the nuclear industry in the 1990s had been busy "getting the house in order" and "preparing for the renaissance 2000s." Now, said Mr. Kennedy, there is "slow but sustained improvement in public acceptance" and "improved political support." Gail H. Marcus, Bush administration appointee as principal deputy director of the U.S. Department of Energy, who is also president of the pro-industry American Nuclear Society, began her presentation by quoting from report of the National Energy Policy Development Group. She said new nuclear power plants would be built under a "cost-shared" arrangement between the federal government and utilities. This will be combined, she said, with the Department of Energys "Early Site Permit" or expedited nuclear plant process on three projects soon to be advanced. The "cost-shared" and "Early Site Permit" arrangements will be initially used in construction by: * Dominion Energy for new nuclear plant at the current North Anna nuclear plant site in Virginia * Entergy for a new nuclear plant at the Grand Gulf nuclear plant site in Mississippi * Excelon for a new nuclear plant at the Clinton nuclear plant site in Illinois. Marcus said the new plants were expected to come on line by 2005 and some, or all, of the "advanced" nuclear plant would be deployed by 2010. The Lone Dissenter The sponsors of The Nuclear Renaissance Conference -- Framatome, Canadian reactor manufacturer AECL Technologies, Winston & Strawn, a Washington law firm that represents clients involved with nuclear power, and EXCEL, a provider of services for U.S. and international commercial nuclear power facilities -- allowed one anti-nuclear advocate to make a presentation. "The real question is: How should the nuclear industry be held responsible for the health and environmental disasters that it has created?" -- Winonah Hauter, Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program, Public Citizen Winonah Hauter, director of the Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program at Ralph Naders Public Citizen, spoke as part of a panel discussion titled "How Should the Environmental Benefits of Nuclear Assets Be Valued?" "The answer to the question about valuing the benefits of nuclear assets is simple. There are none," Hauter stated. Then she fired off questions of her own. "The real questions that should have been asked at this conference is: How should the nuclear industry be held responsible for and required to bear the full cost of the health and environmental disasters that it has created? Why are our government agencies lapdogs for the industry? How has the industry bought public policy?" As to the claim of nuclear proponents at the conference that atomic plants assist in offsetting global warming, Hauter pointed out that the nuclear fuel cycle creates a vast amount of greenhouse gases. "An elaborate energy-intensive process of uranium mining, milling and enrichment must take place before the fuel rods can even be fabricated. All of these processes use massive quantities of fossil fuels. The manufacture and construction of reactors require more fossil fuels. And [as to] the back end of the fuel cycleif the industry is successful in dumping waste on the unwilling citizens of Nevadait will take more fossil fuel to move thousands of shipments." "And even if nuclear energy didnt use fossil fuel," she went on "the regular radiation releases from plants would way offset any benefit." Hauter challenged the industry public relations campaign promoting nuclear energy as a "clean" alternative to fossil fuels. "Nuclear power plants are not cost-effective, which means they can only be built if nuclear corporations are allowed special dispensation from the government. Let me put that more clearly: the industry has to feed at the trough of taxpayer money to survive. So the industry is looking for new ways to justify its existence." Activists Crash the Party The Nuclear Renaissance Conference received uninvited guests, too. Activists from Greenpeace crashed the conference with a 200-pound ice sculpture depicting a nuclear plant melting. Carved into the ice statue were the words No New Nukes. "Greeenpeace is putting plans for any nuclear renaissance on ice" said Jim Riccio, nuclear policy analyst for Greenpeace. "Despite benefiting from millions of dollars of government subsidies, nuclear power plants are still too expensive to build, too dangerous to operate and too vulnerable to potential terrorist attacks." The activists also distributed a broadside at the conference called The /No New Nukes Times/. A New York Times-like front page featured stories with headlines such as, "Once Touted As Too Cheap To Meter Now Too Costly to Matter" and "Dr. Strangelove Hands Plutonium Over to Homer Simpson." Conference attendee Gunter of NIRS/WISE Amsterdam commented that in order to bring about a "renaissance" the nuclear industry faces a number of obstacles. Chief among them he cited "increased public mistrust and growing opposition to a proliferation of new nukes." "The meltdown of the industry plans hatched in the early 1970s to build a thousand reactors by the year 2000 was in large part the result of a public unwilling to swallow the lies of nuclear industrialists and their political cronies," said Gunter. "New construction on the enormous scale the industry must contemplate will provide the anti-nuclear movement with the opportunity to raise concerns over the vulnerability and costs of security, the proliferation of an already unmanageable nuclear waste problem and the inherent risk of an accident associated with the most expensive and dangerous process conceivable for boiling water to make electricity" according to the head of the watchdog group. Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, is the author of books on nuclear technology including Cover Up: What You ARE NOT Supposed To Know About Nuclear Power and host of numerous television programs on atomic energy available from EnviroVideo . *CorpWatch* PO Box 29344 San Francisco, CA 94129 USA Tel: 415-561-6568 Fax: 415-561-6493 URL: http://www.corpwatch.org Email: corpwatch@corpwatch.org ***************************************************************** 23 Anti-nuke groups plan increased efforts to close VY Brattleboro Reformer Thursday, October 31, 2002 - 12:36:57 AM MST By EESHA WILLIAMS Reformer Staff VERNON -- It has been three months since Windham County's five anti-nuclear organizations heard the news that they had failed in their long struggle to stop the $180 million sale of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant to Entergy Corp. of New Orleans. Since then, the groups have been relatively quiet. But now, with several public events planned in the next month, the groups say they are gearing up for an even more challenging fight: closing the plant altogether. Tomorrow, the Putney-based Movers and Shakers Society, which sponsored the ballot question to shut Yankee that in March won 49 percent of the vote in nine towns near Yankee, holds a "Close Yankee Network Night, Dinner, and Dance," from 6 p.m. to midnight at the Putney Community Center. Organizers say donations will be accepted and will go toward their campaign to replace Yankee with electricity-generating solar panels, windmills, and biomass facilities. For more information, call 387-5229. Putney resident Derrik Jordon of the Citizens Awareness Network announced Wednesday a public forum to be held Nov. 18 at 6 p.m. at the West Village Meeting House in Brattleboro, "Living with Nuclear Waste and Terrorism in Our Neighborhoods." Professor Gordon Thompson of Clark University, executive director of the Institute for Resource and Security Studies, will speak at the forum about how to protect Vermont Yankee from terrorist attacks, Jordan said. Also at the forum will be nuclear engineer David Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, and Paul Gunter of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington. For more information, call 387-4050. Brattleboro resident Gary Sachs of the group ShutVYnow.org said his group is focussing its efforts on three areas: * Lobbying the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to shut Yankee on the grounds that the plant's evacuation plan is inadequate because it has never been fully tested; * lobbying the state Legislature to expand the emergency evacuation zone from 10 to 20 miles around the plant, and making sure everyone in the 10 mile zone has picked up their free potassium iodide pill -- only 9 percent of eligible residents have their pill now, Sachs said; * lobbying the state Legislature to adopt a law recently passed in Maine that requires nuclear plant owners to notify the public of how much radiation plants release. Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee spokesman Rob Williams said on Wednesday the plant's evacuation plan has been tested and approved by FEMA every two years and is therefore adequate. The Brattleboro-based New England Coalition is lobbying the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to shut Yankee until it resolves two safety issues, spokesman Ray Shadis said Wednesday: * The plant, which opened in 1972, was designed to last 30 - 35 years, Shadis said. "It's a 1950s design, built with 1960s engineering and components," he said. "It has been used very hard." * Entergy has said it plans to increase the amount of electricity Yankee generates. Shadis said there are only three ways it can do that, and all are risky: First, it could use more highly-enriched nuclear fuel; second, it could "run the reactor hotter;" third, it can try to reduce maintenance shut downs by doing repairs while the plant is running. "That's like trying to fix one of the engines on a two engine airplane while you're still flying," Shadis said. Williams said any plan to increase Yankee's electricity output would have to be approved by the NRC as safe. "Many plants have gone through that process successfully," he said. The Dummerston-based Nuclear Education Group is working to educate the public about the positions on Vermont Yankee held by candidates who will be on Tuesday's ballot, said spokeswoman Mary Ellen Copeland. That information is available by calling 257-0012. ©1999-2002 by MediaNews Group, Inc. and NENI Newspapers ***************************************************************** 24 Corporate Restructuring to Protect Nukes from Liability CorpWatch By Karl Grossman Special to CorpWatch October 23, 2002 Not only have manufacturers of nuclear plants undergone globalization, but utilities in the U.S. have been engaged in consolidation and mergers in the last several years along with the increased use of limited liability and multi-tiered holding companies to own nuclear plants. According to a report titled Financial Insecurity done by Synapse Energy Economics of Cambridge Massachusetts for the Standing for Truth About Radiation (STAR) Foundation and Riverkeeper, the use of such "complex organizational structurescan shield the parent corporations and their shareholders from liabilities." "Nuclear power plants were traditionally constructed and operated mainly by integrated investor-owned utilities under 'cost-of-service regulation' through which necessary funds were provided to operate and decommission the plants safely. Starting in the mid-1990s, however, many nuclear power plant owners began to reorganize and to sell their nuclear units to unaffiliated companies or corporate affiliates," it notes. Some of the entities with such set-ups cited by Financial Insecurity include the Excelon Corporation-now with 10 nuclear plants, Entergy-with 10, Dominion Resources-with six, and Constellation Energy Group-with four. A key object of the new corporate set-ups, says Scott Cullen, executive director of the East Hampton, New York-based STAR, is in a nutshell, to avoid liability. The nature of a limited liability corporation," said Cullen, an attorney, "is to insulate the owners and stockholders from liability in the event of litigation or some sort of accident." "We are not saying that limited liability corporations in and of themselves are bad. But we are saying that the ownership of ultra-hazardous machines by limited liability corporations is extremely problematic," Cullen explained. "The idea is to buy these things cheaply and to run them basically on skeleton crews thereby reducing operation and maintenance costs-to run these things into the ground," says Paul Gunter, head of the Reactor Watchdog Project at the Nuclear Information & Resource Service/World Information Service on Energy-Amsterdam. The conclusion of Financial Insecurity: "Over the last ten years, the ownership of an increasing number of nuclear power plants has been transferred to a relatively small number of very large corporations. These large corporations have adopted business structures that create separate limited liability subsidiaries for each nuclear plant, and in a number of instances, separate operating and ownership entities that provide additional liability buffers." "The limited liability structures being utilized are effective mechanisms for transferring profits to the parent/owner while avoiding tax payments. They also provide a financial shield for the parent/owner if an accident, equipment failure, safety upgrade, or unusual maintenance need at one particular plant creates a large unanticipated cost. The parent/owner can walk away, by declaring bankruptcy for that separate entity, without jeopardizing its other nuclear and non-nuclear investments." Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, is the author of books on nuclear technology including Cover Up: What You ARE NOT Supposed To Know About Nuclear Power and host of numerous television programs on atomic energy available from EnviroVideo at www.envirovideo.com Email: corpwatch@corpwatch.org ***************************************************************** 25 NRC to Hold Public Meetings in Mississippi on the Early Site Permit Process for the Grand Gulf Site NRC: News Release - Region IV - 2002-045 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov No. IV-02-045 October 31, 2002 CONTACT: Roger Hannah Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold two public meetings on November 14, 2002, in Port Gibson, Mississippi, to discuss its review process for an early site permit application from Entergy Inc. at its Grand Gulf site. Entergy has notified the NRC that it expects to file an application in June 2003 for one or more new reactors at that site. The meetings scheduled for November 14 are designed to provide information on the NRC Early Site Permit review process, as well as outline future opportunities for public involvement in that process. Additional information on the early site permit process is on the NRCs web site at www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/license-reviews/esp.html. The meetings will be held in Port Gibson City Hall, 1005 College Street in Port Gibson, and parking will be available in the rear of the City Hall Building. The two meetings will be similar with one in the afternoon at 2:00 and one in the evening at 7:00. In addition, the NRC staff will host an open house beginning one hour before each meeting. During the open house period, individual NRC staff members will be available for informal discussions about the early site permit process. Although only very limited construction activities would be allowed by the NRC under an early site permit, the permit would allow the applicant to resolve many environmental, site safety and emergency planning issues before beginning actual construction of a new reactor facility. If the NRC approves the new reactor site, Entergy could hold or bank the Grand Gulf site for up to 20 years before filing an application with the NRC for approval to begin construction of a new facility. Friday, November 01, 2002 ***************************************************************** 26 NRC wants more data on nuclear plants Las Vegas SUN October 31, 2002 ASSOCIATED PRESS TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) - Nuclear regulators will order operators of pressurized-water nuclear plants to give more detailed information about how the plants work, The Blade reported Thursday. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will issue the directive next week to 68 plants because the agency was not satisfied with the response about potential corrosion damage. The agency ordered a nationwide review of pressurized-water nuclear plants after boric acid nearly ate through a 6-inch-thick steel reactor cap at the Davis-Besse plant near Toledo. It was the most extensive corrosion ever found on a U.S. nuclear reactor. Victor Dricks, an NRC spokesman, said the agency has enough information to stand behind its assertion that no other plant has a rust problem that compares to Davis-Besse. But the NRC will tell utilities in its directive that it believes a comprehensive boric acid corrosion control program is needed to exceed current standards. The first responses indicated that technical follow-up information was lacking, Dricks said. Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp. is paying about $200 million to repair its Davis-Besse plant, install a new lid and buy replacement power until it is restarted. The reactor has been shut down since Feb. 16. The company wants to restart the plant early next year, but regulators have not indicated when they will allow it to operate again. On the Net: http://www.nrc.gov [http://www.nrc.gov] http://www.ucsusa.org [http://www.ucsusa.org] http://www.firstenergycorp.com [http://www.firstenergycorp.com] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 27 TVA hopes distributors can help fund nuclear restart thedailytimes.com - 2002-10-31 by Jennifer Hodson of The Daily Times Staff The Tennessee Valley Authority's plans for 2003 involve working to restart one unit of the Browns Ferry nuclear reactor in Alabama and continued investment in environmental initiatives -- projects which TVA hopes its distributors can help fund. TVA has sent out letters to distributors in an attempt to gauge interest in a discounted energy unit plan, which would allow distributors with readily available capital to purchase power in advance in exchange for a discount. TVA Director Bill Baxter said the pay-in-advance plan could not possibly fund the entire Browns Ferry project -- estimated to cost $1.8 billion over a five-year period -- but would have an impact. ``So we're seeing what the level of interest is, and we'll go forward,'' he said at a press conference Wednesday. Alcoa City Manager Mark Johnson said Alcoa Electric is considering TVA's offer. While the city does not have the extra capital to invest in the plan -- extra capital is reserved for emergencies, he said -- the city is talking with Cumberland Securities about the possibility of issuing bonds to purchase power in advance. A spokesperson for Maryville Electric was not available for comment. Also Wednesday, TVA announced its employees will receive a cash reward ranging from 4 to 6 percent of their pay for achieving performance goals set at the beginning of the fiscal year. President and Chief Operating Officer Ike Zeringue said the employee-bonus program comes with a $44 million price tag, but employees were responsible for ``well over $100 million'' in efficiency improvements. ``This program is paying for itself time and time again,'' he said. ``We tie compensation to performance.'' For fiscal year 2002, TVA reported $73 million in net income, despite generating 3 percent less operating revenue than projected. TVA Chairman Glenn McCullough Jr. said the drop in revenue was the result of an unusually mild winter and the overall economic downturn. This drop, however, was offset by high summer temperatures and an ability to purchase power at a cheaper rate, he added. The delivered cost of power in 2002 was 4.07 cents per kilowatt-hour, and Chief Financial Officer David N. Smith predicted that cost to be 4.12 cents in 2003. No rate increase However, TVA plans no rate increase in the coming fiscal year. Total revenue for 2002 was $6.8 billion from the sale of 160 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity. Also in fiscal year 2002, TVA reduced its debt by $120 million -- $70 million more than projected -- for a total of $2.5 billion since 1997. Interest expense reached its lowest level in 12 years. TVA also continued its work to reduce sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. Director Skila Harris said TVA has cut sulfur dioxide emissions by 73 percent since 1976 and cut nitrogen dioxide emissions by 50 percent since 1995. She said TVA has committed to investing an average of almost $1 million per day over the next decade to further reduce polluting emissions. ***************************************************************** 33 UK: MP leads fight for A-bomb survivors *October 31, 2002 11:55* NORWICH MP Ian Gibson is leading a Commons fight to win compensation for the victims of Britain's atom bomb tests in the 1950s and 1960s. A Commons motion by Dr Gibson calling on the Government to help soldiers, their children and grandchildren suffering horrific effects of radiation exposure, has already attracted support from more than 50 fellow MPs. Dr Gibson, a leading scientific expert on the effects of radiation and cancer, is also planning a mass rally of survivors at Westminster to bring the call for compensation home to Ministers. Norwich veterans and civilians involved in the nuclear tests held by the British and Americans in Australia, Christmas Island and South Pacific today praised efforts to highlight their plight. David Freeman, 63, from Thorpe St Andrew, was just 18 in 1957 when he was posted to Christmas Island where a number of atomic bomb tests were carried out. He said they were told to shut their eyes and shield them with their hands as the bomb was detonated 30 miles away. Mr Freeman, a grandfather of six, said: "Dr Gibson came to see me about nine months ago and was keen to hear about the issue because of his expertise in cancer. "What we are trying to get over is that we were never given any proper medicals, so how do you prove that families are now suffering things like cancer as a result. "We are all hoping that we will now get a proper hearing on the issue in the House of Commons." Survivors claim they were not given suitable protective clothing during the tests and were exposed to large doses of atomic radiation, claims denied by the Ministry of Defence. Campaigners say survivors, their children, grandchildren and even great-grandchildren have suffered birth deformities, miscarriages and cancers as a result. Nearly 2,000 ex-servicemen who witnessed Britain's A-bomb tests in the 1950s were earlier this year given legal aid to sue the Government. The Commons motion calls on the Government to formerly apologise to victims, compensate them with pension in line with US servicemen and set up health monitoring and treatment programmes for their descendants. Dr Gibson, who represents Norwich North, said: "For many, many years I have known of the hazards of radiation and I know that there is no such thing as a safe dose as the Government claims. "I have met many people and been contacted by constituents who were involved in the nuclear tests. I can see that they and their families are suffering from exactly the same long-term effects, in some cases lethal." He added: "This is an issue I have been interested in for many years so I didn't take much persuading to put down the Commons motion. There has already been tremendous support and interest is growing all the time. "The Government needs to listen to the people. They are ahead of ministers in what they suspect really happened." Sheila Gray, secretary of the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association, said: "We are delighted the issue of getting justice for veterans is going to be raised in the House of Commons." Copyright © 2002 Archant Regional. All rights ***************************************************************** 34 Low Radioactive Levels At Old BWXT Landfills * Wednesday October 30, 2002 11:06pm Reporter: *Liz Bryant* Campbell Co., VA - Lynchburg's BWX Technologies says they're well aware of two of their landfills containing low levels of radioactivity -- they add, the situation is under control. BWXT is in the process of securing government approval to remove the industrial waste and ship it to a repository in Utah. They've been working on this with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the EPA since the landfills were taken out of use in 1990. */Ron Hite, BWXT Public Relations - "It has absolutely no health risks to our employees, to the general public, and for that matter certainly not to the environment." /*The waste moving process will begin after the NRC approves BWXT's removal plan. Copyright 2002 WSET, Inc. ***************************************************************** 35 India: Vajpayee declares open waste immobilistion plant © 1991-2002 *Interfax, All rights reserved* News and other data on this ***************************************************************** 37 SA: Radioactivity in Mooi River [http://www.news24.com] South Africa Western Cape 30/10/2002 19:47 - (SA) Cape Town - The gold mining industry has turned the mud of North West province's Mooi River radioactive, posing a potential threat to the health of people who live along its banks. Water Affairs Minister Ronnie Kasrils said the radioactive pollution affects a section of the river between Carltonville and Potchefstroom, and is the result of "water being discharged by the gold mines". The water in the Mooi - an Afrikaans name meaning "beautiful" - flows across the province from north to south before entering the Vaal River about 20km upstream from Orkney. Replying to a parliamentary question in the National Assembly on Wednesday, Kasrils described the level of radioactivity in the river as low, and said it "did not cause a health risk to any downstream user". A study by his department in March this year had shown the radioactivity pollution was "mainly concentrated in the sediments of dams and rivers". "The radioactive material is chemically trapped in the organic materials, and is not released into the waters of the Mooi River. "My department is, however, concerned about the possible external conditions, such as changes in pH (a measure of acidity), that may release the radioactivity into the water," he said. Regular sampling was being carried out to "monitor the pollution plume, and to determine if it was moving downstream towards Potchefstroom". "Currently, people are not drinking this water untreated, and the purification works at Potchefstroom removes any radioactive material before it is delivered to any communities," Kasrils said. The minister's reply did not make clear which gold mines were responsible, now or in the past, for the radioactive pollution. He said a 1999 study had shown it was "mainly caused by gold mining activities since the 1930s". The mining effluent had also caused a high salt load in the Mooi River, although this was "within tolerable limits". Kasrils was replying to a question posed by Freedom Front MP Petrus Groenewald. About News24 - all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 38 Neb. Appeals Ruling in Nuke Lawsuit Las Vegas SUN October 30, 2002 ASSOCIATED PRESS LINCOLN, Neb.- The state on Wednesday appealed a federal judge's order that it pay $151 million for blocking construction of a dump for low-level radioactive waste. The motion before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals also asks for a chance to present the case to a jury. In a Sept. 30 ruling, Judge Richard Kopf denied Nebraska's request for a jury trial, and said that former Gov. Ben Nelson, a Democrat who is now a U.S. senator, engaged in a politically motivated plot to keep the dump from being built in Nebraska. Nebraska officials argued that they refused to license the dump because of concerns over possible pollution and a high water table at the proposed site near the South Dakota border. The dump was to hold waste from Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska and Oklahoma - which formed the Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Compact in 1983. On the Net: Central Interstate Low Level Radioactive Waste Compact Commission: http://www.cillrwcc.org/ [http://www.cillrwcc.org/] U.S. District Court for Nebraska: http://www.ned.uscourts.gov [http://www.ned.uscourts.gov] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 39 Voters face radioactive waste issue Tuesday By Meagan Anderson /NewsNet Staff Writer/ 30 Oct 2002 When Utah voters go to vote on Tuesday, Nov. 5, they will confront what is perhaps one of the most controversial issues to face Utah in years. Deciding which candidate to elect can be a difficult choice, but this year voters will be required to decided the future of an initiative that contains 13,000 words and enacts or changes 100 state laws. Initiative 1, also known as the Radioactive Waste Restrictions Act, will raise taxes on the producers of class A radioactive waste that is transported and disposed of in Utah. Utah currently accepts class A waste, which is waste that retains its radioactivity for less than 100 years, and taxes waste producers 35 cents per cubic foot for the waste, said Howard Stephenson, president for the Utah Taxpayers Association. Initiative 1 will raise the tax up to $150 per cubic foot, 429 times the current rate, Stephenson said. The tax money generated from Initiative 1 will be used for educational funding, to create self-sufficiency programs for the homeless and to build adequate cleanup funds. Those in favor of the initiative say the taxes are fair and the money generated will benefit Utah. "Fourteen million cubic feet of Class A radioactive waste was dumped in Utah last year," said Mark Mickelsen, director of communications for the Utah Education Association. "Utah is accepting the lion's share of this waste, but we are not taxing the waste at a rate that we need to. If Initiative 1 is passed, it will generate an additional $150 million for Utah schools." The exact amount of money that will be generated by the initiative is not yet known, but it is expected to be substantial. The Legislative Fiscal Analyst estimates that if waste volumes continue at current levels, tax revenues from radioactive waste that would be used for education and for the homeless and impoverished could be approximately $208,000,000 annually, according to an impartial analysis of the initiative found in the Utah voter information pamphlet. The Utah Education Association is one of many organizations and citizens supporting Initiative 1. "The Utah Education Association is supporting the initiative for three main reasons. One, it reduces the threat of radioactive waste in Utah. Second, it reduces class size. Third, it provides schools with money for textbooks, computers and supplies," Mickelsen said. Jim Matheson, congressman for Utah's second district, will vote for the initiative, his spokesperson said. "Jim is in favor of it," said. "He is tired of having Utah being a dumping ground for radioactive waste." Mickelson said, "Initiative 1 will stop future licensing of radioactive waste and will not accept hotter radioactive waste." Hotter radioactive waste includes class B waste, which remains radioactive for up to 200 years, and class C waste, which remains radioactive for up to 500 years. Those opposed to the issue think the initiative sounds good on the surface but is a deception and abuse of Utah's initiative process. "It is ambiguous, targets specific companies, and goes against his principles of tax fairness," said Emily Christensen, spokesperson for congressional candidate John Swallow. "It is unfair, unsound and an unwise tax policy." The hazards of class A waste have been exaggerated, Stephenson said. "The radioactive levels are so low that one could stand on the soil at the [disposal sites] and receive less radioactive exposure than in many Utah basements or granite buildings such as the State Capitol," Stephenson said. The impartial analysis section of the Voter Information Pamphlet, drafted by legislative counsel, states that the initiative potentially violates the protection of free speech under the U.S. Constitution, separation of powers under the Utah Constitution and the Legislature's right to appropriate state funds under the Utah Constitution, Stephenson said. Two other states also accept radioactive waste and impose high taxes on the waste producers. South Carolina accepted 128,000 cubic feet last year and Washington accepted 58,000. According to Utahns for Radioactive Waste Control, Washington has a minimum tax of $20 per cubic foot. South Carolina taxes containerized waste at $235 per cubic foot of waste. Utah's present tax is 10 cents on all types of low-level radioactive waste. The petition will impose an average of about $15 per cubic foot of waste - $4 for some bulk categories that the state is receiving in volumes and up to $150 per cubic foot for containerized waste, which comes in lesser quantities than bulk. Utahns who want the taxes on radioactive waste will vote "yes" and those opposed to increased taxation will vote "no" for Initiative 1. *Copyright ©2002 BYU NewsNet* ***************************************************************** 40 Utah: Initiative 1 debate heating up By Kacey Earl /NewsNet Staff Writer/ 31 Oct 2002 In a heated debate between opposing sides of Initiative 1, two quick-witted contenders attempted to sway the audience's vote in their favor. The campaign against Initiative 1, also called the Radioactive Waste Restrictions Act, has spent a record $3.57 million to influence politicians and keep people from voting yes, making this one of the most expensive ballots in Utah's history. In the debate held at the University of Utah on Wednesday Oct. 30, Hugh Matheson, head of the campaign against the initiative, and Frank Pignanelli, campaign manager for Initiative 1, deliberated in a classroom overloaded with students, teachers and reporters. The debate turned into a battle of wits and sarcasm as the two opponents openly insulted the other's position. One example of this was a response by Matheson when jokingly asked if he planned to use passion and language to address his position as Pignanelli was using during the debate. "I don't have to use rhetoric," Matheson responded. "I don't get that passionate because I have facts on my side." Initiative 1, appearing on ballots in Tuesday's election, would raise taxes on class A radioactive waste dumped at Envirocare's Tooele County landfill, direct the extra revenue to schools and anti-poverty programs and ban class B and C waste from Utah. The nuclear waste tax, now varying from 30 cents to $68, would rise to a range of $4.60 to $200, according to Matheson. The 13,000-word, nearly 20-page initiative is long and complicated, Matheson said. "They created a Christmas tree and decorated it to please different groups," Matheson said. "That is why it is so long." Pignanelli said this initiative is important because Utah is not being compensated as it should be to take in nuclear waste. "The other states don't want the waste," Pignanelli said. "We are storing chemical weapons, hazardous waste and PCP waste. If we're going to be a toilet, let's be a paid toilet." If the initiative does not pass, Pignanelli said Utah would receive B and C waste from decommissioned nuclear reactors because it is so cheap to send it here. Class B waste stays radioactive for up to 200 years, and Class C remains radioactive for up to 500 years. Both B and C are not disposed of in Utah at this moment. Matheson said there is more involved in this initiative than increased taxes on nuclear waste. Companies such as Envirocare face possible bankruptcy if the initiative is passed. He said there are many waste sites around Utah, such as in Moab, that have existed since the 1950s. It will be more expensive to clean up these sites because of the higher taxes. The state might also become reliant on the revenue generated by the new tax, which could "create a political constituency" reliant upon nuclear waste. "If you aren't sure what the initiative will do, vote against it," Matheson said. *Copyright ©2002 BYU NewsNet* ***************************************************************** 41 Voters face radioactive waste issue Tuesday BYU NewsNet - Provo, UT Voters face radioactive waste issue Tuesday Related Story: Initiative 1 debate heating up In a debate held at the University of Utah on Wednesday Oct. 30, Hugh Matheson, head of the campaign against the initiative, and Frank Pignanelli, campaign manager for Initiative 1, deliberated in a classroom overloaded with students, teachers and reporters. By Meagan Anderson [meaganbeth@aol.com] NewsNet Staff Writer 30 Oct 2002 When Utah voters go to vote on Tuesday, Nov. 5, they will confront what is perhaps one of the most controversial issues to face Utah in years. Deciding which candidate to elect can be a difficult choice, but this year voters will be required to decided the future of an initiative that contains 13,000 words and enacts or changes 100 state laws. Initiative 1, also known as the Radioactive Waste Restrictions Act, will raise taxes on the producers of class A radioactive waste that is transported and disposed of in Utah. Utah currently accepts class A waste, which is waste that retains its radioactivity for less than 100 years, and taxes waste producers 35 cents per cubic foot for the waste, said Howard Stephenson, president for the Utah Taxpayers Association. Initiative 1 will raise the tax up to $150 per cubic foot, 429 times the current rate, Stephenson said. The tax money generated from Initiative 1 will be used for educational funding, to create self-sufficiency programs for the homeless and to build adequate cleanup funds. Those in favor of the initiative say the taxes are fair and the money generated will benefit Utah. "Fourteen million cubic feet of Class A radioactive waste was dumped in Utah last year," said Mark Mickelsen, director of communications for the Utah Education Association. "Utah is accepting the lion's share of this waste, but we are not taxing the waste at a rate that we need to. If Initiative 1 is passed, it will generate an additional $150 million for Utah schools." The exact amount of money that will be generated by the initiative is not yet known, but it is expected to be substantial. The Legislative Fiscal Analyst estimates that if waste volumes continue at current levels, tax revenues from radioactive waste that would be used for education and for the homeless and impoverished could be approximately $208,000,000 annually, according to an impartial analysis of the initiative found in the Utah voter information pamphlet. The Utah Education Association is one of many organizations and citizens supporting Initiative 1. "The Utah Education Association is supporting the initiative for three main reasons. One, it reduces the threat of radioactive waste in Utah. Second, it reduces class size. Third, it provides schools with money for textbooks, computers and supplies," Mickelsen said. Jim Matheson, congressman for Utah's second district, will vote for the initiative, his spokesperson said. "Jim is in favor of it," said. "He is tired of having Utah being a dumping ground for radioactive waste." Mickelson said, "Initiative 1 will stop future licensing of radioactive waste and will not accept hotter radioactive waste." Hotter radioactive waste includes class B waste, which remains radioactive for up to 200 years, and class C waste, which remains radioactive for up to 500 years. Those opposed to the issue think the initiative sounds good on the surface but is a deception and abuse of Utah's initiative process. "It is ambiguous, targets specific companies, and goes against his principles of tax fairness," said Emily Christensen, spokesperson for congressional candidate John Swallow. "It is unfair, unsound and an unwise tax policy." The hazards of class A waste have been exaggerated, Stephenson said. "The radioactive levels are so low that one could stand on the soil at the [disposal sites] and receive less radioactive exposure than in many Utah basements or granite buildings such as the State Capitol," Stephenson said. The impartial analysis section of the Voter Information Pamphlet, drafted by legislative counsel, states that the initiative potentially violates the protection of free speech under the U.S. Constitution, separation of powers under the Utah Constitution and the Legislature's right to appropriate state funds under the Utah Constitution, Stephenson said. Two other states also accept radioactive waste and impose high taxes on the waste producers. South Carolina accepted 128,000 cubic feet last year and Washington accepted 58,000. According to Utahns for Radioactive Waste Control, Washington has a minimum tax of $20 per cubic foot. South Carolina taxes containerized waste at $235 per cubic foot of waste. Utah's present tax is 10 cents on all types of low-level radioactive waste. The petition will impose an average of about $15 per cubic foot of waste - $4 for some bulk categories that the state is receiving in volumes and up to $150 per cubic foot for containerized waste, which comes in lesser quantities than bulk. Utahns who want the taxes on radioactive waste will vote "yes" and those opposed to increased taxation will vote "no" for Initiative 1. Contact NewsNet! [http://devnet.byu.edu:4010/contact.cfm] ***************************************************************** 42 Initiative 1 debate heating up BYU NewsNet - Provo, UT Voters face radioactive waste issue Tuesday When Utah voters go to vote on Tuesday, Nov. 5, they will confront what is perhaps one of the most controversial issues to face Utah in years. By Kacey Earl NewsNet Staff Writer 31 Oct 2002 In a heated debate between opposing sides of Initiative 1, two quick-witted contenders attempted to sway the audience's vote in their favor. The campaign against Initiative 1, also called the Radioactive Waste Restrictions Act, has spent a record $3.57 million to influence politicians and keep people from voting yes, making this one of the most expensive ballots in Utah's history. In the debate held at the University of Utah on Wednesday Oct. 30, Hugh Matheson, head of the campaign against the initiative, and Frank Pignanelli, campaign manager for Initiative 1, deliberated in a classroom overloaded with students, teachers and reporters. The debate turned into a battle of wits and sarcasm as the two opponents openly insulted the other's position. One example of this was a response by Matheson when jokingly asked if he planned to use passion and language to address his position as Pignanelli was using during the debate. "I don't have to use rhetoric," Matheson responded. "I don't get that passionate because I have facts on my side." Initiative 1, appearing on ballots in Tuesday's election, would raise taxes on class A radioactive waste dumped at Envirocare's Tooele County landfill, direct the extra revenue to schools and anti-poverty programs and ban class B and C waste from Utah. The nuclear waste tax, now varying from 30 cents to $68, would rise to a range of $4.60 to $200, according to Matheson. The 13,000-word, nearly 20-page initiative is long and complicated, Matheson said. "They created a Christmas tree and decorated it to please different groups," Matheson said. "That is why it is so long." Pignanelli said this initiative is important because Utah is not being compensated as it should be to take in nuclear waste. "The other states don't want the waste," Pignanelli said. "We are storing chemical weapons, hazardous waste and PCP waste. If we're going to be a toilet, let's be a paid toilet." If the initiative does not pass, Pignanelli said Utah would receive B and C waste from decommissioned nuclear reactors because it is so cheap to send it here. Class B waste stays radioactive for up to 200 years, and Class C remains radioactive for up to 500 years. Both B and C are not disposed of in Utah at this moment. Matheson said there is more involved in this initiative than increased taxes on nuclear waste. Companies such as Envirocare face possible bankruptcy if the initiative is passed. He said there are many waste sites around Utah, such as in Moab, that have existed since the 1950s. It will be more expensive to clean up these sites because of the higher taxes. The state might also become reliant on the revenue generated by the new tax, which could "create a political constituency" reliant upon nuclear waste. "If you aren't sure what the initiative will do, vote against it," Matheson said. Copyright ©2002 BYU NewsNet Contact NewsNet! [http://devnet.byu.edu:4010/contact.cfm] ***************************************************************** 43 Initiative 1 really won't help schools - Opinion - thespectrum.com [http://www.thespectrum.com/index.html] Thursday, October 31, 2002 IN OUR VIEW At first glance, Initiative I sounds like a great idea. Proponents want to raise taxes on radioactive waste shipments in the state and give the money raised to Utah's public education system. Those are two great issues facing our state. Nobody wants radioactive waste in the state, and most residents would agree that our state's education funding needs all the help it can get. If this initiative did what it promises to do, there would be few reasons to oppose it. But it won't even come close. Begin by looking at the dangerous precedent this initiative would set regarding taxation on businesses. No matter what the 53-page document says, this is really an attack on Envirocare, a Tooele-based company that processes and stores Class-A radioactive waste. This is the lowest level of radioactive waste that exists, and it typically is in the form of soil that has been contaminated or piping. Other forms of Class-A waste include human waste from medical treatments and parts from smoke detectors. Proponents are quick to point out that the company faces the lowest taxes in the nation because it is charged only 10 cents per cubic foot for the shipments it receives. That's true -- if you're talking only about the regulatory fee. Add the revenue tax, impact fee and other charges, and the company is taxed at the rate of $68.10 per cubic foot. That puts Envirocare's tax burden among the highest in the nation. This initiative would raise Envirocare's taxes from about $100 million a year to about $200 million. That would be a lot of money for schools, but the company's gross revenues are only about $120 million a year. Do the math. Envirocare, in a competitive market for this lowest level of radioactive waste, would not be able to pay the tax, and it couldn't pass along the charges to customers because they could get much better prices elsewhere. The company would go bankrupt, and there would be no money for school children. Another reason to vote "No" on Initiative I is the lack of accountability. If passed, more than 100 state laws would be changed, and two new state bureaucracies would be created. But there is no provision for funding these new agencies, and the Legislature would have no oversight authority as to how these new agencies spend those funds. It also won't prevent high-level nuclear waste from traveling through our area on its way to Yucca Mountain. It won't prevent high-level waste from being stored on the Goshutes Reservation. That lethal kind of waste has nothing to do with the low-grade materials stored at the Tooele facility. A vote either way won't change that. This initiative is bad policy aimed at putting one company out of business and then, shamefully, tying it to radioactive waste and school children. This ballot issue won't help kids. It won't prevent radioactive waste from coming into the state. It will bankrupt a legal business in our state. It will remove elected officials -- the people's representatives -- from the process of determining how to spend our tax dollars. Vote "No" on Initiative I. Originally published Thursday, October 31, 2002 Copyright ©2002 The Spectrum. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 Utah: Initiative would affect only low-level waste - - thespectrum.com Thursday, October 31, 2002 Proponents talk of benefit to Utah's students; opponents say Initiative 1 targets Envirocare but does no good By PATRICE ST. GERMAIN patrices@thespectrum.com When it comes to casting ballots on Initiative 1 on Tuesday, the two sides -- Utahns for Radioactive Waste Control and Utahns Against Unfair Taxes -- are both hoping that voters will agree with their side of the issue. The two groups are on far ends of the spectrum, with one group claiming the initiative will do nothing to help Utah school children and that it is unconstitutional. The other group claims that the initiative will stop any higher classes of radioactive waste from being dumped on state-controlled lands and that, through taxes, it will provide revenue to benefit schools and Utah's homeless. One issue the two groups do agree on is that whether the initiative passes or not, it will not prevent high-level nuclear waste from being stored on the Goshutes Reservation in Skull Valley before the waste is shipped for permanent storage at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Because the American Indians have sovereignty on the land, the state cannot pass laws preventing the storage of nuclear waste at the site. Hugh Matheson, chairman of Utahns against Unfair Taxes, said the initiative targets one Utah business: Envirocare, a business that provides one Utah county with 25 percent of its tax base. Matheson claims the initiative would put the company out of business, and it would not prevent the Legislature from passing laws to allow Class-B and C nuclear waste from coming into the state. Although it is not mentioned by name on the initiative, Envirocare, a privately owned business that disposes of low-level nuclear waste in Clive, near the Goshutes Reservation. It currently accepts Class-A nuclear waste, which Matheson said is less radioactive than a home smoke detector, which falls under Class-B and C waste. Envirocare, the largest private disposal site in the country for low-level radioactive waste, had $120 million in gross revenue last year. The initiative would impose on Envirocare, in some cases, up to a 2,000 percent tax increase for disposal fees of nuclear waste, Matheson said. Legislation in 2001 already raised taxes on 11 types of nuclear waste, which makes Utah's tax on the waste the highest in the country. Frank Pignanelli, campaign director for the Utahns for Radioactive Waste Control, said the initiative does target one business that is already operating in Utah but would also target any future businesses that may open. Pignanelli said Envirocare is targeted, but part of the reason is that the company wanted a monopoly and stopped other similar businesses from opening in the state. But Envirocare is not the only business that has goods taxed. "We can't do anything to stop a business from accepting low-level nuclear waste, but what the initiative does is tax the dumping to those who use the facilities," Pignanelli said. "So if you dump radioactive waste, you pay for it. We have taxes on cigarettes, gasoline, liquor -- a long, long list of many companies that are taxed." Pignanelli said that currently, the state is getting the waste without the benefits, and radioactive waste produced within the state is shipped elsewhere. "Utah produces very little radioactive waste but what it does produce has to be sent to Washington and they (Washington) have no problem posing taxes on the waste," he said. Envirocare does accept more waste and collects less tax, but Matheson said that is a simply because of what type of waste is disposed of by Envirocare. Matheson said the volume of waste is more with less tax because it is Class-A waste rather than B or C waste. Matheson said the initiative would tax Envirocare $208 million on the $120 million gross revenue it claimed last year. "The volume comparisons are just bogus," Matheson said. "You can earn those high kinds of revenue but your are talking about B and C waste." Radioactivity is measured in curies, and by comparing curies, one shipment going to a facility in South Carolina could have as much radioactivity as the entire Envirocare site, Matheson said. Although the Legislature can override Initiative 1, Pignanelli said legislatures are reluctant to make changes forged by public opinion and despite what the Utahns Against Unfair Taxes have to say, Pignanelli said the initiative is not unconstitutional. But Matheson disagrees and said the initiative sets a dangerous precedent for the state. "One of the real issues are we going to pass an initiative that is unconstitutional, supports corporate warfare and is so complicated, most people can't understand it?" Matheson said. "If one group can pass an initiative against one business in the state, no business is safe against the initiative process." Matheson said the increased taxes that would be imposed on Envirocare, regardless if the company is ever permitted to take higher classes of waste, would most likely shut the company down. Even without higher-classified waste, Initiative 1 would tax Class-A waste that the company currently is able to accept at a higher rate. The initiative would not only hurt the company, but the people employed there and the county in which the business resides. If the company shuts down, the Utah schoolchildren and homeless will not be better off because there would be no tax base instead of more. Pignanelli's group claims the initiative would not put any company out of business, and because so many nuclear power plants are being decommissioned, the company accepting nuclear waste will see an increase in business. The state would see an increase in nuclear waste dumped within Utah's borders. So who will win the vote on Nov. 5? Both groups are optimistic. Matheson, a campaign consultant paid largely from funds the campaign has received from Envirocare, said he is optimist voters will see through all the "smokescreens" that the citizen's initiative has put up. "The voters can see who is behind us on this all the way from Congressman Jim Hansen up to the governor himself," Matheson said. "It's never over until its over, but the indications are positive and we urge everyone to consider carefully and go out and vote." But Pignanelli, who is working along with almost everyone else for the initiative without pay, said he hopes the message is complete enough in the voter information guide for people to understand the issue and make the right choice about who will benefit from the initiative. "I know Envirocare finds it hard to believe that people would work for a cause because they believe in it but that is what we are doing," Pignanelli said. "Right now, Envirocare is outspending us seven to one." The Utah Education Association, the National Education Association and the Crusade for the Homeless have provided funds in support of Initiative 1. Like Matheson, Pignanelli is optimistic that the voters will vote the right way -- in favor for the initiative. "I'm a Democrat in Utah. I have to be optimistic." Pignanelli said. If the initiative passes, it would take effect Jan. 1, 2003. Originally published Thursday, October 31, 2002 Copyright ©2002 The Spectrum. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 45 Nuclear waste case should go to a jury, not judge, say lawyers Omaha.com Published Thursday October 31, 2002 *BY ROBYNN TYSVER* WORLD-HERALD BUREAU LINCOLN - Former Gov. Ben Nelson and his administration deserve to be judged by a jury, not a federal judge, in the controversy over a low-level radioactive waste facility, the state's lawyers said. Nebraska filed formal notice Wednesday in U.S. District Court that it will appeal the $151 million verdict against the state. "We will ask the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the court's damages award altogether or, at a minimum, give us the opportunity to present our case to a jury," said John Wittenborn, the state's attorney from Washington, D.C. It may take two or more years for the appeal to run its course. Most legal observers expect the case to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf ruled in September that Nebraska acted in "bad faith" during a license review for a proposed low-level radioactive waste facility near Butte. Kopf said Nelson, now a U.S. senator, orchestrated the 1998 license denial on political, not scientific, grounds. The judge ordered the state to pay $151 million in damages to a five-state compact that sought to build the regional waste facility. The state will allege in its appeal that Kopf was fundamentally wrong, that the state had ample legal grounds to deny the license. "The state agencies made the right license decision and did so in a fair and open process, devoid of politics," Wittenborn said. The state also will challenge Kopf's decision to preside over the trial without a jury. Essentially, Kopf ruled that Nebraska had no right to a jury in an action that pits one state against other states. definition wrote: Jury- group of people gathered together to determine who has the better attorney. ©2002 Omaha World-Herald. All rights reserved. Copyright ***************************************************************** 46 Utah: A Matter of Waste Salt Lake City Weekly - Feature - October 31, 2002 Getting to the bottom of Utah's most controversial ballot initiative. by Katharine Biele [comments@slweekly.com?subject=re:A Matter of Waste&cc=biele@slweekly.com] His father was a cotton farmer. Thus, his connection to the land, however tainted by the tortuous business of hazardous waste storage. This is a business Khosrow Semnani calls an environmental requisite. A business he quit in a brief return to the land. A brief encounter which, but for fate, might have seen Semnani sow stands of Christmas trees instead of strife. On Tuesday, Nov. 5, Utahns will cast their consciences in a vote on Initiative 1, arguably the most confusing and personality-laden measure to reach the ballot. The confusion is largely purposeful. This is not supposed to be an easy issue. Voters are being asked to judge the motivations and consequences of an industry born of federal regulations and nurtured by the claws of competition. They are being asked to decide who wears the white hat in a clash of egos and who should survive a battle between economists and environmentalists; whether this is a transparent personal vendetta or a legitimate attempt to draw tax dollars from the only private facility in the country disposing of the governments nuclear waste. The single hole-punch in this ballot means power to the people or freedom for enterprise, depending on how you see the process. But it may come down to who has the best P.R.or the most money. Most people call it the Envirocare issue. More formally, its called the Radioactive Waste Restrictions Act26 pages of legalese that combine education and homeless issues with government ethics and the future of Utahs hazardous waste storage. Polluting History The saga of hazardous waste disposal generally begins in the 1970s, when the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was being shaped by the Environmental Protection Agency. But the debate had been raging since the 1940s, when scientists and technical experts had questioned whether land-based disposal might threaten soil and water. Still, when RCRA went into effect in 1976, the Environmental Protection Agency cited only minor cases of pollution, pretty much ignoring the dire predictions from the scientific community, according to a study by the New Hampshire-based Franklin Pierce Law Center. In fact, the predictions came true. Pollution, theft, illegal dumping and inept management combined to close several waste dumps taking low-level radioactive materials. Only three sites still exist to take low-level radioactive wastes: Chem Nuclear Systems at Barnwell, S.C.; US Ecology at Richland, Wash.; and Envirocare at Clive, Utah. The Barnwell site, which once took 90 percent of the nations waste, has drawn from as many as 39 states and the District of Columbia. The effect of a 1980 federal law, though, will whittle that down to three states by 2007. Theres a war cry rising in Utah. Weve done our duty for the country, says Frank Pignanelli, one of the movers of the initiative. Weve had enough. We talk about the west desert as if its far, far away, but its only miles from a major metropolitan area, and there we have chemical bombs, radioactive waste, all sorts of the refuse the rest of our nation is so willing to dump. Initiative 1, despite a mire of issues, is nonetheless on message to keep out certain classes of nuclear wastesthe higher level low-level nuclear wastes. But will it also drive one company out of business, spark a flood of ill-considered citizen initiatives, and throw the state into an expensive constitutional contest? In a battle of the charts and graphs, the two sides like to point out different statistics to make their cases. For instance, Utahns for Radioactive Waste Control point out that the state takes 97 percent of commercial radioactive waste in the country. Utahns Against Unfair Taxesthe Envirocare peoplelike to say Utahs share of low-level waste radioactivity (in curies, the standard measure of radioactivity) is less than 1 percent. Only 4 percent of low-level radioactive waste goes to commercial facilities, says Hugh Matheson, the point man against the initiative. Mathesons point is that Envirocare gets 97 percent of that 4 percent, diluting the effect of the chart. But you may as well forget the charts. There will be no Ross Perots wielding pointers at the voting booth. Initiative supporters want you to concentrate on the ethics. Were not billionaires like Mr. Semnani, says Pignanelli, the former Democratic legislator who has teamed with conservative lobbyist Doug Foxley on the initiative. We basically hope people will read the voter information packet and that theyll prohibit higher levels of radioactive wastes and charge adequate taxes similar to the other two states. We want some ethical reform in the state of Utah, where it has been seriously lacking. They wanted it badly enough that they paid people to gather signatures on a petition. Envirocare, in turn, paid others to get signers to renege. Ultimately, the state Supreme Court upheld the initiative, and the reform it touts. For instance, theres a clause that prohibits those who regulated the radioactive waste industry from working in it for up to three years. You might remember the big bribery scandal back in October 1996 involving Larry Anderson, the former Director of the Utah Bureau of Radiation Control, and Semnani. Semnani gave Anderson gold coins, condos and cash worth $600,000, which Semnani calls an extortion payoff. Anderson was convicted and Semnani fined $100,000. But Semnanis spin is that he was the victim here. Its all about him Those who know Semnani have a hard time with the victim label. But hes a lot more complicated than the Robber Baron tag would suggest. His name comes from the city and province in northern Iran where he was born. Semnan, the center of a fertile agricultural region, sits on the southern foothills of the Albors mountain range. Thats where Semnanis father grew cotton. An enterprising man with five wives and seven children, he also ran an automobile dealership importing from France, and at one point, had an ice factory. You supply a need, says Semnani, who took the philosophy to heart. In 1966, Semnani left Iran for college in England, where he stayed a few years before moving to Canada. It was an accident of necessity that brought him to Utah. He needed money and planned to hit up this friend of his brothers who was teaching at Brigham Young University. Semnani jumped on a Greyhound bus to Utah, where the teacher had jumped ship. He was vacationing somewhere else. To make ends meet, Semnani mowed lawns, painted for a real-estate agency and then tried to enroll at the University of Utah. At $500 a semester, it was too expensive for him. Westminster College took him on a promise to pay. Semnani worked there as a janitor, later became a teaching assistant and graduated in physics and chemistry in 1972. By that time, hed married a German girl he met in England. With a line at the bottom of a congressional bill, then-Sen. Frank Moss made them both U.S. citizens. Semnani had also been working as a researcher for Kennecott, electrifying copper. It was where he first got involved in the problem of waste disposalspecifically, arsenic. Kennecott carried him through his graduate years at the U, but in 1976, the price of copper plummeted, and Semnani was laid off. He and his wife divorced that same year. Thatcher Chemical Co. hired him on as a waste treatment engineer. A few years later, he became manager of engineering and Thatcher became Sperry Univac, the high-tech company that merged to become Unisys. So much was happening around Semnani. In 1979, the Shah of Iran was ousted. Semnani, a Muslim with a deep regard for his country, demonstrated against the new regime. In his adopted country, the EPA was ratcheting up the regulatory environment. Prior to RCRA, we were sending our wastes to the county landfill, says Semnani. All the companies were now subject to RCRA. An engineer said to me, Khos, where are we going to take this stuff? It might have been Arizona. A truckload of pollutants used to cost $50 or $60 at the Salt Lake County landfill. Now it was looking more like $1,000. So, Semnani started thinking about how he might recover nickel or maybe zinc from the wastes. An easier solution, he thought, was to start his own disposal facility. Semnani opened the states first hazardous waste landfill at Grassy Mountain, north of Clive in Tooele County. Clive, 60 miles west of Salt Lake City, was established in the mid-70s as a place where the state could dispose of Vitro tailings from an old uranium processing plant. The stuff Semnani took at that time was nothing radioactive, but it was still too much for the county landfill. And it made him richor feel richin only a years time. Semnani had been making $27,000 a year at Sperry. In 1981, he sold his facility to U.S. Pollution Control Inc. (USPCI), a subsidiary of Union Pacific Railroad. He got $40,000 right off the bat, with a letter of intent for $200,000 and more down the line. I retired for three days, he says. Thats when the Christmas-tree bulb went off in his head. He went to Payson and Heber to study the science behind raising Christmas trees, but he came to the sad conclusion that Utahs growing season was just too short. Semnani turned to distributing dairy products for a year or so before he had another lightbulb moment. In 1983, be bought up some land in Wendover, Utah, cleaned up a junkyard there and started a housing development. He also got married again. Ghazaleh was just a little girl when Semnani first met her in Iran. Now, educated in Georgia, she made the move to Utah for Semnani. Meanwhile, USPCI bought a site at Clive where it took the Vitro tailings. In 1987, Semnani figured the tailings project was done, so he bought up some land around the site. The next year, he got a license to haul in contaminated soils from Superfund sites. That was how Envirocare startedin a small trailer at Clive, with Semnani himself driving the forklift. Things are different now. Semnani knocks around his high-rise office at the corner of South Temple and Main. He hosts legislators and works the system from the inside out. Consumer watchdog Claire Geddes snidely calls him the King. Thats because he generally gets what he wants when he asks for it. I created this industry, Semnani says. Im now 55 years old and Im comfortable. Im in a position that I can make a difference in somebodys life to make it better. Semnani says hes built schools and clinics for his people in Iran. Of course, hes contributed to countless Utah campaigns, helped pay off one of former Gov. Norm Bangerters debts, and has made Tooele a happy host. The county gets some $5 million or 5 percent of its gross revenues annually from Envirocare. It was able to build a multi-sport facility called Desert Peak Complex, and then used a $1 million donation from the company to construct the Utah State Firefighters Museum. But hes also made some peoples lives worse. Last year, he filed a $5 million defamation suit against some activists and competitors who he claimed were conspiring to destroy his company. If some were quietly working against him, others have been screaming from the rooftops. If its important to Tooele County, why not to the state of Utah? asks Foxley, maniacally pushing for a fair tax on Envirocare. It was, in fact, Foxleys inner maniac that threatened to doom the initiative. He was not exactly Semnanis favorite guy, and his participation looked a little suspect. The issue isnt the issue I was hoping the issue was whether or not we should tax the waste, says Foxley. Their strategy has been to divert attention from the real issue and to use vindictive tactics against Frank, me and others. Have I done some things? Have I been in the waste industry? Sure I have, but the issue isnt Doug Foxley. Oh, but it could be. As much as the issue is Khosrow Semnani. Foxley calls himself a Utah boy, born and raised in Tremonton and graduated from Utah State University, with a law degree from the University of Utah. Pignanelli remembers meeting him in 1986, when he was first running for the Legislature. Foxley calls him up and takes him to lunch. He gives me some small contributions, and says, Look, there are some clients who have issues with your opponent; but dont think theres any more where that came fromjust go out and get elected, Pignanelli says. I thought, Who the hell is this guy? Hed find out soon. Foxley lobbied for business at the Legislature, often against issues Pignanelli supported. When Pignanelli ran for leadership in 1990, Foxley campaigned vigorously against him. Foxley had long been a political player, and was appointed to the states most prestigious and powerful Board of Regents in 1985, the year after he ran Bangerters gubernatorial campaign. In 1983, the city of East Carbon knew it was facing some big challenges. The Kaiser coal mine there was close to bankruptcy and, at times, unemployment in the area hit 50 percent. Garbage is always a hard sell, but talk began to turn toward developing a solid-waste disposal siteinside the city limits. They were desperate. Foxley partnered with Steve Creamer, an industrial engineer who worked on the logistics of the 2,400-acre site. Foxley worked on the politics, and, before long, the East Carbon Development Corp. (ECDC) had signed contracts from one end of the country to the other to take industrial wastes. The concept depended on the idea of waste-by-rail, which had never been done. Whenever there are permitting issues or you have to go before the Legislature or there are siting issues, you get a lot of attention, says a waste specialist familiar with ECDC. Its a very competitive industry. There are not a lot of those permits to be handed out, and whoever usually gets one has a pretty good chance of making a go at it. ECDC started up in 1992, but almost immediately hit a roadblock. Radioactive material was found in one shipment, and the public outcry led to a referendum in 1994 as some said the facility should be turned over to the county. As it turned out, the public overwhelmingly validated the landfill. It was, after all, pumping tippage fees of 50 cents per ton into county coffers. As controversial as ECDC was, it was equally successful. Tax revenues enabled the city to bring in natural gas for the first time and to rebuild its road system. ECDC was directly responsible for keeping East Carbon High School open, and even guaranteed every graduating senior college tuition at the in-state college of their choice. Foxley and Creamer sold out to Allied Corp., and Foxley still receives royalties. Allied owns part of a Tennessee facility which Semnani sees as a potential competitor. This just adds to the friction between the two men. At one point, Foxley also lobbied for the law firm representing Waste Control Specialists, a Texas company looking to operate a low-level radioactive waste dump in far west Texas. Semnani actually bought up 880 acres there and outlined a plan to become a federal contractor for DOE waste there, according to a 1997 Texas Observer article. Semnani in effect forced Waste Control to move before it was ready. Both companies hired heavy hitters to lobby their cause, and are now embroiled in a lawsuit that alleges unfair practices. That year, on the heels of the Anderson scandal, Foxley also made overtures to the Tooele County Commission about siting another low-level facility in the county. Semnani saw it as an effort to compete with Envirocare. George Mantes came unglued, he says of the former Tooele senator. At the end of the day, its all about money. Pignanelli admits that Foxleys good at making money. Hes also good at co-opting the enemy. When Pignanelli left the Legislature, Foxley asked him to go into a consulting partnership. Two men with different strengths and different politics decided where they could meet on business ethics. Doug is a very complex figure, very smart, but he can be very aloof, says Pignanelli. It comes across as arrogance. He doesnt suffer fools easily. He can be short. He can be moody. Hes a conservative Republican. But Envirocare doesnt want people to remember they want to bring in B and C wastes. That is the lethal stuff. That is the No. 1 issue. What is the issue, again? Envirocares license has been upgraded many times, inching above the dirty dirt that made the company. In 1990, it started taking mixed wastes, which include radioactive and hazardous contaminants. Then, in 1999, Envirocare, with the approval of Tooele County, sought a change in its license to accept A, B and C low-level radioactive wastes. This is the part where people start to drop off. Its also the part where the arguments get picturesque. Just know there are lots of different waste streams in the great river of radioactivity. Whats termed low-level radioactivity can be found in the ABCs to varying degrees. The stuff thats slated to go to the Goshute Reservation, and ultimately to Yucca Mountain, Nevada, is way hot in that it comes from spent nuclear fuel rods. Its off the alphabet chart. The ABCs of Envirocare, however, come from things like medical equipment, which arent in the same category, but are radioactive nonetheless. Envirocare is licensed to take A wastes, and has the regulatory OK for the Bs and Csthe higher level of the low-level wastes. Detractors say its just a matter of time before the Legislature gives its approval. Initiative supporters like to say youd be dead in 20 minutes if you were locked in a room with that waste. Semnani likes to quip that youd be dead faster than that if he locked you in a room and opened a natural gas valve. There are always risks; regulations require a level of risk and safety, Semnani says. The real issue, however, is not how fast you may die. It appears to be more about sending a messageto the country and to the Utah Legislature. Something like, Utahs not the nations waste dump and not even the Legislature can make it so. The frosting is some added tax revenue. Maybe. Foxley and Pignanelli knew theyd need help to sell the Envirocare tax. If it were just the two of them, theyd fail for sure, like others before them. To get anywhere, they had to stick a smiley face on an otherwise nasty business. Jack Gallivan, former publisher of The Salt Lake Tribune, hadnt had any luck getting funding to endow his pet cause, the Utah Crusade for the Homeless. Equally frustrated was the Utah Education Association, facing budget cuts in a state that already suffered an image of paltry pupil funding. Both wagered that joining the cause would bring them money. The initiative also creates restricted special revenue funds to which the added tax dollars would go. They could bring in up to $200 million in fees for schools and the homeless. Semnani thinks thats nonsense. Poor UEA, he says. Theyve been duped. There will be two losers in thisEnvirocare and its employees, and the state of Utah. Thats because hell be out of business, Semnani says, reaching in the air for invisible dollars. We just lost a $20 million contract by 5 percent, he says. Five percent! If he could charge Envirocares customers more, he says, dont you think he would? Both sides have found experts to crunch the numbers. The numbers dont match. And in a verbal war seemingly unparalleled in legislative history, the opponents blithely trash each other, threaten lawsuits and stir up passions. Semnani says hell probably spend $2 million to defeat the initiative. Pignanelli and Foxley are guessing Envirocare will spend up to $8 million, while they are taking nothing. Their charity, however, is challenged daily. Semnani pats his hip pocket. Remember, he warns, its all about money. Everybody wants to know about our books, he says. They will say whatever they want to say, Foxley grumbles. But I was 12 years on the Utah Board of Regents, I have four children in the public school system now, and Im involved with the Gallivans, trying to find solutions to the homeless issues we have now. Semnani smiles inscrutably. Hes a dad, too. He just sent his oldest son off to college and is focusing on his young boys, 6 and 8. For Rod, the 8-year-old, Semnani packaged up a box elder bug in a contact lens case so he could take it to show-and-tell. There it was, sealed up tightly. Thats the way Semnani likes things. There are a lot of ways you can evaluate the measure. You can look at it from the economic standpoint, from the environmental standpoint, or from a simple policy standpoint. You can even decide on its ethical implications. Youll probably have to do your own math. But one things for sure: No matter how you look at this issue, youll have to do it inside out to make a decision. The results of this initiative are bound to be varied and evolving, what with all the threats of lawsuits and legislation. So you may have to decide based on what you believe the intent to be. The principles involvedfairness, free enterprise, environmental protection or the sovereign will of the peopleare easier to weigh than the consequences. Jane Abe, a UEA member, struggles like everyone else to figure it out. They think its about money, she says. Its not. But she still doesnt know what it is about. If you have a conscience, you cant vote against it, she says. And then she sighs. I will vote for it, but I cant defend my vote. I cant explain it. Salt Lake City Weekly and slweekly.com ©1996-2002 Copperfield Publishing, Inc.. All rights reserved. offices: 60 W. 400 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 801-575-7003 ***************************************************************** 47 *Nuclear Waste Shipments Planned to Travel through East TN* Some nuclear waste shipments would be transported by rail. October 31, 2002 By AMY RUTLEDGE 6 News Anchor/Reporter KNOXVILLE (WATE) -- Thousands of Knox County residents were affected when a September train derailment resulted in a toxic spill. But imagine if the danger was even greater. Nearly 2,000 miles from East Tennessee, a mountain in the Nevada desert is at the center of a heated national debate. The government has decided to bury the world's most dangerous high-level radioactive nuclear waste deep in Yucca Mountain. But this affects more than the people of Nevada. A large portion of the waste would travel through East Tennessee by barge, truck and train. Over the life of the project, 77,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel will travel to Nevada. And nearly 30,000 tons could come through Tennessee from nuclear facilities in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida and Texas. Ralph Hutchins has been fighting nuclear waste issues at Oak Ridge for more than 14-years. "When we first heard about Yucca Mountain 10 years ago, we first thought it was so stupid it couldn't happen," he says. He never dreamed the desert project the government was considering would get this far. Now, he's worried that it could turn into East Tennessee's worst nightmare. "It's an enormous risk to everybody who lives along the transportation routes. As stuff goes across Tennessee, it's going to go through Knoxville to Nashville. And a lot of people are going to be placed at risk." Based on preliminary data for the route, high-level nuclear waste will be shipped within five miles of at least 165 East Tennessee schools and seven hospitals. Scientists say the probability of an accident is extremely rare. In fact, after 40 years of transportation, officials cite a clean record. "We've never had one of these break," says hazardous materials safety instructor Tom Kerr. "We've never had a release. We've never had an injury, never had a death. We can't say that about any other hazardous material." But unlike the sulfuric acid spill in Farragut, no one really knows what would happen if a large amount of nuclear waste was spilled. It's never happened. The government has also never shipped such a large amount of high-level waste before. Earlier this year, mayors from 109 cities along the transportation route took a stand. They adopted a resolution to prevent any shipments until each city had the proper training and funding to handle public safety at least three years in advance. But with new threats of terrorism coming frequently, some people worry even that amount of preparation may not be enough. Continue with Part Two: Can Officials Keep Us Safe? All content © Copyright 2000 - 2002 WorldNow ***************************************************************** 48 Hydrogen Bomb: Half a century later Sify News *Washington, Oct 31* At the height of the Cold War at 7:00 am on November 1, 1952, the United States tested "Mike," the world's first hydrogen bomb, on the Enewetak atoll off the Marshall Islands. It was a bomb unlike any one had ever seen before. The 10.4-megatonne bomb was 600 times more powerful than the atomic bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki and ended the Japanese front of World War II in August of 1945. The test set off an atomic mushroom cloud 12.8 kilometres wide and 43 kilometres high. It vaporised 80 million tonnes of earth. "Mike" was followed by a second, more powerful test in March 1954 on the nearby Bikini atoll. Nearly a decade earlier in July 1945, the United States had tested the first atomic bomb in the New Mexico desert. The culmination of what was known as the Manhattan Project, it succeeded in harnessing power by splitting the neutrons of atoms, in a process called fission. Two types of atomic bombs were developed: enriched uranium and plutonium. Unlike them, the hydrogen bomb, or H-bomb, does not use fission but is based on fusion of elements. That concept, first imagined in the early 1940s by Italian physicist Enrico Fermi, was technically much more difficult than fission. The energy for that is derived from thermonuclear fusion of hydrogen isotopes. The same energy powers the stars, and comes from heat produced by a classic nuclear explosion, liberating enormous amounts of energy and shock waves. The story behind Mike's creation is one of rivalry between world powers... and scientists. As Richard Rhodes detailed in his book /Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb/, the Soviet's first atomic test in August 1949 - aided, no doubt, by spy Klaus Fuchs - pushed the United States to up the ante: the H-bomb, dubbed the "Super" bomb by scientist Edward Teller. Teller was involved in the birth of the atomic bombs. An American of Hungarian origins, he was the sole architect of the "Super" bomb. Now aged 94, Teller was immortalised in popular culture as the basis of the character "Dr. Strangelove." Robert Oppenheimer, who led the Manhattan Project, opposed the development of the H-bomb, fearing that it might spark an arms race that could spell the end of humanity. Sure enough, the Soviet Union, thanks to physicist Andrei Sakharov, tested its first H-bomb in August 1953. Other world powers soon followed: Britain in 1957, China a decade later and France in 1968. "It is very difficult now to imagine an active scenario where the H-bomb would be used, but we still have thousands," said Michael Levi, of the Federation of American Scientists, because such a scenario would produce a holocaust. "The US arsenal of strategic nuclear weapons is completely composed of H-bombs. The same is believed for Russia," he added. ©AFP 2000. All rights reserved. This material should not be ***************************************************************** 49 India: PM inaugurates BARC facilities Don Whitman was a 21-year-old high school graduate with military training in meteorology and happy to be in the South Pacific in 1952 instead of Korea. He was unaware that the data he was gathering would play a role in ushering in the thermonuclear age. "We had little to complain about because our friends from high school were being shot up in the Korean War while we were in the Marshall Islands," the 71-year-old resident of Kansas City, Mo., said. He and eight other members of the original group of 40 Air Force meteorologists who predicted early nuclear testing conditions gathered Tuesday at the Tuscany Hotel. Their four-day reunion, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the first hydrogen bomb detonation, continues today with a tour of the Nevada Test Site. Now older, wiser and a bit cynical, the surviving "atomic weathermen" are finding their place in history. "A funny thing is that for the last 50 years, few people cared about what we did," Whitman said. "Now we are being asked our opinions about Yucca Mountain and whether we knew we were touching the face of history. We were 20-year-old kids. To us it was just a job." Having made their mark during "Operation Ivy" on Enewetak Atoll in the Marshall Islands, site of the first H-bomb test, they say they have concerns about Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste repository. Some take a hardline look at compensation for the "downwinders" of Utah who were exposed to radiation fallout of Nevada's above-ground tests, saying there was little public concern for on-the-job exposure of military personnel. Whitman eventually paid a price for his service, losing a lung to fallout-related cancer. Fellow weatherman Paul Sulky, 72, of Arizona, lost a kidney to cancer. About half of the crew have died from various causes. Operation Ivy, the largest atmospheric nuclear bomb detonation, occurred on Oct. 31, 1952 -- Nov. 1 in the Marshall Islands. The thermonuclear device nicknamed "Mike" was triggered as part of a plutonium-fueled test where the equivalent of 10.4 million tons of TNT exploded into a massive fireball. The detonation was larger than the accumulative total of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and all other above-ground tests to that date. "From a ship I watched it and thought, 'Wow, that's one hell of a big bang,' " said Harry Mosher, 77, of Trenton, N.J., a lead forecaster on Operation Ivy. "I hoped that no one would ever again have to see such an explosion." So successful was the work of the weathermen that a military report credits the data they collected for resulting in the bomb being detonated on the only day during a several week period when the atmospheric conditions were proper. Nuclear testing in the Pacific Islands led to the search for a continental proving ground, which turned out to be the Nevada Test Site. The move was necessary because Pacific Ocean experiments were expensive and officials felt the area was unsafe as the Korean War and the Cold War intensified. Nevada was chosen because the federal government already owned the land and because Southern Nevada was close to both Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Northern California. Harry Blackford, 72, of Charles Town, W.Va., was one of the Ivy weathermen who later went to work at the Nevada Test Site. "It was such a big waste of money because they would build small towns and place perfectly good cars on the site and blow them up just to watch what would happen," he said. "The scientific evidence was significant, but I was earning $56 a month, and I would have loved to have owned one of those $2,000 cars they blew up." Blackford said that much like in the military, work at the Test Site in the early 1950s involved lots of people doing different jobs with no one really knowing the sum purpose. As a result, he and others say they don't blame themselves for the plight of the downwinders. "I live in Salt Lake City, Utah, and I hear about this subject a lot," said 79-year-old Robert Eskridge, the only officer in the group. "But I had many times more radiation fall on me and not once has the government offered to compensate me for my exposure while I was serving my country." Mosher agreed, noting he was assigned to test atmospheric fallout that fell on him just after the Ivy detonation. "They kept handing me meters and taking them away, saying they were defective," Mosher said. "The reading they used for the report was one that showed the fallout was not significant." As for Yucca Mountain, the concerns ranged from safe storage to security. "I have great concerns, but that's not to say I don't support Yucca Mountain as the site," Whitman said. "It is a much safer option than having the stuff in piles at sites around the country." Harold Wainscott, 72, of Overton, Ky., said his concerns focus on the "half-life" of nuclear waste -- which lingers thousands of years -- and the nation's questionable history of disposing of such waste. "There is a spot on the Enewetak atoll of Runit where nuclear waste was buried in a large crater and covered with a concrete dome," he said. "Today, waves bash over it and are eroding the concrete. What will happen to the environment in a thousand years or less (if it is breached)?" Eskridge said: "With worldwide terrorism, will Yucca Mountain be safe from someone setting off a nuclear device inside the mountain? What a mess that would create." Nick Lauletta, a Las Vegas Navy veteran who participated in the unsuccessful search for the body of a pilot killed while conducting atmospheric tests -- the only direct fatality from Ivy -- on Tuesday presented the group a proclamation from Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., citing their "service, valor and patriotism." Operation Ivy marked the confirmation of the hydrogen bomb that was designed and developed by physicists Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam. The detonation cost the U.S. government $240.9 million, according to the departments of Energy and Defense. In 1974 the Atomic Energy Commission, which later became part of the Energy Department, approved the first specific and comprehensive radiological protection policy for the Marshall Islands. Enewetak was returned to the Trust Territory Government of the Marshall Islands. The small island is inhabited today. Photos: Former Air Force weathermen | A Defense Nuclear Agency photo shows the explosion of the first hydrogen bomb | Newspaper articles from 1952 Las Vegas SUN main page All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 55 Washington, Tokyo and Seoul to discuss fate of 1994 nuclear agreement with North Korea JAE-SUK YOO, Associated Press Writer Thursday, October 31, 2002 (10-31) 02:32 PST SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- The foreign ministers of the United States, Japan and South Korea will meet in Seoul next month to discuss the fate of a 1994 deal in which North Korea agreed to halt nuclear arms programs, a South Korean official said Thursday. The fate of the agreement was thrown into doubt after North Korea acknowledged to U.S. officials this month that it has a uranium-enriching program to make nuclear weapons. Under the 1994 deal, North Korea promised to freeze and eventually dismantle its suspected nuclear program; in return, a U.S.-led international consortium was to build two nuclear power reactors in the North by 2003 and provide 500,000 metric tons of fuel oil a year until the reactors are completed. Washington says Pyongyang has broken the deal, and it, Tokyo and Seoul have demanded the North dismantle the program. South Korea, however, fears that throwing out the agreement completely would prompt the North to go even further in its nuclear program. Secretary of State Colin Powell and Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi will be in Seoul Nov. 10-12 to attend an international meeting on democracy. The meeting will draw the foreign ministers from over 100 democracies. On the sidelines of the forum, Powell, Kawaguchi and South Korean Foreign Minister Choi Sung-hong will meet to discuss North Korea's nuclear issue, a South Korean Foreign Ministry official said. The main topic of those talks will be on whether to keep the 1994 accord, the official said in a briefing to journalists, given on condition of anonymity. The United States, Japan and South Korea have agreed to seek "a peaceful resolution" to the North's nuclear issue. But there are increasing calls in the U.S. Congress to abrogate the agreement and punish the communist regime. "There has been no decision made yet between the United States, Japan and South Korea (on the agreement)," said the South Korean official at the briefing. "The biggest factor (in making any decision) will be North Korea's response." North Korea told U.S. officials that it considered the 1994 deal invalid because the promised nuclear reactors are several years behind schedule and were not expected to be completed by 2003 as promised. It has refused to dismantle the nuclear weapons program unless Washington agrees to conclude a nonaggression treaty with it. The United States says it will engage in serious dialogue with Pyongyang only when the North scraps its nuclear program. During normalization talks with Japan which ended Wednesday in Kuala Lumpur, North Korea again rejected demands that it give up its nuclear ambitions. [Buy The San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 56 South Korea tells North to move on nuclear issue - 10/31/2002 - ENN.com Thursday, October 31, 2002 By Paul Eckert, Reuters SEOUL, South Korea — South Korean President Kim Dae-jung called on North Korea on Wednesday to take "prompt and visible" steps to solve an impasse over the communist state's broken pledges of nuclear nonproliferation. Returning home from an Asia-Pacific summit, Kim told his country he had won the backing of allies the United States and Japan and key players China and Russia for a firm but peaceful approach to averting a nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula. "We absolutely will not permit nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction on the Korean peninsula," Kim said in arrival remarks at Seoul's Songnam Airport. "For our security and for North-South coexistance, North Korea must abandon its nuclear weapons development," he said. "Once again I call on North Korea to show us prompt and visible action," the 77-year-old president said. Completing his last overseas trip as president, Kim flew in from a Seattle stopover after attending a summit of the 21-member Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) grouping in Los Cabos, Mexico, and holding consultations with allies. The APEC leaders gave strong backing for Seoul's demand that Pyongyang give up a covert uranium enrichment scheme North Korean officials had acknowledged early this month. Kim has so far argued that sanctions against North Korea could backfire and exacerbate the nuclear dispute. JAPAN MAKES LITTLE HEADWAY Kim arrived in Seoul just as talks on normalizing ties between Japan and North Korea ended with the two sides deeply divided on the key issues of Pyongyang's nuclear arms program and Japanese kidnapped decades ago, Japan's top negotiator said. During two days of talks in Malaysia, North Korea rejected Tokyo's demand — backed by the United States and other allies — that it scrap its nuclear weapons program. Pyongyang insisted that it felt threatened by the United States. Early this month, North Korea revealed that it was reprocessing uranium for weapons use — a move the United States said put Pyongyang in violation of four nuclear nonproliferation agreements, including a pivotal 1994 agreement with Washington. The United States says it has not yet decided how to persuade the reclusive communist state to abandon its uranium enrichment program, other than through diplomatic pressure in conjunction with South Korea, Japan, China, and Russia. Pyongyang says it will deal with the nuclear issue only if Washington signs a peace treaty and guarantees the North's sovereignty. The U.S. position is that it will not hold new negotiations with the North Koreans, as it has done in the past, until they promise to dismantle the program. On Wednesday, North Korean state media carried several statements reiterating Pyongyang's demand for a nonaggression treaty with Washington and calling on South Koreans to side with the North against the United States. "All those who truly love the country and the nation are called upon to actively cooperate with each other in the efforts to force the U.S. to conclude a nonaggression treaty with (North Korea)," the North's state-run Minju Chosun newspaper said. UNBROKEN NORTH-SOUTH CONTACTS Two weeks after the nuclear revelation, exchanges between the capitalist South and the communist North continue apace. Working-level officials of the two Koreas were beginning four days of talks on Wednesday in Pyongyang to discuss building a South Korean industrial park in Kaesong, a city just north of the heavily fortified North-South buffer zone. Paralleling the talks, which will also cover cross-border flood control, officials of the rival Koreas' Red Cross organizations were to meet to discuss building a permanent center for reunions of families divided since the 1950-53 Korean War. South Korean National Red Cross (KNRC) President Suh Young-hoon said on Tuesday he would use the meeting at the North's Mount Kumgang resort to press Pyongyang about the fate of nearly 500 South Koreans Seoul believes the North has abducted. Prompted by North Korea's confession last month that it had kidnapped about a dozen Japanese, relatives of South Koreans abducted by Pyongyang have demanded an accounting for some 486 southern kidnap victims. Only about 200 are thought to be alive. Copyright 2002, Reuters Copyright © 2001 Environmental News Network Inc. ***************************************************************** 57 Lie-detector screening to stay in nuclear labs The Oakland Tribune [http://www.oaklandtribune.com/] Thursday, October 31, 2002 - 3:14:09 AM MST By Ian Hoffman STAFF WRITER Hundreds of nuclear weapons scientists and intelligence analysts will still be strapped to the polygraph machine for the time being, despite a recent report concluding that polygraphs miss spies and tar the innocent as security risks. The U.S. Energy Department is racing to change its routine polygraph screening program before a six-month congressional deadline. But its lawyers argue that Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is legally barred from suspending the controversial lie-detector tests until a new program is in place, according to an internal memo issued Wednesday. "We are committed to moving rapidly on this issue but, until the secretary issues new regulations, we are obligated by law to continue the present program," wrote Linton F. Brooks, acting chief of the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration that oversees Lawrence Livermore, Sandia and Los Alamos weapons labs. More than 750 Sandia and Livermore employees in California who handle plutonium or nuclear weapons or have access to human intelligence face polygraph tests this year. A Livermore union, the Society of Professional Scientists and Engineers, had written Brooks urging suspension of the tests after a panel of national experts found that polygraphs were based on poor science and too unreliable to justify such heavy use by federal national-security agencies to screen their workers. Given Brooks' memo, the union now will ask Congress to scrap the law requiring polygraphs. Stephen Fienberg, the statistics professor who headed the NRC polygraph panel, said no one really expected the federal government to drop lie-detector tests overnight, in part because no proven substitute exists. "There isn't an alternative sitting there ... that our committee was prepared to endorse or recommend," Fienberg said. Contact Ian Hoffman at [ihoffman@angnewspapers.com] ***************************************************************** 58 Proposed plutonium pit facility triggers strong response at public meeting Las Vegas SUN October 30, 2002 By JACOB JORDAN ASSOCIATED PRESS NORTH AUGUSTA, S.C. (AP) - Just the idea of a new billion-dollar facility at the Savannah River Site near Aiken stirs passionate emotion from supporters who say it will bring economic development and opponents who think it will bring environmental disaster. A sometimes contentious crowd of 300 elected officials, environmentalists and others gathered at a public meeting here Tuesday to learn more about a proposed facility that would make components to trigger the country's nuclear weapons. Even though no official decision to build the facility is expected until 2004, both sides offered opinions for more than three hours at the last scheduled public meeting before the U.S. Energy Department drafts an environmental summary for a proposed modern pit facility. "This is the liveliest and best attended meeting," said Jay Rose, environmental impact statement manager for DOE's proposal. The environmental statement may go a long way in deciding whether or not the department decides to build the facility that could cost up to $4 billion and have an estimated annual operating cost of about $250 million. It would employ about 1,000 people. The facility would make plutonium pits, which are spherical, metallic objects needed for atomic weapons. Currently, the United States does not have the capability to make pits and the DOE is trying to decide if it needs a facility to make pits and where to locate it. SRS, the former nuclear weapons complex near Aiken, is one of five possible sites for the modern pit facility. The other sites are Pantex near Amarillo, Texas, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, N.M., the Los Alamos National Laboratory, in Los Alamos, N.M., or the Nevada Test Site near Las Vegas. "All of these sites are on equal footing at this point," Rose said. But a review by 10 unidentified DOE officials who were asked to to numerically rate possible sites didn't give them equal scores. Los Alamos scored the highest, followed in order by SRS, the Nevada Test Site, Pantex and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, according to a report obtained by The Albuquerque Journal. The document was completed prior to the formal announcement in September of the five sites that are candidates for the project. Environmentalists are concerned that SRS is a top candidate and also is currently apart of the nation's plutonium disposition program. Greenpeace International's Tom Clements said it's hypocritical for the DOE to reduce its nuclear weapons while at the same time propose a new pit facility. Pits were previously made at a former nuclear weapons facility in Colorado, however, that site was shutdown in 1989 for safety and environmental reasons. The Energy Department has a stockpile of plutonium pits but is unsure when that plutonium will decay. Officials said they think plutonium pits would last about 45-60 years and since most were made in the 1970s and 1980s, the DOE has to begin preparing for the facility now in order for it to be fully operational by 2020. Legislators from South Carolina and Georgia were on hand, most of them in support of locating the pit facility at the SRS. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 59 Plutonium project fuels debate in South Carolina reviewjournal.com -- News: Thursday, October 31, 2002 By JACOB JORDAN THE ASSOCIATED PRESS NORTH AUGUSTA, S.C. -- Just the idea of a new billion-dollar facility at the Savannah River Site near Aiken stirs passionate emotion from supporters who say it will bring economic development and opponents who think it will bring environmental disaster. A sometimes contentious crowd of 300 elected officials, environmentalists and others gathered at a public meeting Tuesday to learn more about a proposed facility to make components to trigger the country's nuclear weapons. Even though no official decision to build the facility is expected until 2004, opinions were offered for more than three hours at the last scheduled public meeting before the U.S. Energy Department drafts an environmental summary for the proposed project. The facility could cost up to $4 billion and have an estimated annual operating cost of about $250 million. It would employ about 1,000 people to make plutonium pits, which are spherical, metallic objects needed for atomic weapons. Currently, the United States does not have the capability to make pits, and the DOE is trying to decide whether it needs a facility to do so and where to locate it. SRS, the former nuclear complex near Aiken, is one of five possible sites for the modern pit facility. The others are Pantex near Amarillo, Texas; the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, N.M.; the Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M.; or the Nevada Test Site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "All of these sites are on equal footing at this point," said Jay Rose environmental impact statement manager for the DOE's proposal. A meeting about the proposal Oct. 17 at the National Nuclear Security Administration's North Las Vegas facility drew about a dozen members of the public and only four speakers. The four expressed concerns about the DOE's plans, saying the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project and nuclear weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site have caused them to doubt that the department safely can contain wastes generated by the pit manufacturing process. At that meeting, Project Manager Mike Mitchell said, "We are going to contain those processes. There will be different glove boxes, different shielding and different ways to contain the materials." Review-Journal staff writer Keith Rogers contributed to this report. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 60 Should Ultrak Guard U.S. Nuclear Labs? [http://www.insightmag.com Posted Oct. 30, 2002 By John Berlau The comings and goings of visitors to the White House are approved by Ultrak´s computer systems. A month ago Insight revealed serious concerns about the new computerized access-control system for the White House built in the final months of the Clinton administration and put in place right after George W. Bush took office [see "Security Cracks at the White House," Sept. 30]. Insight quoted sources familiar with the system who said that it frequently breaks down and gives erroneous data about White House employees and guests. The story also noted that controlling interest in the Secret Service's lead contractor, Ultrak Inc. of Lewisville, Texas, recently had been acquired by Niklaus Zenger, a Swiss resident with ties to the Russian government who had led a delegation allowed to visit that country's ultrasecret nuclear-weapons command center. In a June shareholders meeting, Zenger was made sole chief executive officer (CEO) of Ultrak, and new board members were seated. All but one member of that board now are foreign nationals, company spokesman David Paul told Insight. With little information about Zenger readily available, Insight reported that, while "Zenger may be a fine chap," security experts say "a foreign-controlled company whose CEO has ties close enough to the Russian government to be toured through its nuclear command center should not be anywhere near the chain of authority of a highly sensitive data system at the White House." Especially not a system controlling access to the president of the United States and his national-security team. Since the article appeared, Insight has been contacted by former Zenger business associates and others with intimate knowledge of his dealings. They say that, in fact, he is not a "fine chap" and that they are disturbed that he now is running a company in charge of the crucial computer system used to clear those who go in and out of the White House. These sources, some who would speak for attribution and some who would not, say that Zenger's close ties to the Russian government go back to the days of the Soviet Union and claim that he has a history of running away with proprietary U.S. technology after coming up short on promised cash and other commitments. This history, they say, should make him untrustworthy to handle security issues for any government agency, let alone the White House. "He's the last person I'd ever want to be involved with, let alone leading a group that's doing security for the White House," says Wayne Jacoby, a former business associate of Zenger who won an $8,100 judgment against Zenger in a Pennsylvania court. He says Zenger still hasn't paid. "I can't believe the White House wouldn't have checked this guy out," says another American businessman familiar with Zenger's dealings. At press time, Ultrak had not made Zenger available for interviews about these matters. In fact, the company would not provide Insight with a photo or even a basic biography with the date and place of his birth. Ultrak general counsel Karen Austin tells this magazine that the company performed a background check on Zenger before he joined the board of directors, but admitted the inquiry was cursory. "In Europe, the privacy laws are pretty strict, and really all you can find out is whether they've had any criminal convictions," she says. "He did not." Austin says Zenger frequently visits corporate headquarters in Lewisville, Texas, and always gives off positive vibes. "He's really excited about the company, and he really wants to make it successful, " Austin says. "He has a lot of energy, and a lot of real innovative ideas. Our CFO [chief financial officer] compared him to a Bill Gates. He just has a lot of ideas lying around, and some of them will stick and some of them won't, but if some of them stick, that will be great." Meanwhile, new business that Ultrak has obtained with U.S. government agencies has heightened concern. Time and again as Insight researched its initial story security experts said that the only government buildings where security is more important than the White House are U.S. nuclear-weapons laboratories. A week after Insight's story ran, Ultrak issued a press release revealing that it just had been selected to install a new system at the Los Alamos and Sandia nuclear laboratories in New Mexico. These are the very labs where alleged Chinese espionage is reported to have resulted in Communist China getting U.S. nuclear-weapons designs. Austin adds Zenger probably will have little involvement with the Ultrak division handling Los Alamos and Sandia systems, but conceded that he likely would have access to the system designs if he wanted to review them. "He has a reporting chain," she says. "He's only been CEO for a few months." The labs had contracted with Ultrak vendors to build a new computerized fire-protection system that experts say would give the contractor sensitive data about process details and the location of important data and materials. Notra Trulock, the former director of intelligence for the Department of Energy who blew the whistle on lax security at the labs during the Clinton administration, tells Insight there naturally should be concern about a foreign-owned company doing this type of work. "They have to know physically where everything is," Trulock tells Insight. "Presumably they'll have a combination of blueprints and walk-arounds and so forth. At Los Alamos there's one area where they store plutonium, for instance. That could present some interesting fire-protection problems. If there's fissile material — highly enriched uranium or plutonium — or something like that where you would be worried about terrorist threats, then there would be issues." Trulock is careful not to exaggerate. The designers of the system probably will not have access to the most important secrets of Los Alamos, the design of nuclear weapons, he says. Ultrak's press release says that its Albuquerque vendors for Sandia have the same system and "serve as a backup station to Los Alamos." Following Insight's inquiries, Los Alamos now is investigating whether the Ultrak vendors are in breach of contract by violating the lab's "Buy American" provisions, says lab spokesman Kevin Roark. "We direct all of our contractors not to deal with companies that are foreign-controlled," Roark tells Insight. "It's part of every contract we have. ... It could be that they're in breach." And even if the "foreign-controlled" Ultrak somehow technically meets some Los Alamos definitions of an American company, critics say Zenger's background and business history should be enough to make the lab and other government facilities think twice before dealing with him. Acquaintances say that Zenger, now in his early 40s, appears to have had a long relationship with the Russian government, particularly military officials, going back to the days of the old Soviet Union. The Financial Times, describing Zenger as "a lawyer who is fluent in six languages," says he worked as a consultant for Moscow's state-owned Tass news agency, but didn't specify whether this was before or after the fall of the U.S.S.R. In 1992, the shaky first year after the Soviet Union became the Commonwealth of Independent States, Zenger headed a delegation of businessmen touring the nuclear facilities of Arzamas-16, set up as the Soviet Union's nuclear-weapons command center. Ariel Cohen, a scholar at the Heritage Foundation who has warned about the threats to national security Russia still may pose, expresses concern about Zenger's involvement with White House security but cautions that, after the Soviet Union fell, "hundreds of Americans visited Arzamas-16." The problem is that, according to Russian press accounts and the comments that associates say came out of Zenger's own mouth, his visit there was unique. Tass reported that this was "the first time ever" that "a group of foreign businessmen has visited Arzamas-16." Jacoby recalls that Zenger "always bragged about how he had access to Russia's nuclear facilities that no other businessman had." A former Zenger business associate in Switzerland, who requested anonymity, confirmed Zenger's boasts about having high-ranking contacts in the Russian military — contacts that went back to the old Soviet Union. In fact it was a deal with the Ukraine in the early 1990s that appears to have produced the first of Zenger's disputes with American technology companies in which the companies charge he failed to pay the agreed price for their products or services. According to a 1993 article in Oregon Business magazine, Zenger was CEO of a Swiss company called BCG when he made a deal two years earlier with Portland, Ore.-based PC Technology and Summit Micro Design of Sunnyvale, Calif., to ship 3,000 386SX computers to the Ukraine, then a communist stronghold and part of the U.S.S.R. The computers were shipped, but the money never came. "They kept giving us excuses why the money wasn't there, such as the investors were holding onto it or the bank was having difficulty transferring the money," a PC Technology official told Oregon Business. "Within days of shipping the computers to Russia, BCG started complaining that the computers didn't work and weren't what it had ordered," the magazine reported. In May 1993, an Oregon circuit court issued a judgment of $45,000 against Zenger's BCG that the companies still were trying to collect when the article was written. Similar disputes arose in the mid-1990s when Zenger formed a U.S. company in the Philadelphia area called CyberNet Inc. He recruited Jacoby, head of Global Education Motivators, a respected nongovernmental organization (NGO) at the United Nations. The company was set up to perform long-distance telephone routing services and to compile U.N. statistics for software. Jacoby, who still heads the NGO, left his secondary-school teaching job to run the Philadelphia-area office and help Zenger make contacts at the United Nations. He says he put $35,000 of his own money into the company. But after almost a year, Jacoby says, Zenger still had not made good on his promise to pay Jacoby and the other associates in the company who developed the technology. "He took the know-how and all my contributions and didn't pay for anything," Jacoby says. The irate professor sued Zenger's company in the small-claims court of Montgomery County, Pa., and won a judgment of $8,500 against him in April 1997, which Jacoby says remained unpaid. During the time he was suing Zenger, the professor says, one of Zenger's associates called and threatened to kill Jacoby and his family. Jacoby says he is concerned because Zenger's modus operandi in the private sector has been to break promises and dishonor contracts, and wonders aloud about what the Swiss resident might do with any sensitive information he acquires about the security of the White House and U.S. nuclear labs. "I don't necessarily see him as a security risk from the standpoint of looking to help enemies to overthrow the U.S. or anything like that, but who knows?" Jacoby says. "I see him as someone who can't be trusted. When he speaks, you can't believe him. You just don't know who the real Nik Zenger is. He's a very charming guy, but he's very Machiavellian in what he does. He does whatever he has to do to get what he wants. And, in the end, you really don't know what it is that he wants." Insight repeatedly asked Zenger to respond to such charges but he never did. Like Jacoby, shareholders in I-Link of Draper, Utah, also are concerned about Zenger being trusted with information relating to national security. I-Link had developed innovative technology that would allow its customers to receive phone calls, faxes and e-mails at the same time on the same telephone line and to engage in teleconferencing without prior arrangements with the phone company. Jim Buechler of La Verne, Calif., heard about the company from his brother-in-law, and he and his wife laid out $67,000 for 30,000 shares in 1999. Buechler liked the technology and was convinced it could have national-security applications as well. In May 2000, Red Cube International, a Swiss telecommunications company whose CEO was Zenger, entered into a licensing agreement with I-Link to market its technology. It later made an agreement to acquire controlling interest in I-Link from its majority shareholder, Winter Harbor LLC, an investment firm owned by hotel magnate Richard Marriott and his family. Then in December 2000, the Zenger company announced it would not pay Winter Harbor and also failed to deliver the operational funding I-Link said it had promised to them. Red Cube contended in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that it was withholding payment because I-Link had violated the terms of its agreement. I-Link disputed this and charged in a lawsuit that Red Cube was trying to bankrupt the company and pirate its proprietary technology without paying for it. "Red Cube has been engaged in a plan to drive I-Link out of business and gain control of its proprietary technology, customers, agents and employees," I-Link charged in a press release in January 2001. I-Link did not return Insight's telephone calls to discuss these matters. Numbers listed for Red Cube on one of its press releases from early 2001 did not work when Insight attempted to contact officials of that company. I-Link and Red Cube went through a long arbitration process in New York City. Winter Harbor eventually sold its controlling interest in I-Link to Counsel Corp., a Canadian firm. But in the meantime I-Link, while remaining solvent, saw its share price tank. It closed at 10 cents on Oct. 23, and shareholders such as Buechler, who have lost almost everything they put in, blame Zenger for much of the drop. "I'm very upset as an I-Link shareholder about what it is alleged he attempted to do to I-Link and the shareholders: drive us out of business and take our technology," Buechler says. "He tried to steal the technology and take our customers and key employees and pirate them away, so that we wouldn't have anything," says Paula Danieli, who bought stock in I-link in 1999. In October 2001, shortly after the I-Link controversy and just after the attacks on New York City and Washington, Zenger acquired controlling interest in Ultrak. Although the company's share price was volatile and it wasn't in the greatest financial shape, Ultrak could have been attractive in a time of heightened security for its prestigious security contracts with government entities such as the Secret Service. And while Los Alamos tells Insight it has launched an investigation of its contract, Sandia National Laboratory seems perfectly fine with Zenger heading the company. Nor has the Secret Service objected to a company headed by a foreign CEO with Russian ties handling a system that contains sensitive data about who goes in and out of the White House, when and why. "Everybody who's worked on it has had the appropriate security clearance," Secret Service spokesman Marc Connolly told Insight, seeking to assure the public. At Sandia, Insight is told, the technicians aren't even required to have a security clearance, but officials there say they're always escorted by lab employees. And Paul Smith, a fire-systems engineer at Sandia, tells Insight that rooms regularly are swept for bugs. "We do have a group here that will, for fire-alarm installation in any place that's classified, be doing sweeps to verify there are no bugs or whatnot," Smith says. But some of those who have dealt with Zenger worry about all of this, based on their experiences. And they say that it's not just mere money that the United States could lose. "It's totally frightening," says I-Link shareholder Danieli. "I can't believe that our government would be so irresponsible as to put this guy into this kind of situation. It just boggles my mind. We're supposedly under heightened security, and it really bothers me that somebody not even from the United States, from a foreign country and with a dubious background, can affect the entire U.S. national security." John Berlau is a writer for Insight. [jberlau@insightmag.com] [http://www.broadbandpublisher.com] Copyright © 2002 News ***************************************************************** 61 Confusion the word in DOE whistleblower case The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- Thursday, October 31, 2002 by R. Cathey Daniels Oak Ridger staff Confusion seems to be only sure word on whether the Department of Energy has settled the Janet Westbrook whistleblower case. Westbrook thinks she's won. The DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals has backed up that contention by listing on its Web site that it has dismissed UT-Battelle's appeal; and George Breznay, director, this week sent letters to that effect to Westbrook's and UT-Battelle's attorneys. However, the DOE secretary's office says the issue is still under review by its general counsel. And a spokesman for UT-Battelle, which has appealed Westbrook's claim of retaliation for her layoff at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, says the company is "confused." "We're confused by the process in which Mr. Breznay appears to have reviewed and upheld his own ruling, and until we hear from the secretary's office we'll refrain from comment," said Billy Stair, spokesman for ORNL, which is managed by UT-Battelle. "We've asked the secretary's office to clarify the procedure," noted Stair, adding that the company's chief counsel on Wednesday sent a letter requesting that clarification. The dismissal of UT-Battelle's case was listed on the DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals Web site Tuesday, under the heading "daily decisions." DOE spokesman Joe Davis said in a phone interview from Washington, D.C., this morning that the Westbrook case is still under review. "DOE's general counsel is reviewing the process for a decision on this case," said Davis. Westbrook said Wednesday that she had won her case, and that she would be reinstated and receive back pay of about $80,000, plus attorneys' fees of about $36,000. An Oct. 3 supplemental order from the Office of Hearings and Appeals concurred, but the order was subsequently stayed. Westbrook said this morning "this is all very disturbing." She asked, once a final decision has been made, "How can they introduce new discussions?" UT-Battelle's appeal comes after a series of hearings where Westbrook lost her claim in the first round, then subsequently won. Davis said the Westbrook case is the only one nationwide that is appealed to the energy-secretary level. Westbrook worked at ORNL as a radiological engineer from Nov. 13, 1989, until she was laid off as part of a large workforce reduction implemented by UT-Battelle. She told The Oak Ridger at the time that she was the "most experienced, qualified and senior" person in her group when she was let go. She has master's degrees in physics and in nuclear engineering from Purdue University, is a certified health physicist and a registered professional engineer. On several occasions while working at ORNL, Westbrook says she disclosed to lab officials, DOE and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, a federal watchdog agency, her belief that radiation safety reviews were not performed in cases where procedures required them, or that reviews were performed but not in accordance with requirements. Westbrook first filed her complaint Dec. 21, 2001. UT-Battelle appealed on Jan. 17, 2002, and won. Westbrook appealed and won May 9, 2002. UT-Battelle then appealed to the energy secretary. R. Cathey Daniels can be contacted at (865) 220-5515 or [danielsrcd@oakridger.com] . [http://www.oakridger.com/contact/index.html] [http://www.oakridger.com] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 62 Environmental lab thrives in niche market - 2002-10-28 - New Mexico Business Weekly [http://www.bizjournals.com/] Andrew Webb NMBW Staff It hasn't been easy, but a small Albuquerque environmental lab that broke ties with its struggling parent corporation four years ago is finding that it is possible to go head-to-head against the big guys and succeed. Pinnacle Laboratories has operated independently in Albuquerque for four years since owners Mitch and Phyllis Rubenstein bought it from bankrupt Colorado-based American Environmental Network Firms, which at one time operated 13 similar labs in the Southwest. The company has since managed to continue its ongoing contract with the state for soil, water and air analysis, as well as develop new technologies, mainly aimed at the state's oil and gas industry. And opportunities on the horizon — like several Superfund sites nearing cleanup by the state — will keep technicians in the company's cluttered Broadbent Business Park office busy, says Mitch Rubenstein, Pinnacle Labs' president. "We would like to get to a size where we're hiring a lot of New Mexicans," he says. "Right now, we're putting in the infrastructure first. We're bringing in core people who can become trainers." The privately held company is in the process of expanding its eight-person operation into the 1,700 square feet recently added to its office at 2709 Pan American Freeway NE, bringing the total up to 4,200 square feet. Lab equipment is being shuffled from its original, cramped space to newly-remodeled rooms, complete with skylights. "We're not so crowded any more," Rubenstein laughs. "No one's working in the corridors." In fact, Pinnacle is hiring to fill two additional positions. A growth spurt in the wake of the May, 2000 Cerro Grande Fire — which necessitated increased soil testing — propelled the company from $800,000 in 2000 revenues to $1.3 million in 2001 and an estimated $1.5 million in 2002. Rubenstein predicts growth of about 10 to 15 percent in 2003. "The first one and a half years were pretty horrible," Rubenstein says of Pinnacles' first steps as an independent company. He had been with the lab since about 1992 before purchasing it. When American Environmental began to sell its labs, "some of them just out and out closed," Rubenstein says. Severn Trent Laboratories, a subsidiary of European water purification giant Severn Trent Services. Severn Trent Laboratories is the world's largest such operation, with 28 labs nationwide. It is the first company on the New Mexico Environment Department's list of labs, with Pinnacle coming in second. Four companies on that list vie for state work, including Colorado-based Paragon Labs, which was also originally owned by American Environmental. Rubenstein says Pinnacle's success comes from it arrangements with other labs nationwide — including Severn Trent — that allow it to manage a broad range of volatile and even radioactive contaminants in everything from circuit boards to soil. "We'd like to do everything in-house, but when you get down to it, we've already had to go to Oklahoma and Indiana to bring in employees," Rubenstein says. "We have great relationships with labs that can take the work we don't do." Besides the state, Pinnacle handles other clients, such as Arkansas-based Clean Tech International. That company is developing nuclear waste containment systems that use aluminum for the Department of Defense. Pinnacle handles all of their testing needs, including arranging for outside metals or radionucleide testing at out-of-state labs, says Stu Dinwiddie, Clean Tech vice president of environmental sciences. "They've been a real asset to me," he says. Pinnacle is also developing testing methods that could revolutionize the way oil and gas extractors in the state control air pollution. In order to separate water from natural gas, drillers have to absorb the water with a glycol solution, then the glycol needs to be dried, leaving behind the water. Rubenstein estimates that there are about 10,000 such glycol dehydrators operating in the state. Federal and state regulations require that drillers monitor the pollution with these devices in order to remain in compliance with the clean air act. But existing testing methods are unreliable, limited to only one type of glycol dehydrator, and they use samples that are hard to ship, Rubenstein says. Pinnacle labs' method, called 8260ARL (Atmospheric Rich/Lean Method), eliminates those problems, he says. Similar methods are expected to save the natural gas industry in Colorado $250,000. "We're still trying to get the state to determine how our method is applicable," Rubenstein says. awebb@bizjournals.com | 768-7008 x159 © 2002 American City Business Journals Inc. ***************************************************************** 63 First glimpses inside an anti-atom* PhysicsWeb - Physics news, jobs and resources IoP 30 October 2002 *Physicists working on the Antiproton Decelerator at CERN have studied the internal states of anti-hydrogen atoms for the first time. The ATRAP team found that the antiprotons and positrons in their experiment combine to form anti-hydrogen atoms in highly excited states. If the anti-atoms can be trapped in their ground state, it should be possible to compare the atomic structure of anti-hydrogen with ordinary hydrogen and perform the most accurate ever tests of CPT (charge-parity-time) symmetry. Any violation of CPT symmetry would require new physics beyond the Standard Model of particle physics (G Gabrielse et al 2002 /Physical Review Letters/ in press).* The anti-hydrogen atoms were produced from antiprotons from CERN's Antiproton Decelerator and positrons from a radioactive sodium-22 source. The positrons, which were trapped between sets of antiprotons in a "Penning" trap, cooled the antiprotons. When both reach a similar temperature some combine to form anti-hydrogen atoms, consisting of a positron orbiting an antiproton nucleus. These anti-atoms, which are electrically neutral, drift out of the trap. Any anti-hydrogen atoms moving along the axis of the apparatus traverse a strong electric field that removes the positron from the anti-atom. This "field-ionisation" technique allows the resulting negatively charged antiprotons to be trapped and counted. Using this technique the researchers were able to produce nearly 170 000 cold anti-hydrogen atoms. This means that a remarkable 11% of the antiprotons in the Penning trap formed anti-hydrogen atoms. This compares well with previous experiments performed at CERN, by researchers on the ATHENA collaboration, using a similar trapping technique they produced about 50 000 anti-hydrogen atoms two months ago. ATRAP's field-ionisation technique also gives information about the internal states of the anti-hydrogen atoms, showing that the principal quantum number n is between about 43 and 55 (where n=1 corresponds to the ground state). By changing the strength of the ionising electric field the researchers hope to discover more about the internal state of the anti-hydrogen atoms, and to learn how to de-excite them to the ground state. This knowledge will be essential because hydrogen atoms and anti-atoms can only be trapped if they are in their ground state. This high rate of production, and the fact that the anti-atoms are formed in highly excited states, suggests that the anti-hydrogen atoms are formed in three-body collisions between two positrons and an antiproton. The ATRAP collaboration, which includes researchers from the US, Switzerland, Germany and Canada first demonstrated the cooling of antiprotons with positrons in a Penning trap last year. Since then they have carried out more detailed studies of this cooling process to ensure that the antiproton loss observed during positron cooling is indeed due to the formation of anti-hydrogen and not other mechanisms. The team is confident that every recorded event comes from the production of an anti-hydrogen atom and that their measurements are free of background. The ultimate goal of the experiments will be to trap cold anti-hydrogen atoms and study their spectra in detail. Comparing the spectra of anti-hydrogen with hydrogen, and studying the transition from the n=2 to the n=1 state in particular, will give researchers new insights into the differences between matter and antimatter. *Author* Belle Dumé is Science Writer at /PhysicsWeb/. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************