***************************************************************** 01/31/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.27 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: "THE PUSH TO 'REVIVE' NUCLEAR POWER" 2 US: EDITORIAL: Cheney's energy talks 3 UK: Thursday Law Report: Authorisations to discharge radioactive 4 Need for floating nuclear power stations queried in Russian 5 US: Nuclear plants targeted 6 US: GAO Showdown With the Hill NUCLEAR REACTORS 7 US: license renewal application (LRA) of Duke Energy Corporation 8 US: Beaver County nuclear plant workers reject contract, 423-5 9 US: Nuke Plants Warned After Attack Tip 10 China to build new nuclear reactor in Zhejiang 11 US: Fired workers win $13 million: Several Shoals residents involved 12 US: NRC Staff to Meet with Puerto Rico Hospital to Discuss Apparent 13 US: NRC to Hold Public Meeting with Virginia Power to Discuss Initia NUCLEAR SAFETY 14 Satellite could have dropped over Egypt 15 PI: Across the Nation (DU)Toxics spread in South feared NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 16 US: Yucca: Here's The Point (interview with Las Vegas mayor) 17 Contamination could endanger plan for Piketon 18 Ohio top court gets plea to let beryllium suit continue 19 US: Letter(lake Michigan federation): Nuclear waste 20 US: Haddam Spent-Fuel Storage Building Permit Issued 21 US: Cleanup criteria for West Valley established 22 US: Hanford tank work behind schedule 23 US: Yucca: Warning signs subject of exhibition 24 US: Members say panel pumped to fight dump 25 US: Scientists asked about decision on Yucca Mountain 26 US: Technical panel, DOE officials spar at Yucca Mountain hearing 27 US: County's Yucca study projects effects of roadway spill 28 US: Yucca foes say firm had conflict of interest 29 UK: Dounreay still leaking 30 US: Nuke expert says no data shows Yucca suitable for repository 31 US: Leader of Yucca board stymied by DOE 32 US: Study: Yucca stigma will hit economy 33 US: Panel backs Guinn's plan to veto Yucca site 34 US: Upton: Bill for disposing of nuclear waste likely to pass 35 US: Casino donates $50,000 to Yucca battle 36 AU: Software bug blamed in radioactive spill 37 US: Judge gives approval to spent fuel storage at Yankee 38 Irish Safety Fears Not Allayed 39 US: Connecticut mulling its role in nuclear waste debate 40 US: Science Will Catch Up at Waste Site, U.S. Says 41 US: 232 Groups Urge Congress to Reject Nuclear Dump 42 US: Cleanup criteria for West Valley established NUCLEAR WEAPONS 43 US: EPA Proposes Johnston Atoll Cleanup Permit 44 Trafficking in stolen nuclear material on the rise 45 Bin Laden the victim of nuclear con artists, says US 46 N.Korea rebuffs US over nuclear program - The Times of India 47 Pak freezes assets of retired nuclear scientist for Al Qaeda 48 India getting two Russian N-subs? 49 Russia Calls for Binding Pact to Reduce Nuclear Arsenals 50 US: Nuclear security concerns voiced 51 us: Weapons of mass destruction threat up -- CIA 52 India sharpens nuclear claws 53 US: Flashback: Richard Lowry on nuclear proliferation 54 US: Energy Secretary Abraham Announces Nuclear Nonproliferation Effo US DEPT. OF ENERGY 55 Dayton-area officials question plans for radioactive material 56 Funds for Brookhaven Lab Cleanup Restored 57 LANL locates missing disk in inventory 58 Reid to tour two nuclear laboratories 59 Fernald cleanup coming sooner 60 Secretary of Energy Abraham Previews New Accelerated Cleanup Plan OTHER NUCLEAR 61 PI: Irradiation facility 62 IAEA Daily Press Review Date 2002-01-30 Number 15 ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 "THE PUSH TO 'REVIVE' NUCLEAR POWER" Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 20:11:36 -0800 at Old Westbury "THE PUSH TO 'REVIVE' NUCLEAR POWER" Presentation at Conference on "The Next Environmental Hurdles" Sponsored by The Professionals' Network for Social Responsibility The New School University January 26, 2002 The Bush administration and the nuclear industry are making an intense push to "revive" nuclear power in the United States. Diane D'Arrigo of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service says "relapse" is the better term: "It's the push to relapse," she says. As Bob Alvarez, executive director of the group Standing for Truth About Radiation says, "It's like reviving Frankenstein-this is the sequel." For years-ever since the accidents at the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl shattered public trust in atomic power-nuclear power advocates in government and industry have been laying the groundwork for a nuclear power comeback in the U.S. An unbridled drive is now underway. The Bush administration's stance is aggressive and extreme and minimizes the dangers of nuclear power often in outrageous ways. As Bush's Secretary of Treasury Paul O'Neill told The Wall Street Journal: "If you set aside Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, the safety record of nuclear is really is good." (Yes, Mrs. Lincoln, apart from that, how did you enjoy the show?) The Bush administration struck a close working relationship with the nuclear industry well before taking office. The Bush administration's energy "transition" advisors included Joseph Colvin, president of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the self-described "policy organization of the nuclear energy and technologies industry;" and other nuclear industry biggies. There was no one representing renewable energy or environmental organizations. Two weeks after being sworn in, he set up a "National Energy Policy Development Group" and appointed Vice President Cheney as its chairman. The group included O'Neill. Behind closed doors, it huddled with fat energy industry cats-indeed, the General Accounting Office is now in the process of pursuing an unprecedented lawsuit because of Cheney's refusal to disclose who this government panel met with before setting policy. The panel, 10 weeks after being organized, issued its report declaring how it "supports the expansion of nuclear energy in the United States." The National Energy Policy plan-now being considered by Congress-- would substantially increase the use of nuclear power in the U.S. both by building new nuclear power plants-many to be constructed on existing nuclear plant sites-and extending the 40-year licenses of currently operating plants each by another 20 years. The National Energy Policy says: "Many U.S. nuclear plants sites were designed to host four to six reactors, and most operate only two or three; many sites across the country could host additional plants." Further, "Building new generators on existing sites avoids many complex issues associated with building plants on new sites." It would also magnify the impacts of an accident for if one nuclear plant in a cluster of plants undergoes a catastrophic accident resulting in a site evacuation and abandonment of control rooms, there is then the potential for a "cascading loss" involving additional plants, stresses Paul Gunter, who heads NIRS' Reactor Watchdog Project. The National Energy Policy speaks of extending the operating licenses of existing nuclear plants by 20 years-and that's already being done. "No one foresaw" nuclear plants "running for more than 40 years," says Alvarez, who was senior policy advisor to the DOE secretary from 1993 to 1999. "These reactors are just like old machines but they are ultra-hazardous," he says, and by pushing their operating span to 60 years, "disaster is being invited." The Bush-Cheney administration National Energy Policy supports purportedly "new and improved" nuclear plants, "advanced" nukes. It says, "Advanced reactor technology promises to improve nuclear safety." The administration is especially bullish on "the gas-cooled, pebble bed reactor, which has inherent safety features," it says. In fact, says Gunter, the pebble bed reactor is not new, it's just "old wine in a new bottle." It's a "hybrid" of the gas-cooled high-temperature design that "has appeared and been rejected in England, Germany and the United States." And far from being "inherently safe," a reactor of similar design, a THTR300 in the Ruhr Valley in Germany spewed out substantial amounts of radioactivity in a 1986 accident leading to its permanent closure. The new nuclear push would be pursued through what's called "one-step" licensing. This was part of an Energy Policy Act bill approved by a Democratic-controlled Congress in 1992, might I note-381 to 37-and signed into law by the first President George Bush. "One-step" licensing allows the NRC to hold a single hearing for a "combined construction and operating license." No longer can nuclear plant projects be slowed down or stopped at a separate operating license proceeding at which evidence of construction defects are revealed. As the New York Times described passage of the Energy Policy Act in a back-of-the paper story in 1992, "Nuclear power lobbyists called the bill their biggest victory in Congress since the Three Mile Island accident." As NIRS reported in its "Nuclear Monitor" in 1992: "As the bill wound its way through the Senate and House, the nuclear industry won nearly every vote that mattered, proving that Congress remains captive to industry lobbying and political contributions over public opinion." That has not changed-with a few notable exceptions including Representative Major Owens of New York, scheduled to speak here today, and Representative Edward Markey of Massachusetts. Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program has documented how the nuclear industry regularly showers Congress-and this includes members of both major parties-with political contributions. And when the nuclear industry gives, members of Congress listen-and act. Likewise, nuclear industry money pours into presidential campaigns. The Republican Bush-Cheney posture on nuclear power is super-extreme, but that doesn't mean the Democratic alternative was-or is-on the diametric other "side." The website of the Nuclear Energy Institute-www.nei.org-includes a page of "Endorsements of Nuclear Energy" and among those quoted are Al Gore: "Nuclear power, designed well, regulated properly, cared for meticulously, has a place in the world's energy supply," he is reported to have said. Gore's running mate as candidate for vice president, Senator Joseph Lieberman, is quoted as saying at a Senate hearing in 1998: "I am a supporter of nuclear energy." To make sure the public hardly participates even in the "one-step" process, the NRC is now involved in a "rulemaking" to undo what it through the years interpreted as the public's right to formal trial-type hearings on nuclear plant licensing. It seeks to "deformalize" the hearings eliminating due process procedures. No longer will people be entitled to documents or to cross-examine witnesses. Documents would be restricted to what the NRC staff and company deem relevant and instead of cross-examining witnesses, people will have to submit written questions as suggestions to the NRC presiding officer for he or she to ask-at their discretion-at a hearing. Also to help in a nuclear power comeback is the effort to alter the standards for radiation exposure. As more and more has been learned about radioactivity, the realization came that any amount can kill, that there is no "safe" level. This is called the "linear no-threshold theory." Now nuclear advocates in government and industry want to alter the standards premised on a contention that low doses of radiation are not so bad after all. There is even interest in a long-rejected notion called "hormesis"-that a little radiation is good for people, that it helps exercise the immune system. The instrument for making the changes is a new Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) panel of the National Academy of Sciences that is to make recommendations to the federal government. It is "stacked," notes Diane D'Arrigo of NIRS, with "supporters of radiation advocates." Nuclear waste is another obstacle the nuclear proponents in government and industry are seeking to get around. The Bush administration is now moving to open Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a repository and also use Utah's Skull Valley Goshute Reservation and possibly other Native American reservations. For what is considered "low-level" waste, the strategy is to "recycle" it-to smelt metals down and incorporate irradiated material into consumer items. The huge problem with using Yucca Mountain, which the government began exploring as a high-level nuclear waste repository in the 1980s, is that it is on or near 32 earthquake faults and, notes D'Arrigo, has a "history and prospects of volcanoes and a likelihood of flooding and leakage." In 1997, tribal leaders of the Goshute Reservation, as the Goshute's website notes, "leased land to a private group of electrical utilities for the temporary storage of 40,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel." Some members of the tribe are fighting the deal in court demanding to know who got what for what. To nuclear advocates in government and nuclear industry, collaborating with Indian reservations as sovereign nations is a way to unload atomic garbage. Critics describe it as a new form of environmental racism"-"nuclear racism"-seeking to take advantage of the poverty of Native Americans. The drive to "recycle" nuclear waste has been percolating for years. In 1980, the NRC first proposed that irradiated "metal scrap could be converted" that "radioactive waste burial costs could be avoided [and] the resulting use of smelted scrap could be made into any number of consumer or capital equipment products such as automobiles, appliances, furniture, utensils, personal items and coins." Some thought that the push for radioactive quarters and hot Pontiacs was too crazy to be true. But now the scheme is coming down the pike full-speed. Meanwhile, those behind the nuclear push have moved to extend a key piece of U.S. law that facilitated the nuclear power industry in the first place: the Price-Anderson Act, the law that drastically limits the amount of money people can collect as a result of a nuclear power plant disaster. It was enacted in 1957 after nervous utilities and insurance companies balked at building nuclear power plants--to be a temporary measure to give a boost to setting up a nuclear power industry, it originally limited in the event of a nuclear plant accident to $560 million with the federal government paying the first $500 million. Price-Anderson has been extended and extended, and now it's being extended once more-to provide a financial umbrella for the push to revive nuclear power. As Michael Mariotte has pointed out: "The renewal of Price-Anderson is only to build new reactors. That's the issue. Existing nuclear plants are covered by the present law." The new Price-Anderson liability limit would be $8.6 billion, a fraction of what the NRC itself has concluded would be the financial consequences of a nuclear plant accident. Those figures are contained in a 1982 report done for the NRC by the DOE's Sandia National Laboratories and titled "Calculation of Reactor Accident Consequences for U.S. Nuclear Power Plants." It calculates-in 1980 dollars-costs as a result of a nuclear plant disaster as high as $274 billion for Indian Point 2 and $314 billion at the Indian Point 3 nuclear plants both a little more than 40 north of where we are today. The number of "early fatalities"-46,000 as a result of Indian Point 2 undergoing a meltdown with breach of containment, 50,000 for Indian Point 3. And what are the chances of such a disaster occurring? In 1985, the NRC was asked by a House oversight committee chaired by Representative Markey to determine the "probability" of a "severe core melt accident" in the "next twenty years for those reactors now operating and those expected to operate during that time." The NRC concluded: "The crude cumulative probability of such an accident would be 45 percent." That disaster has not come...yet. "Luck" is the only reason it hasn't, says David Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists. But the drive to revive nuclear power, the push to relapse, will, if it succeeds, help make inevitable that catastrophe-along with extending the damage of every aspect of the nuclear power chain, from mining to milling to transportation to fuel enrichment and fabrication to reactor operation and the "routine" emissions of radioactivity from that and then atomic waste management in perpetuity. And, new-but not really new-is the specter of nuclear plants as terrorist targets. In 1980, a landmark book by Bennett Ramberg was published, "Nuclear Power Plants as Weapons for the Enemy: An Unrecognized Military Peril" was its title. Despite the "multiplication of nuclear power plants," it begins, "little public consideration has been given to their vulnerability in time of war...The failure or unwillingness of policy makers in the United States and abroad to make this matter a subject for extensive public review and debate is unfortunate." Unfortunate-and in the wake of September 11-potentially lethal. Dr. Ramberg, now research director of the Los Angeles-based Committee to Bridge the Gap, said in a post 9/11 presentation at the National Press Club: "I presented my findings to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission raising questions about the vulnerability of American reactors to terrorist action. The commission dismissed my concerns." Indeed, in a "rule-making" in 1982, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of the NRC, in considering an operating license for the Shearon Harris nuclear power plant in North Carolina, dismissed a contention by an intervenor, Wells Eddleman, that the plant's safety analysis was deficient because it did not consider the "consequences of terrorists commandeering a very large airplane...and diving it into the containment." The NRC board declared: "Reactors could not be effectively protected against such attacks without turning them into virtually impregnable fortresses at much higher cost...The applicants are not required to design against such things as artillery bombardments, missiles with nuclear warheads, or kamikaze dives by large airplanes." Meanwhile, new since 1982 is the full arrival of safe, clean, renewable energy technologies. The need is for broad-scale implementation. Wind power, solar energy, hydrogen fuel technologies including fuel cells, among other renewable energy technologies, are more than ready after years of dramatic advances. Coupled with energy efficiency, they can be tapped and widely utilized-and render nuclear power completely unnecessary. As NIRS, Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program, Greenpeace USA, Safe Energy Communication Council, the Global Resource Action Center for the Environment, said of the National Energy Policy: "The Bush/Cheney administration is recklessly promoting the building of new nuclear plants to address an energy crisis that in large part is being manufactured by the energy corporations that will benefit from building new power plants....The combination of demand reduction and increased usage of renewables would be enough to replace nuclear power....We believe that instead of promoting dangerous and dirty forms of energy, the United States should be a world leader in promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency. Let us not sell our children's future." Amen. *** Karl Grossman is a full professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury who has specialized in investigative reporting and environmental journalism for more than 35 years. He is the author of six books including "Cover Up: What You ARE NOT Supposed To Know About Nuclear Power" and "Power Crazy." He has long been active in television as well as print journalism and is the host of documentaries and interview shows for New York-based EnviroVideo including many on nuclear power. Starting this spring Grossman's EnviroVideo programs will be broadcast weekly through the U.S. on Free Speech TV airing on cable and public TV and satellite systems. He has given presentations on nuclear power across the United States and abroad. Grossman can be reached by telephone at (631) 725-2858 and by E-Mail at kgrossman@hamptons.com. His address is Box 1680, Sag Harbor, NY 11963 ***************************************************************** 2 EDITORIAL: Cheney's energy talks Thursday, January 31, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Vice President Dick Cheney is picking a no-win fight by refusing to turn over information about his meetings with energy executives. Mr. Cheney argues he's acting out of principle -- that he and the president must have the freedom to discuss matters outside the public domain; that candid advice would dry up if those who offered it believed the details would eventually be subject to disclosure. The argument is not without merit. Few would maintain that every conversation a president or vice president has while discussing policy should be subject to congressional review. But the administration wouldn't be eroding an important principle by providing the information. Instead, it would be making a rational and pragmatic decision based on the fact that it is doing itself more harm than good by going to the mat in this specific case. The General Accounting Office announced Wednesday that it will sue to obtain the data. But even if Mr. Cheney wins, he should capitulate. Given the controversy over Enron and the burgeoning public perception -- however misguided -- that the conversations involved something inappropriate, the White House would further its own cause by simply making everything available. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 3 UK: Thursday Law Report: Authorisations to discharge radioactive material were not unlawful 31 January 2002 Regina (on the application of Marchiori) v The Environment Agency ([2001] EWCA Civ 03) Court of Appeal, Civil Division (Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Morland) 25 January 2002 The Independent - United Kingdom; Jan 31, 2002 BY KATE O'HANLON A CHALLENGE to authorisations to permit the discharge of radioactive waste from military installations at which nuclear warheads were manufactured, which was made on the basis that they did not accord with the "justification principle", failed because the merits or demerits of government defence policy were not justiciable. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of Emanuela Marchiori against a decision that certain authorisations granted by the respondent under the Radioactive Substances Act 1993 which permitted the discharge of nuclear waste by contractors to the Ministry of Defence from two nuclear sites, both of which were military installations at which Trident nuclear warheads were manufactured, were not unlawful. The applicant had a longstanding and deeply held opposition to the manufacture of nuclear weapons and the threat to use them. She contended that the authorisations granted by the respondent would only be lawful if the respondent, in granting them, had decided that "every activity resulting in exposure to ionising radiation [is] justified by the advantages which it produces". That was the "justification principle" stipulated in article 6(1) of Council Directive (Euratom) 80/836 made under Chapter III of Title 2 of the Euratom Treaty. She maintained that the respondent had wrongly treated the nuclear defence programme as a benefit or advantage for the purposes of the justification principle, whereas in fact it was required to treat it as a detriment, having regard to the humanitarian principles of international law as explained in the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons given on 8 July 1996. The respondent submitted, inter alia, that the Directive was not engaged, since Chapter III of Title 2 of the Euratom Treaty had no application to military installations, but that it had chosen in any event to apply the same principle as it was articulated by the International Commission on Radiological Protection in ICRP Publication 60 adopted in November 1990; that far from being required to regard the nuclear programme as a detriment, the respondent was bound to treat it as a benefit; and that the merits or demerits of government defence policy were not justiciable in the courts. Michael Fordham (Public Interest Lawyers) for the applicant; Dinah Rose and Nicholas Khan (Environment Agency) for the respondent; Nigel Pleming QC and Eleanor Grey (Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State for Defence; David Wolfe (CSM Cameron McKenna) for AWE plc. Lord Justice Laws said that the law of England would not contemplate what might be called a merits review of any honest decision of government upon matters on national defence policy. The court was not equipped to judge such merits or demerits. Moreover, the graver a matter of state and the more widespread its possible effects, the more respect would be given, within the framework of the constitution, to the democracy to decide its outcome. In the present case the question was whether the respondent had, in granting the authorisations, acted lawfully within the terms of section 13(1) of the 1993 Act. If the merits of Trident were not justiciable, being a matter of defence policy which was within the constitutional framework for the Government alone to decide, the respondent could not be criticised for doing precisely what it had done, i.e. to treat criticisms of Trident as being outside its remit, and to regard its status as a benefit as axiomatic for the purposes of the justification principle. It was, therefore, clear that the respondent had acted lawfully within the terms of section 13(1). Kate O'Hanlon, Barrister ***************************************************************** 4 Need for floating nuclear power stations queried in Russian newspaper BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 30, 2002 Severodvinsk-Moscow: It became known yesterday that the world's first floating nuclear heat and power station will be laid down at the Sevmashpredpriyatiye dock in Severodvinsk this year. The minister of atomic energy order for its construction at Sevmash was signed the year before last but the project's implementation was initiated only after President Vladimir Putin visited the defence dockyard on 4 December 2001. Two weeks later the government earmarked R130m for its design... The first floating nuclear heat and power plant should be generating energy for the Sevmash shops in 2006 which, in the opinion of the enterprise's leadership, will ensure its stable operation - 70 per cent of equipment at the heat and electric power stations owned by the Arkhenergo company, which supplies the dockyard with energy, is currently worn out. In addition, the cost of "nuclear" electricity is no more than 36 kopecks per kilowatt hour. "Floating nuclear power stations are economically ineffective," Izvestiya was told by Ivan Blokov, Greenpeace Russia director for companies. "The Ministry of Atomic Energy has set the cost of one kilowatt-hour at 10-12 cents but the real prime cost will be two or three times higher. And they have failed to calculate the cost of security guards, insurance risks, and so forth." According to [project leader] Grigoriy Vengerovich, the floating nuclear power station is a barge with a displacement of 20,000 tonnes, on which are installed two turbogenerators and two KLT-40S nuclear reactors. The building of the first station will cost R3bn. The designers believe that within the next 10 years, 20 of these stations will be required for the regions of the Arctic and the Far East. The floating nuclear power station will be equipped with systems ensuring its safety, survivability and unsinkability, Vengerovich says. At the same time specialists at the St Petersburg "North-West" strategic studies centre are convinced that Severodvinsk does not need its own electric power station. In the opinion of centre expert Aleksandr Nyago "the Northwest's energy resources are already working at only 60 per cent of capacity and, given the orientation towards an innovatory economy and energy-saving technologies, the region's energy requirements could decline still further." "The Ministry of Atomic Energy project has not undergone a state environmental study," Professor Aleksey Yablokov, president of the Environmental Policy Centre, told Izvestiya. "If something happens in Severodvinsk then Moscow will definitely feel the effect. Moreover, the creation of such stations is also dangerous from the viewpoint of the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. Their reactors use highly enriched uranium-235, which can be used to produce an atom bomb." In the view of environmentalists, the floating station is a wonderful target for terrorists. Source: Izvestiya, Moscow, in Russian 29 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 5 Nuclear plants targeted -- The Washington Times January 31, 2002 By Bill Gertz THE WASHINGTON TIMES U.S. intelligence agencies have issued an internal alert that Islamic terrorists are planning another spectacular attack to rival those carried out on September 11. The detailed warning was issued within the past two weeks in a classified report that said one target was a U.S. nuclear power plant or one of the Energy Department's nuclear facilities. The alert was based on sensitive intelligence gathered overseas that revealed discussions among terrorism suspects. The latest warning was similar to other terrorist threats that prompted public alerts in October and December. Officials familiar with the report said it contained six potential methods and targets of attack, among them: A bombing or airline attack on a nuclear power plant or other U.S. nuclear facility, such as a weapons storage depot, designed to cause mass casualties and spread deadly radiological debris. A bombing against a U.S. warship in Bahrain, headquarters of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, where some 20 ships are based. The attack would be similar to the October 2000 suicide bombing attack on the USS Cole. Another airliner attack on a building using a hijacked commercial jet as suicide bomber. A vehicle bombing in Yemen. Authorities in Yemen, acting on intelligence gathered by the United States in Afghanistan, recently averted a car bombing of the U.S. Embassy in San'a by finding the explosives-laden vehicle. A public alert had been issued Jan. 14 that said al Qaeda terrorists were planning an attack in Yemen. President Bush said in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night that U.S. intelligence agencies had uncovered plans of U.S. nuclear power plants at terrorist bases in Afghanistan, an indication attacks on the facilities were planned. "We have found diagrams of American nuclear power plants and public water facilities, detailed instructions for making chemical weapons, surveillance maps of American cities, and thorough descriptions of landmarks in America and throughout the world," Mr. Bush said. "What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that — far from ending there — our war against terror is only beginning," he said. A defense official said yesterday that intelligence gained from Afghanistan had led to the thwarting of three terrorist attacks, including the arrests of terrorists in Singapore and Yemen. A third operation is still "being rolled up," the official said. "We have been getting a lot of indications [of an attack] but no specific threat information," the official said. Yemen's foreign minister, Abubaker al-Qirbi, told The Washington Post on Wednesday that authorities in Yemen have tracked down two key al Qaeda suspects in that country. Mr. al-Qirbi said Yemen was working to capture a group of suspects wanted by the United States for questioning about their links to Osama bin Laden, blamed for the September 11 attacks. A U.S. intelligence official said the intelligence community is constantly receiving new threat data. "It's a heightened threat environment, and we get threat information on a regular basis," this official said. No public announcement has been made of an impending terrorist attack based on recent assessments. But the information related to a potential new attack first came to the attention of intelligence agencies last week, officials said. The last time the Bush administration issued a public warning of a potential terrorist attack was Dec. 3, when Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge announced that Americans should be alert to the danger of an attack. It was the second such warning. "We remain on alert," Ridge spokesman Gordon Johndroe said yesterday, adding that the FBI also has issued a warning to law enforcement around the country to remain on high alert through March 11. "Subsequent warnings for heightened vigilance around utilities, nuclear power plants, water treatment plants were issued a couple of weeks ago," Mr. Johndroe said in an interview. "The threat remains, and therefore we remain on alert." Attorney General John Ashcroft said Friday, in releasing a photograph of a suspected suicide terrorist, that "I want to advise the public to exercise vigilance and common sense in the face of the terrorism threat." On Jan. 17, Mr. Ashcroft released photographs of five al Qaeda terrorists whose statement made on videotapes found in Afghanistan "suggest future terrorist acts, specifically suicide attacks." Energy Department spokeswoman Lisa Cutler said security has been stepped up at nuclear-weapons facilities throughout the United States since September 11. In San Francisco yesterday, security guards detected bomb residue on the shoes of a passenger seeking to pass through a security checkpoint. The man disappeared before he could be questioned. On Dec. 22, Richard C. Reid, a British national linked to the al Qaeda terrorist network, was arrested after he tried to light the fuse of an explosives-laden shoe on a Paris-to-Miami flight, authorities said. copyright © 2002 News World Communications, Inc. ***************************************************************** 6 GAO Showdown With the Hill (washingtonpost.com) By Howard Kurtz Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, January 31, 2002; 8:51 AM Looks like George Bush may be heading back to the Supreme Court, the site of the victory that made him president. This time as a defendant in a civil suit. After months of saber-rattling, the GAO is finally heading to court over the Cheney energy task force. Most people don't much care about Washington process stories, with lawyers arguing over abstract constitutional principles. (Such as: does Congress, of which the General Accounting Office is the investigative arm, have the right to examine executive-branch decision-making or not?) But the administration's refusal to budge is keeping the Enron story alive. Not the corporate-malfeasance story, of course. That seems to get fresh fuel every day, whether from new shredding disclosures or Linda Lay's weepy NBC interview about what a great guy her husband is, and how they're oh so broke. But on the what-did-the-administration-really-do-for-Enron front, the Bush-Cheney stance smells a bit like stonewalling. Yes, the president and vice president should be able to get confidential advice from colleagues. But with Ken Lay making his desires known directly to former Halliburton Co. Chairman Cheney, doesn't the public have a right to know how private-sector folks are influencing administration policy? These confrontations – which erupted not only over the Hillary health care squad but between lots of committee chairmen and Cabinet members, with plenty of contempt-of-Congress citations – are almost always settled with face-saving compromises. So why, even some Republicans are asking, doesn't the White House stem the bad publicity by cutting a deal now? Maybe the Bush team is hoping for a Rehnquist-led 5-4 ruling. Maybe they're just being stubborn. Or maybe there are some things they really don't want to get out. "The General Accounting Office said today that it would sue the White House to try to force Vice President Dick Cheney to release documents detailing contacts between corporate executives and the administration's energy task force," the [http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/31/business/31GAO.html] reports. "In a letter to the White House and Congressional leaders, David M. Walker, the comptroller general of the United States and director of the accounting office, said he intended to ask a federal judge to order Mr. Cheney to give Congress the identities of energy industry executives who helped the Bush administration formulate a national energy policy last year. Mr. Walker said he was also seeking the subject that each executive discussed with task force members. Mr. Cheney was the chairman of the task force. "The announcement today sets up a legal showdown between the accounting office – an investigative arm of Congress – and the Bush administration with potential political consequences for the White House. The dispute over task force records has made it more difficult for the White House to distance itself from the collapse of the Enron Corporation, whose executives met with Mr. Cheney and other energy task force members a half-dozen times last year. "Also today, a Congressional committee asked Kenneth L. Lay, Enron's former chairman and chief executive, to explain what Enron did in response to a whistle-blower's assertion last summer that a major division had overstated profits by hundreds of millions of dollars. The division, Enron Energy Services, was run by Lou L. Pai, who sold $353 million in Enron stock over the past three years, and Thomas E. White, who left Enron to become secretary of the Army last June." The press has somehow gotten the crazy notion that the United States might be planning to attack other terrorist-harboring countries. How? From the president's own words. Yesterday was clearly ratcheting-down time, as this [http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-013102iraq.story] story makes clear: "Despite his threatening words toward the three nations he characterized as the 'axis of evil,' President Bush apparently does not intend to launch major new military initiatives against Iraq, Iran or North Korea--yet. "U.S. officials scrambled Wednesday to temper the tone of the president's first State of the Union speech, in which he said the United States 'will not wait on events while dangers gather,' specifically citing the three nations' programs on weapons of mass destruction. "For now, administration sources said, the Bush administration does not intend to break off efforts to negotiate a missile deal with North Korea that would end its production and exporting of ballistic missiles. The administration's offer of a dialogue with Iran on nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and other disputes is still on the table. And its top demand of Iraq is still that Baghdad allow U.N. inspectors to return after a four-year absence to track and destroy Iraq's remaining weapons of mass destruction. "'The president emphasized his determination on this issue but did not change current efforts or U.S. strategy,' a senior administration official said Wednesday. 'He did not take anything away from the military options, but he did not name the next three countries the United States is going to attack. This is not an indication of what's next.'" So it was just . . . rhetoric? The Wall Street Journal offers some different guidance: "The president's strong rhetoric reflected his own impulses on those countries – but not, administration officials rushed to say, a comprehensive strategy for moving toward military action.Nevertheless, Mr. Bush seemed to move the U.S. closer to a possible confrontation with Iraq over its weapons programs, and its defiance of the international community's demands to monitor those. One White House official characterized the president's words as laying the groundwork for future action, especially against Iraq." The [http://washingtontimes.com/world/20020131-84959384.htm] has the Korea fallout: "The Bush administration yesterday struggled to defend the president's inclusion of North Korea in an 'axis of evil' – along with Iran and Iraq – while insisting that U.S. policy toward Pyongyang had not changed and Washington was open to resuming dialogue with the reclusive state. "South Korea, meanwhile, expressed dismay with Mr. Bush's remarks in his State of the Union address to Congress on Tuesday, arguing that the North didn't support terrorism and that the threat it posed was different from the harm Iran and Iraq could inflict on the United States. "The State Department, which, according to administration sources, had little input in the president's speech, said Mr. Bush's strong language was in fact a signal that Pyongyang should sit at the negotiating table as soon as possible." [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64678-2002Jan30.html] chronicles the new White House push for volunteerism: "President Bush embarked on a barnstorming tour to promote the national service initiative he proposed in Tuesday's State of the Union address, calling for significant expansion of a program Republicans had tried to kill a few years ago. "In a campaign-style appearance before 7,000 cheering supporters here, Bush released the details of the national service and volunteerism effort unveiled in his address to Congress. Its early provisions are fairly modest, costing $560 million next year and expanding service programs far less than some in Congress had proposed. "But symbolically, Bush made clear that national service would be a priority for his administration, creating an eight-person White House office to oversee the initiative and putting it under the authority of John Bridgeland, a senior White House domestic policy official. That guarantees a prominent place in a Republican administration for President John F. Kennedy's Peace Corps and President Bill Clinton's pet project, AmeriCorps." But after Tuesday's speech highlighted what Bush wants to spend more on, the [http://nytimes.com/2002/01/31/politics/31BUDG.html] finds other programs coming under a sharp scalpel: "Even though unemployment has increased sharply in recent months, President Bush's budget will seek cuts in several job-training programs for laid-off workers and young adults most affected by the rise in unemployment, budget documents and federal officials say. Bush administration officials question the effectiveness of some of the jobs programs, which Congress created with overwhelming bipartisan support four years ago." The [http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/000/845jnmqz.asp] sees nothing but good news for the GOP: "President Bush's State of the Union address should be judged in the context of a remarkable political shift since the September 11 terrorist attacks. Before then, Republicans trailed Democrats on two important counts: which party most Americans identify with, and whether they intend to vote for a Democrat or a Republican in the next congressional election. Now, not only has Bush's 30-percentage point surge in popularity after September 11 been sustained, but Republicans have opened solid leads in party ID and congressional vote intention. Republican poll numbers, in fact, are the party's best in decades. "The question is what has prompted this dramatic shift. And the answer is issue inversion. Issues that were paramount in voters' minds before the attacks--health care, Social Security, the environment--are now peripheral. These are Democratic issues. And issues that were peripheral--terrorism, national security, homeland security--are now central. These are Republican issues. Bush pursues the war and talks constantly about security. Democrats insist they're with the president on the war, but since they don't hold the White House they can't direct the war effort. Instead, they spend most of their time talking up Democratic domestic issues, including the newest one, the Enron scandal." [http://www.nationalreview.com/jos/jos013002.shtml] says Dubya is Reaganesque: "Bush enjoys popularity ratings of between 80 and 90 percent despite recession and war because the American population blames him for neither and trusts in his capacity to deal with both. He does so because Sept. 11, in addition to all its other consequences, was for him what the social commentator Ben Wattenberg calls 'a moment of political truth' – one of those events that reveal the real qualities that animate a politician underneath all the black arts of political 'spin' and opinion management. "Like Ronald Reagan's gallant joking in the hospital following his shooting by John Hinckley, or Margaret Thatcher's fortitude revealed by her grim determination in the Falklands War, George W. Bush's calm and confident leadership in the war on terrorism has permanently changed the public's view of him. Once the public has such a privileged glimpse of a leader's inner authority, it is thereafter willing to grant him its confidence across the range of political issues. And the president spoke Tuesday night with the knowledge that he had the nation's backing." But hold on! [http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/01/31/bush/index_np.html] offers a full-throated dissent: "Am I watching the same George W. Bush as the rest of the media? To read the New York Times, you'd think that Cicero himself had graced the House with his presence Tuesday night. "Bush 'appeared both vigorous and confident tonight; gone were the deep lines that marked his face during the first month after the attacks,' gushed David E. Sanger. 'More comfortable than ever in the formal setting of the House, he was mostly free of the verbal stumbles that sometimes mark his speech, and he struck tones of deep passion when he talked of the war, its victims and its effects on the national soul.' . . . "The runner-up newspaper of record, the Washington Post, also ten-hutted to attention in its editorial, saluting 'his well-delivered speech.' . . . "The Bush I saw delivered a minimally competent, workmanlike speech. There wasn't anything absolutely off about his delivery, but at times his emotions didn't quite seem to fit him, like a suit of clothes one size too large. He punctuated the solemn wartime address with his usual odd, slightly inappropriate smirks. And the speech was utterly devoid of eloquence – unless, of course, the standard of comparison is Bush's previous utterances. "In a classic example of what Daniel Patrick Moynihan called 'defining deviancy down,' as long as Bush doesn't spew mangled words like a Tourette's sufferer, he is apparently to be regarded as a kind of reincarnated combo pack of Demosthenes, Lincoln and Churchill. . . . "To find 'plain-spoken eloquence' and 'deep passion' in Tuesday night's C-plus address, you'd have to be lightheaded from standing on a 10,000-foot stack of printed copies of 'God Bless America.'" Guess he didn't much like it. [http://j-marshall.com/talk/index.html#] takes a whack at Dick Cheney and the (actually quite interesting) Dan Balz/Bob Woodward series on how the White House responded to 9/11: "Refusing to disclose the details of the Veep's Energy Task Force to Congressman Henry Waxman of the House Government Reform Committee to check on possible Enron connections = A matter of the highest principle. "Disclosing the details of the war on terrorism to Bob Woodward of Washington Post for an endless series of puff pieces = A matter of the highest necessity." Should the charges against the president's niece be a big story? It was overshadowed by the State of the Union, but it certainly seems more serious than Jenna and Barbara having a margarita. Here's the [http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orl-locnoelle30013002jan30.story?coll =orl%2Dhome%2Dheadlines] account: "The arrest of Gov. Jeb Bush's daughter on a prescription-fraud charge propelled her private struggle with drug use into public view Tuesday. "Noelle Bush, 24, was arrested at a Walgreens pharmacy a few blocks from the governor's mansion after posing as a doctor to call in a phony prescription for Xanax, an anti-anxiety medication, police said. "The governor, who has used his office to campaign against drug abuse, said he was 'deeply saddened' by the his daughter's arrest. He and his wife, Columba, offered little comment, asking the public and media to respect the family's privacy. "'She's doing fine. This is a private matter,' Bush said after a news conference on the state's nursing shortage. 'It's really hard for our family, but a lot of families go through this.' "Charged with a third-degree felony, Noelle Bush faces as much as five years in prison if convicted, although law enforcement officials said that for a first offense, probation would be more likely. . . . "Since 1995, Noelle Bush has received seven speeding tickets, been cited for five other traffic violations and has been involved in three automobile accidents, according to state motor-vehicle records." Now here's on the media's handling of the gubernatorial daughter: "I knew Noelle Bush had a drug problem before she was arrested. "The state editor told me. "He knew because most of the reporters in Tallahassee who cover the governor knew about it. "We are not the mudslingers we are portrayed to be. This was Jeb's family affair and had no bearing on his job, so it was off-limits. But when Noelle was arrested, the family matter became a criminal matter and therefore a story. . . . "In the booking picture of Noelle Bush, she looks like she could have been arrested on a street corner, trying to earn enough for her next fix. She has the hollow-eyed, defeated look of an addict. "But when an addict is the daughter of a doctor, lawyer or governor, she is upgraded to 'victim of substance abuse.'" Hard to blame this one on the nosy press. © 2002 The Washington Post Co ***************************************************************** 7 license renewal application (LRA) of Duke Energy Corporation Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 16:53:54 -0800 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL Before Administrative Judges: Ann Marshall Young, Chair Dr. Charles N. Kelber Lester S. Rubenstein In the Matter of DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION (McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2) Docket No’s. 50-369-LR, 50-370-LR, 50-413-LR, and 50-414-LR ASLBP No. 02-794-01-LR January 31, 2002 NOTICE OF HEARING This proceeding concerns the license renewal application (LRA) of Duke Energy Corporation (Duke), seeking approval under 10 C.F.R. Part 54 to renew the operating licenses for its McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, and Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, for additional twenty-year periods commencing in 2021, 2023, 2024 and 2026, respectively. After noting receipt of the application, see 66 Fed. Reg. 37,072 (July 16, 2001), the NRC Staff determined it to be complete and acceptable for docketing and on August 15, 2001, provided a notice of opportunity for hearing with regard to the application. See 66 Fed. Reg. 42,893 (Aug. 15, 2001). In response to this notice, Petitioners Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) and Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL), both appearing through non-attorney representatives, timely filed petitions to intervene and requests for hearing on September 14, 2001. By Order dated October 4, 2001, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission referred the hearing requests and intervention petitions to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, CLI-01-20, 54 NRC 211 (2001), and on October 5, 2001, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, consisting of the members listed above, was established to preside over the proceeding. See 66 Fed. Reg. 52,158 (Oct. 12, 2001). Notice is hereby given that, by Memorandum and Order dated January 24, 2002, the Board granted Petitioners NIRS and BREDL a hearing, after holding oral argument in Charlotte, North Carolina, on December 18-19, 2001. LBP-02-04, 54 NRC __ (Jan. 24, 2002). In this Memorandum and Order, the Board found that both NIRS and BREDL have standing to proceed, admitted contentions relating to the anticipated use of plutonium mixed oxide (MOX) fuel in the Duke plants and to ice condensers and station blackout risks, and certified one question relating to terrorism risks to the Commission for its consideration. This proceeding will be conducted under the Commission’s hearing procedures set forth in 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart G. During the course of the proceeding, the Board may conduct additional oral argument as provided in 10 C.F.R. § 2.755, hold additional prehearing conferences pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.752, and conduct an evidentiary hearing in accordance with 10 C.F.R. §§ 2.750-.751. The time and place of these sessions will be announced in Licensing Board Orders. Except as limited by the parameters of telephone conferences (which will in any event be transcribed), members of the public are invited to attend any such sessions. Additionally, as provided in 10 C.F.R. § 2.715(a), any person not a party to the proceeding may submit a written limited appearance statement setting forth his or her position on the issues in the proceeding. Persons wishing to submit a written limited appearance statement should send it to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. A copy of the statement should also be served on the Chair of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. At a later date, the Board will entertain oral limited appearance statements at a location in the vicinity of the Duke plants, which are both situated within a 20-mile radius of Charlotte, North Carolina. Notice of these oral limited appearance sessions will be published in the Federal Register and/or made available to the public at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR). Documents related to this proceeding are available electronically through the Agencywide Documents access and Management System (ADAMS), with access to the public through the NRC’s Internet Web site (Public Electronic Reading Room Link, < The NRC Public Documents Room (PDR) and many public libraries have terminals for public access to the Internet. Documents that may relate to this proceeding that are dated earlier than December 1, 1999, are available in microfiche form (with print form available on one-day recall) for public inspection at the PDR, Room 0-1 F21, NRC One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738. FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ________________________________ Ann Marshall Young, Chair ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE Rockville, Maryland January 31, 2002 ***************************************************************** 8 Beaver County nuclear plant workers reject contract, 423-5 Pittsburgh, PA Thursday, January 31, 2002 By Jim McKay, Post-Gazette Staff Writer The 450 workers who operate and maintain the Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Plant have overwhelmingly rejected a four-year contract offer from FirstEnergy Corp., prompting a federal mediator to call for a resumption of talks today. Members of Local 29 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers voted 423 to 5 Tuesday night to reject an offer that FirstEnergy said would raise wages by 2.75 percent a year at a total four-year cost of $13 million. Jeff Davis, a spokesman for the local, said sticking points were contract proposals from FirstEnergy involving union representation, work rules, vacations and scheduling. "It's not about economics to any major extent," Davis said. "It's about quality of life issues, things our predecessors in the union fought for and gained over the years in negotiations by trading away other things." FirstEnergy subsidiaries took over ownership and control of the plant in 1999 as part of an asset exchange agreement with Duquesne Light Co. The facility is west of Pittsburgh on 500 acres in Beaver County along the Ohio River. The reactors, both built by Westinghouse Electric, are running at a significantly higher rate of capacity under FirstEnergy than when they were owned by Duquesne Light, company spokesman Todd Schneider said. "Obviously, the employees have done a great job," he said. "But for us to move the plant to the next level, we need more flexibility to allow employees to learn new technologies and move ... into different positions or jobs." The previous contract expired at the end of September. The plant's union employees are working under a day-to-day extension of the old contract. Davis said a 72-hour notice would be given to the company in advance of a strike if that becomes an option. One of the two units was shut down last fall for a scheduled refueling. The second will be idled for a refueling beginning Monday. Copyright ©1997-2002 PG Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 9 Nuke Plants Warned After Attack Tip Las Vegas SUN Today: January 31, 2002 at 19:35:27 PST WASHINGTON- Acting on a tip from an al-Qaida operative, the government alerted nuclear power plants last week that terrorists may be planning an attack on a power reactor using a hijacked commercial airliner. The alert, a copy of which was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press, said the operative claimed "the attack was already planned" and three people "already on the ground" were trying to recruit non-Arabs to take part. An FBI official, speaking only on condition of anonymity, said Thursday night the information was received months ago, was evaluated and has been deemed not to be credible. It re-emerged, however, through other U.S. intelligence channels within the last two weeks, prompting the NRC action. "This information contained in the nuclear regulatory commission advisory is dated information. It is uncorroborated," the official said. "It is threat information from several months ago. The FBI analyzed it, vetted it and determined it was not a credible threat. It remains uncorroborated." The NRC communication said the agency decided to issue the alert after an FBI agent in Washington state had contacted a nuclear power plant about the threat. The FBI official said the agent was doing routine follow-up. Because power plants are already at the highest alert, the advisory said no additional action was needed at the 103 power reactors in 31 states. The alert stemmed from information obtained during questioning of an "al-Qaida senior operative," in mid-January, prompting the FBI to issue a warning to its field offices, said one government source, who spoke on condition of not being identified further. On Jan 23, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission followed up with an advisory to all of its plant licensees entitled "Update on threat environment - commercial aircraft." The advisory said the al-Qaida operative had told the FBI "there would be a second airline attack" in the United States and "the plan is to fly a commercial aircraft into a nuclear power plant chosen by the team on the ground." The advisory continued: "The attack was already planned and three individuals were on the ground ... recruiting non-Arabs to take part in the attack." "The plan included diverting the mission to any tall building if a military aircraft intercepts the plane," said the advisory. Security at nuclear power plants was increased immediately after the New York and Washington attacks, although federal and industry officials have acknowledged that an attack using a commercial airliner as a missile has never been specifically addressed. NRC spokesman William Beecher said the agency would have no comment. "We do not discuss the details of any of our (security) advisories," said Beecher. He said that since the Sept. 11 attacks more than 20 advisories have been sent involving potential threats. Beecher said the nation's nuclear power plants have been "on the highest level of alert" since the Sept. 11 attacks and that has not changed. But Rep. Bernard Sanders of Vermont, an independent, called the latest threat, although not corroborated, "frightening" because it demonstrates that an attack on a nuclear reactor "is something that al-Qaida is thinking about." "This raises to a very high level the need to substantially increase security at nuclear power plants," said Sanders, calling as a first step creation of no-fly zones around all commercial reactors. NRC officials and power industry executives have emphasized that nuclear reactors are hardened structures, protected by 2-by-5-foot thick steel and concrete containment building and redundant safety equipment. Still, NRC Chairman Richard Meserve acknowledged in a recent speech that he could not say with assurance what the consequences would be "if a large, airliner, fully loaded with jet fuel ... crashed into a nuclear power plant." Since Sept. 11, scientists and engineers at several government research laboratories have begun tests to try to determine whether an aircraft could adequately penetrate a reactor's concrete containment and cause a release of radioactive material. Studies at the Los Alamos lab in the early 1990s suggested that a commercial jet aircraft probably would not be able to penetrate sufficiently to cause a radioactive release. But another study in the 1980s suggested a jet might penetrate and if even a small amount of fuel ignited it could cause a fire and possibly an explosion, releasing radioactivity. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 10 China to build new nuclear reactor in Zhejiang BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Jan 31, 2002 Text of report by Chinese news agency Zhongguo Xinwen She Beijing, 29 January: In three years - that is, at the end of the 10th Five-Year Plan period - China will have eight sets of nuclear generators in operation with an increase of 6.6m kW after the completion of all new sets of nuclear generators. The total capacity of nuclear power in China will reach 8.7m kW. At the news conference held by China Nuclear Engineering Construction Corporation (CNEC) on 29 January, director of the general office of the CNEC and spokesman Wang Zhaofu said: Current nuclear power projects under construction include Lingao nuclear power station in Guangdong, the second phase of the Qinshan nuclear power station designed and built mainly by China, the third phase of the Qinshan nuclear power station with the heavy water reactor introduced from Canada, and the Tianwan nuclear power station in Jiangsu, which is to be jointly built by China and Russia. In 2005, after all the aforementioned nuclear power stations go into operation, the on-net power only from the three phases of the Qinshan nuclear power station will reach more than 30 billion kWh, about 15 times the current power, with a sales revenue of nearly 13bn yuan. Thereupon the economic growth of the CNEC will speed up and economic conditions will improve. In the meantime, the CNEC is striving to set up new projects for the 10th Five-Year Plan period. The corporation has selected the location for a new project in Sanmen county, Taizhou district, of Zhejiang Province. Wang stated: To meet the requirements of setting up new projects in the 10th Five-Year Plan period, the CNEC has completed the main engineering parameters and main systems, as well as the civil work layout of the million kilowatt reactor, and consulted with Zhejiang to advance engineering expenditures by instalments in pushing preparations for the Sanmen nuclear power station project. This year, based on the improvement of technological and economic indexes of Chinese nuclear generators, the focal point will be preparations for bidding. Water and power supply, roads, communications and land should also be prepared in due time. Source: Zhongguo Xinwen She news agency, Beijing, in Chinese 29 Jan 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to Copyright ***************************************************************** 11 Fired workers win $13 million: Several Shoals residents involved in discrimination lawsuit against TVA By Russ Corey Staff Writer January 31, 2002 Several Shoals residents are among 19 former Tennessee Valley Authority employees who have been awarded $13 million in a federal discrimination lawsuit. The plaintiffs, skilled craftsmen employed at TVA properties in north Alabama, claimed they had been discriminated against because of their disabilities. A jury composed of nine women and one man awarded the plaintiffs from $500,000 to $1.5 million at the conclusion of a two-week trial in U.S. District Court. TVA has the option of appealing the verdict. "TVA believes the verdicts are not supported legally or factually and is reviewing options for seeking further review," TVA spokesman Gil Francis said Wednesday. Montgomery attorney Jay Lewis, who represented the plaintiffs, said they had been employed as boilermakers, steamfitters, carpenters and in other positions during the 1970s and '80s at Brown's Ferry Nuclear Plant near Athens and other TVA facilities. Lewis could not be reached late Wednesday for comment on the verdict. Francis said the case arose from an effort in the early 1990s to re-employ former TVA employees who had been injured on the job and were receiving workers compensation benefits. The employees claim in the suit they were convinced by TVA to participate in the Re-employment Initiative program, which was designed to provide the disabled workers with jobs, retraining and an opportunity to seek positions outside TVA's nuclear program. However, the plaintiffs claim that once in the program, they lost their former seniority and were placed on a special roster that targeted them for future termination. They lost wages and other job-related benefits, as well as workers compensation benefits. Noonan Greene, 59, a former ironworker foreman, said he was making nearly $50,000 per year before he went on disability. Greene said he was injured in a fall from a scaffold, then injured his knee two years later. He returned under the reinstatement program and was earning $19,000 before he was terminated. TVA hired the disabled workers, placed then in "nothing jobs," then fired them to avoid paying them workers compensation, Greene said. These skilled craftsmen had been earning $50,000-$60,000 annually. "I'm proud it's over," Greene said. "It may be a while getting the money, but it's money in the bank for us." He said at least eight of the plaintiffs were from the Shoals area. Other plaintiffs were from Scottsboro and Athens. Some worked at the Colbert Steam Plant near Barton and Bellefonte Nuclear Plant near Scottsboro. Greene said he was able to survive after being fired, but some of the workers ended up on food stamps or working in fast-food restaurants to survive. Francis said TVA's decisions were not based on disability discrimination but on legitimate business reasons. He said the plaintiffs' dismissal was the result of deep budget cuts that occurred in 1996 and '97. The workers began suing TVA in 1997. "It was and is TVA's position that the proof, including the plaintiffs' own testimony, showed that virtually all of them were not disabled, as defined by the applicable law, and that all were capable of working in a variety of positions," Francis said. He said TVA will ask the court to reduce the amount of the awards to the statutory limit of $300,000 for each plaintiff. That would lower the total award from $13 million to $5.7 million. A judge also will decide what other relief - such as back pay, attorneys' fees or reinstatement - the plaintiffs might be owed. Greene said the jury awarded the plaintiffs more than what was originally sought in the lawsuits. Russ Corey can be reached at russ.corey@timesdaily.com [russ.corey@timesdaily.com] or 740-5738. Copyright © 2002 TimesDaily | Privacy Statement ***************************************************************** 12 NRC Staff to Meet with Puerto Rico Hospital to Discuss Apparent Violations of Radioactive Material Regulations NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 2 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-002 January 31, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416/e-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417/e-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a pre-decisional enforcement conference with officials of I. Gonzαlez Martνnez Oncologic Hospital in Puerto Rico, on Wednesday, February 6. The discussion will focus on a missing and subsequently recovered radioactive implant in March 2001. The enforcement conference, which is open to public observation, will begin at 9:00 a.m. at the Medical Center, Barrio Monacillos, Rio Piedras. NRC officials will be available after the meeting to answer any questions. The radioactive implant, containing about 97 millicuries of cesium-137, was discovered to be missing on March 14, 2001, and was found in a trash compactor the next day. An NRC investigation determined that the licensed radioactive material was not intentionally placed in the compactor, but a total of nine apparent violations stemming from the incident have been identified and are being considered for enforcement action. In addition, the hospital is required to perform a radiation dose assessment on all workers or members of the public who may have had access to the areas where the source was located until it was recovered. The enforcement conference is an opportunity for hospital officials to provide their perspective on the apparent violations stemming from the missing source, and to clarify or correct any information they feel may be inaccurate or incomplete in the NRC's inspection report. No decision on the apparent violations or any enforcement action will be made at the conference. Those decisions will be made later by NRC officials. ***************************************************************** 13 NRC to Hold Public Meeting with Virginia Power to Discuss Initial Plant License Renewal Inspection for Surry and North Anna NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 3 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-003 January 31, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416/e-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417/e-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials will meet with Virginia Power Company officials at 9:00 a.m. on February 8 at the company's Innsbrook Technical Center near Richmond to discuss the results of the agency's initial inspection of the company's license renewal program for Surry and North Anna. The meeting will be open to observation by the public. The Innsbrook Technical Center is located at 5000 Dominion Boulevard in the Richmond suburb of Glen Allen. NRC officials say the inspection is the first of three planned license renewal reviews for Surry and North Anna and was conducted to verify that the company's license renewal program is implemented consistent with its license renewal application and pertinent regulations. Subsequent NRC inspections will verify that programs are in place to manage the material condition of plant systems, structures and components. NRC officials will also discuss the license renewal process and the schedule for both Surry and North Anna. ***************************************************************** 14 Satellite could have dropped over Egypt Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:09:06 -0800 February 1, 2002 Posted: 5:44 AM HKT (2144 GMT) By Richard Stenger CNN Sci-Tech (CNN) -- Most of a falling satellite likely burned up in the atmosphere over Egypt but surviving chunks could have crashed or splashed into the planet, U.S. space officials said Thursday. Whether or where fragments of the 3.5-ton Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer (EUVE) landed could remain unknown for some time, NASA spokesperson Dolores Beasley said. NASA revised predictions several times as the defunct satellite took its final 90-minute laps around the world. But based on radar tracking by the U.S. Air Force, the agency concluded Thursday that it re-entered atmosphere at about 11:15 p.m. EST the night before. "We expected EUVE could come in at a number of points along the ground track," said NASA engineer Scott Hull. "The actual location of EUVE's re-entry was within the predicted orbit track." Out of control Predicting the planetary bulls-eye had proven difficult because the aging NASA satellite had no onboard steering system. Circling the planet in a rapidly decaying orbit, EUVE tumbled from space in an uncontrolled manner. Up to nine stainless steel or titanium pieces could have survived re-entry, ranging from 4 pounds to 100 pounds (1.8 kg to 45 kg), NASA said. The debris trail could have extended up to 625 miles (1,000 km). Despite the uncertainty, space agency scientists said there was little risk to humans. "The probability of the few EUVE surviving pieces falling into a populated area and hurting someone is very small," said Ronald Mahmot of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, which originally managed the EUVE mission. Bovine bomber Launched in 1992, EUVE was the first space observatory dedicated to studying extreme ultraviolet light. The $215 million satellite lasted much longer than its intended three years, studying celestial objects first for NASA and later the University of California, Berkeley, until it ceased operations one year ago. In contrast to EUVE's uncontrolled descent, NASA in 2000 safely guided the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory into the ocean because the 17-ton craft had an onboard steering system. Likewise, in 2001, Russian ground controllers relied on similar means to coax the 135-ton Mir space station, the heaviest object in Earth orbit besides the moon, into its watery grave without a hitch. The most massive NASA spacecraft to re-enter the atmosphere in an uncontrolled descent was the 78-ton Skylab space station, which in 1979 scattered debris in the Indian Ocean and an isolated stretch of Western Australia. Orbital debris has never been known to injure a human, but legend has it a chunk of Skylab brought an untimely end to an Australian cow. © 2002 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. ***************************************************************** 15 PI: Across the Nation (DU)Toxics spread in South feared Philippine Daily Inquirer; Feb 1, 2002 BY TONETTE OREJAS, PDI CENTRAL LUZON DESK CLARK SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE-The highly toxic and radioactive anti-tank weapon, depleted uranium (DU), would most likely be used by the United States military during the Balikatan 02-1 in Mindanao, the People's Task Force for Bases Cleanup warned. The task force aired this warning amid what it called "secrecy" on what the US forces really brought in for the exercises involving 660 soldiers in Basilan and Zamboanga City. The war exercises started Thursday. "There is no guarantee that DU will not be used," Myrla Baldonado, PTFBC executive director, said in a statement sent by electronic mail to the INQUIRER on Wednesday. The DU is actually a bullet that, when ignited, forms fine particles of radioactive dust, she said. She noted that if inhaled or swallowed, the DU could lead to cancers that may affect the lungs, kidney and liver. It also causes congenital abnormalities or genetic damage. The use of the DU, according to Baldonado, was "very possible" because the weapon was widely used during the Gulf War. It has been also used as a training weapon in Okinawa in Japan and Vieques in Puerto Rico. Baldonado said the US Special Forces more likely tested these in Subic in Zambales, which, like Clark in Pampanga, is considered by the PTFBC a toxic-contaminated military base. Since 1995, the group has monitored nearly 150 deaths, mostly among children living at the borders of the bases from ailments believed linked to exposures to toxic wastes. Citing more information from the US-based research and advocacy group Military Toxics Project (MTP), Baldonado said the DU was blamed for the birth of several babies with no heads and with abnormally large heads and short limbs. Many others have various types of birth deformities. But with or without the DU, Baldonado said even practice ammunition, like bullets, bombs, shells, missiles and grenades, also posed "grave threats" to the health of residents, to the environment and even to Filipino and American soldiers engaged in the Balikatan exercise. "Whether it's for joint training, combat or a prelude to basing, these ammunition have immediate and long-term impacts, especially on the children," she warned. The MTP said practice ammunition "contain or utilize smoke cartridges, fuses, primers, igniter charges, propellants, incendiary components, and/or tracers-all of which may contain hazardous components." The MTP has listed 25 potential hazardous chemicals contained in practice ammunition. It said the chemicals' health effects included anemia, blurred vision, swelling, itching, pain, infertility in males and females, central nervous system disorder, impaired male productive function, personality behavioral changes and induced formation of tumors. "The arsenal and sophisticated weapons of the US are actually a poisonous venom on the Filipino people," Baldonado said. She also scored the American military for its "double standard," saying that in the US, the military is asked to present first a study of an area before it is allowed to use it as a training ground. The Philippine government, she lamented, has also allowed more exercises, and this time with bigger contingent, without holding environmental impact studies on areas where the training exercises are held since 1990 when the Visiting Forces Agreement was ratified by the Senate. "If the Philippine government would not hear of the sovereignty issue or finds it all too abstract to understand, can it at least defend the lives of the residents, their health and their environment against this toxic monster that is the war games?" Baldonado asked. World Reporter All Material Subject to Copyright ***************************************************************** 16 Yucca: Here's The Point (interview with Las Vegas mayor) Yahoo! News - Thu Jan 31, 3:59 PM ET ABCNEWS.com - Here's an excerpt from ABCNEWS Radio's Here's The Point, with Mark Halperin. ABCNEWS Political Director Mark Halperin : Are you treated like, and are you like mayors of other cities or is Las Vegas such a unique place and therefore you have a different kind of job? Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman : I'm treated like a star … When I walk into the room, everybody wants to talk to me about Las Vegas, I don't think there's been a mayor who's at the conference who hasn't been there, who hasn't had a great time, their wives have a great time, their girlfriends have a great time, their boyfriends have a great time. Everybody has a great time when they come to Las Vegas. Halperin : You have said a number of things about the [Bush] Administration, about people in the Administration, that some have called hotheaded and perhaps -- Goodman : Me? Halperin : Yes. I swear to goodness. Goodman : Well, I can't believe that anyone would say I'm hotheaded -- Halperin : What are things you have said about Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham? Goodman : I think I called him a piece of garbage. Halperin : And to what end? Goodman : Well, to the end that he comes in, spends 45 minutes out at the test site, tells everybody there are 18,000 documents that he had to review, I don't think the guy spent an hour and a half on the whole project, and then recommends that it's a suitable — I like to call it a suppository, but a suitable repository for nuclear waste based on that kind of very inept-type analysis. Halperin : What are President Bush's chances of carrying the state of Nevada, as he did in the year 2000, if this project goes through? Goodman : Well, there was a certain inference that was suggested to the voters in Nevada that if in fact Mr. Bush was elected that he would veto the site. That's what we were told as voters and -- Halperin : Who told you that and when, and how explicit were they? Goodman : Oh it was very explicit by the politicians who were running on the Republican party ticket at the time, they made it very, very clear that we had support as far as the President was concerned if President Bush was elected … Halperin : … So let me go back to my previous question: What are the chances of President Bush once again getting the electoral votes of Nevada … if he approves Yucca Mountain? Goodman : Zero. Copyright © 2002 ABC News Internet Ventures. ***************************************************************** 17 Contamination could endanger plan for Piketon The Columbus Dispatch Wednesday, January 30, 2002 Jonathan Riskind [jriskind@dispatch.com] Dispatch Washington Bureau Chief Evidence of plutonium and other hazardous materials is endangering a major economic-development initiative on the grounds of southern Ohio's shuttered uranium-enrichment plant. The U.S. Department of Energy says there is no danger, despite two environmental reports detecting low levels of plutonium and another radioactive element called neptunium, as well as mercury. However, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency wants to know more before agreeing there are no risks. "We need to look into it more closely,'' said Brian Blair, an environmental supervisor at the Ohio EPA's southeast division. "I'm not willing to accept there is no problem.'' All this leaves southern Ohio officials worried about the fate of a plan to convert to industrial use 340 acres of the 3,700-acre Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant site in Piketon. "It potentially is a big deal,'' said Greg Simonton, who heads the Southern Ohio Diversification Initiative, the nonprofit group in line to be given the federally owned property by the Energy Department for a nominal fee. Simonton said the group has to consider whether the land is more of a liability than it is worth. He said his organization intends to commission an independent analysis to determine whether the land, located in a buffer area outside the buildings in which the uranium was processed, has environmental problems and whether it is attractive to an industrial user. Simonton said one potential user is ready to take out an option on the land as soon as the parcel is transferred to his group. He declined to identify the possible occupant, but sources have said a power plant may be envisioned for the site, a project that would provide hundreds of jobs and millions of dollars for the Pike County tax rolls. Hundreds of jobs were lost when the enrichment plant ceased operations last year. Rep. Ted Strickland, D-Lucasville, wants environmental officials to test nearby homes. "If there are any indications of potential contamination in the land currently being evaluated, that says to me that areas outside the (plant grounds) need to be evaluated,'' Strickland said. Based on the data he's seen so far, Ohio EPA's Blair said there doesn't appear to be a danger of contamination outside the plant grounds, because there are such low levels of contamination inside. During the Cold War, the Piketon plant produced weapons-grade enriched uranium for use in the nation's atomic-defense program. During part of that period, highly radioactive plutonium and neptunium contaminated the plant as a result of a flawed program to recycle enriched uranium. A recently enacted federal program compensates some nuclear workers from Piketon and other sites nationwide who contracted cancer after being exposed to radiation and other hazardous materials. The second environmental assessment, released on Monday, was conducted after a survey in October raised alarms. Both surveys turned up soil samples containing small quantities of plutonium, neptunium and mercury. But the levels of radioactive elements were so low the second time that the Energy Department blamed the results on instrument errors. That survey also found lower levels of mercury, but those findings were not dismissed as instrument errors. Still, the second report stated, the low levels suggest that contamination is not widespread and poses no "risk to human health or the environment.'' Simonton said he hopes that is the case, for the sake of southern Ohio's depressed economy. But he said the reports leave him confused. His group will look to the Ohio EPA and its own independent analysis before deciding whether to accept the land, Simonton said. "At this point it is just not explained well enough.'' Copyright © 2002, The Columbus Dispatch. Content may not be ***************************************************************** 18 Ohio top court gets plea to let beryllium suit continue toledoblade.com Article published January 30, 2002 Brush worker asks relief from time limit By JAMES DREW BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU CHIEF COLUMBUS - In 1992, David Norgard was diagnosed with chronic beryllium disease - 11 years after he first developed symptoms. That happened shortly after he began working at the Brush Wellman plant near Elmore. Mr. Norgard joined a support group of Brush employees with the debilitating lung disease, caused by inhaling the metal’s dust. In January, 1993, he and his wife, Theresa, became the group’s facilitators. "Brush was not receptive nor supportive of the research that the support group was performing," recalled Mr. Norgard, in a 2000 affidavit. "Several times I was told by Brush to stop snooping around and stop talking to regulatory agencies and members of Congress." In 1995, Mr. Norgard read a brief article in The Blade that referred to James Heckbert, an attorney from Tuscon, Ariz., who had filed lawsuits on behalf of Brush employees. It was from Mr. Heckbert that Mr. Norgard learned that "for decades Brush Wellman withheld from its employees information about the causes of beryllium-related diseases and the acceptable levels of beryllium to which an employee could be exposed without harm," according to state court records filed by Mr. Norgard’s attorneys. In 1997, Mr. Norgard sued Brush, alleging that the company intentionally had exposed him to conditions at the Elmore plant that led to his getting chronic beryllium disease. Too late, replied Brush’s attorneys. The statute of limitations ran out on the Norgards in 1994 - two years after Mr. Norgard was diagnosed with chronic beryllium disease and knew or should have known its cause, Brush’s attorneys said. "Norgard had reason to suspect that he had a beryllium-exposure related disease in 1992 - when, by his own admission, he was diagnosed with [chronic beryllium disease] and began to investigate the possible causes," wrote attorney Jeffrey Sutton of the firm Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, which is representing Brush. But Mr. Norgard, 46, and his attorneys say the statute of limitations didn’t start ticking until he learned from Mr. Heckbert about "facts" supporting allegations that Brush intentionally had withheld information about the causes of chronic beryllium disease. Mr. Norgard says that when he and his wife filed their lawsuit against Brush in October, 1997, they made the two-year deadline. A Cuyahoga County judge and a state appeals court have sided with Brush, but the Norgards have asked the Ohio Supreme Court to overturn the decisions and allow their lawsuit to move forward. They are seeking compensatory and punitive damages in excess of $25,000. The seven-member Supreme Court will hear the case today in Columbus. A decision is expected later this year. The outcome could have enormous consequences for workers with occupational illnesses, said Louise Roselle, an attorney with Waite, Schneider, Bayless & Chesley, the firm representing the Norgards. The firm is handling about 30 intentional tort lawsuits against Brush in Ohio, she said, and the Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers has filed a brief in support of the Norgards. "If this decision is allowed to stand, Ohio employees who learn they have work-related injuries or occupational diseases will be forced to file intentional tort claims immediately - whether in addition to or in lieu of workers’ compensation claims - simply to preserve their right to litigate," wrote attorney Paul DeMarco, who is representing the Norgards. But Brush’s attorneys counter that if the Norgards win, Ohio companies will face lawsuits that could be filed decades after an occupational illness is discovered. "There would be no limit on how long this kind of investigation could be drawn out," wrote Mr. Sutton. "In this case, Mr. Norgard says that it took him five years. In another case, it could easily be 15." The Ohio Manufacturers’ Association has not filed a brief in support of Brush, but the trade group is "opposed to any broadening of the tort law," spokesman Randy Leffler said. The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that in certain situations people do not have to become aware of their injuries before the two-year statute of limitations has expired. Examples include medical malpractice, workers exposed to asbestos or toxic chlorine gas, and children who have been abused sexually but who suppressed memory of the incidents. But the Ohio Supreme Court has made it clear that the clock starts ticking when a worker discovers his or her injury, wrote Judge Timothy McMonagle of the Cleveland-based state appeals court. Attorneys for the Norgards say the two-year statute of limitations clock shouldn’t start ticking until an employee uncovers facts showing that a company intentionally harmed him or her. Mrs. Norgard, who lives in Manitou Beach, Mich., with her husband, said at the time they sued Brush in 1997, they were "just beginning to have an understanding" about chronic beryllium disease. "The information you need to file this kind of suit is not readily available," Mrs. Norgard said. "A lot of the documents were classified. It takes a heroic effort to even get an elementary understanding of the disease or Brush Wellman." Mr. Norgard said workers with chronic beryllium disease face a "Catch-22" situation. "In speaking to people who filed suits right away, generally those cases were thrown out for lack of evidence because they were not able to find evidence," he said. Instead of suing Brush immediately after being diagnosed with chronic beryllium disease in 1992, Mr. Norgard and his wife started a detailed investigation that led to a lawsuit filed four years ago. "It has been hell. When you get into the courts, you find out it doesn’t happen overnight. It drags on for years," he said. In 1999, The Blade published a six-part series documenting a 50-year pattern of misconduct by the federal government and the beryllium industry - wrongdoing that caused the injuries and deaths of dozens of workers. Among the findings: Government and industry officials knowingly allowed workers to be exposed to unsafe levels of beryllium dust. Reached for comment about Mr. Norgard’s allegations that Brush intentionally exposed him to conditions that led to his disease, a spokesman for Brush’s parent company said that is not the issue the Supreme Court will consider today. "The case is about statute of limitations on a tort claim," said Patrick Carpenter, director of corporate communications for Cleveland-based Brush Engineered Materials Inc. "Brush is confident about the strength of its case." Mrs. Norgard said her husband "still is having some problems with depression and lung functioning," but he is working as a home repairman and remains an "unpaid employee" of Brush. Ms. Roselle, one of the attorneys representing the Norgards, said Mr. Norgard is an example of a "very loyal employee" who began to ask questions with his wife after contracting an often fatal disease. "[The Norgards] went about it in a very careful and logical manner," she said. The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660, (419) 724-6000 ***************************************************************** 19 Letter(lake Michigan federation): Nuclear waste Chicago Tribune | VOICE OF THE PEOPLE (LETTER) Cameron Davis, Executive director Lake Michigan Federation Published January 31, 2002 We applaud the Tribune for recognizing that the U.S. needs to "Quit dawdling on nuclear waste" (Editorial, Jan. 19). How we do so, however, isn't just a matter of finding a new rug under which to sweep the problem. The real policy debate is about the phaseout of nuclear power generation so that waste isn't created in the first place. Nowhere is the phaseout of nuclear power more important than on the shores of the Great Lakes, which comprise nearly 20 percent of the world's freshwater supply. By not turning off the tap, and constantly dealing with the flow, nuclear waste will continue to be stored along erodable shorelines. As with the closed Exelon plant in Zion, where 2.7 million pounds of spent fuel rods are stored just over 100 yards from the lake that provides 10 million people with drinking water, continued nuclear power generation means we'll keep dealing with the symptom, not the problem. Moving to renewable energy sources like solar and wind energy over time will reduce our dependence on foreign fuel. It will also keep our precious Lake Michigan clean. Copyright © 2002, Chicago Tribune ***************************************************************** 20 Haddam Spent-Fuel Storage Building Permit Issued ctnow.com: CONNECTICUT January 30, 2002 By GARY LIBOW, Courant Staff Writer HADDAM -- The town issued a building permit Tuesday to the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co. for construction of a spent nuclear fuel storage pad and a monitoring station off Injun Hollow Road. The permit was issued within hours of a federal judge's signing of a consent order in U.S. District Court in Bridgeport, sanctioning the out-of-court settlement negotiated between the utility and board of selectmen to build a storage complex in Haddam Neck. The first community-sanctioned nuclear waste storage facility in Connecticut will be built on 15 acres, just outside the footprint of the decommissioned Connecticut Yankee nuclear power plant. The fenced storage complex, the size of a football field, will house 43 upright concrete and steel casks. Plans call for 40 casks to hold the plant's 1,019 spent nuclear fuel rods, and three casks to hold other radioactive materials such as metal from the reactor's core vessel. The building permit was signed by Alan Paskewich, Haddam's building official, after the town's fire marshal and health department signed off on the plan. The document was signed at the direction of the board of selectmen. Connecticut Yankee paid the town a $3,860 permit fee for construction at 362 Injun Hollow Road. While the building permit lists the cost of the storage pad and monitoring station at $380,000, Connecticut Yankee says the complex will cost $40 million to complete and operate. Kelley Smith, a Connecticut Yankee spokeswoman, said construction will take about 10 months. Russ Mellor, Connecticut Yankee president and chief executive officer, said the federal court-sanctioned settlement is an important step toward getting the radioactive fuel out of Haddam. He said the fuel will now be placed in transportable canisters at a safe and secure location on Connecticut Yankee property. "The next critical step, and one that we will pursue diligently, is to ensure the federal government meets its obligation to establish a centralized storage disposal facility and remove the used nuclear fuel from Haddam," Mellor said. ctnow.com is Copyright © 2002 by The Hartford Courant ***************************************************************** 21 Cleanup criteria for West Valley established Buffalo News - By JOHN F. BONFATTI News Staff Reporter 1/30/2002 Federal regulators may allow higher radiation levels than are normally permitted when the West Valley Demonstration Project is decommissioned. That's one interpretation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's issuance Monday of the criteria it is establishing for the eventual closing of the site, which once housed the country's only private nuclear fuel reprocessing center. The NRC, which has to set criteria for what will be the acceptable level of radiation on the site once it is closed, said in its final policy statement that it would use its existing license termination rule for those criteria. That standard is 25 millirems per person per year, assuming that the site is monitored and controlled, and up to 500 millirems per person per year if those controls fail. The natural background level of radiation for the average person is 300 millirems a year; a chest X-ray delivers between 10 and 20 millirems. But the statement also said the NRC "also recognizes that health and safety and cost-benefit considerations may justify the evaluation of alternatives that do not fully comply with the license termination criteria." For instance, the NRC said it would "consider an exemption allowing higher limits for doses on a failure of institutional control if it can be rigorously demonstrated that protection of the public health and safety for future generations could be reasonably assured through more robust engineered barriers and/or increased long-term monitoring and maintenance." The statement continued, "The Commission is prepared to provide flexibility to ensure cleanup to the maximum extent technically and economically possible, providing protection of public health and the environment can be maintained." Carol Mongerson of the Coalition on West Valley Nuclear Wastes called the NRC's decision "quite unsatisfactory" because she feels it allows the Department of Energy, which will conduct the cleanup, too much latitude. "It sounds to me like (the NRC is) willing to go along with what DOE comes up with," she said Tuesday. "We want the same criteria that the rest of the country has to live by." Alice C. Williams, director of the West Valley Demonstration project for the Department of Energy, said she interpreted the ruling as meaning that the project "is in and of itself a unique facility. As you apply the license termination rule to it, you have to be able to accommodate those unique aspects." Specifically, according to the DOE's Dan Sullivan, who has been working on the issue at West Valley, the NRC's decommissioning criteria have in the past almost exclusively involved nuclear reactors. There is no reactor at West Valley. Instead, there are contaminated buildings and two large burial grounds that would be difficult and expensive to clean up. "The NRC has never compromised public health and safety, and I'm sure they're not going to do it here," Sullivan said. A spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said that the people involved in the West Valley decision were not available to comment Tuesday. e-mail: jbonfatti@buffnews.com Copyright © 1999 - 2002 The Buffalo NewsTM ***************************************************************** 22 Hanford tank work behind schedule This story was published Wed, Jan 30, 2002 By John Stang Herald staff writer Some work digging trenches and installing pipes at central Hanford's tank farms has fallen behind schedule. A combination of preventable and unpreventable reasons has delayed the jobs by several months, said Steve Wiegman, a senior technical adviser at the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection. CH2M Hill Hanford Group, which manages the tank farms, has submitted a recovery plan that DOE is reviewing. "We hope to catch up this year," Wiegman said. Information was not available on the number of months that the project is behind or on costs of the delay. One of CH2M Hill's jobs is to fix old pipelines and install new pipelines to move liquid radioactive wastes to tanks on the east side of the 200 East Area, where they are supposed to be eventually pumped to a yet-unbuilt glassification plant. This work also deals with upgrading highly radioactive concrete pits that serve as junctions for pipes to meet and wastes to be rerouted. DOE and state officials said this work has gone slower than expected because old pipelines and pipe connections have failed, lines plug up, the soil and material are radioactive, the overall project is complicated, some management glitches showed up and some routine safety measures were not followed. "Folks in the field are always dealing with the unexpected," Wiegman said. "We are concerned that work has started to slow down," said Melinda Brown, an external budget analyst with Washington's Department of Ecology. Wiegman and Brown briefed some Hanford Advisory Board committees earlier this week about the situation. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 23 Yucca: Warning signs subject of exhibition Thursday, January 31, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal The Desert Space Foundation and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Marjorie Barrick Natural History Museum are presenting an exhibition titled "Universal Warning Sign: Yucca Mountain" through March 9. An opening reception is set for 6-8:30 p.m. Friday in the museum on campus, 4505 S. Maryland Parkway. The exhibit is made up of winning designs in a variety of media that address the challenge of creating an effective universal warning sign or permanent marker for the proposed high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. The purpose of the warning sign is to effectively communicate over the next 10,000 years (the projected duration of the volatility of the waste) that the integrity of the site must not be compromised. Works in the exhibition were selected from more than 150 design submissions that were part of an international competition. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 24 Members say panel pumped to fight dump Mark Brown on Wednesday tells the Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects about his plan for a grass-roots effort to oppose the Yucca Mountain Project. Photo by Clint Karlsen. Thursday, January 31, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Fund to pay for court, PR efforts By JANE ANN MORRISON REVIEW-JOURNAL Buoyed by nearly $5.4 million in contributions and three reports challenging the science of placing a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, members of the Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects expressed optimism Wednesday at the state's chances of fending off the federal project. Commissioner Richard Bryan said that at no time in the 18-year-old battle against the repository has Nevada had such independent scientific support. "If this is all about science, as we are told, Nevada's case has never been stronger," said the former Democratic U.S. senator who has been one of Yucca Mountain's strongest opponents. He was referring to reports from the General Accounting Office, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board and the International Atomic Energy Agency, all of which raised scientific questions about the suitability of the site. But just in case the matter isn't all about science, the Nuclear Projects Commission on Wednesday welcomed a $50,000 check from Station Casinos. It is the first private-sector money donated to the Nevada Protection Fund, which has nearly $5.4 million. The fund will be used to fight nuclear waste on two fronts, in the courts and through public relations in states where the waste would travel on its way to Nevada. The commission will push for more private-sector contributions. Most of the $5.4 million has come from government bodies across Nevada. The immediate goal is to bump the pot to $6 million. Commission Chairman Brian McKay, a former state attorney general, and Bryan will lead the fund-raising effort. McKay and Bryan criticized Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's Jan. 10 announcement that he plans to recommend the site to President Bush, and Abraham's statement that the repository is important to national security. Abraham said moving nuclear waste to a single underground location removed from population centers would improve protection against terrorist attacks. He said the science behind the project was sound and said, "The site is technically suitable for this purpose." Bryan said the idea that placing nuclear waste in one site would be safer than storing it at nuclear power plants "is a lie." He said building a repository will not minimize national security problems because the spent fuel rods are going to be stored at the reactors anyway. The rods are required to go through a five-year cool-down period before they can be moved, he said. Mark Brown, president of Brown &Partners, which in late November was awarded a $1 million contract to take the anti-Yucca message to the states where the waste will be transported, said developments "have been going fast and furious" since Abraham's announcement. He and his staff are in the final stages of identifying which states the waste probably will travel through. The Energy Department will not confirm which routes the nuclear waste would take. Once the routes are identified, Brown is preparing to start grass-roots campaigns in the individual states. The efforts, he said, will contact the 50 most influential people in each town along the route, from the bank president to the chiefs of the PTA and the chamber of commerce, to make them aware of the dangers they face. He said the Las Vegas Chamber has agreed to work with chamber members in communities along the routes, and the Nevada State Education Association will work with the teachers unions. Brown said he is trying to identify the Senate and House members who represent districts along the routes and who might be persuaded to support Nevada's position. He plans to focus on them rather than known opponents. Brown said he worked with Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman on his recent reception for mayors in Washington, D.C. "That's a message that took hold," Brown said, particularly for small cities. "These folks have volunteer fire departments and limited police departments." "They have no idea what they're about to face" if an accident occurs, he said. Brown's contract is for $1 million, but he estimated the long-term costs of a grass-roots effort will call for at least double that, which is one of the reasons Gov. Kenny Guinn thanked Station Casinos for its contribution before Wednesday's commission meeting. He called the donation "a very important gesture" and "a giant step" and said the money is important because "Nevada is fighting for its life." Station Casinos President Lorenzo Fertitta, whose business focuses on locals and who was born and raised in Las Vegas, said, "It's everyone's time to step up to the plate." Brown formerly worked for Station Casinos. He left the company because of his role in the creation of a controversial anonymous political mailer in March 2000 was made public, after he denied having any role in creating it. Three lawsuits are pending over the mailer, which criticized then-Clark County Commissioner Lance Malone. One lawsuit filed by Secretary of State Dean Heller is to enforce a $5,000 fine against Brown, and two concern whether a ban on anonymous mailers is constitutional. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 25 Scientists asked about decision on Yucca Mountain Thursday, January 31, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Panel of experts questions confidence By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL PAHRUMP -- A panel of experts quizzed federal scientists Wednesday about how much confidence they have in calculating the long-term risks of storing nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain. The experts said they also wonder whether Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham understood those risks before he decided the mountain is suitable for building a repository. Jared Cohon, chairman of the panel known as the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, said the way Yucca Mountain Project scientists present the risks on charts and graphs in some cases can distort how the risks should be perceived by decision makers. The discussion centered on the risks linked to corrosion of metal waste containers and the likelihood that molten rock from volcanic activity could invade the planned repository and spread nuclear contaminants into the environment. "Presenting it this way does not inform decision makers about the risk. It obscures the risk," Cohon said during a presentation by William Boyle, senior policy advisor for the project's Office of Licensing and Regulatory Compliance. Boyle said the chances are remote that a worst-case scenario could ever happen. That would include such occurrences as a volcanic event or total corrosion of the waste canisters. Even in the case of an unlikely event, like molten rock invading the tunnels holding waste containers, the repository still might comply with the standards, Boyle said. Since its inception in 1987, the panel has continually reviewed the scientific work in the project and continues to do so as the proposed repository enters the licensing phase. The panel reports to the Energy Secretary and Congress. Panel member Alberto Sagues said he is concerned about how much confidence federal scientists have in projecting when corrosion of waste containers will occur over hundreds or thousands of years. "This is a concern we have over and over and over," he said. The panel has suggested DOE scientists should refine their calculations to reflect that heat from decaying radioactive materials could accelerate corrosion of canisters inside storage tunnels. Cohon said federal scientists to some degree can reduce uncertainties in their risk calculations by collecting more data on how wet the repository could be in the distant future and what the chemical effects of water draining into storage tunnels will have on metal canisters. The board has expressed concern that project scientists don't know if moisture driven off into surrounding rock heated by decaying waste will condense later and seep into the repository. "We believe uncertainty can be decreased through further research," Cohon said during a break in the board's two-day meeting that ended Wednesday. Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site the Department of Energy has targeted to entomb 77,000 tons of the nation's highly radioactive waste. Lake Barrett, the Department of Energy's acting chief for civilian radioactive waste management, said when Abraham visited the mountain on Jan. 7 he was well briefed on technical aspects. "I would say he has a very good policy maker's understanding of the issues. I would say he is very much involved in his responsibility as a decision maker," Barrett told the panel. Abraham notified Gov. Kenny Guinn on Jan. 10 that he intends to recommend to President Bush after 30 days that the Yucca Mountain site be developed into a repository. But Cohon and other members of the nonpartisan panel of presidential appointees, said they wondered how DOE scientists can draw some of their conclusions when data is lacking. After the meeting, geologist Steve Frishman, a full-time consultant for the Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency said federal scientists are presenting their results "in an extremely misleading way." webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 26 Technical panel, DOE officials spar at Yucca Mountain hearing Las Vegas SUN Today: January 31, 2002 at 17:16:13 PST LAS VEGAS - A technical oversight panel and Energy Department officials sparred at a hearing about whether federal scientists know enough about the risks of burying the nation's radioactive waste in the Nevada desert. Members of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board focused on gaps in federal scientists' knowledge about Yucca Mountain, a volcanic rock ridge that would contain the proposed nuclear waste repository. Lake Barrett, the Energy's Department's acting chief for civilian radioactive waste management, said the repository design could be flexible to adopt emerging technology. He said the technical work is not finished, but that the project is scientifically sound. Jared Cohon, panel chairman and president of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, focused part of Wednesday's hearing in Pahrump on how the Energy Department is presenting data. He pointed to graphs and charts about whether metal casks containing spent nuclear fuel could corrode and whether molten rock could reach stored waste and spread radioactivity into the environment. "Presenting it this way does not inform decision-makers about the risk. It obscures the risk," Cohon told William Boyle, a senior Yucca Mountain policy adviser. Cohon said the technical oversight board has for years asked the Energy Department to release information that could be interpreted by the general public. Boyle, of the Yucca Mountain project's Office of Licensing and Regulatory Compliance, said chances are remote that such worst-case scenarios could happen. Even if they did, Boyle said, the repository still might comply with regulatory standards. Federal Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham on Jan. 10 gave Nevada 30 days' notice that he will recommend to President Bush that Yucca Mountain is a suitable place to bury the nation's nuclear waste. The site - at the edge of the vast federal Nevada Test Site about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas - is the only place under study. If built, the repository would entomb 77,000 tons of spent commercial, industrial and military nuclear waste for 10,000-plus years. The Energy Department wants to apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license in 2004 and begin accepting waste in 2010. William Reamer, deputy director for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's division of nuclear waste management, said the NRC will not let the Energy Department begin building Yucca Mountain until it answers questions about water flow through the mountain and how heat from radioactive waste might affect surrounding rock. The technical oversight board was created by Congress in 1987 to review the scientific work in the Yucca Mountain project and report to the Energy Secretary and Congress. In a report released last week, it criticized the Energy Department scientific work at Yucca Mountain as "weak to moderate." "We believe uncertainty can be decreased through further research," Cohon told the Las Vegas Review-Journal on Wednesday. Panel member Alberto Sagues, a civil and environmental engineering professor at the University of South Florida, said he is concerned about projections of waste container corrosion over hundreds or thousands of years. "This is a concern we have over and over and over," Sagues said. Panel members have suggested project scientists refine their calculations about heat from decaying radioactive materials accelerating corrosion of canisters inside storage tunnels. The Energy Department is still undecided whether to create a "hot" repository with decaying waste packed tightly but warming tunnels to high temperatures, or a "cold" repository with waste more spread out. The "cold" option would cost more - requiring more tunnels to be drilled in the repository grid pattern 1,000 feet below the surface. The project is estimated to cost $58 billion over 17 years. Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 27 County's Yucca study projects effects of roadway spill Thursday, January 31, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By FRANK GEARY REVIEW-JOURNAL A Clark County study released Wednesday gauges the catastrophic effects to Southern Nevada if a roadway accident were to occur involving the release of radioactive material after the completion of a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. Such an accident could eliminate 54,000 jobs in Southern Nevada, remove $1.4 billion a year from the local economy and cause as many as 90,000 residents to move, the study said. The Impact Assessment Report says routes proposed for the transportation of high-level nuclear waste through Clark County would send trucks past 37 schools, two hospitals, one special-events center and 23 hotels. The 82-page report analyzes the effects a Yucca Mountain repository could have on the Las Vegas economy, property values, the cost of public services and health and safety, but at least two critics said the study was irrelevant and a waste of taxpayer money. "They spent taxpayer dollars to perpetuate a fear factor that is totally unrealistic," said former Republican Nevada Gov. Bob List, a lobbyist for the Nuclear Energy Industry, which favors the repository. "The truth is that it is highly unlikely this material will ever come through Las Vegas, the Las Vegas Valley or Clark County. The governor will not allow that to happen." And State Sen. Bill O'Donnell, R-Las Vegas, who said he is indifferent on whether Yucca Mountain should be built, said the study is merely a compilation of opinions and will do nothing to alter the fact that federal law identifies Nevada as the only study site for the burial of nuclear waste. "It is all subjective, and does it matter? Does it matter how scared we get? Does it matter how scared we make each other? Is that going to change the law?" O'Donnell said. "There are going to be a lot of politicians that are going to get elected on this issue by scaring people to death." The County Commission on Tuesday is scheduled to forward the Impact Assessment Report to Gov. Kenny Guinn. It will be included in a state report that is expected to be forwarded to the federal Department of Energy before a crucial Feb. 10 deadline. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham told Guinn in January that he expected to send his site recommendation for Yucca Mountain to President Bush by Feb. 10, and that his recommendation would include any input received before that time, said Irene Navis, manager of the county's Nuclear Waste Division. "We think he (Abraham) is going to do it at the earliest possible moment ... so we want to make sure the county's and the state's information is sent to the secretary of energy before he forwards it to the president," Navis said. Conclusions in the report are based on analysis and opinions of local real estate experts, gaming executives, government officials, consultants and others. It is intended to fill gaps in the Energy Department's 1999 analysis of impacts on the community. The information shows the federal government cannot alleviate all the potential negative effects a Yucca Mountain dump could have on Clark County, Navis said. A draft copy of the report released in December focused primarily on the effects a dump would have on assessed property values, but the final version includes information on jobs, trucking routes and the effects on the market value of area land. The analysis is divided into different scenarios, such as whether there were an accident in Clark County involving the release of radioactive material. The study says 5,393 jobs would be lost if the dump is built, and that 54,429 jobs would be lost if the dump is built and such an accident occurred. The higher figure would push unemployment in the county to 13 percent, or about twice the current rate. List said the conclusions are "completely off the mark" because Yucca Mountain is expected to bring thousands of jobs to Southern Nevada while helping to diversify the local economy. The dump already has created 1,300 jobs that pay an average salary of more than $60,000 a year, he said. "It is totally irresponsible to say there is going to be a loss of jobs," List said. Southern Nevada's population, the fastest growing in the country during the past decade, would drop by 11,294 people if Yucca Mountain is built, the study asserted. The loss would be more than eight times greater if there were an accident involving the release of radioactive material, according to the report. The local economy would lose $185 million a year, and a total of $5.6 billion over the life of Yucca Mountain, if the repository is built, the study projected. If there were an accident, the loss would be $1.4 billion annually and $68.1 billion over the life of the project. Disposable income, the money a person retains after taxes, would drop $136 million in one year and more than $4.7 billion over the life of repository if it is built, the study said. The losses jump to $686 million a year and $42.1 billion over the life of the project if there were an accident. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 28 Yucca foes say firm had conflict of interest Thursday, January 31, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Groups send report to every congressional office By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada's allies against nuclear waste disposal called Wednesday for members of Congress to challenge how the Energy Department has managed the multibillion-dollar project to establish a repository at Yucca Mountain. A coalition of environmental organizations and public interest groups hand-delivered every congressional office a copy of a 24-page DOE inspector general's report from November detailing the activities of a Chicago-based law firm that held a Yucca Mountain contract at the same time it was registered to lobby Congress on behalf of a nuclear industry group. The law firm, Winston &Strawn, withdrew from its $16.5 million government contract two weeks later. "Clearly, the DOE has failed to exercise necessary oversight of its contractors, resulting in an apparent pro-industry bias in the agency's site characterization and site recommendation activities," the groups said in an accompanying letter. The letter, dated Tuesday and delivered Wednesday, was signed by representatives of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service and the Public Citizen Critical Mass Energy Project. Both Washington-based groups have worked closely with Nevada officials against the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Attached was a list of 230 other organizations from around the country said to endorse those views. Kevin Kamps, nuclear waste specialist for the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, said the letter campaign was not coordinated with Nevada officials. "This was an initiative by the national environmental movement," Kamps said. "We've been concerned since the story broke that this is a huge scandal," Kamps said. "Our concern is Congress doesn't realize the magnitude of the scandal, that much of the work at Yucca Mountain is tainted by bias." DOE spokesman Joe Davis said the letter was a "rehash of old news," and the inspector general "found no conflict of interest." Chuck Connor, a Winston &Strawn spokesman, referred to previous comments by firm Chairman James R. Thompson stating DOE did not find a legal conflict "and we don't believe we had one either." Besides citing Winston and Strawn, the groups noted in their letter that DOE inspector general Gregory Friedman also raised conflict questions about TRW Inc., the managing and operations contractor for Yucca Mountain until February 2001. TRW also was involved in an earlier inspector general's investigation that examined draft documents on Yucca Mountain prepared by a TRW subcontractor. Nevada lawmakers had requested the probe, contending that comments in the documents suggested managers were biased in favor of burying nuclear waste in the state. After a four-month inquiry, investigators said they found no evidence that bias hurt the integrity of the Yucca Mountain program, but the internal documents still were "inappropriate" for the nuclear waste disposal project. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 29 UK: Dounreay still leaking CAMPAIGNERS last night welcomed the UK Atomic Energy Authority's recognition that radioactive particles may still be leaking at Dounreay. The UKAEA, which runs the Caithness plant, has always insisted the particles washed up on nearby rocks and beaches were the result of historic spills dating back several decades. However, Professor Keith Clayton told the Dounreay Particles Advisory Group, of which he is a member, that there may still be continuing releases. He said yesterday that his analysis of the two latest reports from the UKAEA suggested that a waste shaft near the site was a more likely source rather than a diffuser under the sea. An average of 11 particles were found annually for 16 years, but this figure dropped to six in 2000, and three last year. Professor Clayton said this supported the historic spill argument. Conversely, however, any particles from the 1960s should have been dispersed off Dounreay within three years. The fact that particles were still being found in relatively large numbers until very recently favoured the case for continuing escape. "It is terribly important to keep the possibility of continuing source in mind. There may be a source "x" that nobody has had the imagination to think of yet and we have to bear that in mind," Professor Clayton said. Campbell Gemmell, chair of the group which was set up to give expert advice to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, said: "The evidence that there is a continuing source is growing but there is not enough at this stage to say that it is definitely the case." "There is a lot more work to be done and we want the UKAEA to pursue investigations into this as a matter of urgency," he added. Lorraine Mann, of the Scotland Against Nuclear Dumping group, said: "This is a complete turnaround on Dounreay's previous position. They have always rubbished any suggestion that there be an ongoing source, particularly that the source might be the shaft." Geoffrey Minter, who owns the neighbouring Sandside estate and the foreshore, also welcomed the group's approach. "I am satisfied that this issue is now being given the proper attention it deserves. I am very pleased that the shaft is now coming into the picture as the possible source and that this is to be investigated further," he added. - Jan 31st + ***************************************************************** 30 Nuke expert says no data shows Yucca suitable for repository Las Vegas SUN January 30, 2002 By Mary Manning PAHRUMP -- A former Department of Energy nuclear waste chief said he has reviewed numerous scientific reports on Yucca Mountain and can find no information that would prove the site is suitable to serve as the nation's nuclear waste repository. John Bartlett, who was director of DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management under former President Bush and is now a consultant for Clark County, said he has reviewed 5,000 pages of scientific studies done by the Department of Energy, which is guiding the Yucca project. "You could have come up with any result depending on the assumptions you made," Bartlett on Tuesday told the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, an independent panel overseeing DOE's work at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "As a result, the documentation does not provide a sound foundation for the basis of a site recommendation," he said. Bartlett said the DOE tended to focus on the containers, built with a metal alloy known as C-22 that must, according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission guidelines, be strong enough to prevent radiation from leaving the repository for at least 10,000 years. "The performance of the repository for that long is genuinely unknowable," he said, noting that the proposed metal has been in existence for about 20 years. Bartlett, while working for the DOE in 1972, studied the Nevada Test Site as a possible burial ground for nuclear waste leftover from the Department of Defense. He currently works as a consultant for Clark County and S. Cohen and Associates in Washington. Technical Review Board Chairman Jared Cohon said he was not surprised by Bartlett's criticism. In fact, the board has produced its own report on the project, which was released last week. In it the board called the DOE's science "weak to moderate." The board and Bartlett agreed that the DOE's study included neither a final design for the repository nor a final container package, in which spent nuclear fuel and defense waste would be buried. Many of the DOE's assumptions regarding Yucca Mountain are extreme and unrealistic, said board member Paul Craig, a hydrologist. "That's an astute observation," Craig said, referring to Bartlett's yearlong review. Physicist John Garrick of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste said that the DOE fails to define potential risks to people and the environment should a repository at Yucca Mountain be built. Any repository decision would be based on cost, potential risks and potential benefits, he said. "But it (the DOE) does not answer the question, What is the risk?" Garrick said. Garrick stopped short of saying the DOE failed to prove its case for a Yucca Mountain repository. He did concede, however, that, "I think there are shortcomings," he said. Conversely, there is no single variable that would at this time derail the project, said Lake Barrett, acting director of DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. The DOE is continuing scientific studies as it prepares to submit a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2004. The process was delayed about a year because Congress this year trimmed $70 million from the DOE's $375 million budget, he said. The DOE has earmarked $4.1 million of its budget to begin addressing transportation issues involving the Yucca project, Barrett said. The DOE has yet to announce what highways or rail lines it would use to transport waste to Yucca Mountain should it become a repository. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is prepared after Feb. 10 to recommend Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste repository to President Bush. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 31 Leader of Yucca board stymied by DOE Las Vegas SUN Today: January 31, 2002 at 10:13:54 PST By Mary Manning PAHRUMP -- The chairman of a board reviewing the Energy Department's work at Yucca Mountain threatened to cut short a meeting Wednesday with DOE experts, saying the agency consistently failed to provide evidence supporting the site's suitability as a nuclear waste repository. Jared Cohon, chairman of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, interrupted the meeting after becoming frustrated with what he said was the scientists' failure to provide specific information on the level of radiation that would leave the site in the event of a volcanic eruption. Cohon said the independent board, created by Congress in 1987 to oversee the DOE's work, has for years asked the DOE to release information that could be easily interpreted by the general public. "What makes me so annoyed is that we have made this comment over and over again," Cohon said, leaning across a table to emphasize his point. "That shows an attempt at obfuscation." The board, in a report released last week, said the DOE's scientific foundation on its work at Yucca is "weak to moderate." A potential volcanic eruption at the repository is one of nine key technical points in which the DOE has failed to provide crucial information that would support the safe storage of 77,000 tons of nuclear waste for 10,000 years, said William Reamer, deputy director for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's division of nuclear waste management. The NRC will not allow construction at Yucca Mountain until the DOE answers questions on how fast ground water flows through the mountain, how heat from radioactive waste affects rock and water and how long metal caskets will safely contain nuclear waste, Reamer said. According to the NRC, 293 issues pertaining to the suitability of Yucca as a nuclear waste repository remain unsolved. Only 29 of those are completed. The DOE has promised to supply sufficient scientific evidence to resolve the remaining questions, Reamer said. Jerry McNeish, an engineer with Bechtel-SAIC, the contractor overseeing the Yucca project, tried to shed some light on the process used by the Energy Department to estimate radiation levels that would escape from the site during a volcanic eruption. It was then that Cohon became agitated, saying McNeish's explanation was deceptive because, as McNeish later conceded, it was based on scientific probabilities and not on hard evidence. Cohon asked to what extent Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham had been briefed on DOE studies of Yucca Mountain before he announced he would recommend the mountain as a repository. Lake Barrett, acting director of DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, said Abraham, who toured the site for the first time Jan. 7, read thousands of pages of DOE research on the project. "I would say it was an extensive review," Barrett said, noting Abraham had been briefed on the DOE's technical approach, repository performance estimates, volcanism, peak radiation doses and other issues. "He has a policy-maker's understanding of the issue," Barrett said. Abraham told Gov. Kenny Guinn on Jan. 10 he intended to recommend the site to President Bush. Judy Treichel, director of the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force, said Nevadans fear the DOE will present a skewed view of Yucca research in its haste to recommend the site to Congress. "What decision-makers will get is one sentence from a letter, a piece of this and a bit of that," Treichel said. Review board members said they plan to talk to congressional representatives in detail about their concerns over the Yucca project. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 32 Study: Yucca stigma will hit economy Las Vegas SUN Today: January 31, 2002 at 11:05:51 PST By Mary Manning < [manning@lasvegassun.com] > Las Vegas' economy will be hobbled almost immediately if the federal government designates Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste repository, according to a study released Wednesday. The study, sponsored by Clark County, says if Yucca Mountain is officially named, tourism, property values and gaming revenue will immediately drop because of the stigma attached to the waste. County Commissioner Myrna Williams called the report astonishing. "(A repository at Yucca) would wipe us out," Williams said. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said he would recommend making Yucca Mountain the repository. President Bush is expected to get the recommendation within the next month, and the government could make a final decision later this year. As part of the county's study, more than 1,000 visitors to Las Vegas were interviewed in December to determine the likelihood of their return should nuclear waste be shipped to Yucca, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. According to the survey: + Twelve percent said they would not return to Las Vegas; + Seventy-seven percent said they would not visit as often; + Twenty-five percent said that the shipment of nuclear waste, without an accident or incident, would affect their decision to come to Las Vegas. The study used its tourist survey along with state studies and new interviews to conclude that the economy will be further weakened with the government's announcement, saying impacts will "occur immediately." The study estimates a 10 percent to 15 percent drop in tourism translates into $1.1 billion to $1.7 billion in lost gaming revenues. Frank Fahrenkopf, president of the American Gaming Association, the industry's top Washington lobbying group, was surprised the study suggested that there would be only a 10 percent tourism dip if a repository were constructed in Nevada. He thought it would be as much as 20 percent. "The difficulty we face is that you're going to have all of the nation's nuclear waste buried 90 miles (northwest) of the city, and there's always going to be a certain segment of the population regardless of how educated they are about alleged safety that is going to be concerned," Fahrenkopf said. The study say that "according to virtually every gaming industry representative interviewed, the most serious risk is from the stigma that will result if there is any accident of any kind involving the shipment of high-level radioactive waste." Rob Powers, vice president of communications for the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, said he had not seen the study and was hesitant to comment on it. "If indeed the study is sound and those numbers are true, that's cause for concern," Powers said. He acknowledged that if Yucca Mountain becomes a waste dump, it will be a challenge to create new promotions to keep tourists coming to Las Vegas. "It's a fine line to walk because you don't want to raise a red flag," Powers said. "Las Vegas has always been promoted as a place to come and get away. We've never had to deal with something like this before; it's new ground for us." The report also says government will have to spend up to $2.67 billion -- to to prepare for a nuclear accident -- over an expected 24-year period that waste will be shipped to the site. Officials from the Nuclear Energy Institute, the top industry lobbying group, declined to comment today. Former Gov. Robert List, who is now a lobbyist for the nuclear energy industry, called the report a "red herring" and said it amounted to "scare tactics." He said Yucca Mountain could be an economic benefit to the state by bringing thousands of high-paying jobs and an industry that could help diversify the economy. He said he thinks Nevadans are beginning to see through the "scare tactics," and he said once Congress approves the dump, residents will want their public officials to negotiate for compensation. "Our public officials have really held the federal government's feet to the fire," List said this morning from New York, where he was attending an international economic forum. "Through their resistance, they have forced the DOE to do a better job." "Gov. List and the proponents of Yucca Mountain, their responsibility is to downplay the risk," former U.S. Sen. Richard Bryan, who is also a former governor, said. "The fact of the matter is nuclear waste is scary stuff. "It's not only scary, it's scary for tens of thousands of years. Obviously the nuclear power industry would prefer to classify this as a benign compound of highly technical physics." The seven-chapter, 82-page report will be part of Nevada's response to the Department of Energy's final environmental impact study on Yucca Mountain. The study, officials said, can be used as leverage in the state's battle against the repository should the issue proceed to Congress after the president's expected recommendation. The study tracks what would happen if there is an accident involving vehicles carrying nuclear waste, saying an accident would cause catastrophic problems for Nevada. "Transportation is one of the sound arguments against Yucca Mountain," Greg Bortolin, Gov. Kenny Guinn's spokesman, said, noting he had yet to see the study. "... You can chalk up one more for the state's fight against Yucca Mountain." Employment would suffer 10-fold if an accident involving nuclear waste were to occur, the report says. Shipment of nuclear waste would account for 5,393 lost jobs without an accident. That number would increase to 54,429 should an accident occur, the report says. Personal spending would follow a similar pattern. Without a shipping accident, $4.7 billion would be lost between 2010 and 2035. An accident involving leaking radiation would result in a $42.1 billion loss, according to the report. A severe nuclear accident could result in gaming losses of up to $3.7 billion. If nuclear shipments continue for 24 years, collective property values would decrease as much as $8.7 billion. "Obviously, the more serious the problem, the greater the impacts will be," said Keith Schwer of the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The shortest routes from 103 nuclear reactor sites throughout the country to Yucca Mountain traverse Clark County, the report notes. The Department of Energy has yet to designate shipping routes. The study says of the likely transportation routes, nuclear waste will pass 37 schools, two major health facilities, one special events center and 23 hotels. List, though, said it's unlikely that the materials would not even pass through the Las Vegas Valley, and he said the governor will have a say in how the waste goes through Nevada. An average of 457 shipments annually would expose people within a half-mile of the track to 1 millirem to 200 millirems of radiation. An average chest X-ray produces about 10 millirems. Clark County Commissioner Dario Herrera said accidents that occur anywhere along the transportation route will draw headlines worldwide and Las Vegas -- an international destination -- will be mentioned as the end of the route. Herrera noted the possibility of terrorist attacks on nuclear waste shipments and said the Department of Energy had not studied security issues. "The security issue is an important element of our opposition," Herrera said. "The DOE has not attempted to address the security concerns while disguising its recommendation as a promotion of national security interests." Sun reporters Erin Neff, Benjamin Grove and Adrienne Packer < [adrienne@lasvegassun.com] > contributed to this story. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 33 Panel backs Guinn's plan to veto Yucca site [RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL] January 31, 2002 ASSOCIATED PRESS A legislative panel studying a proposed federal dump for nuclear waste voted 7-1 Tuesday to back Gov. Kenny Guinn’s plan to veto the Nevada site. Panel members also said federal Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham used scare tactics by raising the specter of terrorism in recommending Yucca Mountain, about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as the dump site. Assemblyman John Lee, D-Las Vegas, pushed for the study committee’s support of Guinn’s plans, saying, “Nevada is not the national septic system for this country.” Lee also said the legislative committee has been in existence for years but until now hadn’t taken a stand against the proposed high-level radioactive waste dump. Sen. Lawrence Jacobsen, R-Minden, voted “no,” expressing concern that Nevada’s continued opposition might close the door to any possible federal benefits to the state for accepting the dump. The committee’s vote was to recommend that an anti-dump resolution passed by the 2001 Legislature be sent to Guinn for inclusion in his veto, which he has promised should President Bush accept Abraham’s recommendation. Lee criticized Abraham for talking about terrorism and national security hazards for Americans in backing the Yucca Mountain site. “I believe it’s a scare tactic and it doesn’t take into consideration the health and safety of these same people,” Lee said. Assemblyman Harry Mortenson, D-Las Vegas, who chairs the legislative committee, said the biggest security risk would be using 10,000 miles of highways and rail lines to ship the waste from nuclear reactors in other states to Nevada. The legislative committee’s action followed Guinn’s letter to Abraham on Friday criticizing his endorsement of Yucca Mountain as a good site to entomb the nation’s spent nuclear fuel. U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Las Vegas, and Nevada Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa raised another issue — an independent oversight panel’s report that scientific work on the project has been “weak to moderate.” The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board has issued periodic reports to Abraham and Congress expressing concerns about the project. Berkley said the panel’s latest report, released last week, underscored a Congressional General Accounting Office recommendation that the Bush administration postpone a decision on the project. The GAO said in November that 293 unanswered technical questions should first be addressed. Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis has said the department disagrees with the state’s interpretation. He added the DOE agrees with one finding in the technical panel’s report — that no single scientific or technical issue would disqualify Yucca Mountain as a dump site and that “vigorous scientific study” should continue in years ahead. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a [http://www.gannett.com] Newspaper. Use ***************************************************************** 34 Upton: Bill for disposing of nuclear waste likely to pass [RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL] January 31, 2002 Associated Press [] Standing beside rows of nuclear waste-storage containers, U.S. Rep. Fred Upton predicted that Congress probably will designate a Nevada location as the country's repository for spent nuclear fuel. Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, appears to be the"one safe place"for the nation's nuclear waste, Upton said during a news conference at the Palisades Nuclear Plant. The Republican from St. Joseph said Tuesday he expects the House and Senate to pass new legislation on the issue this spring, the South Bend (Ind.) Tribune reported. The estimated cost for building, operating and monitoring the site over 100 years is $58 billion. Supporters want construction completed by 2010. For 30 years, up to 77,000 tons of waste shipments sent by truck and rail would be accepted at the site. Today there are more than 40,000 tons of highly radioactive reactor waste piling up at nuclear power plants in 31 states, with the amount growing by 2,000 tons annually. Even if Congress gives the go-ahead this year, it could take eight or nine years before any waste is moved, Upton said as whitecaps from the Lake Michigan surf crashed onto the beach in the background. "Even though these casks have been deemed safe, I want them gone,"he said."This is a Sammy Sosa throw from the lake." Palisades sits next to the lake in Van Buren County's Covert Township, about 15 miles northeast of the St. Joseph-Benton Harbor area. The plant has 18 filled casks, each containing 24 fuel rods, stored on an outdoor pad. The rods are encased in a 1-inch steel liner, pressurized with helium to prevent corrosion, and surrounded by 29 inches of concrete, The Grand Rapids Press reported. Palisades spokesman Mark Savage said the 18 casks represent about six years worth of enriched uranium fuel, which has a 100-year half life. Crews have started excavating a site for a new platform to house more casks, he said. Bill Schalk, a spokesman for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant near Bridgman, told The Herald-Palladium of St. Joseph that Cook will run out of storage room for its spent fuel in 10 to 12 years. Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 35 Casino donates $50,000 to Yucca battle Brief news stories from Las Vegas [RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL] January 31, 2002 Station Casinos Inc. contributed $50,000 on Wednesday to help Nevada fight a federal plan to bury the nation's radioactive waste 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. State officials called the donation, announced before a Nevada Nuclear Projects Commission meeting Wednesday in Las Vegas, the first involving a private company. Gov. Kenny Guinn and the Legislature have put up $4 million in taxpayer funds, and counties, cities and the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce have contributed an additional $1.1 million to a legal and public relations fight against the Yucca Mountain project. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has said he will recommend to President Bush that the nuclear repository be built in Nevada. The commission also heard about a public relations campaign by BrownPartners aimed at alerting cities across the nation that trucks and trains would have to transport radioactive material through their towns to get to a Nevada nuclear dump. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a [http://www.gannett.com] ***************************************************************** 36 AU: Software bug blamed in radioactive spill BusinessWeek Online: News from C|Net.com A programming error at a uranium processing plant in Western Australia leads to a failure in a control system and a rupture in a pipe carrying radioactive fluid. SYDNEY, Australia--Amec Engineering, which designed the Beverly uranium processing plant in Western Australia, has blamed buggy software for a radioactive spill that occurred at the site last December, confirming early suspicions that computers played a role in the accident. "After a detailed assessment of the incident it is now clear that the problem was caused by a computer programming error that has since been corrected," said Stephen Middleton, spokesman for the plant's operator, Heathgate Resources. According to Amec's report, the glitch cut power to the plant's fluid-distribution control system during a routine service exercise. At the time, the mechanism should have shut down pumps moving fluid into the plant. "Before they could be shut down manually, pressure built up in the pipelines leading into the plant and one ruptured," Middleton said. According to Middleton, Amec has re-examined the entire system, retested the plant's pipes and corrected the "computer logic error." He refused to name the software technology responsible for the error. Staff writer Andrew Colley reported from Sydney. By Andrew Colley Copyright ©1995-2001 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 37 Judge gives approval to spent fuel storage at Yankee By Associated Press, 1/30/2002 08:00 HADDAM, Conn. (AP) Town officials have issued a building permit for a nuclear fuel storage area following a judge's approval of an agreement between the town and the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co. The agreement signed Tuesday will allow for construction of a storage complex the size of a football field on residential land in Haddam Neck. The settlement, which would create the state's first community-sanctioned storage facility, puts an end to a lawsuit filed by Connecticut Yankee that charged the town with illegally preventing it from storing the spent nuclear waste at the best possible site on its property. The town's selectmen had voted 2-1 on Jan. 23 to grant Connecticut Yankee a building permit to construct the facility at its preferred site. The company and the town were facing a Feb. 6 deadline to reach an agreement. The building permit allows the nuclear facility to start construction of a $40 million dry-cask storage complex on 15 acres. Construction is expected to take 10 months. The plant has been closed since 1996. The agreement approved by U.S. District Judge Alan Nevas requires the company to pay the town $13 million over the next 10 years. ***************************************************************** 38 Irish Safety Fears Not Allayed THE WHITEHAVEN NEWS Thursday, January 31, 2002 BNFL chief executive, Norman Askew, faced a tough challenge on Monday attempting to convince British and Irish politicians of the safety of Sellafield and its Mox plant. The BNFL boss also admitted at media briefings that the new Mox plant not only has to win back Japanese confidence and contracts, but also has to get permission from the United States before it can deal with a crucial Mox shipment. Mr Askew said: "The United States Congress has a veto on the movement of plutonium. We need to get their consent for return of the Mox fuel at the centre of the falsification row. We have told the Japanese we will take responsibility for that fuel. "We have not had an answer from the US since the events of September 11.'' But he said the veto by the USA was not regarded by BNFL as "insurmountable". Mr Askew came to Sellafield to meet the British-Irish inter Parliamentary Committee made up of Irish, Scottish and British MPs. After the politicians were shown around the Mox plant Irish TD Connor Lenihan said: "The more we have seen the less I am convinced of the safety of this place. I especially resent the lack of information for stakeholders in the community. I include the Irish people as stakeholders as we share the same waterway (the Irish Sea) that is used by Sellafield.'' Fellow Irish politician Maria McGuinness added: "The fight over Mox is not over yet...there is still a chance the International Law of the Sea, in Hamburg, will rule against the Mox plant.'' Chairman of the group, Labour MP Kevin McNamara, said: "I would not agree with Mr Lenihan's comments, that was far too sweeping. But there are concerns in the UK.'' During their visit the politicians were also met by Sellafield director of operations, Brian Watson and trade union representatives. Mr Askew said he felt Irish government fears over Sellafield safety were "groundless'' ***************************************************************** 39 Connecticut mulling its role in nuclear waste debate By Kathryn Masterson, Associated Press, 1/31/2002 01:45 HADDAM, Conn. (AP) Connecticut's attorney general said Wednesday the state may not be able to help those who oppose a town decision to allow a high-level nuclear waste storage facility near the now-defunct Connecticut Yankee power plant. Richard Blumenthal said he will examine the settlement between Connecticut Yankee and Haddam's Board of Representatives. The deal would allow the construction of a dry-cask storage facility near the plant in exchange for $13 million over the next ten years. The plans call for constructing a hockey rink-sized concrete pad to accommodate 43 concrete canisters, lined with carbon steel, to store 1,019 spent nuclear fuel rods. The waste is now kept in a pool inside the plant, which is in the process of being decommissioned. A federal judge approved the deal on Tuesday. Blumenthal said his office will review local zoning rules and federal standards for safety and environmental protection. ''We haven't decided if there are issues of state or federal law that would merit our involvement,'' Blumenthal said. The review is expected to be completed by the end of next week. The settlement was the result of a lawsuit Connecticut Yankee filed against the town, claiming Haddam was illegally preventing it from storing the spent nuclear waste at the best possible site on its property. Haddam had wanted the storage complex to be located on the footprint of the decommissioned plant. The company wants to build the facility on what is now a wooded area, zoned for residential use. The town's selectmen approved the settlement 2-1, even though the local zoning board unanimously rejected the plan. ''Storage of nuclear waste outside the area presently being used by the power plant into a residential area would in fact spoil another piece of land,'' said Ed Munster, a former state senator, who asked the attorney general to get involved. Munster, a three-time candidate for Congress, said about 400 residents have written the town in opposition to the plan. U.S. District Judge Alan Nevas approved the agreement Tuesday, and First Selectman Tony Bondi issued a building permit the same day. Bondi, who voted against the settlement, said the town's land use rights were circumvented by the court ruling. He also said residents many of whom had expressed concerns in the past were treated unfairly because they were not given a public hearing to question the settlement. ''It was a huge issue that is now over and done with,'' Bondi said. Selectmen Keith Ainsworth and Philip Pessina said the deal was in the town's best interest and the $13 million could be used for sorely needed economic development in Haddam. The anti-nuclear group Citizen's Awareness Network is supporting the appeal to Blumenthal for intervention, said Rosemary Bassilakis, research director for the Connecticut chapter. If Haddam's case had gone to court instead of a settlement, the town would have stood a good chance to win, Bassilakis said. ''We didn't believe the federal government would force a town to put high-level waste in a residential area,'' Bassilakis said. Citizen's Awareness Network is concerned about the health of nearby residents and safety of the materials, especially after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Nancy Burton, a lawyer who represents another anti-nuclear group, said she was worried that the Connecticut Yankee storage facility would become a regional radioactive waste dump and a potential target for a terrorist attack. ''This is Haddam's day of infamy,'' said Burton, who represents the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone, which opposes the Millstone nuclear plants in Waterford. ''For a mere $13 million, it sold away its soul and the safety of its residents and generations unborn.'' Blumenthal said the concerns of storing nuclear waste are shared by communities around the country near nuclear facilities. ''This problem of storing or disposing of nuclear waste requires a national solution, because it is a national problem,'' Blumenthal said. ***************************************************************** 40 Science Will Catch Up at Waste Site, U.S. Says January 31, 2002 By MATTHEW L. WALD PAHRUMP, Nev., Jan. 30 — The Energy Department plans to ask permission to dispose of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain before it has finished designing the repository, and it hopes to begin burying the waste long before it knows how to seal the tunnels, department officials said in testimony here before an independent science advisory panel. Members of the panel, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, said there were enormous gaps in what the Energy Department knew about the site, a volcanic structure about 100 miles from Las Vegas, and about the high-tech canisters it was proposing to put the waste in. Officials said the research on how well the mountain and the waste containers would isolate the radioactive materials would continue for as long as the repository was open, which could be 300 years. Congress chose Yucca Mountain years ago for disposal of the wastes from power reactors and the government's weapons programs, and the Energy Department has spent nearly $4 billion over two decades studying the site. It was supposed to start accepting wastes for burial four years ago, but it has not completed the scientific work needed to apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to open. In a two-day hearing of geochemists and hydrologists here, the department acknowledged the amount of work remaining. After a presentation on Tuesday on corrosion rates anticipated over the next few thousand years, one member of the review panel, Alberto A. Sagues, a professor in the department of civil and environmental engineering at the University of South Florida, asked, "Do you agree that this is just barely beginning to scratch the surface?" The witness, Mark T. Peters, manager of the Science and Engineering Test Project at Los Alamos National Laboratory, replied, "I don't know if I'd say `barely.' " Among the questions is whether to create a "hot" repository, packing the wastes together so that the radioactive decay — which creates heat — would keep the rock above the boiling point for a few hundred years. That would slow corrosion by keeping the metal containers dry, but could induce changes in the rock that could damage the canisters later. A "cold" repository, with wastes spaced more widely, might mean more corrosion in the early years. It would also cost more and mean more excavation, which releases radon gas, among other hazards. Some scientists say the performance of a cold repository over thousands of years would be easier to predict. The department has not made a decision, partly because it has not tested the metal it has proposed for the canisters, Alloy 22, at high temperatures. The nuclear industry and the Energy Department contend that a phased approach is appropriate and that technical problems can be resolved later. Lake Barrett, the acting head of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, said the design could be "flexible." But another board member, Norman L. Christensen Jr., a Duke University ecology professor, said, "In a regulatory world, flexibility can be a refuge from dealing with hard problems." The board said in a letter last week to the energy secretary and Congressional leaders that "the technical basis for the D.O.E.'s repository performance estimates is weak to moderate at this time." "The board has limited confidence in current performance estimates generated by the D.O.E.'s performance assessment model," the letter said. Jared L. Cohon, the board chairman and the president of Carnegie Mellon University, said the department's work showed "varying degrees of strength and weakness." Another expert, Allison Macfarlane of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Yucca Mountain Project, said the board's assessment meant "there really isn't a large enough set of data to proceed, to really make a strong case that Yucca Mountain will be O.K." This is not surprising, she said, because some of the science is new. For example, she said, scientists have studied underground water flow for years, which is important to the repository because that is the likely means for radioactive material to spread. But they have little experience studying whether rain water could wash radioactive materials through the soil into underground water supplies. But if the board contends that the Energy Department has not made its case on Yucca, it also has found no factor to disqualify the site. The department gave Nevada 30 days notice on Jan. 10 that it would recommend Yucca to President Bush. Congress will probably vote on the issue this year. The Energy Department plans to apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license in 2004 and wants to begin accepting waste for burial in 2010. That would be 12 years after it was first legally obligated to do so, but the delay seems likely to grow. Thus Yucca, the longest-term project attempted in modern history, is now rushed. Government officials are eager to make progress before the political consensus that picked Yucca can dissolve. The project faces continual local opposition. Mr. Barrett said, "We also agree that our technical work is not finished." But he added, "We think we have sufficient science for the step that we are at." He said that when it came time to apply for a license, the department would have more information, and the same would be true when the time came to bury the waste and to seal the tunnels. If research turns up a design problem after construction, he said, engineers will fix it. Unlike a nuclear reactor, a waste repository would be "very, very slow-acting," he said. "You've got a lot of time, decades." Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy ***************************************************************** 41 232 Groups Urge Congress to Reject Nuclear Dump Public Citizen Jan. 30, 2002 Letter Highlights Conflict of Interest WASHINGTON, D.C. – A broad coalition of environmental and public interest organizations delivered a letter to Congress today drawing attention to the flawed process that has characterized the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Yucca Mountain Project and urging lawmakers to reject the proposal for a high-level nuclear waste dump in Nevada. The groups also distributed a November report by the DOE Inspector General, which uncovered conflicts of interest involving contractors on the Yucca Mountain Project. According to the report, the law firm Winston & Strawn was simultaneously employed as counsel to the DOE, working on the Yucca Mountain Project, and was registered as a member of and lobbyist for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the pro-repository nuclear industry trade group. "Clearly, the DOE has failed to exercise necessary oversight of its contractors, resulting in an apparent pro-industry bias in the agency’s site characterization and site recommendation activities," the groups wrote in the letter. "It would be irresponsible for Congress to allow the Yucca Mountain Project to continue without a thorough review of the causes and consequences of contractor conflict of interest that have recently been brought to light." The letter was endorsed by 22 national organizations, including the Sierra Club, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and the Indigenous Environmental Network. In addition, 210 regional, local and Native American groups from 50 states and the District of Columbia endorsed the letter. The letter and list of endorsing groups can be viewed online. "Advocates for public health, safety and the environment agree that the Yucca Mountain Project is a disaster," said Kevin Kamps, nuclear waste specialist with the Washington-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service, a signatory to the letter. "Far from solving the nuclear waste problem, this irresponsible project would introduce new risks to the state of Nevada and the 44 other states through which nuclear waste would be transported." Lisa Gue, policy analyst with the national consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, agreed. "An honest process would have shelved this dangerous proposal long ago," she said. "In defense of responsible, accountable government, as well as public health and safety, we are joining with concerned citizens across the country in urging members of Congress to oppose the Yucca Mountain Project." ### ***************************************************************** 42 Cleanup criteria for West Valley established Buffalo News - News Staff Reporter 1/30/2002 Federal regulators may allow higher radiation levels than are normally permitted when the West Valley Demonstration Project is decommissioned. That's one interpretation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's issuance Monday of the criteria it is establishing for the eventual closing of the site, which once housed the country's only private nuclear fuel reprocessing center. The NRC, which has to set criteria for what will be the acceptable level of radiation on the site once it is closed, said in its final policy statement that it would use its existing license termination rule for those criteria. That standard is 25 millirems per person per year, assuming that the site is monitored and controlled, and up to 500 millirems per person per year if those controls fail. The natural background level of radiation for the average person is 300 millirems a year; a chest X-ray delivers between 10 and 20 millirems. But the statement also said the NRC "also recognizes that health and safety and cost-benefit considerations may justify the evaluation of alternatives that do not fully comply with the license termination criteria." For instance, the NRC said it would "consider an exemption allowing higher limits for doses on a failure of institutional control if it can be rigorously demonstrated that protection of the public health and safety for future generations could be reasonably assured through more robust engineered barriers and/or increased long-term monitoring and maintenance." The statement continued, "The Commission is prepared to provide flexibility to ensure cleanup to the maximum extent technically and economically possible, providing protection of public health and the environment can be maintained." Carol Mongerson of the Coalition on West Valley Nuclear Wastes called the NRC's decision "quite unsatisfactory" because she feels it allows the Department of Energy, which will conduct the cleanup, too much latitude. "It sounds to me like (the NRC is) willing to go along with what DOE comes up with," she said Tuesday. "We want the same criteria that the rest of the country has to live by." Alice C. Williams, director of the West Valley Demonstration project for the Department of Energy, said she interpreted the ruling as meaning that the project "is in and of itself a unique facility. As you apply the license termination rule to it, you have to be able to accommodate those unique aspects." Specifically, according to the DOE's Dan Sullivan, who has been working on the issue at West Valley, the NRC's decommissioning criteria have in the past almost exclusively involved nuclear reactors. There is no reactor at West Valley. Instead, there are contaminated buildings and two large burial grounds that would be difficult and expensive to clean up. "The NRC has never compromised public health and safety, and I'm sure they're not going to do it here," Sullivan said. A spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said that the people involved in the West Valley decision were not available to comment Tuesday. Copyright © 1999 - 2002 The Buffalo NewsTM ***************************************************************** 43 EPA Proposes Johnston Atoll Cleanup Permit KITV TheHawaiiChannel.com Wednesday January 30 09:05 PM EST The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (news [http://rd.yahoo.com/DailyNews/manual/*http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news? p=%22Environmental%20Protection%20Agency%22&c=&n=20&yn=c&c=news&cs=nw] - web sites [http://rd.yahoo.com/DailyNews/manual/*http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p=Envi ronmental%20Protection%20Agency&cs=nw] ) announced its proposal Wednesday to renew the Air Force's permit to clean up Johnston Atoll. Since the 1960s, Johnston Atoll served as a site for nuclear weapons testing and a storage facility for chemical waste. The EPA proposed a 10-year permit for the Air Force. The permit ensures the Air Force will safely clean up the contamination. The EPA said the Air Force will stop treatment and storage of chemicals on the island. Copyright © 2002 Yahoo! and ***************************************************************** 44 Trafficking in stolen nuclear material on the rise Chicago Tribune | January 31, 2002 Experts cite cases since mid-1990s as cause for concern By Sam Roe Tribune staff reporter Published January 31, 2002 VIENNA -- As fears rise over terrorists trying to possess nuclear bombs, a disturbing trend is emerging in the shadowy world of weapons smuggling: More thieves are trafficking in plutonium and highly enriched uranium, the essential materials for a nuclear device. The number of confirmed incidents remains small--eight in the last three years. But that has risen since the mid-1990s, when some analysts thought the nuclear smuggling threat might be easing. Experts point to the recent cases as evidence that too little is being done to safeguard nuclear facilities, particularly in Russia. "It's a very good reason to accelerate programs to enhance the physical security of these sites," said Rose Gottemoeller, who served in the Clinton administration as assistant energy secretary for non-proliferation and national security. All the trafficking cases since 1999 have occurred in Europe or the countries of the former Soviet Union. In Paris, police arrested three men and seized 5 grams of highly enriched uranium inside a lead cylinder. In Germany, a worker stole a vial containing a small amount of plutonium. And at the Bulgarian-Romanian border, customs officers discovered uranium hidden in the trunk of a car. Experts said they were unsure why they were seeing more such trafficking cases. Improved police work might be leading to more arrests. But one theory is that trafficking is on the rise because terrorists and hostile nations are more interested in nuclear materials. Since 1993, the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, a United Nations watchdog, has documented 411 incidents of trafficking in nuclear material and industrial and medical radioactive sources. But not one of these incidents has been linked to terrorists, and only 18 involve even small amounts of plutonium or highly enriched uranium--the fissionable material needed for a nuclear weapon. Nuclear junk Most smuggling cases involve what is essentially nuclear junk, including low-enriched uranium, natural uranium and radioactive isotopes--material of little use to terrorists. Most of it, experts said, could not even make a significant "dirty bomb," radioactive material packaged with conventional explosives to contaminate a large area. But experts said it is likely that many traffickers escape attention, especially those moving through Central Asia, where centuries-old trade routes are poorly policed. "We have very little idea what fraction of the total traffic is being intercepted," said John Holdren, a Harvard professor who in 1995 led a classified study for President Bill Clinton on the security of nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union. Those caught smuggling appear to be amateurs. Many are low-paid nuclear workers in the former Soviet states who steal small amounts of material hoping to make some quick money. Instead, they search in vain for buyers and eventually stumble into the police. The first documented theft of highly enriched uranium from a nuclear facility in the former Soviet Union occurred in Russia in 1992. Leonid Smirnov, an engineer at a nuclear research facility outside Moscow, stole about 3 pounds of highly enriched uranium powder. "He built up his stock for a long time, and nobody had any idea that anything was amiss," said Matthew Bunn, an expert on nuclear theft and a White House adviser in the mid-1990s. But Smirnov became nervous, Bunn said. So he put the uranium in a suitcase and went to the train station in search of a buyer. There, he bumped into several neighbors who were being followed by police for stealing batteries from their factory. The neighbors were arrested, and Smirnov was taken in for questioning. "So he gets swept up," Bunn said, "and he's in jail, and police are questioning him, and they said, `What's in the suitcase?' And he said: `Uranium.'" Difficult and expensive So far, there is no conclusive evidence that terrorists have acquired a nuclear weapon or the materials to build one. While opinions vary, experts generally say that building a nuclear weapon from scratch is difficult and expensive. Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein tried for years, they note, apparently without success. Even if terrorists had the proper materials--not an easy undertaking given the quantity and quality required--they would need a team of highly technical specialists to design, construct and detonate the bomb, experts say. Osama bin Laden has repeatedly stated his desire to obtain nuclear weapons, and President Bush has said that bin Laden's terrorist group, Al Qaeda, is seeking such devices. A likely place for terrorists to obtain nuclear material is Russia, where there is enough highly enriched uranium and plutonium to make about 40,000 nuclear weapons, according to U.S. government studies. Some of this material, the studies state, is inadequately protected. Over the last decade, the United States has created numerous programs and spent hundreds of millions of dollars to help secure the Russian material. Significant improvements have been made, but experts said security gaps, poor inventory records and excess plutonium production still are not being fully addressed. Copyright © 2002, Chicago Tribune ***************************************************************** 45 Bin Laden the victim of nuclear con artists, says US Ananova - Crude diagrams of nuclear weapons have been discovered in a suspected al-Qaida safe house in Kabul, the US spy chief has revealed. The discovery provides further evidence of al-Qaida's efforts to acquire such weapons to use in terrorist attacks. The unclassified report, submitted by CIA Director George Tenet to Congress, says the "diagrams, while crude, describe essential components - uranium and high explosives - common to nuclear weapons." The report says terrorists are not believed to have a functional weapon, however. Other evidence obtained in Afghanistan shows that Osama bin Laden's operatives have fallen for a number of cons in their attempts to acquire nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, a senior government analyst says. "That's good news for us," said Gary Richter, a government terrorism expert. "It shows they really don't know what they are doing. If they knew to turn away these scam artists, it would be frightening." Richter says he had examined several items recovered from al-Qaida caches in Afghanistan, all of which are believed to be tied to the terrorist group's attempts to develop or buy weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear devices. From them, Richter concluded that al-Qaida operatives tried to buy such weapons several times, paying cash for items that turned out to be worthless. "They'll buy junk," he said, adding that they appear to be very naive regarding nuclear weapons. Richter refused to describe the items he has examined, but he says they show an encouraging lack of technical sophistication in the group. He did not know how much money al-Qaida had spent on trying to buy these weapons. "We're not talking about dullards. But their forte, their whole M.O. (modus operandi) tends to be more brute force than high-tech," he said. "Al-Qaida is not a techie kind of organisation, and they've fallen flat on their faces in some areas." Story filed: 09:59 Thursday 31st January 200 Copyright © 2002 Ananova Ltd ***************************************************************** 46 N.Korea rebuffs US over nuclear program - The Times of India THE TIMES OF INDIA WORLD: ASIA-PACIFIC POWERED BY AP [ WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 2002 7:25:40 PM ] SEOUL: North Korea on Wednesday accused the United States of failing to meet its obligations under a 1994 agreement that froze the communist state's suspected nuclear weapons programs and of placing unfair burdens on the Pyongyang regime. A North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman, quoted by the North's official news agency KCNA, denounced the United States for insisting on inspecting the North's nuclear laboratories. "The US has, in fact, not properly discharged its obligations under the framework (agreement in 1994)," said the spokesman, who customarily was not identified by name. "Nevertheless, it is now demanding 'inspection' of the (North) in a bid to attain its sinister purpose." In his State of the Union speech, President George W Bush called North Korea "a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens." Although North Korea froze its nuclear facilities under the 1994 agreement, experts fear that the country could still be diverting nuclear materials intended as fuel into a clandestine weapons program. North Korea is denying UN inspectors full access to its facilities, complaining about delays in building two modern nuclear reactors that the United States promised in return for the 1994 freeze. The first of the new reactors was promised by 2003. But the project has been plagued by a lack of funds and political tensions. Experts now say the completion will be delayed by several years. North Korea is accusing Washington of reneging on its promise and is demanding compensation for the delays. Wednesday's comment came in reaction to charges by US Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton made during a conference on disarmament in Geneva on Jan. 24 that North Korea has violated the UN nonproliferation treaty. The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN nuclear watchdog, says that even if North Korea allowed full-fledged inspections, it would take the group three to four years to verify that all nuclear materials have been declared to the agency. Copyright © 2002 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. | ***************************************************************** 47 Pak freezes assets of retired nuclear scientist for Al Qaeda Expressindia.com > Top stories > Press Trust of India Islamabad, January 31: Pakistan government has frozen the assets and accounts of a retired nuclear scientist on the recommendations of the UN security council for his links with Taliban and Al Qaeda network. The UN security council on January 24 issued an updated list of individuals and entities associated with Taliban or Al Qaeda, the Dawn newspaper reported on Friday. The list also named Sultan Bashir-ud-Din Mehmood among others. The action became mandatory for Pakistan after the UN security council resolutions, Pakistan foreign office spokesman Aziz Ahmad khan was quoted as saying by the daily. Earlier, the assets and funds of another alleged pro-Taliban nuclear scientist, Abdul Majeed, were also frozen. Mehmood's family sources said that his personal bank account had been frozen, the paper said. Investigations have revealed that Mehmood, who was arrested in October last following the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US had been "conditionally" released by the government, it said, adding he has been asked to remain available on an hour's notice, and a mobile telephone given to him for the purpose. © 2002: Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. All rights ***************************************************************** 48 India getting two Russian N-subs? The Times of India; Jan 31, 2002 BY RAJAT PANDIT NEW DELHI: Will India add two nuclear-powered submarines to its existing fleet of 16 conventional diesel- electric submarines in another couple of years? While defence ministry officials here are tight-lipped about any proposal to lease two nuclear submarines from Russia, recent reports from Moscow hold this as a distinct possibility in the near future. Two Russian Project-971; Shchuka-B (Bars) class multi-role nuclear submarines, say reports from Moscow, may well join the Indian Navy by 2004 for a period of five years if the Indian government gives the financial go-ahead. Incidentally, Project-971 was frozen by the Russians sometime ago due to financial problems. Though Navy chief Admiral Madhvendra Singh says he will neither confirm nor deny any Indian proposal to lease Russian nuclear submarines, it is reliably learnt that some talks on these lines have been underway for quite some time now. Admiral Singh is only ready to say that it would take two-and-a-half years to train personnel for a nuclear submarine, which is a highly complex system to operate, if the Navy indeed gets one. As opposed to conventional ones, nuclear submarines can operate at higher speeds and at practically unlimited ranges, as also carry a much larger arsenal of weapons. It may be recalled that India had leased a Charlie-I or Skat class guided missile nuclear submarine from Russia from 1988 to 1991 to give the Navy first-hand experience in nuclear submarine operations and maintenance. The Navy was quite satisfied with the performance of that submarine, which had been rechristened INS Chakra, but the US succeeded in pressurising Moscow into not prolonging the lease or selling it to India. Now, with the indigenous Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) programme to build a nuclear submarine based on Russian designs dogged by delays, the Navy is apparently keen to lease another Russian nuclear submarine to effectively counter the heavy military presence in the Indian Ocean region, especially the increasingly aggressive Chinese Navy. Many of the personnel who trained on the INS Chakra have since retired. Another nuclear submarine will help impart new skills to the Navy till the time the ATV project actually materialises, says a defence expert. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 49 Russia Calls for Binding Pact to Reduce Nuclear Arsenals January 31, 2002 By TODD S. PURDUM WASHINGTON, Jan. 30 — Russia told the United States in arms talks here this week that it wanted a binding agreement that both sides would make real and irreversible cuts in their nuclear arsenals, and that Washington would not simply store excess warheads, as it proposed, but destroy them. The Russians hope to have a treaty ready for signing when President Bush meets with President Vladimir V. Putin in Russia later this year that would reduce arsenals to about 2,000 warheads each during the next decade. But the Bush administration has preferred to talk of a "codification" agreement, and some American officials have said each side should just decide how many warheads to eliminate and inform the other. The State Department spokesman, Richard A. Boucher, said today that the administration was prepared to reach an agreement on reductions, but that "the form of the agreement would be subject to discussion." He added, "Our position is that we'll talk about it." Russia's deputy foreign minister, Georgi Mamedov, who held talks on Tuesday with John R. Bolton, the under secretary of state for arms control, issued a statement saying he was pleased with the negotiations. But he also said that "more certainty is needed," and that Russia's draft "includes a provision calling for the elimination of both the delivery systems and warheads." The official Russian statement said, "It was stressed that it will be a legally binding document that provides for radical, real and verifiable cuts in strategic offensive weapons, with ceilings at 1,700 to 2,200 warheads in the course of 10 years." Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin pledged deep reductions in nuclear arsenals in their talks in Washington and Crawford, Tex., in November, but they disagreed on Washington's aspirations for a missile defense system. A senior administration official said the talks this week had been productive, especially given Russia's anger over the United States decision to withdraw from the Antiballistic Missile Treaty of 1972, which bans national missile defenses. "It could have been contentious," the official said. Instead, "they came with drafts, and we will give them counterdrafts, and they may well be very different," the official said. "We told them we will agree to a legally binding document regarding the reductions. Exactly what form that takes remains to be decided. Exactly what it contains remains to be decided." Mr. Mamedov also met briefly with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, and Mr. Boucher said the overall focus of the talks was "the elaboration of a new U.S.-Russia strategic framework." The next round of talks is set for Feb. 19 in Moscow. Also this week, State Department officials had talks with a Russian delegation led by Sergei V. Kiriyenko, chairman of the State Commission for Chemical Disarmament, on American financing for a plant to destroy chemical weapons. Mr. Boucher said the two sides had agreed to resume consultations on the topic "on an expedited basis." Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 50 Nuclear security concerns voiced Pioneer Press [http://www.twincities.com Published: Thursday, January 31, 2002 BY SETH BORENSTEIN Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- President Bush's disclosure that U.S. forces have found "diagrams of American nuclear power plants" in Afghanistan indicates that terrorists have been casing the plants and researching them on the Internet, U.S. intelligence officials said Wednesday. Bush's revelation, in Tuesday night's State of the Union speech, provoked concern over security at the nation's 103 nuclear power plants, even though an attack would not trigger a nuclear explosion. Experts say the worst result would be clouds of poisonous radiation. Some of the nuclear plant diagrams came off the Internet and were not interior blueprints, said a senior intelligence official who asked not to be identified. But some materials found in al-Qaida caches in Afghanistan, the official said, "might lead you to believe they're doing casing" of the U.S. plants. The strategy fits al-Qaida's pattern of careful pre-attack surveillance of potential targets. There is "pretty convincing evidence," that al-Qaida has been watching U.S. nuclear power plants, said another senior intelligence official, speaking on the same condition. The al-Qaida teams may have been reporting to a control officer in Canada, the second official said. The diagrams showed more than one U.S. nuclear plant, the officials said, and depicted specific facilities and their security perimeters. The officials declined to identify the plants, but they said intelligence suggests that al-Qaida members have been considering attacking the plants with car or truck bombs, boats or aircraft. Experts disagreed on how useful the diagrams are and how devastating such an attack could be. Even with the diagrams, "it's not obvious that you could do something dangerous," said Michael Golay, a nuclear engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass. While an attack could spread radiation, "it's not a very attractive way to do it. ... I don't think it's something we should be worrying about." Others found reason to worry. "It does tell you we have to do even more to secure them," said Rob Housman, a homeland security planner at Bracewell &Patterson, a Houston law firm with many energy industry clients. Nuclear power critics and others, including some Democrats in Congress, are pushing for heightened security at U.S. nuclear power plants, even a federal takeover of the security at the plants. Experts stress that a nuclear explosion is not physically possible. The nuclear material used in U.S. power plants is far less enriched and reactive than that required for nuclear weapons, they said. Also, power plants employ control rods to slow or stop reactions. But physicist Arjun Makhijani, president of the anti-nuclear Institute for Environmental and Energy Research in Takoma Park, Md., said he worries about attacks intended to release clouds of radiation. In effect, a power plant could be turned into a "radiological dispersal device" or "dirty bomb," said Randy Larsen, director of the ANSER Homeland Security Institute in Alexandria, Va. That's a conventional explosion that spreads radioactive material and with it illness and fear. That type of attack would not necessarily kill many people, but it would terrorize the public, said analyst Phillip Saunders at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies in Monterey, Calif. U.S. nuclear plants have been on heightened alert since last fall. Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman Richard Myers said this month that there have been no credible terrorist threats to U.S. nuclear power plants since Sept. 11. © 2002 PioneerPlanet / St. Paul (Minnesota) Pioneer Press / TwinCities.com- All ***************************************************************** 51 Weapons of mass destruction threat up -- CIA (01/31/2002) (Agencies) The threat from terrorists using a weapon of mass destruction has increased since Sept. 11, and extremist groups appear most interested in chemicals like cyanide salts to contaminate food and water supplies, a CIA report said on Wednesday. The Sept. 11 attacks used hijacked planes as weapons to destroy skyscrapers in New York and damage the Pentagon near Washington, killing about 3,000 people. It was followed by an anthrax scare that killed five people and revealed the country's vulnerability to biological warfare. Since then, extremist groups appear to be increasing their search for weapons that could destroy large populations using chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear agents, according to an unclassified CIA report to Congress. The semiannual report on the acquisition of technology relating to weapons of mass destruction covered Jan. 1 through June 30, 2001, but a special section dealing with the post-Sept. 11 threat was also included. "The threat of terrorists using chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear materials appears to be rising -- particularly since the 11 September attacks," the report said. Information and technology on weapons of mass destruction was widely available from the Internet and the former Soviet Union, the report said. CONVENTIONAL TACTICS FAVORED Several of the 30 foreign organizations the United States has designated as terrorists have expressed interest in weapons of mass destruction, although terrorists would probably continue to favor conventional tactics such as bombings and shootings, the report said. While extremists, including Osama bin Laden, were seeking a nuclear weapon, there was no evidence that they had acquired one or the materials to build one, the CIA report said. "Although the potential devastation from nuclear terrorism is high, we have no credible reporting on terrorists successfully acquiring nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make them," the report said. "Gaps in our reporting, however, make this an issue of ongoing concern," it said. Bin Laden, accused by the United States of masterminding the attacks on America, has pursued development of chemical and biological weapons in his al Qaeda organization and has had a long standing interest in nuclear materials, the report said. "We have uncovered rudimentary diagrams of nuclear weapons inside a suspected al Qaeda safe house in Kabul. These diagrams, while crude, describe essential components -- uranium and high explosives -- common to nuclear weapons," the report said. Among the weapons of mass destruction, extremist groups appeared most interested in chemicals that could do widespread damage to food or water supplies, the report said. "Terrorist groups are most interested in chemicals such as cyanide salts to contaminate food and water supplies or to assassinate individuals." Copyright 2002 By chinadaily.com.cn. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 52 India sharpens nuclear claws Asia Times: January 31, 2002 atimes.com By Praful Bidwai NEW DELHI - By test-flying a new, improved short-range version of the Agni missile last Friday, India has made a provocative move vis-a-vis Pakistan. It has also signaled that it is determined to weaponize its nuclear capability and fully and rapidly proceed toward deploying it in the field. New Delhi's summary rejection of Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf's offer to work with India for de-nuclearizing South Asia underscores the same message. The government of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee has clearly set its face against nuclear restraint. It is equally dogged about not de-escalating its unprecedented conventional military buildup along the border with Pakistan, in the wake of an armed attack on its parliament building in New Delhi on December 13, allegedly by Pakistan-based terrorists. About a million Indian and Pakistani soldiers, armed to the teeth, confront one another at the border. This is the biggest-ever buildup in the two rivals' history. India has linked de-escalation to "effective action" on Musharraf's part against the "terrorists", 20 of whom it has named in a list handed over to Pakistan. Pakistan is now under growing pressure not just from India, but also the United States, to cut its umbilical cord to the jihadist militants operating in Kashmir - just as it had turned against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Amid the high-tension confrontation comes a new war of words, focused on nuclear weapons. This has further aggravated matters. The hostile rhetoric belies the fond hope that possessing nuclear weapons would instill sobriety and a sense of responsibility in Indian and Pakistani leaders. Musharraf's proposal for de-nuclearizing South Asia came two days before the latest Agni test-flight. Musharraf also offered to sign a no-war pact with India. The Vajpayee government last Friday rejected both these proposals summarily, but with characteristic sanctimoniousness. It said its own stand is that "Nuclear weapons should be banished from the entire globe. De-nuclearization of India and Pakistan will have no meaning." It also said Musharraf's proposals are "nothing new", and asked Islamabad to end its "cross-border terrorism and proxy war" forthwith. This is the second time Musharraf has offered to rid South Asia of nuclear weapons in cooperation with India and other powers. The first occasion was September 2000, when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly and proposed the formation of a nuclear weapons-free zone in South Asia. India made a riposte to the de-nuclearization proposal in the form of the Agni test. This version of the ballistic missile has a shorter range (700 kilometers) than its predecessors (Agni-I, range of 1,500km, and Agni-II with a range 2,000-2,500km). But the new missile is much lighter and road- and rail-mobile. It is said to be far more accurate than the older versions. The new Agni also uses all-solid fuel. This offers a major advantage over the liquid fuel used in the second stage of the earlier models, which is corrosive and requires a prolonged filling process. This missile thus further narrows the gap between the manufacture and testing of nuclear weapons, on the one hand, and their induction into the armed forces, or deployment, on the other. India is also reportedly building a huge underground facility at thecost of US$300 million to house a nuclear command and control center. In addition, India is believed to be acquiring two nuclear-powered submarines from Russia. The Russian daily Novye Izvestia said the two Project-971 "Bars" class multi-role submarines will be leased in 2004 and are likely to be deployed in the Indian Ocean to "balance" China's growing presence there. The move is significant because India's own Advanced Technology Vessel submarine development project has repeatedly failed to deliver results. In 1988 too, India had leased a Soviet nuclear submarine for three years. Nuclear-powered submarines have a long submergence capability. They can stay underwater for up to a year and hence carry a big element of surprise, which is an asset in creating a "deterrence" equation or in an actual nuclear war. The growing nuclear rhetoric partly reflects some of these India-specific developments. In the past three weeks, a number of Indian political and military leaders have made statements warning Pakistan that it could be "wiped out" by nuclear weapons. Among the more remarkable of these statements was army chief S Padmanabhan's January 11 statement that his force was "fully ready" for war. He warned that although "nuclear weapons are not meant for war fighting", India would severely punish any state that is "mad enough to use nuclear weapons against any of our assets". Padmanabhan added, "The perpetrator shall be so severely punished that his very existence will be in doubt. We are ready for a second strike." Defence Minister George Fernandes was quick to issue a rebuttal of this "cavalier" statement - under Western diplomatic pressure. But he had himself boasted only a few days earlier that India could "absorb" a first nuclear strike and yet retaliate. General Padamanabhan's statement was highly unusual, because Indian defense chiefs are not expected to make policy or policy-oriented pronouncements. And it is only rarely that their news conferences are televised live. However, the controversy was not laid to rest on January 12. Four days later, India's naval chief too made a hawkish statement referring to a second-strike capability. He said he could "neither confirm nor deny" whether any ship in his fleet carries nuclear weapons. Such pronouncements are extraordinarily dangerous in the middle of the present eyeball-to-eyeball crisis. Twice before their 1998 nuclear tests, India and Pakistan came close to the verge of war amidst "routine" military exercises - in 1986-87 and then again in 1990. Since the tests, during the Kargil war of 1999 alone, they exchanged nuclear threats 13 times. The present nuclear danger is much, much graver than Kargil, indeed more serious than any Cold War nuclear standoff since the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. Neither side is relenting or blinking first. Both are trying to extract the maximum possible political and military advantage by courting the United States and getting it to act as the effective mediator, although by a different name. (Inter Press Service) ©2001 Asia Times Online Co., Ltd. Room 6301, The Center, 99 Queen's Road, Central, Hong Kong ***************************************************************** 53 Flashback: Richard Lowry on nuclear proliferation on National Review Online Delay or Die? The imperative of counter-proliferation. By Richard Lowry From the December 3, 2001, issue of National Review EDITOR'S NOTE: On Tuesday night President Bush put anti-proliferation on the top of the nation's agenda, warning "time is not on our side." Rich Lowry wrote a piece on this issue called "Delay or Die?" in the December 3, 2001, issue of National Review, reprinted below. [http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/redirect.asp?jump=http://www.pfizerforum .com] n 1946, U.S. delegate to the U.N. Bernard Baruch had an idea. All nations would be prohibited not just from seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but from building nuclear power plants that might create fissionable material appropriate for a bomb. Instead, an international authority would maintain a monopoly over nuclear activity, and the U.S. would eventually relinquish its weapons. U.N. Security Council permanent members would lose their veto over any action to enforce these restrictions, because, when it comes to nukes, "to delay may be to die." Today, with worries about Osama bin Laden or other terrorists gaining access to the tens of thousands of nuclear weapons and the thousands of tons of fissionable material rattling around the world, Baruch's urgency may again seem appropriate. But his prescriptions don't, even as the spirit of them lives on in U.S. policy. The Baruch plan went nowhere in the U.N., but it still can be seen as a sort of high-water mark for post-war arms control. Then, the fantasy of non-proliferation at least still seemed shiny and new. It has been steadily discredited ever since. The Baruch plan was the first shot in what would become an ever more tolerant and open-minded attitude to non-proliferation, pioneered by the Eisenhower administration, enshrined in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and finally brought to its appalling nadir by the Clinton administration. In the Age of Osama, it is time to acknowledge that non-proliferation is mostly a failure. It has restrained some nations — Japan, Ukraine, etc. — from acquiring nuclear weapons, but the overriding lesson of the last half-century is that weapons technology will always get through: through to the state that is willing to lie, cheat, and pay enough to get it. The U.S. should now adopt a tougher, more clear-eyed approach to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and missile technology. It should concentrate less on the universalist goal of bringing all states under sweeping arms-control plans on an equal basis, and focus instead on a frankly discriminatory objective: denying weapons to the states — most of them Islamic — that are hostile to the West. This would be more practical than the grander efforts of the past, but it too would be doomed, eventually, to failure (although mere delay has its value). When rogue governments succeed in acquiring these weapons, the U.S. will have to punish or topple them, on the theory that the act of proliferation can't be eliminated but occasionally noxious governments can. There should be no illusion about what is at stake in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. should oppose it not because these weapons are inherently evil or because we seriously seek a nuclear-free world, but rather because their spread represents a diminution of Western power. As Samuel Huntington puts it in The Clash of Civilizations, "The proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction is a central phenomenon of the slow but ineluctable diffusion of power in a multicivilizational world." In fact, much of it has occurred with anti-Westernism as its implicit rationale, as China in particular seeks to undercut American dominance. "Weapons proliferation is where the Confucian-Islamic connection has been most extensive and most concrete, with China playing the central role in the transfer of both conventional and nonconventional weapons to many Muslim states," Huntington writes. China and Russia have been the suppliers, with Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, and North Korea — all terrorist states to one degree or another — the primary recipients. The Pakistani nuclear program, for instance, is almost entirely a Chinese production. And the Russians have been playing the same role for Iran. Western naivete has, over the years, helped push proliferation along, as Henry Sokolski argues in his book Best of Intentions. Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace program spread nuclear reactors around the globe "to serve the peaceful pursuits of mankind," with little thought to the possibility that they might serve the war-making pursuits as well. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968, which sought to maintain the exclusivity of the nuclear club, is similarly starry-eyed. It talks of "the inalienable right" of signatories to develop nuclear technology, and urges "the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials, and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy." Cheating? Don't be silly. Sokolski quotes a Dutch NPT negotiator explaining that for parties to the treaty there should be "a clear presumption" that nuclear material and know-how won't be diverted to weapons programs. This remarkable faith in the trustworthiness of every NPT nation is why signing the treaty was Iraq's first step toward acquiring a bomb. According to Khidhir Hamza, an Iraqi scientist who defected, Iraq used the presumption of innocence to acquire the hardware and knowledge for its massive nuclear program, with the International Atomic Energy Agency lending a hand. Hamza writes: "Few of Iraq's suppliers — or the IAEA itself — ever bothered to ask a simple question: Why would Iraq, with the second-largest oil reserves in the world, want to generate electricity by burning uranium?" IAEA inspectors were easily deceived and manipulated, partly because any particularly aggressive inspector would simply not be invited back. Not just the NPT, but most arms-control agreements — the chemical and biological weapons conventions, for example — rely on inspecting the uninspectable. As Kathleen C. Bailey writes in a paper on bioterrorism for the National Institute for Public Policy, "Biological weapons facilities can be small, temporary, and without distinguishing features; there is no current means to detect a clandestine biological weapons production capability, absent serendipitous discovery." This is the problem with inspections generally: They can be guaranteed success only in the case of a nation not bent on frustrating them. This circularity applies to arms-control agreements more broadly: They work so long as no one wants to violate them, in which case they simply don't work. The danger is forgetting this, and mistaking the sentiments and assurances that come with signing an agreement — which are so comforting and high-minded — with reality. This was a mistake that the Clinton administration inflated almost to a strategic doctrine: Don't verify, if you can trust instead. Non-proliferation agreements are most effective when they are composed of like-minded nations determined to deny technology to a specific enemy, e.g., the Coordinating Committee (CoCom) of Western nations that sought to keep advanced military technology from the Warsaw Pact. The Clinton administration instead wanted to transform such organizations from, as Sokolski puts it, "like-minded discriminatory organizations to norm-based efforts that increased members' access to technology" — in other words, it sought to include the proliferators in the agreements in the hopes that it would somehow reform them. So, instead of cracking down on Moscow's missile proliferation, for instance, the administration made Russia part of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), even as the Russians were flouting its terms. The EU wanted the Russians in so that they could be a permitted market for European aerospace sales, while the administration argued that their membership would modify their behavior. When Moscow's behavior was resolutely unmodified — it continued to proliferate to Iran and Iraq — the administration rewarded the Russians with various contracts and subsidies anyway. Meanwhile, at the administration's urging, China bulked up on treaties and agreements. It signed the NPT, the Chemical Weapons Convention, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and it (sort of) joined the MTCR. All these Good Housekeeping seals made it easier for China to acquire Western weapons technology, harder to punish it for any transgressions. And did nothing to stop its proliferating. As an important 1998 Senate report, "The Proliferation Primer," put it, Beijing still managed to be "the principal supplier of weapons of mass destruction and missile technology to the world." As with Russia, the Clinton administration not only failed to punish the Chinese for their violations, it often rewarded them. After Beijing sold anti-ship missiles to Iran, Sokolski writes, the White House approved "hundreds of millions worth of sensitive U.S. missile-related exports to the very Chinese firms known to be proliferating missiles." Such was the pattern. Russia and China-even if the Clinton administration mishandled them-are at least major states susceptible to U.S. influence. Now, thanks partly to their handiwork, proliferation is so far advanced that an isolated basket case like North Korea has graduated from weapons consumer to weapons supplier. The North Korean No Dong missile has become, as a result of Pyongyang's salesmanship, the missile of choice in the Third World. The Pakistani Ghauri and the Iranian Shahab-3 are both really No Dongs. Iran, in turn, has been able to market missile technology acquired from North Korea to Syria, as the daisy chain moves from rogue to rogue. Despite this dismaying picture, the U.S. must still do all it can at least to slow proliferation. Instead of ambitious global agreements and conventions, the U.S. should seek to create a CoCom-style regime focused on stopping proliferation to the bloc of nations that are most likely to use or threaten to use a weapon against the West or leak one to a terrorist: Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Libya, North Korea, and even our rent-an-ally Pakistan. One reason the success of the CoCom wasn't duplicated after the Cold War was that there was no agreement on who the enemy was; now there should be. The effort should spread in concentric rings, beginning with tough export controls here in the U.S. No one-not businessmen, not politicians, not our allies-likes export controls, since they necessarily mean forgoing cash: but some things are just more important. The argument against controls is often that the technology in question is available elsewhere, so why not have American-supplied Libyan poison-gas plants rather than German? But we should lead by showing our own willingness to spurn certain profits. Meanwhile, European allies like Germany and France need to be convinced that joining the war on terrorism means recognizing that some export markets simply aren't worth having. Finally, we should urge nations that are loitering on the outskirts of the civilized world to choose up sides. Russia may choose the right way, China probably won't. But there are limits to what can be done to stop the spread of weapons technology. Non-proliferators are in the position of anti-drug warriors, constantly involved in a futile effort to keep supply from meeting demand. It inevitably will. Then what? When supply-side non-proliferation fails, demand-side counter-proliferation should fill the breach. The best way to end demand for weapons of mass destruction is to seek the end-through diplomatic, economic, and military means-of the governments that want them. Iraq should be the easiest case. After years of flouting U.N. resolutions and international inspections, after stockpiling tons of chemical and biological agents and seeking a nuclear bomb, Saddam's regime should be made into a demonstration of the consequences of seeking weapons of mass destruction: It should be destroyed. This would have an important educational effect. The reason governments seek weapons of mass destruction is that they know these weapons will increase their power. If they are shown that the pursuit of these weapons could also end their power, they might alter their calculations. In this light, aiding the Iranian opposition is a more important act of non-proliferation than getting President Khatami's signature on some agreement. In a similar way, missile defense can change the cost-benefit equation of acquiring missile technology by undermining the utility of ballistic missiles. So, this supposedly dangerously "unilateral" initiative-American missile defense-buttresses the cause of non-proliferation. Other unilateral actions, such as preemptive strikes on the model of Israel's take-out of an Iraqi reactor in 1981, or covert operations to sabotage technology shipments, can also repress proliferation in a way that gaudy treaties cannot. None of this will be easy. It will require Western self-confidence, moral clarity, and, above all, military superiority. The cause of keeping our enemies from attaining weapons is achievable only with lots of weapons of our own: an enormous conventional military superiority, a credible nuclear deterrent, and-as a fail-safe-missile defense. But adopting this more muscular, realistic approach to non-proliferation is as urgent as the other kind seemed in 1946. In the words of Bernard Baruch, "to delay may be to die." [http://www.nationalreview.com] ***************************************************************** 54 Energy Secretary Abraham Announces Nuclear Nonproliferation Effort with Kazakhstan for Former Soviet Nuclear Weapons Facility energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: January 30, 2002 WASHINGTON, DC -- Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham today launched an ambitious nuclear nonproliferation effort with the Republic of Kazakhstan and private U.S. industry. In support of President Bush's National Energy Policy, the initiative will improve the nation's energy security, bolster the global economy, and enhance international cooperation. "The project at the Ulba Metallurgical Plant in Kazakhstan is a concrete example of how our nuclear nonproliferation programs can facilitate important industry initiatives to improve both U.S. energy security and national security," Secretary Abraham said. "Additionally, today's initiative will enhance our relationship with an important international partner and improve global energy supplies as well." Under the project, a former nuclear weapons plant in Kazahkstan will develop its capability to separate low-enriched uranium from uranium concentrates with assistance from two private U.S. companies and Brookhaven National Laboratory. The uranium will then be made available as a power source to civilian power reactors throughout the world. The Department of Energy's (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) brought the parties together and will continue to assist with the project. The endeavor will immediately create 50 new civilian jobs for former nuclear weapons scientists in Kazakhstan and will create hundreds of additional jobs for former nuclear weapons workers in the coming years. This new project signals an increase in security cooperation between the United States and the Republic of Kazakhstan and their joint efforts to further secure nuclear materials and nuclear weapons knowledge. Kazakhstan, which inherited the world's fourth-largest nuclear weapons arsenal after the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, decided to terminate its nuclear program and joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear state. Kazakhstan has dismantled and removed all nuclear weapons from its territory and has destroyed the associated infrastructure. Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas (GNF) of Wilmington, N.C., and RWE Nukem of Danbury, Conn., will assist the Ulba plant in Oskemen, Kazakhstan, to use its advanced solvent extraction technology to recover low-enriched uranium from uranium concentrates. DOE/NNSA has committed $1.2 million in Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP) funds over three years for joint work between Ulba and Brookhaven National Laboratory to design and install this technology for commercial use. The recovered uranium will be available to GNF and other commercial nuclear fuel manufacturers for use in Boiling Water Reactors. The U.S. industry partners have already matched the NNSA's contribution. Secretary Abraham was joined by U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), Kazakh Ambassador Kanat B. Saudabayev, GNF President &CEO Jack Fuller, RWE Nukem President &CEO Jim Cornell, Brookhaven National Laboratory Deputy Director Thomas Sheridan, KazAtomProm President Askar Kasabekov, and Ulba Director Vitaly Khadeyev for the announcement. The NNSA's IPP program helps engage former Soviet experts in the field of weapons of mass destruction in the development of commercial technologies for peaceful purposes. Both GNF and RWE Nukem are members of the U.S. Industry Coalition (USIC), a non-profit association of companies and universities that are active partners in the NNSA-IPP program. USIC works to facilitate technology commercialization for its members. Media Contact: Lisa Cutler, 202/586-7371 Drew Malcomb, 202/586-5806 Release No. PR-02-012 Back to Previous Page> ***************************************************************** 55 Dayton-area officials question plans for radioactive material 01/31/02 James Hannah Associated Press Dayton - The federal government wants to move plutonium-filled space batteries from the former Mound nuclear weapons plant to a more secure location, lawmakers and local officials said yesterday. But the officials, who want to protect jobs, say it would cost less to upgrade security at the current site. The Heat Source/Radioisotopic Thermoelectric Generator program in suburban Miamisburg produces plutonium-filled heaters and electrical generators for NASA's deep-space probes. The U.S. Department of Energy started rethinking security at the program because of national security alerts after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the local officials said. They said DOE officials notified them of their intent to move the program. "It is their intention to move the assembled RTGs off the Mound site for security reasons," said Michael Gessel, press secretary for U.S. Rep. Tony Hall, a Democrat from Dayton. "They are looking at making this move sometime in the spring. "One of the things we're looking at is whether the money spent to move the program can be better spent to improve security." Several messages seeking comment were left for the Energy Department and its Ohio field office. Hall is also concerned that moving the generators would mean the loss of assembly jobs. There are about 40 workers in the RTG program, but that number has doubled during busy periods of a space-mission project. Ten additional workers at the site provide services to the program. Gessel said the plutonium was encapsulated and not weapons-grade, meaning it can't be used to make a bomb. "To what extent it could be used as a poison, I don't know," he said. Hall and U.S. Rep. David Hobson, a Springfield Republican, have asked the Energy Department to detail the safety and financial reasons for moving the program. Miamisburg Mayor Dick Church opposes moving the program. "We have always been told by DOE that this is a safe program to have in this community," Church said. "If I really thought it was a threat to the community, I would be the first one to say get it out of here." The buildings that house the RTG work are surrounded by barbed-wire fencing, concrete barricades and armed guards. Church said it would cost at least $22 million to build a new facility and transfer the work. "Surely, we could secure this at our site for a lot less than $22 million," he said. Β© 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. Β» Send This Page | Β» Β© 2002 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 56 Funds for Brookhaven Lab Cleanup Restored Schumer: $35.6M due in 2003 By Elaine S. Povich WASHINGTON BUREAU January 31, 2002 Washington - The massive cleanup of radioactive waste at the Brookhaven National Laboratory will get its full $35.6 million in promised federal funding for next year under President George W. Bush's fiscal 2003 budget to be released Monday, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said yesterday. Last month, the Department of Energy indicated the cleanup funding would be cut in the new budget, saying that the lab's overall budget was in line to be slashed by $46 million over the next three years. Under intensive lobbying, the department relented and restored the cleanup funds, Schumer said. "Yesterday, I was visited by Jessie Roberson, assistant secretary for environmental management, and she assured me that the $35.6 million would be in there for this year and that we were sticking with our [cleanup] plan," Schumer said. "It's great news for Brookhaven, and we're back on track." Schumer, who has worked for the past three years to get the funding, said he discussed the issue last month with Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham, and made the case that stretching out the funding over more time actually would cost more in the end. A spokeswoman in Roberson's office said the assistant secretary had no comment. Department of Energy spokesman Joe Davis said he did not have the exact budget figures, but said, "We are certainly committed to the accelerated cleanup at Brookhaven, and that will be reflected in the budget proposal that will be sent to Capitol Hill on Monday." The project to remove contaminated soil and protect the groundwater supply near Brookhaven from a radioactive leak is expected to take four years. The lab received $41.3 million in the current fiscal year and had been promised $35.6 million in 2003, $43 million in 2004 and $44.7 million in 2005, but the lab got the word in December that the amounts were to be kept at a flat $25 million for each year. Now, with the funding back in place, Brookhaven officials said they could proceed with the full cleanup plan. Brookhaven spokeswoman Mona Rowe said the full funding "would be good news. We have programs here that put priorities on what we are going to do first, or second or third in the cleanup, and with the money we can go back to those guidelines." Those guidelines give the highest priority to projects posing an immediate risk to public health, focusing on removing contaminants threatening groundwater supply and restoring the Peconic River, whose headwaters start on the laboratory's grounds. Adrienne Esposito, associate executive director of Citizens Campaign for the Environment, which watches environmental issues in New York State and coastal Connecticut, said the funding left her group "thrilled beyond words. It means that the public is going to save money. The sooner we clean it up, the less tax dollars will be spent. It's a win-win." Schumer said the cleanup plan is the "glue" that has brought the community and the laboratory - which often have been at loggerheads - together. "Another four years, and it will be done," Schumer said. "Then we can all breathe easier." Copyright © 2002, Newsday, Inc. Newsday.com ***************************************************************** 57 LANL locates missing disk in inventory Santa Fe New Mexican By JEFF TOLLEFSON/The New MexicanJanuary 30, 2002 Los Alamos National Laboratory has located a computer disk that turned up missing during a periodic inventory by the Nuclear Materials Technology Division, the laboratory reported Tuesday. The lab's announcement followed on the heels an assertion by the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group based in Washington, D.C., that materials containing nuclear-weapons secrets might be missing. Denying the disk contained "sensitive highly classified data" about weapons design, the laboratory initially confirmed in a written statement the missing disk was among "some minor discrepancies with previous inventories." Later in the evening, spokesman John Gustafson said the disk had been located. "It was in the possession of another staff member, and it had been properly secured at all times," Gustafson said. "The purpose of an inventory is to ensure accountability of all items, and often there are discrepancies at the start of the inventory that are fully resolved when it is concluded." Gustafson said he did not know how often such inventories take place. He also said he did not know what was on the disk. In its initial response, the lab stressed the disk did not contain the highly classified weapons-design information but conceded its contents were unknown. Possibilities range from nothing to "scheduling information to information that may be sensitive or classified," according to the statement. In Washington, POGO Executive Director Danielle Brian said she stood by her organization's report that the missing disk contained nuclear-weapons design. That information came from a single but reliable source at the laboratory, according to POGO officials, who point out that this isn't the first time such problems have arisen at Los Alamos. The national spotlight initially focused on computer security at Los Alamos in 1999 because of scientist Wen Ho Lee, who eventually pleaded guilty to downloading classified nuclear-weapons information. Last week, the U.S. attorney concluded an investigation into computer hard drives that turned up missing for a period of weeks in the spring of 2000. The drives were eventually found behind a copy machine. No one was charged after the investigation. Brian said the fact such information can turn up missing is further evidence the laboratory needs to implement new security measures to keep track of nuclear secrets. The laboratory could institute a computer system that gives access only to monitors and keyboards, requiring two people to access the computers. "Why don't they move to a system where this kind of data isn't misplaceable?" she asked. "They need to move away from a system where people can access on an individual bases this kind of data." LANL's Gustafson said he could not discuss such security issues. Copyright 2002 Santa Fe New Mexican ***************************************************************** 58 Reid to tour two nuclear laboratories Thursday, January 31, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is scheduled to travel today to New Mexico for two days of inspections of national nuclear laboratories. After visiting Los Alamos National Laboratory today, Reid plans to tour Sandia National Laboratory in Albuquerque on Friday. "I hope that we will get a firsthand look at what our nation is doing to keep al-Qaida's finger off the nuclear trigger," Reid said in a statement. "I was very troubled to learn that blueprints of American nuclear plants had been found in Afghanistan." Reid was referring to comments by President Bush during the State of the Union address Tuesday night. "Clearly, we must re-evaluate all of our nation's potential vulnerabilities," Reid said. As chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water development, Reid oversees the budgets of national nuclear laboratories. The Bush administration is scheduled to release its federal budget proposal for the next fiscal year on Monday. Joining Reid for the security briefings in New Mexico will be Sens. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., and Pete Domenici, R-N.M. Bingaman is chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Domenici is the ranking Republican member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water. Reid originally planned to make this trip one week after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The trip was postponed after Reid decided he wanted to stay in Washington as the White House and Congress contemplated a U.S. response to the terrorist attacks. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 59 Fernald cleanup coming sooner The Cincinnati Post By Michael Collins, Post Washington Bureau WASHINGTON - Work to remove environmental contamination at the old Fernald uranium plant could wrap up four years ahead of schedule under an accelerated cleanup plan the federal government will announce this week. The former plant in northwestern Hamilton County is one of several environmental sites targeted in a new Department of Energy program. U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is scheduled to make the announcement during an appearance at Fernald Thursday. The program means that millions of additional government dollars will be available for cleaning up Fernald, pending a final agreement. Removal of contamination could be finished by 2006 under the accelerated schedule. The cleanup was to be completed around 2010, although the company hired to do the job had been pushing to finish by 2008. Rep. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, of Terrace Park, described the accelerated cleanup plan as a good deal for both the government and the residents who live near the plant. ''This saves the taxpayers money over time because you get the site cleaned up more quickly,'' Portman said. ''It also reduces the risk to human health and safety and the environment in our area by swiftly cleaning up the problems that remain.'' Yet the accelerated cleanup will come with a tradeoff, Portman said. ''Not every inch of the Fernald site will be pristine,'' he said. ''Some of it probably will end up being fenced off. ''Yet what you get from that is a good deal for our area. You get a more rapid cleanup and a reduction of the environmental risks.'' Abraham outlined plans for the new cleanup program on Tuesday during a meeting with Portman and Ohio's two U.S. senators, George Voinovich of Cleveland and Mike DeWine of Springfield, both also Republicans. Abraham indicated during the meeting that $800 million will be available for sites included in the new cleanup program, but did not say how much of that money will go toward Fernald, Portman said. Congress already has allocated $300 million for cleanup at Fernald, and Portman said he hopes to get another $25 million or more next year, along with a commitment to continue the funding while the cleanup remains under way. Fernald processed uranium for the government's nuclear weapons program for 37 years before it ended production in 1989. A federal study concluded that, during the nearly four decades that the facility was in operation, Fernald residents were exposed to radioactive materials that resulted in a higher-than-expected risk for lung cancer. Cleanup at the site started in earnest in 1993. The total cost of the cleanup is expected to top $3.7 billion. Publication date: 01-30-02 ***************************************************************** 60 Secretary of Energy Abraham Previews New Accelerated Cleanup Plan for Former Cold War Nuclear Weapon Production Sites Department's Budget Creates New $800 Million 'Expedited Cleanup Account' energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: January 31, 2002 FERNALD, OHIO - In a visit to the Department of Energy's Fernald, Ohio cleanup project, U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham today previewed the Department's new accelerated cleanup plan for the sites of former nuclear weapon plants that were crucial to winning the Cold War. The Environmental Management plan creates a new $800 million "Expedited Cleanup Account" to be used by participating sites and is part of the overall program's $6.7 billion request for basic cleanup at all sites that will be released with the entire DOE FY03 Budget request next Monday. "When I took office, I was presented with the old plan for cleaning up the Department's Cold War nuclear sites, which called for a timetable of some 70 years to complete and at a cost of $300 billion," Abraham said. "That is not good enough for me, and I doubt it is good enough for anyone who lives near these sites." "So last year I called for a top-to-bottom review of the program, which has been recently completed. The result is this new plan that is targeted to swiftly clean up serious problems at sites and also reduce the risks to human health, safety and the environment," Abraham said. The new proposal emphasizes three basic goals: eliminate significant health and safety risks as soon as possible, review remaining risks on a case-by-case basis working with state and local officials and develop strategies for remediation, and streamline cleanup so current funding will go instead to accomplishing real cleanup progress, rather than routine maintenance and other non-cleanup projects. "This initial $800 million Expedited Cleanup Account represents our current estimate of the number of sites likely to need new cleanup agreements this year. However, we are ready to expand this account with more money as additional sites move to expedited schedules," Abraham said. Under the proposal, to have access to the Expedited Cleanup Account, a site and DOE will have to reach an agreement on an expedited schedule that shows measurable gains in addressing cleanup and important risks. A site that agrees to participate in the new expedited cleanup plan will receive more resources in the near term than in previous years. After the level of funding ramps up at one of these sites and problems are addressed, the level of funding will ramp back down. Once an agreement is reached there will be a roadmap for activity and budgets through Fiscal Year 2008, leading to predictable funding levels which the Department and the White House will consent to submit to Congress for the entire period of these agreements. "By cleaning up serious problems more quickly under the new plan, our communities will be cleaner and safer," Abraham said. "The Environmental Management Program will be stronger and more effective in its mission of reducing health risks and expediting the environmental restoration of the nation's nuclear sites. And there is an extra benefit to the taxpayers, because over the long run, the new plan will yield substantial savings on overhead, maintenance and security costs which the program estimates to account for two-thirds of the overall EM budget." "Working with the states and the regulatory agencies, DOE is proposing a new way of doing business, leading to greater accountability, responsibility, and opportunities for both the Department and the States," Abraham said. "Promoting compliance and ensuring that key milestones are met must be our focus. In some instances, we will set aside funds in escrow, not to be released until those milestones are met. And if they are not, then that money will be put toward cleanup and making things right." "Some will say the new approach won't work. But those who want to continue with business as usual will be consigning their sites and communities to a slower cleanup of the most serious health and safety risks," Abraham said. "Years ago, skeptics predicted that the cleanup of the Department's Rocky Flats site would take 65 years and cost more than $36 billion. Through innovative reforms, like those embraced in our plan, the Rocky Flats site will be cleaned up and closed 55 years ahead of schedule in 2006 for about $7 billion - saving taxpayers nearly $29 billion." Details of the Environmental Management's accelerated cleanup plan will be released following the presentation of the Department's Fiscal Year 2003 Budget on Monday, February 4. Secretary Abraham's remarks from today's event will be available at the Department of Energy web site, www.energy.gov/HQDocs/speeches/2002/janss /EMProgramReform.html. Media Contact: Joe Davis, 202-586-4940 Release No. PR-02-014 ***************************************************************** 61 PI: Irradiation facility BusinessWorld (Philippines); Jan 31, 2002 DAVAO CITY - The Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI) will look at the possibility of putting up an irradiation plant here to help fruit growers and investors get their products into the world market. PNRI acting director Alumanda dela Rosa yesterday said the plan will be submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which will evaluate whether the project is technically feasible and economically viable. "The major component of this project is to determine also the acceptance of radiation treatment. We have to do a market survey, consumer survey," she said. Copyright © Asia Intelligence Wire ***************************************************************** 62 IAEA Daily Press Review Date 2002-01-30 Number 15 1. Non-proliferation US and Kazakhstan will reportedly unveil joint venture aimed at processing uranium concentrates for use as fuel in commercial nuclear reactors and keeping former Soviet atomic scientists from taking their expertise elsewhere. Russian official says at security conference in Geneva that retention and consolidation of preexisting agreements are crucial for strategic stability and international security and that Russia agrees with US proposal of greater non-proliferation efforts. (ITAR; R - 29/1) Kazakhstan; Russian Federation; Switzerland; United States of America 2. IAEA IAEA is tightening control over nuclear operations and taking steps to make them safer: Agency will pass document on security matters and problems of nuclear terrorism, during March 2002 Board of Governors. (INT - 29/1) IAEA 3. Illicit trafficking Controversy over recent case of uranium smuggling in Belarus continues. Report on alleged smuggle of Congolese enriched uranium to Iraq. (R - 30/1) Belarus; Chernobyl; Congo; Democratic Rep. of the Congo; Ukraine 4. Terrorism US President warned nation that war against terrorism is only just beginning and referred to Iraq, Iran and DPRK as "states of concern" and described their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction as imminent danger. (NYT - 30/1) Dem. P.R. of Korea; Iran, Islamic Republic of; Iraq; United States of America 5. Nuclear power Three of China's four NPPs under construction are expected to begin operating in 2002, Chinese nuclear official announces. Russia reportedly beats previous nuclear electricity record and country's Atomic Energy Deputy Minister says its NPPs will double electricity output by 2015. Bulgarian Premier says safety concerns over Kozloduy NPP are ungrounded and points out that IAEA's forthcoming mission in late June is extremely important as it will give an assessment of design and operational safety of units 3 and 4. (BBC; ITAR; NOR - 1/30) Bulgaria; China; IAEA; Russian Federation 6. Radwaste, fuel Four-year experiment on Yucca Mountain rock temperatures concludes. (HIN; ITAR; NUC; R - 28/1) United States of America 7. Nuclear technology US task force to probe effects of mail irradiation to defend against anthrax-contaminated letters. (apa - 29/1) United States of America 8. Miscellaneous Military experts warn that if Pakistan and India start lobbing nuclear missiles at each other they would be affected by their own fallout because their nuclear warheads are not suited to short-range conflict. (NS - 25/1) India; Pakistan ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************