NWSC: Urgent Need To Move Nuclear Waste Disposal Program Forward

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET>]

Index:



NWSC: Urgent Need To Move Nuclear Waste Disposal Program Forward

Hanford Experimental Nuclear Reactor to Be Shut Down

Low-Yield Nuclear Device Considered

Munters Lands Order for Dehumidification of Nuclear Reactors

UK BNFL say to start controversial n-plant in days

Hanford Nuclear Employee Dismisses Litigation Against Brush Wellman

============================================



NWSC: Urgent Need To Move Nuclear Waste Disposal Program Forward

  

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 /U.S. Newswire/ -- In a meeting on Wednesday, Dec. 19, 

with the Secretary of Energy, Spencer Abraham, members of the Nuclear Waste 

Strategy Coalition (NWSC) urged the Secretary to make positive recommendations 

to the President to site Yucca Mountain as the nation's permanent repository for 

high-level nuclear waste. 



"We feel confident that the Secretary recognizes the need for this program to move 

forward after 'decades' of program delay," stated Commissioner Koppendrayer, 

Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and Chairman, NWSC.  "Further, scientific 

documents clearly demonstrate that Yucca Mountain should be recommended to the 

President as the permanent repository contrary to what is stated in the draft report 

recently leaked from the General Accounting Office."   The Nuclear Waste Policy Act 

(NWPA) mandates the Department of Energy (DOE) conduct a multistep process for 

identifying and licensing the repository. 



Russell Mellor, President and CEO of Yankee Atomic and Connecticut Yankee and 

DPC Chair further stated, "It is the Decommissioning Plant Coalition's (DPC) strong 

conviction that the necessary scientific and technical foundations for Yucca Mountain 

have been successfully completed and it is time for a favorable recommendation by 

the Secretary to develop Yucca Mountain as a federal repository. We also encourage 

the Secretary to expedite and assure that the transportation infrastructure is in place 

to move the waste." 



A no action alternative by the Secretary would mean stranding high-level nuclear 

waste indefinitely at plant sites. "Consequently, the nation's ratepayers would be 

burdened with additional costs estimated by the NWSC to be $5 Trillion (1998 

dollars)," stated Koppendrayer. Both, the President's energy plan and the 

environment would be affected. More fossil and gas power plants would be built to 

replace the 20 percent of our electricity generated by nuclear power, an emission-

free source of electricity. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, 

nuclear power plants avoid annually nationwide the emission of 147 million metric 

tons of carbon dioxide and 2.5 million tons of nitrogen oxide that significantly helps 

our air quality. Nuclear generating power plants are an environmentally clean, 

affordable, reliable and highly efficient source of electric power. 



Since 1983, the nation's ratepayers have paid more than $19 billion, including 

interest, into the NWF, for the DOE to obtain a license, construct, operate and 

monitor a repository for commercial high-level nuclear waste.  Since 1987, the DOE 

has spent approximately $7 billion to characterize a geologic repository at Yucca 

Mountain. 



The 1982 NWPA and subsequent contracts the DOE signed with each electric utility, 

specified that the DOE had a contractual and statutory obligation to remove waste 

from civilian nuclear power plants by Jan. 31, 1998. "The DOE is authorized and 

obligated to do so.  It has not happened," said Commissioner Philip Bradley, Public 

Service Commission of South Carolina. As stated in the President's energy plan, the 

Federal government is more than ten years behind schedule for accepting high-level 

nuclear waste from power plants and the NWSC expects the Government to deliver 

on its contractual and statutory obligations. 



Our mission is to pursue administrative and congressional actions; assist with legal 

remedies on behalf of the ratepayers; secure a centralized, interim storage facility for 

high-level nuclear waste; and ensure timely development of a cost-effective, safe, 

and environmentally sound repository for permanent disposal of high-level nuclear 

waste based on "sound science." 



The NWSC is comprised of state regulators, state attorneys general, nuclear electric 

utilities and associate members working together to hold the federal government 

accountable for its contractual and statutory obligations to remove spent nuclear fuel 

from power plants across the nation to interim storage and eventually to a permanent 

repository. The NWSC is made up of participants from 43 organizations in 25 states. 

--------------------



Hanford Experimental Nuclear Reactor to Be Shut Down

  

YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - The Energy Department decided Wednesday that an 

experimental nuclear reactor at the Hanford reservation will be shut down 

permanently. 



Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said restarting the Fast Flux Test Facility would 

be impractical. The plant has been idled since 1992. 



Though more than 20 years old, the 400-megawatt plant is the Energy Department's 

newest reactor. It was designed to research advanced forms of nuclear fuel for 

breeder reactors, which produce as much or more plutonium fuel than they consume. 



However, the government scrapped its breeder reactor program in the 1980s after 

deciding it had misjudged the nation's electricity needs. 



The nuclear fuel was removed from the plant's core, though the cooling system had 

been maintained in case of a restart. 



Former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson ordered the plant decommissioned. The 

order was rescinded by the Bush administration, which studied the possibility of 

letting private interests use the plant to research medical isotopes. 

------------------



Low-Yield Nuclear Device Considered

  

WASHINGTON (AP) - Defense officials are considering the possibility of developing 

a low-yield nuclear device that would be able to destroy deeply buried stockpiles of 

chemical or biological weapons. 



Such a move would require Congress to lift a 1994 ban on designing new nuclear 

warheads. 



In a report to Congress, the Defense Department argues that conventional weapons, 

while effective for many underground enemy targets, would be unable to destroy the 

most deeply protected facilities containing biological or chemical agents. 



In recent years there has been a growing unease that terror groups or unfriendly, 

newly nuclear-capable states may be hiding weapons of mass destruction, including 

chemical and biological weapons, in deep underground facilities. 



In the report sent to Congress in October, the Defense Department said a low-yield, 

less than five-kiloton, nuclear warhead coupled with new technology that allows 

bombs to penetrate deep underground before exploding could prove effective in 

destroying biological and chemical agents. 



Although not formally engaged in developing a new warhead design, nuclear 

scientists ``have completed initial studies on how existing nuclear weapons can be 

modified'' for use to destroy deeply buried targets containing chemical or biological 

weapons, the report said. Studies include ``synergies of nuclear weapons yield, 

penetration, accuracy and tactics,'' it said. 



Conventional weapons cannot destroy the most deeply buried chemical and 

biological holding facilities, the report concludes, but a low-yield nuclear device could 

do the job. It notes that the current nuclear arsenal was ``not designed with this 

mission in mind.'' 



The report was submitted in response to a congressional directive that the Pentagon 

report what it was doing to develop ways to attack stores of chemical and biological 

weapons and also contains updates on a number of programs involving conventional 

weapons. 



The report shows the Bush administration views a nuclear strike as ``an intrinsic 

part'' of dealing with deeply entombed enemy targets and ``is essentially doing all the 

preparation'' for a future full-scale research and development program for a new 

mini-nuclear warhead, said Martin Butcher, director of security programs at the 

Physicians for Social Responsibility. 



This kind of warhead is ``the dirtiest kind of all. It's highly radioactive,'' said Butcher, 

whose group has been a leading voice in the nuclear nonproliferation debate. 

Development of such a bomb would send the wrong signals and would add to the 

risk of nuclear proliferation, he said. 



A low-yield nuclear weapon generally is considered to be no more than five kilotons. 

By comparison, the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan at the end of World War II 

were about 15 kilotons each. 



The report sent to key committees in Congress by Defense Secretary Donald H. 

Rumsfeld in October provides a general outline of U.S. capabilities for dealing with 

what defense officials believe is a growing gap in U.S. military response. 



The House International Relations Committee is pressing for renewed U.N. 

inspections in Iraq on the belief that it has rebuilt its nuclear, biological and chemical 

weapons programs since President Saddam Hussein's government stopped allowing 

inspections in 1998. 



Notes and diagrams found in houses vacated by al-Qaida fighters in Afghanistan 

also point to an effort to create weapons of mass destruction. 



The report said enhancements expected to be completed by 2005 to an array of 

conventional weapons, including laser-guided bombs and cruise missiles, should be 

able to destroy most underground facilities. But it maintains such weapons cannot 

penetrate the deepest facilities. 



The report acknowledges that any decision to proceed with a nuclear device for 

attacking underground targets would be considered within the administration's 

broader plans for the nuclear stockpile and overall nuclear weapons policy. 



It said a joint nuclear-planning board already has been established to examine the 

use of nuclear weapons as bunker-busters. 



The idea of using low-yield nuclear warheads to attack deeply buried enemy targets 

has been discussed for years. It was the subject of a classified study concluded in 

1997 and has been frequently discussed by nuclear weapons scientists at the Los 

Alamos and Sandia national laboratories. 



The essence of the report sent to Congress was reported Tuesday by The 

Albuquerque Journal. A copy was distributed by Nuclear Watch of New Mexico, 

based in Santa Fe, on its Web site. 



The report had been requested by Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Wayne Allard, R-

Colo., and was part of this year's defense authorization legislation. 



On the Net: Nuclear Watch of New Mexico: www.nukewatch.org 

-----------------



Munters Lands Order for Dehumidification of Nuclear Reactors

  

STOCKHOLM, Sweden--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 19, 2001--Ontario Power 

Generation (OPG), one of North America's largest power producers, has purchased 

12 customized dehumidification systems from Munters for removing heavy water 

from the reactor buildings of the Pickering Nuclear Power Station. 



Heavy water is a valuable commodity for the Candu nuclear reactors designed by 

Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL). Munters vapor recovery systems remove 

heavy water vapor from the air, and condense it to liquid. The system also reduces 

the tritium radiation levels in the plant, and also those released to the environment, 

making the reactor safer for workers and the community. 



Munters first supplied four such dryers for the first reactor being overhauled in the 

spring of 2000, and has now been awarded the contract for all of the 4 reactors being 

overhauled. 



"This order is the result of a complete team effort between the project management, 

service and sales groups in Munters. It fits in line with our Key Accounts' strategy of 

focusing on developing long term relationships with core customers. After OPG's 

experiences with Munters persistent attention to details on the first project, we 

became the only logical choice for the next phase of the project," says Scott Haynes, 

National Key Accounts Group Manager. 



The total value of the order is CAD 3.9 million (SEK 26 million). 



There are currently 22 Candu reactors in Canada and another 10 worldwide. 

------------------



UK BNFL say to start controversial n-plant in days



LONDON, Dec 18 (Reuters) - State-owned British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) said it will 

start operating a controversial nuclear fuel manufacturing plant within the next few 

days. 



"We expect to put plutonium into the plant on or around December 20," a spokesman 

for the group said on Tuesday. 



BNFL's 472 million pound ($796 million) mixed oxide (MOX) fuel plant has been the 

focus of several legal challenges to stop it starting up following its completion in 

1996. 



The lastest legal battle was tied off on Monday when a United Nations court 

announced that both Britain and Ireland had submitted reports outlining consultations 

they had been ordered to have. 



The Hamburg-based International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which ordered the 

two countries to consult each other about safety and pollution concerns, had earlier 

this month rejected a request from Ireland for an injunction to prevent the Sellafield 

MOX Plant (SMP) from opening. 



Ireland says it is worried about safety and pollution from Sellafield because the 

BNFL's MOX plant will discharge low level radioactive emissions into the Irish Sea. 



The plant will mix highly toxic plutonium with uranium oxides to create a fuel that can 

be burnt in specially adapted nuclear reactors. 



Environmental groups Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, also say that apart from 

the pollution concerns, the MOX fuel will find few customers because it is more 

expensive than conventional uranium reactor fuel. 



An international furore erupted in 2000 when it was revealed data on a pilot batch of 

MOX fuel sent to Japan had been falsified. 



The ensuing row and cancelled orders led to the UK government shelving plans to 

part privatise BNFL. 



A government commissioned report into SMP published earlier this year said the 

plant would deliver net financial benefits of 216 million pounds ($364 million) over its 

lifetime once build costs were excluded. 

------------------



Hanford Nuclear Employee Dismisses Litigation Against Brush Wellman

  

CLEVELAND--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 19, 2001--Brush Wellman Inc. announced 

today that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington has granted 

the plaintiff's motion for dismissal in Craig Hall v. Brush Wellman and Starmet Corp. 

The dismissal is the latest in a consecutive series of legal developments favorable to 

Brush Wellman that have involved occupational exposure to beryllium. 



Craig Hall is an employee of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford 

Nuclear Reservation. In an unopposed voluntary motion,  Mr. Hall noted that he was 

dismissing his claims against both defendants with prejudice to pursue federal 

benefits under the DOE's Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

Program (EEOICP). 



The EEOICP provides benefits for eligible employees affected by chronic beryllium 

disease (CBD) and other illnesses such as silicosis and radiation-induced cancer. In 

July, the government began making tax-free $150,000 compensation payments to 

qualifying workers affected by CBD while working for the DOE, certain vendors or 

subcontractors throughout the nuclear weapons program. 



Less than two weeks before the Hall case was dismissed, Brush Wellman received a 

favorable decision in a similar case in Arizona. In Gamez v. Brush Wellman, the 

Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the Superior Court's 1999 grant of summary 

judgement. The plaintiff in that case was Rudy Gamez, a former employee of Brush 

Wellman's ceramics facility in Tucson. Gamez v. Brush Wellman was initially filed in 

June 1996. Mr. Gamez alleged willful misconduct, breach of contract and bad faith in 

connection with his employment-related exposure to beryllium particulate at the 

company's Tucson facility. 



Courts in Colorado, Tennessee and California have also ruled in favor of Brush 

Wellman in similar cases heard previously. 



In a statement, Brush Wellman said, "Each of these decisions, whether made by 

juries or judges, involved similar issues and resulted in the same conclusions. With 

the precedent these decisions set, other plaintiffs need to reassess the strength of 

their claims." 



Instead, the company stated that the EEOICP provides a more expedient and certain 

benefit for eligible employees affected by CBD and other illnesses. 



Brush Wellman continues to work to end CBD and to minimize the risk to its workers 

and customers. The company remains steadfastly committed to this objective while 

ensuring that the substantial benefits from using beryllium products remain available 

to society. 



Brush Wellman Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Brush Engineered Materials Inc. 

(NYSE:BW). Brush Engineered Materials Inc. is headquartered in Cleveland. The 

company, through its wholly owned subsidiaries, supplies worldwide markets with 

beryllium products, alloy products, electronic products, precious metal products, and 

engineered material systems. 



NOTE TO EDITORS: Following is a summary of the Brush Wellman litigation 

mentioned in the above press release. 



Summary of Workplace-Related Litigation Decided in favor of Brush Wellman Inc. 

and voluntarily dismissed by plaintiffs 



Judges and juries in a number of states have consistently ruled for Brush Wellman in 

cases involving workers exposed to beryllium particulate at Brush Wellman or 

contractor facilities. 



Craig Hall v. Brush Wellman and Starmet Corporation 



Dismissed in favor of Brush Wellman October 18, 2001, in the U.S. District Court for 

the Eastern District of Washington. U.S. District Judge Edward F. Shea granted 

Craig Hall's Voluntary Motion for Dismissal so, as stated in the motion, Mr. Hall could 

pursue federal benefits under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program, EEOICP. 



The suit was filed in 1999 by Mr. Hall, an electrician since 1981 at the Hanford 

Nuclear Reservation, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-owned and contractor 

operated facility. Mr. Hall alleged he became ill from working around fuel production 

operations involving beryllium-containing products. Mr. Hall initially sued Brush 

Wellman only, but later joined Starmet Corporation as a defendant when he 

discovered that Starmet's predecessor made the beryllium-containing products he 

worked around. 



Gamez v. Brush Wellman Inc. 



Decided in favor of Brush Wellman September 27, 2001 in the Arizona Court of 

Appeals. 



The Arizona appellate court affirmed the Superior Court's June 1999 granting of the 

company's motion for summary judgement in Pima County. The trial court case was 

originally filed in September 1996. 



The plaintiffs alleged willful misconduct, breach of contract and bad faith in 

connection with Mr. Gamez's employment-related exposure to beryllium particulate 

at Brush Wellman's Tucson, Arizona production facility. 



Troy Murphy Morgan, et al. v. Brush Wellman Inc., et al. 



Decided in favor of Brush Wellman September 4, 2001 in the U.S. District Court for 

the Eastern District of Tennessee. U.S. District Court Judge James H. Jarvis granted 

Brush Wellman's motion for summary judgement. 



The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in June 1994 by Mr. Morgan, three other 

plaintiffs, and two of their spouses. The plaintiffs alleged they had become ill from 

handling beryllium or beryllium-containing products while working for Union Carbide 

or Martin Marietta Energy Systems, contractors of the DOE's Oak Ridge, Tennessee 

facility. 



In its motion filed with the court, Brush Wellman argued that: 



--  It was not responsible for health and safety of another 



company's employees. 



--  It had adequately warned the government's Oak Ridge 



contractors of the need to properly protect workers from known 



unsafe levels of respirable beryllium. 



--  Under Tennessee law, Oak Ridge contractors were "sophisticated 



users" and had the responsibility to provide proper safety and 



health programs to protect employees against workplace 



hazards. 



--  Products supplied by Brush Wellman were to government 



specification. 



--  The plaintiffs' "conspiracy theory" was not supportable. 



Michael D. Ballinger, et al. v. Brush Wellman Inc. 



Decided in favor of Brush Wellman on June 26, 2001 by a unanimous jury in 

Jefferson County, Colorado District Court. 



The plaintiffs, who initially filed their case in November 1996, alleged they had 

become ill from handling beryllium or beryllium-containing products while working for 

Dow Chemical or Rockwell, contractors of the DOE's former Rocky Flats, Colorado 

facility. 



In a three-week trial covered by national news media, Brush Wellman argued that it 

had adequately warned the government's Rocky Flats contractors of the need to 

properly protect workers from known unsafe levels of beryllium particulate. The 

verdict also exonerated Brush Wellman of the unsupported "conspiracy" theory the 

plaintiffs' attorneys advanced when they were not successful in challenging the 

company's record of hazard communication and product labeling. This "conspiracy" 

theory was also rejected in an earlier determination by the U.S. Government 

Accounting Office. 



On September 5, the Jefferson County District Court denied the plaintiffs' motion for 

a new trial. 



Donald Polensky v. Brush Wellman Inc. 



Jury verdict for Brush Wellman March 19, 1993. The judge in the case had 

previously dismissed the plaintiff's punitive damage claim. 



The suit was filed in Superior Court of Orange County, California in January 1990. 

Mr. Polensky, the plaintiff, was a ceramics engineer employed by Ceradyne, Inc. The 

plaintiff alleged that Brush Wellman's warnings were inadequate and that Brush 

Wellman understated the risk of handling beryllium ceramic pieces. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sandy Perle				Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100   

Director, Technical			Extension 2306

ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service	Fax:(714) 668-3149 	           

ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.		E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net

ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue  	E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com   

Costa Mesa, CA 92626                    



Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com

ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.