ftp.xmission.com

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ ftp.xmission.com / 2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar / ftp.xmission.com / pub / lists / abolition-usa / archive / v01.n048 < prev next >

Wrap

Internet Message Format | 1998-12-10 | 51KB

From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #48 Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest Sender: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk abolition-usa-digest Friday, December 11 1998 Volume 01 : Number 048 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 21:30:04 -0000 From: "Sally Light" <sallight@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Subcritical test letter Hi, Timothy - You might use *$60 billion over the next 13 years* as the current, estimated cost (and it may yet rise!) of the Stockpile Stewardship Program. Regards, Sally Light, Tri-Valley CAREs. - ---------- > From: Timothy Bruening <tsbrueni@wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us> > To: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com; fcnl@IGC.APC.ORG; shundahai@shundahai.org; wslf@IGC.APC.ORG; wilpfnatl@igc.org; marylia@IGC.APC.ORG; pasacramento@igc.org; ldazey@igc.org; wslf@IGC.APC.ORG; abeier@igc.org; planevada@aol.com; wiednerb@aol.com; iio1@pge.com; mcli@igc.org; wagingpeace@napf.org; NUKE-WASTE@IGC.APC.ORG; pamembers@IGC.APC.ORG > Subject: (abolition-usa) Subcritical test letter > Date: Friday, December 11, 1998 1:57 AM > > Below is my draft of a letter to the editor about the Cimarron subcritical > test. I am asking for suggestions on how to improve this letter. > > U.S. TO VIOLATE COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY FOR THE 5TH TIME! > > Since last July 2, the Department of Energy (DOE) has conducted 4 > subcritical nuclear tests (the most recent on September 26). A subcritical > test involves an amount of plutonium too small to produce a nuclear > explosion, but still provides information about nuclear weapons explosions. > In the near future, the U.S. will conduct a 5th subcritical test, code named > Cimarron. > > I believe that subcritical nuclear tests clearly violate the spirit of the > historic Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) signed in September 1996 by > President Clinton. The CTBT commits the U.S. "not to carry out any nuclear > weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion...". The intent of the > CTBT is to pave the way for the elimination of nuclear weapons by halting > the development of new nuclear weapons. The subcritical tests can provide > information which helps the U.S. develop new nuclear weapons. The DOE > claims these experiments are permissible because the CTBT does not define > "nuclear weapon" test. However, I believe that subcritical nuclear tests do > violate the CTBT because they are intended to help the U.S. develop new > nuclear weapons. These tests make global adoption of the CTBT less likely > by encouraging other nations to copy the U.S. decision to continue testing > and update their nuclear arsenals. > > These tests especially contradict the condemnation expressed by the U.S. > government against India and Pakistan for conducting their own series of > nuclear weapons tests earlier this year, and against North Korea for > allegedly building an underground nuclear weapons facility. How can we > credibly condemn India, Pakistan, and North Korea for testing or allegedly > possessing nuclear weapons if we conduct nuclear weapons tests? > > The subcritical tests are part of a massive "Stockpile Stewardship and > Management" program, intended to maintain and expand U.S. nuclear weapons > capabilities well into the next century. A DOE document admits that "The > ability to design nuclear weapons is the core of DOE program and is utilized > in all other aspects of the program ... The nuclear design capability will > be maintained by pursuing an understanding of the underlying physics of > nuclear weapons and exercising the process of design of nuclear weapons .. > A limited number of new nuclear component design requirements are > foreseeable in the future." (U.S. Dept. of Energy, Office of Defense > Programs, Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan, February 29, 1996, > unclassified version, p. VII-3). During the next decade, taxpayers will > spend about $45 billion for this program, an annual rate higher than the > Cold War average. Thus, it is fair to say these tests are intended to signal > to the rest of the world an unflagging U.S. commitment to nuclear weapons as > the ultimate "big stick." > > Please call the Department of Energy and the White House and your > Congressional representatives and demand that the U.S. cancel all future > subcritical tests, and also demand that the U.S. stop all new and modified > nuclear weapons development, close down the Nevada Test Site and all nuclear > weapons development facilities except for disarmament programs, and begin > immediate clean up and containment of the nuclear nightmare caused by the > U.S. Nuclear Weapons program. Below are phone numbers and addresses to call > and write: > > President Bill Clinton, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington DC 20500, (202) > 456-1111. > > Secretary of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave, Washington DC, 20585 > To leave a message for Bill Richardson, new Secretary of DOE call the 202 > 586 6210 and the press office at 202 586 5806. > > Members of Congress (202)224-3121. Senators Boxer and Feinstein (U.S. > Senate, Washington, D.C., 20510). Representatives (U.S. House, Washington, > D.C., 20515). > > > - > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 03:16:56 -0600 From: "Boyle, Francis" <FBOYLE@LAW.UIUC.EDU> Subject: RE: (abolition-usa) A newsletter article about Iraq This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BE24E6.FFF08B70 Content-Type: text/plain 1. have not seen those articles, but they are true 2. The CIA estimated Israel had 200 nukes about a decade ago. So you figure it out from there. 3. The United Nations. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu > ---------- > From: Timothy Bruening[SMTP:tsbrueni@wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us] > Reply To: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com > Sent: Thursday, December 10, 1998 7:57 PM > To: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com; fcnl@IGC.APC.ORG; > shundahai@shundahai.org; wslf@IGC.APC.ORG; wilpfnatl@igc.org; > marylia@IGC.APC.ORG; pamembers@IGC.APC.ORG > Subject: (abolition-usa) A newsletter article about Iraq > > In a Sacramento-Yolo Peace Action newsletter, I read that respected > British newspapers reported that the latest Iraq crisis was "triggered by > the U.S. refusal to commit to lifting the oil embargo even if Iraq fully > complies with requirements to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction". > Which British newspapers published those reports and when did they do so? > > I also read that Israel has up to 400 thermo-nuclear warheads. Where did > that figure come from? TIME's estimate was a little over 100 in May. > > I also read that the oil embargo against Iraq has killed over one million, > with as many as 7,000 dying each month. Where did those figures come > from? > > > - > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to > "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. > - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BE24E6.FFF08B70 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = charset=3DUS-ASCII"> <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version = 5.5.2410.0"> <TITLE>RE: (abolition-usa) A newsletter article about Iraq</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> 1. have not seen = those articles, but they are true 2. The CIA = estimated Israel had 200 nukes about a decade ago. So you figure it out = from there. 3. The United = Nations. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania = Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu <UL> ---------- From: = Timothy = Bruening[SMTP:tsbrueni@wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us] Reply To: = abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com Sent: = Thursday, December 10, 1998 7:57 = PM To: = abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com; fcnl@IGC.APC.ORG; = shundahai@shundahai.org; wslf@IGC.APC.ORG; wilpfnatl@igc.org; = marylia@IGC.APC.ORG; pamembers@IGC.APC.ORG Subject: = (abolition-usa) A newsletter article about Iraq In a Sacramento-Yolo Peace Action = newsletter, I read that respected British newspapers reported that the = latest Iraq crisis was "triggered by the U.S. refusal to commit to = lifting the oil embargo even if Iraq fully complies with requirements = to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction". Which British = newspapers published those reports and when did they do so? I also read that Israel has up to 400 = thermo-nuclear warheads. Where did that figure come from? = TIME's estimate was a little over 100 in May. I also read that the oil embargo = against Iraq has killed over one million, with as many as 7,000 dying = each month. Where did those figures come from? - To unsubscribe to = abolition-usa, send an email to = "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe = abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or = retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same = address. Do not use quotes in your message. </UL> </BODY> </HTML> - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BE24E6.FFF08B70-- - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 08:07:33 -0500 From: Peace through Reason <prop1@prop1.org> Subject: (abolition-usa) NucNews USA: 12/11/98 1. http://www.ohio.com/bj/news/ohio/docs/008749.htm Fire causes uranium plant evacuation 2. http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/unc-msctros.html Dating shipwreck by Bombs 3. http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/16772.html No More Nukes in '99 4. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,30000101,00.html? Salt Lake City Golf Course Built on Uranium Tailings 5. http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1209d.htm Flats security gets 'B' for effort 6. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/344/nation/Nuclear_power_ads_hit_as_mislea ding+.shtml Nuclear power ads hit as misleading - ---------------------------- 1. http://www.ohio.com/bj/news/ohio/docs/008749.htm Fire causes uranium plant evacuation PIKETON, Ohio (AP) -- A fire in a motor forced the evacuation of 24 workers from a plant in this southern Ohio city that enriches uranium for fuel for nuclear power plants. Four workers were treated at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant for minor injuries from the fire, which started about 6:10 a.m. Wednesday, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a statement. Two plant operators suffered smoke inhalation and two of the plant's firefighters slipped and fell on leaking oil. The fire involved lubricating oil used in an electric motor that drives compressors to extract gases, the plant's owner, U.S. Enrichment Corp., said in a news release. The NRC said the exact cause of the fire was not known and that a team of investigators is at the plant. ``We're still examining and trying to determine what the cause of the fire was,'' Angela Greenman, a NRC spokeswoman from Chicago, said this morning. U.S. Enrichment spokeswoman Elizabeth Stuckle said this morning that company officials are reviewing the circumstances of the fire. It took the plant fire department about two hours to put the fire out. Operations continued in other parts of the plant. No chemical or radioactive material was released outside of the area where the fire occurred. The company, based in Bethesda, Md., runs the plant in Piketon, about 60 miles south of Columbus, and a similar plant in Paducah, Ky. - ----------------------- 2. http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/unc-msctros.html Excerpt story about radiocarbon-dating shipwreck, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill ... Even atomic bombs exploded in the 1950s and 1960s may offer clues to what happened at the site since the sinking. ... Since radioisotopes such as cesium-137 and plutonium-239 and 240 from atmospheric nuclear testing have accumulated in most marine sediments worldwide, Martens should be able to detect any later wreck movement by analyzing sediments cored from beneath the oak hull. "We won't find the bomb-produced radioisotopes directly under the hull or stones unless they have moved due to storms or other events," he said.... Contact: David Williamson - David_Williamson@unc.edu 919-962-8596 - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill - -------------------------------------------- 3. http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/16772.html No More Nukes in '99 by Declan McCullagh 4:45 p.m. 10.Dec.98.PST WASHINGTON -- US nuclear power plants must be shut down unless operators can prove all Year 2000 bugs have been exterminated, an anti-nuclear advocacy group said Thursday. Arguing that Americans can't risk even a slight chance of system failure, the group asked federal regulators to flip the switch on suspect nuclear plants by 1 December 1999. "This is a very reasonable request. The [government] should be required to establish a noncompliance date so that if the plants aren't compliant with Y2K they should be closed," said Paul Gunter, director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service's reactor watchdog project. NIRS, which lobbies for elimination of all nuclear energy, on Thursday requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission adopt an emergency regulation saying companies that haven't tested for Y2K "shall close their facilities... by December 1, 1999 until such time as the licensees have conducted a successful exercise." The NRC already has required that all nuclear power plants report their Y2K-readiness by 1 July 1999. And a spokesman for the nuclear industry said there was no need for further government action. "The reality is if you talk to the experts, they'll tell you safety systems are not at risk," said Steve Kerekes of the Nuclear Energy Institute. "If for some reason that proves not to be the case, we'll do what we have to do to ensure safety." Federal audits of nuclear power plants show that safety-related systems suffer from Y2K woes. A November 1998 government audit of the Seabrook, New Hampshire, nuclear plant found that reactor coolant level monitoring systems, fuel handling systems, reactor vessel level indication systems, and the computer system that oversees digital controllers would not work properly in the year 2000. Of 1,304 programs and embedded systems afflicted with Y2K, the audit said 12 had "safety implications." NIRS's Gunter thinks of Y2K as yet another reason to ban nukes. "This is just another issue in an overlay of issues like age-related degradation and unresolved nuclear waste management," he said. If all US nuclear plants were shut down, the country would lose approximately 20 percent of its electric power. Nuclear units are disproportionately located in the northeast, where they supply about 40 percent of the power. NIRC also wants operators to stockpile 60 days' worth of diesel fuel for diesel generators -- which are already required as a backup power source -- and consider alternative energy sources in case of generator failure. Its recommendations: solar, wind, natural gas, hydro, or other dedicated power systems. Nuclear reactors require backup power to cool their cores and fuel pools after they are shut down. - -------------------------------------- [Un-Holy Cow!] 4. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,30000101,00.html? December 06, 1998 Deseret News - Utah South S.L. golf course gets nod Facility on Vitro site is expected to open in 2000 By Jason Swensen Deseret News staff writer SOUTH SALT LAKE - OK, maybe a golf course on the shoulder of a sewer plant won't capture the ambience of Augusta. But South Salt Lake duffers will finally have nine holes they can call their own. The city's Planning Commission recently approved Central Valley Water Reclamation Facility's application to develop an executive golf course next to the treatment plant near 900 West and 3300 South. The nine-hole, par-33 course will be designed on the old Vitro tailings site and, yes, treated wastewater will be used to fill the ponds and refresh the fairways. It will be South Salt Lake's only golf course. The infamous Vitro property, now owned by Central Valley Water, was once home to a uranium mill that contaminated soils with radioactivity. Those soils have since been removed and there is no longer a health danger. (State environmental regulators say the amount of radiation there now is less than natural radiation found elsewhere in the Salt Lake Valley.) Central Valley trustees had thought about simply landscaping the 50 acres, "until the board voted to go ahead and put a golf course in," said Central Valley Executive Director Reed Fisher. Excavating work is already under way to shape the tentatively named Central Valley Golf Course. Irrigation and seeding will begin sometime next year, said architect William Neff, who is designing the course. Central Valley officials are pointing to a 2000 opening date. The course will be managed by Doug Vilvin, a PGA pro who operates the neighboring driving-range facility, Golf in the Round. A starter's shack will be built near the driving range, and golfers will be able to use the Golf in the Round pro shop. Fisher said it is not unusual for golf courses to use treated wastewater. Arizona, in fact, requires it on all courses as a conservation tool. A course now under construction in Tooele will also used treated wastewater. While treated water isn't fit to drink, it poses no danger. Course regulations will prohibit golfers from wading into the ponds, but Fisher adds the water wouldn't harm a stubborn golfer opting to chip an errant ball out of the pond to save a stroke. Sand traps, trees and berms will be included to make the course more challenging. The golf course is expected to be self-supporting. "Any additional revenues will be used to offset the costs" of the sewer facility, Fisher said. - -------------------------------------------- 5. http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1209d.htm Flats security gets 'B' for effort By Jim Kirksey Denver Post Staff Writer Dec. 9 - BROOMFIELD - Security at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site northwest of Denver was given a grade of "B'' Tuesday by members of an independent panel asked last year to investigate whether nuclear materials there are safe. Two of the four panelists who attended a news conference voiced some concern over security, but didn't consider it to be a serious threat. When U.S. Rep. David Skaggs, who called for the panel in June 1997, pressed the two panelists present to grade Rocky Flats security, they agreed on "B.'' Filiberto Cruz, the vice president of the security guard union at the plant, later concurred with that mark. One of the panelists, Donovan Hicks of Cygnus Enterprise Development, admitted, "I've never given an "A' to anybody in my life.'' The Denver Post reported in May 1997 that plant security officers had warned federal investigators that plant security is so flawed terrorists could steal plutonium and make a nuclear bomb. The plant security director quit "in disgust'' in April 1997, saying he couldn't ensure the safety of the Denver region and that members of the anti-government Montana militia had tried to recruit plant guards. Maj. Mark Larson, commander of the 821st Security Forces Squadron at Buckley Air National Guard Base and one of the panelists, said there needs to be better coordination among the different contractors at the plant who have different security responsibilities. Pat Ahlstrom, executive director of the Colorado Department of Public Safety, and U.S. Marshal Tina Rowe were the two other panelists. Their reports were submitted Monday to the U.S. Department of Energy and to Kaiser-Hill, the primary contractor at the Rocky Flats plant. Ahlstrom concluded in his report that "the employees and surrounding communities are quite safe from assaults upon the strategic nuclear material still on site. The plant is well prepared to deter such criminal actions and foreign or domestic terrorism or failing deterrence, to meet and overcome likely threats.'' Hicks came to a similar conclusion: "I believe that the overall security . . . is sufficient to deter the theft of special nuclear material from the facility.'' In Larson's assessment, "Security provided material stored at Rocky Flats is sound and provide solid protection from theft, sabotage and accidental release of nuclear material.'' However, all the panelists had some concerns about security at the plant. Rowe decried the lack of coordination between different aspects of security at the plant. "When a site which has achieved so much in recent years puts security in all its forms as a focus, the chain can stay strong in spite of limitations and restrictions.'' Other panelists also recommended better security coordination throughout the plant, and aging security equipment also was often cited. It was also suggested the some of the security equipment was getting very old and nearing the end of its lifespan. Hicks compared the situation to personal computers. Much of the security at the plant is comparable to a 386 computer processing chip, when the state of the art is a "Pentium.'' - -------------------------------------------- 6. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/344/nation/Nuclear_power_ads_hit_as_mislea ding+.shtml Nuclear power ads hit as misleading By Scott Allen, Globe Staff, 12/10/98 The national Better Business Bureau yesterday called on a nuclear industry trade group to stop running advertisements that flatly assert nuclear power is ''environmentally clean,'' in a unique decision that attempts to stop misleading marketing claims in the growing competition for consumers' electricity business. The business ethics group found that recent full-page advertisements by the Nuclear Energy Institute went too far in touting the safety and cleanliness of nuclear power, neglecting to mention such drawbacks as radioactive waste and the air pollution from making nuclear fuel. But the decision's message went far beyond the nuclear industry. As companies using telemarketing and direct mail gear up to battle for electricity customers from Massachusetts to California, Better Business Bureau officials warned energy advertisers that they will be held to a higher standard than in the past when strict regulation prevented competition. ''We felt it is very important that, as this market opens up ... that claims about the environment be very clear and very specific,'' said Andrea Levine, director of the national advertising division at the Council of Better Business Bureaus in New York City. ''You can sort of think of it as a warning shot to the industry.'' Officials at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington-based group that represents more than 100 nuclear plants, objected to the decision, arguing that the Better Business Bureau had no jurisdiction to begin with. They said the ads, which appeared this fall in 13 publications including The New York Times, Washington Post, and Atlantic Monthly, were aimed at influencing policy rather than consumers. ''This is clearly a campaign that is directed toward policy makers. That's our charge: to coordinate policymaking for the nuclear industry,'' said Nuclear Energy Institute spokesman Scott Peterson. However, the institute did not appeal the nonbinding Better Business Bureau decision, and promised to consider it in future advertisements. Environmentalists called the decision a big victory against market-hungry energy suppliers who make blanket claims of environmental virtue. ''When companies use vague environmental terms like clean or green or safe they are on shaky ground because there are usually facts that undermine the claim,'' said Lewis Milford, director of the Vermont-based Clean Energy Group, one of several environmental groups that brought the complaint. Environmentalists have long objected to energy industry advertising claims, criticizing ads that assert coal plants are environmentally beneficial or that the now-closed Yankee Rowe nuclear power plant in western Massachusetts is ''aging like fine wine.'' However, until now, they had few places to turn with complaints. Because power companies were government-regulated monopolies, the Federal Trade Commission and Better Business Bureau alike treated their ads as political statements rather than consumer advertising. Political statements receive much broader free speech protection than commercial advertising. Over the past three years, however, states increasingly have eliminated the monopolies, allowing customers to choose their power supplier just as they choose their telephone service provider. More than 19 million people live in states where they can choose where their power comes from, and the number could increase eight-fold in the next year. Competition in Massachusetts so far has been limited, largely because of a law that guaranteed customers a 10 percent electric bill cut even if they stayed with their existing power company. But 100,000 California households have changed power providers, and competition is heating up in states such as Pennsylvania. As a result, the Better Business Bureau for the first time agreed to hear a complaint about energy industry advertising. The disputed ads included such statements as: ''Nuclear power plants don't burn anything to produce electricity, so they don't pollute the air.'' The New York-based Natural Resources Defense Council argued that the claims were misleading. Though nuclear plants do not release conventional pollution from their stacks, the uranium fuel is enriched with power from polluting coal plants, and the hot water that reactors discharge kills fish. In addition, the group said, there is no permanent place for the nuclear waste. The Nuclear Energy Institute countered that critics were bringing in issues beyond the scope of their ads, but the Better Business Bureau disagreed. In the decision released yesterday, the panel ''recommends that the advertiser refrain from using overly broad claims that nuclear energy is `environmentally clean' or produces electricity `without polluting the environment.''' One company that has entered the competitive power market, Green Mountain Energy Resources of Vermont, said the decision will make it easier for the firm to market renewable energy such as wind power without being undermined by others' misleading claims. ''We want customers to have confidence in the information they are getting from everyone,'' said Tom Rawls, Green Mountain's director of environmental affairs. _______________________________________________________________________ * NucNews - to subscribe: prop1@prop1.org - http://prop1.org * Please forward -- help educate! _______________________________________________________________________ - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 08:17:03 -0800 From: Shundahai Network <shundahai@shundahai.org> Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) US prepares for paramilitary, right-wing, anti-nuclear groups! Hi Jackie and others. I could not believe it when I read the article in the Las Vegas Review Journal on this training simulation. It seems like this is part of a coordinated effort by the DOE to charecterize anti-nuclear organizations as dangerous and fanatical. I have been meaning to write a letter to the editor about this but have been swamped with other projects. It sure is crazy though. Peace and Holiday wishes to all. Reinard At 06:29 PM 12/10/98 -0800, you wrote: >Greetings, collegues. Losing sleep worrying about paramilitary, right-wing, >anti-nuclear groups wanting to raise public awareness about nuclear issues >and willing to sacrifice lives to further their cause? I kid you not. I >came across this press release on the DOE's Nevada Test Site web page. >Check out the last paragraph! -- Jackie Cabasso > The actual hands-on, two-day field exercise at the Nevada Test Site > will be based on the following scenario. Intelligence information > gathered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation over a period of > several months on the Good Earth Movement, a small, right wing, > paramilitary group that is against nuclear power. The group wants to > raise public awareness about nuclear issues and is willing to > sacrifice lives, their own as well as others', to further their cause. > ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< SHUNDAHAI NETWORK "Peace and Harmony with all Creation" <paraindent><param>out,out</param>5007 Elmhurst St., Las Vegas, NV 89108-1304 Phone:(702)647-3095 (FAX)647-9385 </paraindent>Email: shundahai@shundahai.org <underline><color><param>0000,0000,fefe</param>http://www.shundahai.org </color></underline>Shundahai Network is proud to be part of: Healing Global Wounds Alliance, a multi-cultural alliance to foster sustainable living and break the nuclear chain; and Abolition 2000: A Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< ><<><< - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:22:55 -0600 (CST) From: smirnowb@ix.netcom.com (Robert Smirnow) Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Y2K and nuclear power - ---- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 16:40:21 -0500 From: Michael Mariotte <nirsnet@igc.org> Reply-To: nirsnet@igc.org To: nirsnet@igc.org Subject: Y2K and nuclear power Sender: owner-nukenet@envirolink.org Dear Friends, today (December 10, 1998), NIRS submitted three emergency petitions to the NRC about the Y2K issue and nuclear power. A news release and fact sheet are below; the petitions themselves and other material is available on the NIRS website. Michael Mariotte NIRS NEWS FROM NIRS Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1424 16th Street NW, #404, Washington DC 20036 202-328-0002; fax: 202-462-2183; nirsnet@nirs.org, www.nirs.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Michael Mariotte, Paul Gunter, Mary Olson December 10, 1998 202-328-0002 NAT'L GROUP SUBMITS THREE EMERGENCY RULEMAKINGS TO NRC Y2K COMPUTER BUG MAY AFFECT SAFETY OF ATOMIC REACTORS AND ABILITY TO RESPOND TO EMERGENCY CONDITIONS Washington, DC. The Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) today submitted three emer-gency petitions for rulemaking to the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to address problems that may be caused to atomic power reactors and the electric power grid by the Y2K computer bug. "The Y2K computer problem is greater than most people imagined even a year ago," said NIRS' execu-tive director Michael Mariotte, "and it is becoming clear that not every nuclear utility will be Y2K com-pliant in time for the millennium. Further, the possibility of electrical grid instability and local and re-gional blackouts cannot be ruled out, and nuclear power reactors require large amounts of electricity for essential cooling even when closed. Moreover, few-if any-utilities have actually tested emergency plans to cope with potential Y2K difficulties. Our petitions address each of these issues." The first NIRS petition would require the NRC to close by December 1, 1999 any reactor that cannot prove, through full testing, that it is Y2K compliant until it can prove such compliance. The second peti-tion would require nuclear utilities to install additional backup power units to ensure a steady supply of electricity to reactors. The third petition would require each utility to engage in a full-scale emergency response exercise during 1999 in which plant personnel must attempt to address a Y2K-related problem. The petitions were submitted under 10 CFR 2.802, a formal legal process that can lead to the establish-ment of binding regulations. NIRS requested that the petitions be treated in an expedited manner. "The nuclear industry and the NRC say they are working diligently to resolve the Y2K problem," said Mariotte, "and we believe them. Unfortunately, the magnitude of the problem is so large that not every nuclear utility is likely to complete their work in time. The actions we are requesting today are prudent, modest steps-some would say too modest-to help ensure that the Y2K computer bug does not lead to catastrophe. The probabilities of severeY2K problems for some nuclear utilities fall well within the prob-abilities for which the NRC has promulgated other major safety rules." "The NRC and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) consistently have said that they have not identified any Y2K safety-related issues at nuclear reactors," said Paul Gunter, Director of NIRS' Reactor Watchdog Project. "But a November 6, 1998 audit of Y2K issues at the Seabrook, New Hampshire reactor found 12 safety-related systems affected by the Y2K bug, another 13 systems that could cause a reactor trip, and more than 800 affected systems "significant to business. "A key issue for all nuclear utilities, even those able to put their house in order, is stability of the electri-cal grid," said Gunter. "There are thousands of utilities and independent power generators in the U.S. and Canada and it is highly unlikely all will resolve their Y2K problems in time. Instability of the grid could lead to local and regional blackouts, and the NRC has identified [in NUREG-1150, the agency's basic safety document] station blackout as the single largest contributor to risk at many reactors." Gunter explained that nuclear utilities typically use diesel-powered generators to provide necessary power to cool reactor cores in the event of a blackout. This cooling power is necessary for months even when reactors are shut down. But a NIRS investigation of the generators, attached as an appendix to the peti-tion, found that they frequently don't work and are subject to multitudes of problems. "This is just the tip of the iceberg," said Gunter, "our investigation of these generators is continuing and we are finding they are even less reliable than we had believed." High-level atomic waste fuel pools at every reactor site also must be cooled; otherwise, the water cover-ing the fuel rods could boil off, and their lethal radioactive inventory released. "The NRC currently does not even require that these fuel pools have back-up power," noted NIRS radioactive waste specialist Mary Olson. "But any extended blackout would place these pools at severe risk. We are demanding that the NRC add backup power capability, and to classify these pools as safety-related and requiring cooling." Mariotte noted that current rules only require nuclear utilities to conduct emergency plan exercises once every two years, meaning that half the nation's utilities will not even address the Y2K issue in their exer-cises unless the rule is changed. "Every utility must have hands-on experience in coping with these is-sues," Mariotte said. "The unpredictability of how systems may respond to Y2K bugs, questions of the reliability of off-site emergency responders, including telecommunications, fire, police and other officials, all beg for additional training and practice." "We are not suggesting people head for the hills at the Millennium," said Mariotte. "But when I was a Boy Scout, the motto was 'Be Prepared' and right now we aren't prepared. The potential problems are real, and deserve the type of measured and appropriate response we are urging today. It clearly would be irresponsible and negligent to allow non-Y2K compliant reactors to operate, and we trust the NRC will agree with us on that. It is also simple prudence to require emergency plan exercises and additional back-up power sources. It is perhaps ironic that it may require renewable energy resources to rescue the nuclear power industry from its own shortcomings, but the future begins now." Mariotte noted that some Y2K-related problems may surface even before January 1, 2000. A Swedish utility recently turned its computer clocks to January 1, 1999, and its reactor unexpectedly shut down. "It would have been a cold New Year's Eve in Sweden if that reactor hadn't been tested," said Mariotte. "Testing and ensuring Y2K compliance is the critical issue here, and too many utilities have left them-selves too little time for proper testing, and fixing the new unexpected bugs testing reveals." NIRS also announced that it is contacting funders in an effort to launch a Y2K awareness campaign through its existing Eastern Europe/Commonwealth of Independent States program. "On one hand, the relatively poor reactor designs in those countries have a silver lining: they are much less dependent on digital technology," said Mariotte. "On the other hand, very little work is being put into identifying and repairing both their potential direct nuclear problems and problems associated with their electrical grid. A massive public awareness campaign and development of effective contingency/emergency plans are des-perately needed. One Chernobyl was too many." "The Millennium should be a time of celebration and joy," concluded Mariotte, "not an occasion of fear or panic. The actions we are proposing today will go a long way toward providing assurance of our health and safety as we enter the excitement and promise of the 21st century. Copies of the NIRS petitions and background materials are available from NIRS and on the NIRS web-site, www.nirs.org. - --30-- NUCLEAR POWER AND Y2K In mid-1998, a nuclear utility in Sweden decided to see what would happen if it switched the clocks in its reactor's computers to read January 1, 1999. The response surprised utility officials, who had expected business as usual. The reactor's computers couldn't recognize the date (1/1/99) and thus turned the reactor off. If the utility had waited to run this test, New Year's Eve would have been rather cold in Sweden. The Y2K computer bug caused the problem. The Y2K computer bug has the potential to affect the safety and operation of commercial nuclear power reactors, other major nuclear facilities, and the entire electrical power grid. This is true in the U.S. and abroad. While utilities are working to correct their Y2K vulnerabilities, it is not clear that all such problems will be fixed in time. Citizens can play an important role in ensuring that any Y2K-related disruptions are minimized by encouraging their utilities, state and local governments, and federal regulators and officials to devote the resources necessary to address the issue and to make appropriate contingency and emergency plans to cope with unexpected circumstances. BACKGROUND The Y2K computer bug stems from the early days of computers, when memory was very expensive. Software designers saved on memory costs by writing date-sensitive functions with a two-digit year (i.e. 98 instead of 1998). Thus, when the program reaches the year 2000, it may read it as 1900, with unpredictable ramifications. Many of these early programmers assumed their programs would be obsolete by 2000. Unfortunately, the practice continued for many years, and affects not only the early mainframe computers, but also personal computers and other electronic devices that use preprogrammed "embedded chips." In addition, depending on how programs were written, other dates may set off problems, including January 1, 1999, September 9, 1999, February 29, 2000, and others. Y2K AND NUCLEAR SAFETY The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the nuclear power industry, through its trade association Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), claim that the Y2K bug does not affect the safety of atomic reactors. This attitude, while reassuring, may be overly optimistic. For example, an NRC audit of the Seabrook reactor in New Hampshire, released November 6, 1998, found, in this single power plant, 1,304 separate software items and embedded chips that were affected by the Y2K bug. Twelve of these were described as having "safety implications," including the critical Reactor Vessel Level Indication System; another 13 could cause the reactor to trip (itself a potential safety issue); 160 affected systems required by regulations; and 800 were "significant to business"-in other words, keeping the supply of electricity from the plant running. Only about 40% of the items were described as having "minimal" or "no impact" on plant operations. The NRC plans to conduct audits of only 12 reactor sites (out of more than 70) and, by December 1, 1998, had completed and published only three of these. All showed some potential compromise of safety-related systems. In addition, the unpredictable nature of computer and embedded chip responses to an unreadable date means that some failures of systems not directly related to safety could adversely affect safety systems or operator responses to unrelated emergencies (e.g., by providing incorrect data). REACTORS NEED ELECTRICITY The Y2K bug threatens to disrupt the electrical grid, and could cause local or regional blackouts. Some have predicted a national electrical blackout. Consider that there are more than 1,000 different utilities, public and private, and non-utility generators of electricity in the U.S. and Canada. In June 1998, a U.S. Senate Committee issued a survey of the ten largest U.S. utilities. The Committee concluded that "there is significant cause for concern" about utilities efforts to remedy the Y2K problem, that "assurances of timely Y2K compliance [are] little more than a hope," and that, because the utilities surveyed are the largest in the nation, "we are pessimistic about the implications for the rest of the utility sector." Failure of some small utilities could cause instability in the electrical grid, leading to localized blackouts; failure of one or more larger utilities could lead to regional blackouts. While this would be inconvenient at best for most people, it is potentially disastrous for nuclear reactors. A little-known reality of nuclear power is that atomic reactors need a steady source of electricity to cool their cores and irradiated fuel pools even when they are shut down. Without this cooling ability, even closed reactors would melt down; fuel pools would boil dry and release their highly-radioactive inventories. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission considers this "station blackout" scenario to be among the largest contributors to risk of operating reactors. To compensate, nuclear plants are required to have back-up power sources. These are normally giant generators that run on diesel oil and each reactor is required to have two of them (although some multi-reactor sites share generators). But these diesel generators can be unreliable. At best, the NRC says they are 95% reliable. That means that if all 200 or so generators were required at one time, 10 may fail. Moreover, there is reason to believe, given the operating history of these generators, that the 95% level is little more than wishful thinking. WE'VE GOT EMERGENCY PLANS, OR DO WE? Nuclear utilities have been slow to design and implement contingency plans to cope with unforeseen Y2K-related problems. The Senate Committee found, in June 1998, that "none of the utilities surveyed had completed contingency plansà" For the most part, contingency plans will be folded into existing emergency response plans at nuclear utilities. But these emergency plans, which include emergency evacuation capabilities, are tested only once every two years, meaning that under current regulations, at least half the utilities will never even test their Y2K-related plans. All nuclear emergency plans rely heavily on off-site sources of assistance, including police, fire and other essential services. But these services, as well as critical communications abilities, also may be vulnerable to the Y2K bug if not properly assessed, remedied and tested. THE INDUSTRY RESPONSE TO Y2K The utility industry, including the nuclear utilities and the NRC, has been working to resolve Y2K issues. For the most part, they say they will be "Y2K ready" (which does not necessarily mean compliant) by the turn of the millennium. But many utilities began working on the problem late, and some have not even completed their initial assessments of the scope of their problems. Once the assessments are completed, utilities must repair the problems, if possible, or purchase and install new systems. Then systems must be tested, itself a time-consuming process that may reveal still more bugs and incompatibilities. Few utilities have allowed themselves more than a few months to fully test all systems and repair any new problems found. WHAT YOU CAN DO Citizens can take several proactive steps to help assure that Y2K-related disruptions will be minimized and that effective emergency and contingency plans are implemented. In December 1998, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) submitted three emergency petitions for rulemaking to the NRC. These call for: 1) the shutdown of all reactors that are not demonstrably Y2K compliant through full testing, by December 1, 1999 until they are compliant; 2) installation of additional sources of back-up power to replace or supplement the existing diesel generators. These may include solar, wind, natural gas, hydro or other dedicated power systems; 3) a requirement that every nuclear utility test a full-scale emergency plan during 1999 with a scenario that includes a Y2K-related component. Concerned people should write to the NRC (U.S. NRC, Washington, DC 20555, Attn: Docketing and Service Branch) in support of these petitions. Copies of the petitions are available from NIRS. People can also contact your state and local officials and urge them to institute separate emergency and contingency plans for your state, paying special attention to the possibility of electrical blackouts and telecommunications failures. Finally, people should contact their federal legislators and demand continued congressional hearings on the nuclear industry and Y2K, and ask their Congressmembers to support the NIRS petitions. The Y2K issue is, by its very nature, rapidly changing. New information continually is being developed. For the latest information, check the NIRS website (http://www.nirs.org) or contact NIRS. Michael Mariotte, December 1998 Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1424 16th Street NW, #404, Washington DC 20036 202.328.0002; fax: 202.462.2183 nirsnet@nirs.org; http://www.nirs.org - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #48 ********************************** - To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.