ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n110

Internet Message Format | 1999-04-12 | 42KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #110
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest      Tuesday, April 13 1999      Volume 01 : Number 110




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

Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 22:41:25 -0700
From: "David Crockett Williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fw: So nukes don't blow up...

- -----Original Message-----
From: Declan McCullagh <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 7:50 PM
Subject: FC: So nukes don't blow up...


>This is a fascinating report on the technology used to prevent unauthorized
>detonation of nuclear weapons. Of relevance to this list, perhaps, is how
>encryption is used (or isn't). The author is Steven Bellovin of AT&T
Research.
>
>-Declan
>
>
>http://www.research.att.com/~smb/nsam-160/pal.html
>
>What is a PAL?
>
>A PAL -- a "Permissive Action Link" -- is the box that is supposed to
>prevent unauthorized use of a
>nuclear weapon. "Unauthorized" covers a wide range of sin, from terrorists
>who have stolen bombs to
>insane American military officers to our allies who may have some of their
>own uses for bombs that are
>covered by joint use agreements. It's supposed to be impossible to
>"hot-wire" a nuclear weapon. Is it?
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
>To subscribe: send a message to [e-mail] with this text:
>subscribe politech
>More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>


- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:07:41 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: Bombing a monastery on Easter

In a message dated 4/12/99 11:34:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<<
 April 9, 1999

 Guest Opinions
 The Catholic Messenger
 Davenport, IA 52801

 On Easter Sunday night, NATO bombed St. Gabriel's
 monastery in Zemun, a Serbian municipality. Father Filaret
 of St. Gabriel's was quoted as saying, "I cannot
 comprehend that the believers, some of them probably
 Christian, were able to bomb this monastery, built in 1786,
 on Roman Catholic Easter".

 St. Gabriel's has been a sanctuary for Serbian, Croatian,
 and Muslim refugees since 1991, when war broke out in
 Bosnia.  Assuming that this was not an intended target
 of NATO's bombing campaign, I do not blame the
 soldiers who dropped the bombs on St. Gabriel's.

 But I find it very curious that this story did not make
 headlines back in the US. Once war breaks out, we usually
 hear only one side of the story. And part of the story that
 we do hear is about the pinpoint accuracy of our bombs,
 which supposedly discriminate between the innocent
 civilians and the military targets we wish to destroy.

 Wars bring out the nationalistic loyalties in all of us. That
 is true on all sides of a war. They say that truth is the first
 casualty of war. The bombing of their country binds the
 Serbian people closer together under the leadership of
 even a dictator like Milosevic, while we hear only the
 worst stories about the Serbs and their leaders.

 And vice versa.  The people living in the areas being
 bombed by NATO have a hard time understanding why
 we are bombing their homeland, regardless of our
 intentions. Especially when we bomb sacred places
 like St. Gabriel's. What we see as settling one score
 creates another score for the losers of this war to settle
 some time in the future.

 As the flood of refugees continues to rush across the
 borders with unimaginable stories of ethnic cleansing, our
 immediate concern must certainly be for those who need
 food, shelter and medical care. As a church, we are
 already responding through Catholic Relief Services. The
 whole world needs to stand together against ethnic
 cleansing. But the intention of stopping these atrocities
 does not automatically justify the NATO bombing.

 For those of us opposed to both the ethnic cleansing and
 the NATO bombings, the question is:  What are the
 alternatives? I would suggest three helpful steps:
 Meaningful dialogue.  International authority. Conflict
 prevention.  Without threatening to use violence against
 parties who do not agree with American terms of a
 peace agreement, as we did at Rambouillet, the US
 should use its vast influence to get all the parties to
 the negotiating table. And let them settle their differences
 through dialogue.

 This war will not end war in the Balkans.  It will not
 make the world safe for democracy.  Not will it make the
 world a safe place for Americans to travel.  We cannot
 expect that dropping bombs will end the murderous
 assaults of a man like Milosevic.  If we expect to enforce
 our will through the use of bombs, we had better be
 prepared to live in a dangerous world.  If we wish to
 build peace and promote freedom, we need to sow the
 seeds of justice and reconciliation.

 Sincerely,

 Dan R. Ebener
 Coordinating Director of Social Action
 Diocese of Davenport
 <[e-mail]>



- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:07:34 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) Re: Write to Clinton, Urges Metropolitan Anthony

In a message dated 4/12/99 11:27:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<<
 Subject: 1999.04.10 Voithia:
 Read Voithia at http://www.voithia.org
 Posted: Saturday, April 10, 1999, Written: Friday, April 9, 1999,
 Section: Articles Content: Archdiocese

 Write to Clinton, Urges Metropolitan Anthony

 April 9, 1999

 By Stephen P. Angelides / Voithia Executive Editor

 OAKLAND, CA -- In a dramatic Good Friday homily at the Greek
 Orthodox Cathedral of the Ascension here this evening,
 Metropolitan Anthony urged each member of the congregation to
 "write a letter to President Clinton tomorrow."

 "Because it is Holy Saturday, tomorrow is a good day for each and
 every one of you to write a letter to President Clinton and ask him
 to stop the bombing of Yugoslavia," Metropolitan Anthony
 exhorted the approximately 1,000 Good Friday worshipers. The
 choir had just begun to sing the Doxology when Metropolitan
 Anthony dramatically interrupted and delivered his homily
 extemporaneously for about 15 minutes.

 "The reason for this war is not humanitarian, otherwise we would
 have been in Rwanda when people there were being killed by the
 thousands," Metropolitan Anthony asserted. "There is absolutely
 no justification for this war," Metropolitan Anthony said
 emphatically, "no matter how hard they try to convince us that this
 is a just war, or even a holy war."

 "President Clinton should fall down on his knees and beg for
 forgiveness," Metropolitan Anthony said. "Instead of continuing
 this bombing," he urged, "the parties should return to the table and
 exhaust every possibility."

 Metropolitan Anthony asserted that although the media was not
 reporting everything, the bombing was damaging or destroying
 civilian buildings, including "thousand-year-old churches and
 monasteries."

 Metropolitan Anthony said that Yugoslavian President Milosevich
 is "equally responsible" along with President Clinton. Then,
 speaking to the congregation, Metropolitan Anthony said, "each of
 you is also partially responsible."

 He illustrated this point by recounting a television interview with a
 22 year old soldier responsible for firing guided missiles. When
 the soldier was asked what he felt when he launched a missile,
 according to Metropolitan Anthony, the soldier's response was,
 "nothing--they just give us some numbers to punch in and the
 computer does the rest." Metropolitan Anthony then spoke directly
 to the young people present, telling them "you should never, ever,
 let a computer do your thinking for you."

 Metropolitan Anthony urged the worshipers not to forget the
 history of the Balkans, and reminded them that two world wars had
 started there. "War never solves any problem," he asserted.
 Metropolitan Anthony said that he had experienced the second
 world war as a boy in Crete, and that he could still "hear the sound
 of bombs flying around," and has "scars in my heart" from that
 experience.

 Metropolitan Anthony concluded by wishing those present "the
 best Resurrection celebration possible under these circumstances."

 Although the Cathedral's Dean, Rev. Thomas Paris, had previously
 spoken out against the bombing, Metropolitan Anthony's homily
 was the first time parishioners here had been asked to take direct
 action against it.

 Although Metropolitan Anthony's anti-war homily was a unique
 Good Friday experience, most parishioners seemed to either be in
 agreement or to take it in stride. Many applauded softly at the
 conclusion of the homily to show their support for Metropolitan
 Anthony's message while maintaining their respect for the
 solemnity of the occasion.

 As they passed through the narthex of the church after the service,
 parishioners were handed flyers for a Peace Demonstration and
 Prayer Vigil on Holy Saturday afternoon in downtown San
 Francisco, sponsored by the Serbian Orthodox Churches of the
 Bay Area and the Serbian Unity Congress.

 * * *
 note: A page has been added to the Orthodox Peace Fellowship
 web site on Church response to the NATO attack on Yugoslavia:
 www.incommunion.org/nato.htm
 * * *



- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:43:35 +0100
From: "Sally Light" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fw: New! On TVC's Web Page! Good Stuff!

- ----------
> From: marylia <[e-mail]>
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: New! On TVC's Web Page! Good Stuff!
> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 5:56 PM
>
> Attention peace and enviro people:
>
> New! On the web! From Tri-Valley CAREs at http://www.igc.org/tvc
>
> 1. Your sign-on wanted! Read the criteria by which the community (that's
> all of us) can judge the adequacy of Livermore Lab's plans to clean up
its
> mess at site 300. Please sign on! And, if you have another polluted
> facility in your neighborhood, consider using these to assist you in
> developing your own criteria for cleanup. This is all about community
> rights and stating affirmatively what kind of cleanup is needed from the
> public's perspective.
>
> 2. Action alert! The text of House Concurrent Resolution 74 is now on our
> web site. The is the Congressional Resolution offered by Rep. Ed Markey
> (D-MA) to replace the DOE's stockpile stewardship program with a
> "curatorship" program for the arsenal that will be less expensive, less
> dangerous and will not cause the proliferation problems that the DOE's
> current program entails. Cosponsors are listed, along with the number for
> Markey's office. Is your Representative a co-sponsor yet?
>
> 3. Action alert! The text of House Resolution 82 is on our web site, with
> co-sponsors. Offered by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) to "recognize the
security
> interests of the United States in furthering complete nuclear
disarmament,"
> this Resolution seeks to encourage the President to initiate multilateral
> negotiations on a treaty on nuclear weapons elimination, in accordance
with
> Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Is your Rep. a co-sponsor
yet?
>
> 4. The April 1999 edition of our newsletter, Citizen's Watch is now up on
> our web site. You will find (a) all about the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
> in New Mexico, and why it is not the solution to our country's nuclear
> waste problems, (b) all about the positive progress on nuclear abolition
- --
> giving an update on the grassroots campaign and the congressional
actions,
> (c) action alerts, Mother's Day events and the stirring poem and call to
> action "Mother's Day Proclamation 1870," by Julia Ward Howe, from whence
> the celebration stems, (d) print bites, Project Censored chooses
> "subcritical" tests and the U.S. stockpile stewardship program as the #6
> most underreported story of the year, etc., etc. CHECK IT OUT!
>
> Don't forget to check out our (downloadable) postcards to Clinton asking
> him to take this country's nuclear weapons off alert status, and our
other
> features on the site. Happy browsing...
>
> ++++ Please note that my email address has changed to
> <[e-mail]> on 3/1/99 ++++
>
> Marylia Kelley
> Tri-Valley CAREs
> (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
> 2582 Old First Street
> Livermore, CA USA 94550
>
> <http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!
> Our web site will remain at this location. Only my email address has
> changed on 3/1/99.
>
> [phone] - is our phone
> [phone] - is our fax
>
> Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983,
Tri-Valley
> CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear
> Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the
> international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear
> weapons.
>
>

- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 23:18:25 +0100
From: "Sally Light" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fw: comm. accept. crit. for the abol-usa list serve

- ----------
> From: marylia <[e-mail]>
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: comm. accept. crit. for the abol-usa list serve
> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 7:36 PM
>
> Dear Sally: For whatever reason, I still cannot post to the abolition-usa
> list serve. Can you please post this? Peace, MK
> Dear friends and colleagues:
>
> Hi. I am posting these Community Acceptance Criteria to the abolition-usa
> list serve for 3 reasons. (1) You are invited to please sign on at the
end
> and return the message to us; (2) You are invited to include comments in
> your return message; and (3) Because so many of us are affected by
> contaminated nuclear facilities, we at Tri-Valley CAREs want to encourage
> other communities to develop their own criteria for other sites. You are
> invited to let our posting below spark your thinking about community
> acceptance of a cleanup plan in your area.
>
> Two quick notes -- I'm sorry that the cool formatting and our graphic get
> lost by sending via email, and please note that this is a fairly long
file.
> There are 12 criteria. Read on...
>
>                 ** Livermore Lab's Site 300 Cleanup: Community Acceptance
> Criteria
>
>                 ** please read, sign and return
>
> Dear environmental advocate:
>
> Livermore Lab's site 300 is a high explosives testing range located
between
> Livermore and Tracy. Site 300 is heavily polluted with toxic and
> radioactive waste, including chemical solvents, high explosive compounds,
> radioactive tritium and uranium. In 1990, the U.S. Environmental
Protection
> Agency (EPA) put site 300 on its "Superfund" list of worst contaminated
> places in the country.
>
> The cleanup of site 300 is at a crucial phase, one where the public can
> make a difference in determining whether the Lab chooses an appropriate
set
> of remedies to clean up soil and groundwater at the site, and also
whether
> it commits sufficient budget resources to do the job right.
>
> The Lab has recently produced a draft "Site Wide Feasibility Study"
(SWFS)
> to explain some of the options that could be used to clean up site 300.
> Following completion of a final SWFS, the Lab will then prepare a
proposed
> Remedial Action Plan, which will form the legal basis for cleanup of the
> site, including such things as cleanup levels, how radioactive wastes
> should be controlled and the timing of cleanup activities. In order to be
> accepted by the EPA and other regulatory agencies, the final plan will be
> evaluated by nine criteria.
>
> One of EPA's criteria for "signing off" on a cleanup plan is community
> acceptance. In the interest of achieving a real and lasting cleanup,
> Tri-Valley CAREs is proposing 12 Community Acceptance Criteria. We
welcome
> your support. Please sign this form and return it to us. Also, we welcome
> any suggestions for additional criteria or other comments you may have.
>
> ********* Community Acceptance Criteria *************
>
> #1.     Complete the cleanup project in a timely manner. Set a schedule
for
> cleanup activities and adhere to it. The goal should be to complete
cleanup
> ten years after the DOE's last scheduled Record Of Decision, with up to
30
> years thereafter for continued monitoring of residual contamination. As
> part of the plan, schedule milestones addressing total contaminant mass
> removal and trends toward achievement of cleanup goals should be
> established and committed to by the Dept. of Energy, which is the Lab's
> parent agency. Any areas at site 300 that will still be contaminated
after
> ten years should be identified up front and the reasons stated.
>
> #2.     Cleanup levels should support multiple uses for the property.
Those
> uses should be unrestricted by environmental contamination. The Lab's
> current assumptions about land-use need to be altered. As we can see,
> residential development is beginning to take place up to the site
boundary.
> Therefore, assumptions should include the possibility of large
residential
> communities relying on the regional aquifer for drinking water, thus
> speeding up groundwater movement. Second, we do not believe that site 300
> will necessarily always remain in DOE's custody. The "need" for testing
> nuclear weapons and components (particularly of new and modified designs)
> is a political decision, not a technically necessary mandate, and, in our
> opinion this testing should cease. We recommend that site 300 future land
> use assumptions include mixed residential, recreational, ecological
> preserve and industrial activities. Without full cleanup to standards
> appropriate for all of the above-listed uses, substantial residual
> contamination may remain in soil and groundwater and restrict any
> non-military use of the property.
>
> #3.     Cleanup levels should be set to the strictest state and federal
> government levels. We believe that the strictest cleanup levels should be
> met in cleaning up the site. Federal and state Maximum Contaminant Levels
> (MCLs) for all groundwater (on-site and off-site) should be the "bottom
> line below which the cleanup will not fall." In many cases the technology
> exists (and/or can be developed) that will clean up contamination to
> "background" levels - that is to the level that existed in nature at the
> site before Livermore Lab took over in 1955 and began polluting it. In
all
> cases where this can be achieved, it should be. In this regard,
Tri-Valley
> CAREs concurs with a strict interpretation of the CA Regional Water
Quality
> Control Board's non-degradation policy for groundwater. Migration of
> pollutants into pristine waters must be halted.
>
> #4.     Remedies that actively destroy contaminants are preferable. In
> order of preference, Tri-Valley CAREs recommends the following types of
> cleanup measures: a) remedies that destroy contaminants (i.e. by breaking
> them down into non hazardous constituents), such as ultra-violet
> light/hydrogen peroxide, permeable barriers, or biodegradation; b) active
> remedies that safely treat or remove contaminants from the contaminated
> media; c) monitored natural attenuation in so far as it relies on natural
> degradation (and not further dispersion of the pollution) within a
> reasonable time frame. What is called "risk and hazard management" (i.e.,
> restrictions on land use, fencing, signs and institutional controls),
while
> potentially useful for reducing short-term risks, is not a valid cleanup
in
> our eyes and should only be used as an interim measure. In no case do we
> think that "point of use cleanup" (e.g., merely placing filters on
off-site
> drinking water wells) is appropriate. When soil excavation takes place,
it
> should be properly controlled to minimize releases of contaminated soil
> into the air, and onto adjacent properties.
>
> #5.     Radioactive wastes and the tritium-polluted underwater plume
should
> be controlled immediately in order to prevent further releases to the
> environment. The tritium plume, nearly two miles long and growing, cannot
> be cleaned up in the traditional sense of the word, since it is not
> economically feasible to separate the radioactive hydrogen (tritium) from
> the water. Therefore, Tri-Valley CAREs recommends the following: a)
> isolation of the tritium contaminated wastes in the unlined dumps at site
> 300 to prevent further and continuing contamination of the groundwater;
b)
> hydraulic control of the underground water plume to prevent further
> migration; c) aggressive monitoring to ensure no migration occurs over
time
> while the tritium decays (tritium decays at a rate of 5.5% per year);
and,
> d) a stringent contingency plan in case these methods fail. As it
currently
> stands, groundwater rises into the unlined waste dumps during heavy
> rainfall and, once that water mixes with the radioactive wastes there, it
> picks up additional tritium contamination. Isolation of the wastes can be
> accomplished by means of drains, by capturing groundwater upstream from
the
> dump sites before they are inundated, or by removing the
> tritium-contaminated solid debris from the dumps and storing it above
> ground in a monitored facility. This latter method has the highest
> likelihood of actually preventing further tritium contamination.
>
> #6.     Radioactive substances should be isolated from the environment.
As
> is the case with tritium (discussed above), there are several underground
> plumes containing uranium 238. Technology exists to separate this
> contaminant from the groundwater. We recommend that this radioactive
waste
> be stored in above ground monitored facilities after separation from
> groundwater.
>
> #7.     The ecosystem should be protected and balanced against the
cleanup
> remedies. Site 300 sits on 11 square miles of land, including a series of
> steep hills and canyons, covered by grasslands. Seven major plant
> communities occur at site 300, including: coastal sage scrub, native
> grassland, introduced grassland, oak woodland and 3 types of wetland.
> Twenty species of reptiles and amphibians, 70 species of birds, and 25
> species of mammals also live there. Special and rare and endangered
species
> include the burrowing owl, San Joaquin Kit Fox and the Large-Flowered
> Fiddleneck. Ecological risks should be no greater than those for humans.
> The Lab should update its ecological assessment of 1994, as there are
more
> complete data now. Moreover, cleanup activities should not inadvertently
> destroy unique habitat.
>
> #8.     Decisions should not rely on computer modeling. The draft SWFS
> points out just how complex the hydrogeology of the site is, and how
little
> it is understood by the "experts". Given this, Tri-Valley CAREs believes
> that over-reliance on computer modeling to predict the fate and transport
> of pollution is not a good idea. Computer modeling should be used as a
tool
> only, and continually updated by field testing.
>
> #9.     Additional site characterization is needed and therefore must be
> adequately included in budget planning. It is also apparent from the
draft
> SWFS and other documents that additional characterization (e.g. of soil,
> groundwater, unlined waste dumps etc.) is necessary, and will have to be
> budgeted for many years to come.
>
> #10. A contingency plan should be completed and subject to public review.
> We recommend that a site wide contingency plan be part of the SWFS, or
part
> of the upcoming Remedial Action Plan. This is needed because cleanup of
> several areas at site 300 is not scheduled for some years to come and
there
> are many uncertainties regarding the effectiveness of cleanup. For
example,
> innovative technologies that have not been fully evaluated will be used
> (because exotic bomb testing activities created a "toxic stew" of
> contaminants).
>
> #11. The public should be involved in cleanup decisions. As it now
stands,
> public involvement takes place through Tri-Valley CAREs and at
> Lab-sponsored public meetings and hearings which could end altogether
after
> "sign off" is obtained on the cleanup remedies. Instead, the Lab should
> commit to keeping the public informed and getting public feed-back on a
> regular basis.
>
> #12. Cleanup should be given priority over further weapons development.
> Perhaps most important of all, Tri-Valley CAREs insists that cleanup of
> site 300 be given a priority over further bomb-creating enterprises, and
> that adequate, stable, long-term funding be assured in order that the
> cleanup may be done right. The current allocation of approximately 1% of
> Livermore Lab's annual budget to cleanup at site 300 (and only another 1%
> to cleanup at the Lab's main site) is insufficient. Moreover, ongoing and
> planned weapons activities must not be allowed to continue to pollute the
> site.
>
> Please sign and return to Tri-Valley CAREs, 2582 Old First Street,
> Livermore CA 94550. Fax: [phone]. Phone: [phone]. E-mail:
> [e-mail]
>
> Name:
>
> Address:
>
> Phone:
>
> Additional comments:
>
> ++++ Please note that my email address has changed to
> <[e-mail]> on 3/1/99 ++++
>
> Marylia Kelley
> Tri-Valley CAREs
> (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
> 2582 Old First Street
> Livermore, CA USA 94550
>
> <http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!
> Our web site will remain at this location. Only my email address has
> changed on 3/1/99.
>
> [phone] - is our phone
> [phone] - is our fax
>
> Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983,
Tri-Valley
> CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear
> Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the
> international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear
> weapons.
>
>

- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 23:19:29 +0100
From: "Sally Light" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fw: wipp for the abol-usa list serve

- ----------
> From: marylia <[e-mail]>
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: wipp for the abol-usa list serve
> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 7:39 PM
>
> Dear Sally: Please post this to the abolition-usa list serve if you think
> it will be of interest. Peace, Marylia
> Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: The Two Percent "Solution"
> (with an Action Alert)
>
> by Marylia Kelley
> from Tri-Valley CAREs' April 1999 newsletter, Citizen's Watch
>
> The flatbed truck left Los Alamos Lab in New Mexico at 7:49 PM on
Thursday,
> March 26, and headed south on U.S. 285  for about 270 miles - to the
Waste
> Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, NM. Loaded in the truck was
600
> pounds of plutonium-contaminated waste. The trip was reported to have
taken
> around 7.5 hours.
>
> In truth, that journey took the Dept. of Energy 25 years and $2 billion.
> When the nuclear debris reached its destination at about 4 AM on Friday,
> Energy Secretary Bill Richardson called it "a truly historic moment."
>
> Was it, really? What is WIPP? Will it solve the nuclear waste problem? If
> so, why have environmentalists toiled such long hours for  two decades
and
> more - in courtrooms, on picket lines and in offices piled high with
> technical reports - to stop it? Why had the state of New Mexico also
sought
> to enjoin its opening? Why is DOE putting nuclear waste in WIPP without
> first obtaining a hazardous waste permit?
>
> WIPP is the DOE's proposed deep geologic repository for nuclear
> weapons-generated transuranic waste (containing radioactive elements
> heavier than uranium, mostly plutonium). WIPP is being excavated in an
> ancient salt bed 2,150 feet below the ground. Still under construction,
> WIPP will ultimately contain 16 square miles of buried plutonium wastes,
> including up to 850,000 55-gallon drums entombed in 56 rooms, each 300
feet
> long by 33 feet wide.
>
> WIPP will leak. Much of the waste slated for WIPP is contaminated with
> plutonium 239, which has a radioactive half-life of over 24,000 years. A
> radioactive element's hazardous life is generally calculated at 10
> half-lives, in this case 240,000 years.
>
> The WIPP site is surrounded by proven oil and gas reserves and potash
> deposits. Future mining and drilling operations could hit the waste
rooms,
> releasing  massive amounts of radioactivity to the surface. Other
drilling
> operations, such as fluid injection, could cause radioactive releases at
> WIPP even if the original operation is kept outside the site boundary.
> Experts don't understand the groundwater system at WIPP very well. The
> Rustler aquifer, which sits above the WIPP waste rooms has fractures and
> caverns in it that could transport waste, eventually contaminating
drinking
> water supplies. Pressurized brine reservoirs under the WIPP site could
> bring wastes to the surface as well. These reservoirs contain large
amounts
> of salt water under high pressure.
>
> DOE is seeking, but does not yet have, a hazardous waste permit from the
> state of New Mexico. The permit is required because DOE will dispose of
> mixed transuranic wastes at WIPP. These are wastes that are contaminated
> with both a chemical hazard (like a solvent) and a radioactive element
such
> as  plutonium. States can regulate DOE's hazardous (chemical) wastes.
> Therefore, WIPP must have an operating permit. However, DOE is the sole
> regulator for all the radioactive waste in the weapons complex. DOE is
> essentially forcing the premature opening of WIPP by bringing in a
shipment
> of "purely" radioactive waste from Los Alamos.
>
> Never mind that this waste is from NASA activities at Los Alamos Lab, and
> that WIPP is supposed to be for military wastes only. And, never mind
that
> significant controversy exists over whether the Los Alamos waste was
> properly analyzed and classified. DOE's aim was to get waste, any waste,
> into WIPP and preempt the state's ability to impose limits through its
> permitting authority.
>
> DOE plans to bring 40,000 truck loads of transuranic waste to WIPP over
the
> next 30 years. Most of it will come from California (including from
> Livermore Lab), Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio,
> Tennessee, North Carolina and Washington state. DOE estimates these
> shipments will result in 6 deaths and 48 injuries from accidents and that
> 3 people will die from radiation exposure during "accident free"
shipments.
>
> WIPP is part of the DOE's nuclear waste "shell game," a dangerous
> enterprise that puts deadly wastes on our highways, moving them around
the
> country and substituting "out of sight - out of mind" for a sound policy.
>
> Estimates are WIPP will cost around $20 billion. Storing waste where it
is
> would cost about $3 billion. Moreover, WIPP will not come close to
solving
> the country's nuclear waste problems, not by any standard of measurement.
> WIPP is designed to handle less than 2% of the existing volume of nuclear
> bomb-generated radioactive wastes. Even if one calculates the transuranic
> wastes alone, WIPP is proposed for only about one-third of DOE's existing
> TRU waste.
>
> Yet, Secretary Richardson sent out a press release to say that WIPP will
> safely clean up the nuclear weapons complex. So, what gives?
>
> Perhaps, WIPP's main use is not for waste disposal, but rather for its
> public relations value. If DOE can convince enough people that it has
taken
> care of its waste problems, then currently operational weapons facilities
> like Livermore Lab will face less pressure to cut down on the future
> production of nuclear wastes.
>
> Transuranic wastes will continue to be generated. And we will put them...
where?
>
> WIPP action suggestion:
>                         Write to Bill Richardson, Secretary of Energy,
1000
> Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20585. In your own words, tell him,
> "Transuranic waste generation must be reduced at its source. Don't bury
it,
> Bill."
>
> WIPP legal update:
>                         Four groups have appealed Judge Penn's decision
to
> lift the 1992 injunction against WIPP. This is the decision that now
allows
> DOE to send 17 shipments of Los Alamos waste to WIPP, of which the first
> has been sent. (The Judge has not yet given a go-ahead for DOE to begin
> waste shipments from other sites around the weapons complex.) If the
appeal
> is successful, the injunction would be fully reinstated. No hearing date
> has been set as yet. The four groups filing the appeal are: Southwest
> Research and Information Center, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety,
> Natural Resources Defense Council and the Environmental Defense Fund.
(The
> state of New Mexico had been a party to the original suit as well.)
>
>                         In a separate legal action, SRIC, CCNS, the state
> of New Mexico and Citizens for Alternatives to Radioactive Dumping are
> challenging the legality of the EPA certification for WIPP. A hearing is
> scheduled for May 6. If the plaintiffs are successful, the DOE would have
> to try and recertify WIPP, a process that would likely take several years
> and, theoretically at least, its end result would not be assured.
>
>                         Meanwhile, the DOE's Idaho National Engineering
and
> Environmental Lab and Rocky Flats Plant are gearing up to ship waste to
> WIPP, and may try to argue before the Judge that somehow "national
secuity"
> demands putting nuclear trash on the road.
>
>                         Meanwhile, the state of New Mexico has gotten an
> earful from its citizenry through the public comment process, and must
> ponder the permit issues and make that decision.
>  -- Stay tuned.
>
> ++++ Please note that my email address has changed to
> <[e-mail]> on 3/1/99 ++++
>
> Marylia Kelley
> Tri-Valley CAREs
> (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
> 2582 Old First Street
> Livermore, CA USA 94550
>
> <http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!
> Our web site will remain at this location. Only my email address has
> changed on 3/1/99.
>
> [phone] - is our phone
> [phone] - is our fax
>
> Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983,
Tri-Valley
> CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear
> Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the
> international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear
> weapons.
>
>

- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:24:23 -0400
From: Stephen Young <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Securing Peace In Europe - International Conference

Dear Colleagues,

We would like to invite you an international conference on "Securing
Peace in
Europe" on 22 April 1999 in Washington, DC. The agenda of the conference
appears
below.

NATO's war in Kosovo may overshadow plans for a celebration of the
Alliance's
50th anniversary this April in Washington. The NATO Summit, 23-25 April,
will be
forced to focus on the on-going crisis in the former Yugoslavia, rather
than
lauding the success of the Alliance. At the same time, NATO must
establish its
vision for the Alliance's role in European security. Profound changes in
the
region's security environment have challenged the Alliance and will
alter the
roles and responsibilities of the European countries for the 21st
century. The
role of nuclear weapons will be a particularly important issue.

On 22 April 1999, the day before the NATO Summit begins, the Berlin
Information-center for Transatlantic Security (BITS), the British
American
Security Information Council (BASIC), the Heinrich B÷ll Foundation and
the
Lawyers Alliance for World Security (LAWS) will be hosting an
international
conference in Washington, DC, entitled "Securing Peace In Europe". The
conference will be held a short distance from the NATO Summit at the
Renaissance
Washington DC Hotel, 999 Ninth Street, NW.

The aim of the conference is to take an informed look at core aspects of
the
future of European Security and to discuss them with a transatlantic
audience.
For this purpose the conference will bring together distinguished
experts from
Western Europe, the United States and Russia.

Please let us know whether you will be able to attend. Please reply via
email to
Stephen Young at [e-mail] or to Peter Cross via telephone on
202-785
1266 or fax [phone].

Yours sincerely

Otfried Nassauer
Director, BITS

Daniel T. Plesch
Director, BASIC

Sascha Mueller Kraenner
CEO, Heinrich Boell-Foundation

Amb. Thomas Graham Jr,
President, LAWS

+ + + + +

Securing Peace in Europe

International Conference

April 22, 1999

Renaissance Washington, DC Hotel Auditorium
999 Ninth St NW, Washington DC

Conference organizers and hosts:
Berlin Information Center for Transatlantic Security û BITS
British American Security Information Council û BASIC
Lawyers Alliance for World Security û LAWS
Heinrich B÷ll Foundation, Washington Office

Agenda

8.30 Coffee and Pastries

9.00 Welcome
 Keynote Speeches: European Security Architecture for the 21st Century
û Joschka Fischer, Foreign Minister, Federal Republic of Germany
(invited)
û Robert MacNamara, former US Secretary of Defense (invited)

10.00 Panel I: The Future Role of NATO in European Security
Chaired by Amb. Jonathan Dean, Union of Concerned Scientists, United
States
û Gen. George Joulwan, former NATO SACEUR (invited)
û Charles William Maynes, Eurasia Foundation, United States (invited)
û Dr. Esther Brimmer, Carnegie Commission on Preventing Violent
Conflict, United
States
û Admiral Sir James Eberle, former director of the Royal Institute of
International Affairs (Chatham House)
û Dardan Gashi, OSCE Special Advisor on Kosovo, Austria
û Angelika Beer, Defense and Disarmament Spokesperson, Alliance 90/The
Greens,
MP, Germany (invited)

12.00 Buffet Lunch

13.00 Panel II: NATO - Nuclear Weapons, Arms Control and Proliferation
Chaired by Dr. Jo Husbands, National Academy of Sciences, United States
û Mr. Vladimir Iakimets, Russian Academy of Sciences (invited)
û Otfried Nassauer, Director, Berlin Information-center for
Transatlantic
Security, Germany

15.00 Coffee Break

15.30 Panel III: NATO, Russia and the Future of European Security
Chaired by: Daniel T. Plesch, Director, British American Security
Information
Council, United Kingdom
û Dr. Dmitri Trenin, Deputy Director Carnegie Moscow Center, Russian
Federation
û Amb. Thomas Graham, President Lawyers Alliance for World Security,
United
States
û Bruce Clark, The Economist
û Alexis Chahtahtinsky, Head of NATO Information Office in Moscow
û Dr. Prof. Egon Bahr, former German minister (invited)
û Andreas Zumach, freelance journalist, Geneva

17.30 Final Remarks: The Future of European Security and the Future of
Europe
û Guest Speaker: Akis Tsochatzopoulos, Greek Defense Minister (invited)

+ + + + +

Directions:  The Renaissance Washington, at 999 Ninth St NW,  is
directly
opposite the Washington Convention Center. The nearest metro stop
Gallery
Place/Chinatown. If you need additional directions, please contact Peter
Cross
on [phone] or email him at: [e-mail].





- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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 #110
***********************************

-
 To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 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.