World Information Service on Energy founded in 1978 NUCLEARNUCLEAR MONITORMONITOR A Publication of World Information Service on Energy (WISE) and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service (NIRS), incorporating the former WISE News Communique

#620--North American Edition December 24, 2004 BRAZIL, AND THE NUCLEAR ACCORD In November 2004 the Brazilian and German governments agreed to substitute their nuclear cooperation accord with a broader umbrella agreement on sustainable energy cooperation. Long discussions between the German government and parliament had taken place before the German government finally requested, by diplomatic note to the Brazilian government, the conversion of the nuclear accord. Just days before the dead- line was due to expire, the Brazilian Foreign Ministry accepted the proposal but nevertheless, the Brazilian government declared that it would not abandon nuclear energy. (620.5656) Urgewald - The bilateral The energy crisis in 2001, caused by In reaction to this proposal, the nuclear agreement is a relic of insufficient rainfall and the lack of German Foreign Ministry stated in a Brazilian military dictatorship and the water in Brazilian dams, has changed letter to German NGOs that the “atomic euphoria” in the 1970s. It was the situation. Until now, up to 80% of government’s official position did not inspired by the military leadership’s Brazilian energy is produced by (large) support the construction of Angra 3. In desire to construct its own nuclear hydropower facilities. Therefore, the particular, it argued against the weapons. The bilateral agreement old plans for expanded use of nuclear provision of public credits and itself was intended to facilitate the energy have once again been revived in investment guarantees by German construction of eight nuclear power order to reduce the dependency on companies. plants and further nuclear facilities. hydropower. In another reaction to this dispute, the To date, only one plant has been built Regarding the nuclear accord, the coalition treaty between Greens and as a result of this co-operation mostly German nuclear industry has been Social-Democrats in 2002 makes an because of the major economic crisis applying pressure on the government explicit reference to nuclear treaties affecting the Brazilian government to support the new nuclear euphoria in mentioning that “nuclear treaties since the early 1980s but additionally Brazil. In 2002, German public should be reviewed in order to check if due to the escalation of construction KfW showed interest, by “letter of they should be cancelled or rene- costs. As a result, plans to expand intent”, in financing the construction gotiated” (coalition treaty 2002: 38). nuclear energy were mothballed of the Brazilian nuclear power plant, during the 80s and 90s. Angra 3. The bilateral nuclear accord between Germany and Brazil was the first test case for this governmental promise IN THIS ISSUE: made in 1998.

Every five years, either or both parties Brazil, Germany and the nuclear accord 1 can terminate the German-Brazilian Unsavoury connections: skeletons in the Yucca closet 3 nuclear agreement. Already in 1994, parliamentarians from the German U.S.: NRC gambles with safety 5 Social-Democratic party, then still in opposition, struggled to end the EU investigation requested into illegal aid to Finnish NPP 7 nuclear agreement, however, the then A concerned U.S. citizen's New Year wish: permanent right wing government did not accept shut down at San Onofre! 10 this proposal.

ICRP should recommend more protective radiation standards 11 Five years later, despite the Social- In brief 14 Democrats and Greens assuming power, the new government still decided to continue the nuclear “solid base for future negotiations on Germany’s nuclear industry still agreement. a broader sustainable energy co- continues its efforts to have nuclear operation”. energy included in the scope of the In 2004, environmentalists in both negotiations and new accord between countries lobbied the German During his visit to Brazil in November, Germany and Brazil. government once again to definitively Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer stop this bilateral nuclear co- affirmed that the bilateral nuclear Therefore, the question of whether or operation. German parliamentarians accord was incompatible with not nuclear co-operation could still be also applied pressure on their Germany’s drive to get rid of atomic an option for future energy co- government by pushing forward a power by 2025. Fischer told reporters operation between the two countries resolution on this issue. that “in Germany we have a (nuclear will be decided definitively during power) phasing out policy and this is negotiations due to start in early 2005. Only a few days before the deadline moving into our international for the cancellation expired, the relations” (Reuters, 19 November The German Foreign and Environmen- Foreign Ministry gave the Brazilian 2004). tal Ministries, and also parliamenta- government verbal notice by asking rians of the Greens and the Social for the substitution of the nuclear co- Also, German parliamentarians from Democrats, must ensure that nuclear operation stating that the bilateral the Greens and the Social Democrats energy is definitively excluded from nuclear accord is “not any longer up to said that the exchange of these the new energy accord. These German date” and that they are interested in diplomatic correspondences political leaders should not accept any converting the nuclear agreement by symbolises the end of the nuclear co- compromise in this regard for this an overarching energy deal focusing on operation between both countries. would erode their political credibility renewables, energy efficiency, and damage their reputation. reduction of energy consumption and The environmental spokesman for the emissions etc. Social-Democrats in the national Source and contact: Barbara Happe, parliament mentioned that the urgewald - Büro , Im Grünen In response, the Brazilian Foreign government’s diplomatic note should Haus, Prenzlauer Allee 230, D-10405 Ministry considers the proposal of be seen as an important signal to the Berlin, Germany. substituting the nuclear accord as Brazilian government in an attempt to Tel.: +49 (0) 30 4433 9168/9 “opportune” as it “has already achieved convince them that a future without Mobile: +49 (0) 172 6814474 its most important objectives”. It also nuclear power is the better option for Fax: +49 (0) 30 4433 9133 considers the Memorandum of Brazil as well as for other developing Email: [email protected] Understanding, which was signed countries. Web: www.urgewald.de between the Environmental Ministries of both countries at the Renewables Unfortunately, the fact that Brazil’s Conference in Bonn in June 2004, as a government is ready to terminate the nuclear co-operation with Germany does not indicate willingness to halt WISE Amsterdam/NIRS its nuclear program. Brazil has already ISSN: 1570-4629 found new allies in its efforts to continue its nuclear ambitions and, Reproduction of this material is therefore, no longer needs German co- encouraged. Please give credit when operation. reprinting. Although the construction of Angra 3, Editorial team: Tinu Otoki (WISE Amsterdam), Michael Mariotte (NIRS). which the Brazilian government is With contributions from Urgewald, expected to decide on soon, still Russell D. Hoffman, European depends on equipment and services Renewable Energies Foundation and from Franco-German Framatome Global Network Against Weapons & (formerly Siemens). It is now most Nuclear Power in Space. likely that the financing and public guarantee for this work will come The next issue (621) will be mailed from France, even though the work out on 21 January 2005. will be done at the Siemens facility in We would like to wish all our Germany. readers and contributors the very best for the holiday season and Despite several official statements success in all activities (campaign or from both governments confirming otherwise) in 2005! the end of the nuclear co-operation,

2 WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620, 24 December 2004 25 YEARS AGO What happened 25 years ago? We go back to news from our 1979 WISE Bulletin, comparing anti-nuclear news then and now.

Then In issue 6 of WISE Bulletin we wrote about decommissioning issues in Germany: “the government of Lower Saxony, in West Germany wants guarantees, from the companies that operate nuclear power stations, that the cost of decommissioning will be paid by the operators. These guarantees are wanted before a construction permit is issued”. (WISE Bulletin 6, October 1979)

Now In the German state of Lower Saxony, four NPPs were built: Stade (now closed), Emsland (one reactor closed, one operating), Unterweser and Grohnde. In addition, three underground repository sites were selected for waste disposal (Konrad, Asse and Gorleben). (Informationskreis Kernenergie, 23 December 2004)

The decommissioning of nuclear reactors is a very complex and costly operation. Huge parts of the reactor internals and buildings must be disposed of as radioactive waste and to date only a small number of reactors have been completely dismantled. In all these cases the real costs of dismantling were higher than originally estimated. In many countries, dismantling will be postponed for decades to allow money to be raised from interest growth on decommissioning funds.

Early assumptions by the nuclear industry estimated the costs of decommissioning at 10-15% of original construction costs. Experience has since shown that these costs represent much higher percentages in reality. Decommissioning costs of the U.S. Yankee Row reactor increased from US$368 million to US$508 million due to the elevated costs for spent fuel storage. When the Spanish Vandellos I reactor closed in 1990, the decommissioning costs were estimated at US$138.3 million. Three years later, this figure had tripled to US$563 million. (WISE News Communqiue 394, 21 May 1993;WISE News Communqiue 485, 23 January 1998)

To guarantee that reactor operators are fully responsible for the dismantling of their reactors, sufficient amounts of money must be set aside and used only for decommissioning purposes. A 2003 Greenpeace study showed that European Union member states have adopted extremely different management systems for decommissioning funds. Some countries, such as France and Germany, even allowed operators to use money from such funds to finance company expansions. In such cases, there exists a risk that decommissioning money will no longer be available when it is really needed. (WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 586, 25 April 2003)

The European Commission has failed to set common rules for decommissioning funds. Though the parliament had asked for separate funds managed by independent bodies, the Commission only recommended to set sufficient money aside. (WISE/ NIRS Nuclear Monitor 619, 12 November 2004) UNSAVORY CONNECTIONS: SKEL- ETONS IN THE YUCCA CLOSET On November 14, 2000, Becthel-SAIC won the contract to run the Yucca Mountain Project (YMP) in support of the U.S. Dept. of Energy’s (DOE) efforts to design, license, construct, and operate the dump. The contract runs until February12, 2006 and is worth US$3.1 billion. (1) (620.5657) NIRS - Bechtel’s countless SAIC ranked 294 on the Fortune 500 Operations officer, bragged to tentacles throughout the military and list of largest U.S. companies. “Business 2.0” magazine “We are a commercial nuclear industries were Surveillance work for U.S. spy agencies stealth company. We’re everywhere, covered in WISE/NIRS Nuclear is its biggest source of revenue. SAIC is but almost never seen.” SAIC deployed Monitor #589’s review of “Bechtel: reportedly the single biggest recipient data-mining programs that can process Profiting from Destruction,” 27 June of contracts from the U.S. National 500 million documents per second, 2003 (see full report at Security Agency (NSA), and among the used by spy agencies to sift through www.citizen.org/documents/ top five contractors to the Central immense volumes of monitored profilebechtel.pdf). Intelligence Agency (CIA). 5,000 of its phone calls, faxes, emails, and other 40,000 employees have security communications. (2) J. Robert Beyster, former nuclear clearances; Beyster himself has one of scientist at Los Alamos National Lab, the highest top-secret clearances of any Amy Goodman of “Democracy Now!” founded Science Applications U.S. civilian. SAIC spokesman Keith has named SAIC an “Oily-garchy” International Corporation and by 2002, Nightingale, former U.S. Army Special award winner for its energy-related 24 December 2004, WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620 3 corporate corruption and crony National Congress headed by the now- also to effectively block any oversight connections. Between 1990 and 2002, discredited Ahmad Chalabi. Tellingly, of CACI’s activities at Abu Ghraib. (9) SAIC gave nearly US$5 million in in Jan. 2003 the Pentagon hired SAIC to federal campaign contributions, which coordinate a secret “government in A leaked U.S. Army investigation undoubtedly helped it achieve nearly exile” in Virginia, comprised of Iraqi concluded that at least one CACI US$6 billion in revenues in 2002. SAIC expatriates, to plan the running of Iraq employee was “either directly or won a US$38 million contract from the once Saddam Hussein was ousted. (2) indirectly responsible for the abuses.” Pentagon’s psychological operations Downing also served on the (7) The report held that CACI department in 2003 to run the Iraq Committee to Liberate Iraq, a high- interrogator Steven Stephanowicz Media Network (IMN), “considered the profile group of Washington insiders “made a false statement to the most ambitious and costly foreign (including former U.S. Marine General, investigation team regarding the media program ever undertaken by Bechtel president, and U.S. Secretary of locations of his interrogations, the the U.S. government.” State George Schultz, and former CIA activities during his interrogations, director James Woolsey) calling for the and his knowledge of abuses.” In SAIC appointed Robert Reilly to run invasion of Iraq in 2003. (5) addition, he urged U.S. military police the Iraqi radio and television network. officers to terrorize inmates and He had previously run the Reagan “clearly knew his instructions equated White House information operation Should companies to physical abuse.” (10) backing the Nicaraguan Contras. But implicated in such heinous Reilly lasted only six months at IMN, crimes and corruption be Although the U.S. Army report when Iraqi staffers walked off the air recommended Stephanowicz be fired, entrusted with the to protest lack of funds and the he retained his position at the prison network’s irrelevance. Top Iraqi responsibility of managing for months after the report was issued, broadcasters were receiving a mere 70,000 metric tons of high- and has thus far escaped prosecution US$120 per month and were only level radioactive waste at by the U.S. military, because a private granted allowance for clothing above Yucca Mountain? contractor cannot be court-martialed the waist (that is, on-camera), while unless Congress has declared war, SAIC “consultants” were being paid which it did not do against Iraq. (11) US$273 per hour. Even less known than the omnipresent However, on 9 June New York-based but invisible SAIC is CACI (originally Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) SAIC was fined US$2.5 million in 1995 California Analysis Center Inc.), which filed a class action lawsuit in U.S. for cheating the U.S. Air Force for work also makes money at Yucca. A NRC federal court on behalf of abused Iraqi on fighter jet cockpit displays. document recently revealed that CACI detainees against CACI and Venezuela’s energy minister accused is responsible for compiling and Stephanowicz, accusing them of SAIC of refusing to provide the processing DOE’s tens of millions of conspiring with U.S. military officials government with information needed pages of YMP documentation. (6) (See to hood and rape detainees, force them to keep the country’s oil refineries also WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor #615, to watch their own fathers being open as company management took “NRC rules against DOE Yucca tortured and abused to death, part in the attempted overthrow of submission,” 17 September 2004) In repeatedly beating them (including President Hugo Chavez in Jan. 2003. (3) addition, CACI also has contracts in with chains, boots, and other objects), occupied Iraq – and some ghastly stripping naked and isolating them, SAIC’s revolving door with military skeletons in the closet. urinating on and otherwise and spy agencies is extensive. David humiliating them, and preventing Kay, former UN weapons inspector CACI, based in Arlington, Virginia, them from praying, and forcing them hired by CIA in 2003 to search for gets about two-thirds of its money to violate their Islamic beliefs. weapons of mass destruction in Iraq from the Pentagon and much of the who uttered the now infamous words remainder from other federal Jeffrey Fogel of CCR said, “CACI… “We were almost all wrong,” (4) was agencies, including DOE. (7) In 2003, perpetrated brutal human rights SAIC vice president until 2002. SAIC CACI won US$66 million for work in abuses to obtain information, a directors have included men from top Iraq, (8) including for interrogation practice that is not only barbaric but posts at the Pentagon, CIA and NSA. “services” at Abu Ghraib, scene of leads to false confessions. The modern abuses against Iraqi prisoners by U.S. way to describe this is outsourcing Retired U.S. Army General W.A. military personnel and private torture; in the old days we’d call these Downing is a case in point. Before contractors, photos of which made people mercenaries.” (12) becoming SAIC board member, he international headlines last spring. served at the White House National Strangely, the contract was paid by the Incredibly, despite the widely Security Council counter-terrorism U.S. Dept. of Interior, helping not only documented allegations of abuse, the office from Oct. 2001 to July 2002. He to “hide” the spending away from the class action lawsuits and the then lobbied for the CIA-backed Iraqi burgeoning costs of the Iraq war, but worldwide scandal, the Pentagon

4 WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620, 24 December 2004 extended CACI’s contract in Iraq this audiences,” Corporation Watch special (9) Peckenapaugh and Harris, “Iraq: August. CACI could earn an additional report, Jan. 6, 2004, www.corpwatch.org/ Reigning in Contractors,” Government US$23 million. (13) CCR responded by article.php?id=9508 Executive Magazine, June 1, 2004; filing for a preliminary injunction (3) Goodman, “The Exception to the McCarthy, “Iraq: CACI Contracts Blocked,” Rulers,” Hyperion Press, New York, 2004, Washington Post, May 26, 2004, against CACI, asking the court to page 54. (10) Chatterjee and Thompson, “Private require all private interrogators to (4) www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/28/ Contractors and Torture at Abu Ghraib,” receive proper training in the laws on kay.transcript/ Corporation Watch special report, May 7, torture and how to conduct (5) Zmolek, “The Committee to Bomb 2004, www.corpwatch.org/ interrogations free of torture. CCR Iraq: Project for a New American Empire,” article.php?id=11285 alleged CACI interrogators used attack National Network to End the War Against (11) Miller, “Iraq: Contractors Fall dogs to threaten detainees, forced Iraq, Feb. 7, 2003, www.endthewar.org/ Through Legal Cracks,” New York Times, detainees to simulate sex acts, and that cli1.htm May 4, 2004. CACI improperly influenced the (6) NRC Atomic Safety Licensing Board (12) “CCR FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST “Memorandum and Order Ruling on State PRIVATE CONTRACTORS FOR TORTURE military procurement system. CCR of Nevada’s July 12, 2004 Motion to CONSPIRACY: Charges U.S. Corporations reported detainees were tortured as Strike: In the Matter of U.S. Department Conspired With Officials To Torture late as July 2004, months after the of Energy (High-Level Waste Repository Detainees in Iraq,” June 9, 2004, initial release of photos and Pre-Application Matters),” page 6, Aug. 31, www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/ consequent international uproar. (14) 2004, www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/ report.asp?ObjID=cBct36Qkps&Content=401 news2004/nrc/nrc040831aslb.pdf NIRS/ (13) CACI press release, “IRAQ: CACI Should companies implicated in such WISE filed a “friend of the court” brief, Receives Army Contract for heinous crimes and corruption be along with Public Citizen and Nevada Interrogation,” Aug. 10, 2004, entrusted with the responsibility of Nuclear Waste Task Force, in the www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11491 ultimately successful challenge to DOE’s (14) “Center for Constitutional Rights managing 70,000 metric tons of high- rejected document submission. Seeks Injunction to Require Private level radioactive waste at Yucca (7) Merle and McCarthy, “CACI to Open Contractors in Torture Suit to Properly Mountain? Probe of Workers: Army Officials Train Interrogators: Recent Accusations of Interviewed Employees,” Washington Continued Torture Prompt Filing,” Sept. Sources: Post, May 3, 2004, and Brinkley and 14, 2004, www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/ (1) Press release, “Bechtel, SAIC Combine Glanz, “Contractors Implicated in Prison report.asp?ObjID=PPbySqgPIb&Content=437 to Win DOE Contract,” Nov. 14, 2000, Abuse Remain on the Job,” New York www.bechtel.com/newsarticles/134.asp Times, May 4, 2004. Contact: Kevin Kamps at (2) Chatterjee, “Information Warfare or (8) Emery, “Iraq: CACI Probed on Keeping [email protected] Yesterday’s News? Pentagon media Future Government Contracts,” Reuters, contractor loses battle for Iraqi May 27, 2004. U.S.: NRC GAMBLES WITH SAFETY Taking risks for monetary gain is called “gambling”. In a move controversial even with its staff, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) released its Final Rule affecting how reactor operators purchase safety-related parts to ensure that systems, structures and components (SSC) will perform vital functions during operation or an accident. (1) (620.5658) NIRS - Effective December allows NRC to accept safety equipment Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power 22, 2004, the nuclear industry will use that does not conform to the safety Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants” a “voluntary” rule (10 CFR 50.69) to specifications reactors were licensed to under 10 CFR 50 Appendix B. “risk-inform” its quality assurance maintain. A deteriorating and cost practices for SSC in a variety of safety driven nuclear industry only amplifies These “nuclear grade” products were functions. The rule, largely written by concerns for public safety. qualified and differentiated from industry, promises hundreds of commercial industry grade parts in millions of dollars in savings on The safety problem goes back to the order to ensure the quality control purchasing contracts formerly 1970s when the push to build and necessary to protect public safety. requiring “nuclear grade” components operate power reactors in the US led Utilities were allowed to purchase that can now be replaced with cheaper the American Society of Mechanical safety-related parts from commercial “commercial grade” parts. Engineers and the Institute of grade suppliers only if the parts were Electrical and Electronic Engineers to “dedicated”. Dedicating parts involved The new rule marks an end to the develop standards for products to qualifying the commercial parts to be latest chapter of NRC’s tarnished maximize nuclear safety margins. suitable for use in safety systems so as record on the safety oversights on non- Utilities could purchase parts intended to minimize the introduction of compliant safety parts. It provides for use in reactor safety systems from substandard parts. industry with an exit strategy that suppliers approved by “Quality

24 December 2004, WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620 5 With the worldwide collapse of the products. NRC abandoned a requirements reduced and others not nuclear power market in the 1980s, commitment to Congress for more currently regulated have requirements nuclear vendors began shutting down aggressive inspections and instead added. To prevent excessive industry production lines. “Nuclear grade” parts discontinued industry-wide routine and staff burden, it is essential that an became scarce, forcing aging reactors inspection programs for fraudulent efficient regulatory process be to increase their reliance on parts. employed as part of any “dedicated” parts. Allegations of implementation process.” (7) So substandard and “fraudulently As a result of safety allegations opened the next tortured chapter of marketed” safety components began to originally raised in the mid-1980’s and NRC’s “special treatment” of industry’s surface with greater frequency. brought to the attention of President cheating in a gamble with public Ronald Reagan by Steven Comley and safety. Documents show that NRC was his Massachusetts-based whistleblower originally skeptical of allegations and support organization, We The People, During the subsequent rulemaking, took no aggressive action to stop the NRC Office of the Inspector General three NRC engineers raised significant flood of bad parts. As the result of a (OIG) began an audit of NRC oversight criticisms of changes to the quality government-wide task force, NRC had of the issue. In 1994, OIG found that control for procurement of reactor to recognize that counterfeit parts NRC’s decision to abandon routine parts. A September 26, 2002 “Differing presented a growing safety concern. inspections and inspect only on a Professional View” (DPV) filed by a From 1986 to 1989, NRC initiated a reactive basis was neither technically senior mechanical engineer raised series of inspections of commercial justifiable nor documented. “Our detailed concerns about the treatment grade dedication programs. Out of 13 review disclosed what appears to be requirements for risk informing safety different utilities’ quality assurance conflicting conclusions about the components as “not sufficient to programs for “dedicated parts,” NRC safety implications of the assessments provide reasonable assurance of found problems with 12. and pilot inspections findings, and adequate protection of public health questions about the overall adequacy and safety.” (8) The General Accounting Office (now of utilities’ dedication programs.” (4) Government Accountability Office or According to the DPV, critical portions GAO) identified, in its 1990 report to OIG noted that assessments of pilot of the rule’s language were deleted Congress “Nuclear Safety and Health: inspections from 1991-1992 appeared without valid technical justification on Counterfeit Parts and Substandard similar to findings from 1986-1989, the “nebulous assertion that the rule Products Are a Governmentwide which were characterized as language contained too much detail.” Concern”, that NRC “is deferring its “significant safety implications.”(5) (9) regulatory responsibility” by failing to NRC stonewalled the safety impli- take enforcement action against cations and countered that the agency Similarly, another detailed DPV filed nuclear power utilities that installed was moving toward a more safety the same day by another mechanical “fraudulent” products (such as focused and less costly performance engineer stated that significant fasteners, pipe fittings, electrical based inspection program. modifications made during a equipment, valves, even bolts) in 64% concurrence process resulted in a of the nation’s domestic power By 1998, a Commission Paper directed change that “fails to resolve safety reactors. staff to “risk inform” its regulations so concerns regarding the proposed rule as to reduce both its licensing burden in a sufficient technical manner.” (10) GAO said “Nonconforming products and cost. The nagging counterfeit parts The DPV stated that “the rule will be can fail and result in death or injury to issue was at the top of the list in a insufficient to maintain the reliability the public and workers, increase rulemaking plan that would seek to of SSC’s to perform their safety government program costs put an end to controversy and functions under design-basis significantly, and waste tax dollars.” questions on safety. Option 2, as it was conditions.” (11) (2) The government watchdog coined, stated “As the primary part of recommended “an aggressive this option, risk-informed definitions While the three engineers eventually regulatory posture concerning of ‘safety-related’ and ‘important to agreed with the final draft rule products used in plant safety systems, safety’ could be developed. This would forwarded to the NRC Commission, in GAO recommends that the Chairman, lead to changes in the scope of what a recent internal memorandum the NRC, reinstitute inspections of receives special operational and engineers now say that the final rule utilities’ quality assurance programs qualification treatment.” (6) “raises more safety concerns than the and take appropriate enforcement proposed rule that was released for actions when violations occur.” (3) The paper went on to say “Under public comment in May 2003.” (12) implementation of Option 2, there Contrary to recommendations, NRC could be extensive changes to The three dissenting engineers state avoided enforcement action against treatment of SSCs, as those with low that the final rule “is not sufficient to utilities relying on counterfeit risk importance have their regulatory ensure that the risk associated with the

6 WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620, 24 December 2004 elimination of the special treatment October 1990, p. 2. (10) “Differing Professional View requirements is maintained acceptably (3) Ibid, p.5. Regarding Proposed 10 CFR 50.69, “Risk- small.” (13) (4) “Review of NRC’s Process for Informed Categorization and Treatment Regulating Parts Used in Nuclear Power of Structures, Systems, and Components Plants,” Audit Report, (OIG/93A-25), NRC for Nuclear Power Reactors,” Memo to NIRS has filed for the public release of Office of the Inspector General, July 28, Sam Collins, Director NRC/NRR, from all NRC documents relating to the 1994, Findings, p. 4. Thoms G. Scarbrough, NRR, 09/26/2004, DPVs and dissenting staff memos (5) Ibid, p. 4. p.2. under the Freedom of Information Act. (6) “Options for Risk-Informed Revision (11) Ibid, p. 2. to 10 CFR Part 50-‘Domestic Licensing of (12) “Final 50.69 rule released, but some Sources: Production and Utilization Facilities,” implementation issues remain,” Inside (1) Federal Register, November 22, 2004, SECY-98-300, U.S. NRC, 12/23/1998. NRC, Platts, November 29, 2004, p. 13. Vol. 69. Number 224, “10 CFR 50, Risk- (7) Ibid, SECY-98-300. (13) Ibid, p. 13. Informed Categorization and Treatment (8) “Differing Professional View of Structures, Systems and Components Concerning the Proposed 10 CFR 50.69 Contact: Paul Gunter at for Nuclear Power Reactors; Final Rule” Rulemaking,” Memo to Sam Collins, [email protected] (2) “Nuclear Safety and Health: Director NRC/NRR, from John R. Fair, Counterfeit Parts and Substandard Parts NRC/NRR, 09/26/2002, p. 1. Are a Governmentwide Concern,” GAO, (9) Ibid, p. 1. EU INVESTIGATION REQUESTED INTO ILLEGAL AID TO FINNISH NPP The European Renewable Energies (EREF) has initiated action before the European Commission in Brussels calling for an investigation into whether a planned project to construct the first nuclear power plant in Europe for decades has been made possible only with extensive state aid in violation of EU competition and other rules and regulations. (620.5659) Dr. Fouquet - The action is entities in probable violation of EU The EREF complaint to the EU aimed at the proposed construction of laws and the governments in those Commission charges “serious and a nuclear power facility in Finland by countries for having authorised such orchestrated concertation and action” the Teollissuuden Voima OY (TVO) illegal transactions. aiming “to reduce economic risks group claimed to cost a fixed price of related to the projects...to a level EUR 3.2 billion (US$4.1 billion) and The widespread and complex which is unheard of in any power plant involves a broad coalition of public transactions involve the Finnish Power deal or any energy supply since and private financial and industrial Company, a Franco-German industrial liberalisation of the energy market in participants, clients and supporters. enterprise and public and private 1996.” Without the numerous acts of (See also WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor financial or export credit guarantee assistance to the project, the complaint 600.5563 “Financing New Nuclear institutions in both countries and continues, “which have to be seen in Power Plants” and 612-613.5620 probably Sweden. Specifically cited are the overall context of discrimination “Finnish Nuclear Madness”) TVO, AREVA, Framatome-ANP, Sie- and distortion of the European energy mens, Bayerische (German market, this project could not have In an action filed with the EU ), COFACE French Export happened at the guaranteed purchase Commission on 14 December, EREF, a Agency) and SEK (Swedish Export price and TVO could not sell the future non-profit organisation based in Agency). The Swedish involvement is electricity at the envisaged and already Brussels which represents small especially noteworthy since Swedish subscribed low electricity price.” independent producers of renewable governments and parliament in the energy and other support groups past decades and to date, as well as The complaint by the renewable throughout the EU, called attention to Germany, have decided to follow a energy industry concludes that what it regards as extensive non- policy of phasing out nuclear energy. “structured energy distortions by the compliance with EU law. involvement of state authorities,” in It also underlines that, contrary to EU this project, “undermine any level The letter filed by EREF called law, such incidents of state aids in the playing field and render access to the attention to possible infractions of EU form of low interest , export electricity market on the ground of state aid, export credits, procurement, credit and other advantages are not fair market conditions for any other safety and other regulations and reported in advance to the EU autho- electricity supplier impossible, requests the European Commission to rities for examination nor in connec- creating respectively maintaining a investigate. The document lists tion with the authorisation procedure distorted market.” It reasons that the German, French, Swedish and Finnish according to Article 41 Euratom Treaty. proposed price for the project’s

24 December 2004, WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620 7 electricity would amount to dumping. previous Commissioner for Energy reserved for non marketable risks and had publicly referred to the project designed for deals in countries with It calls on the EU Commission autho- positively. high political and economic instability rities for competition, internal market and energy to open an internal The action is aimed simultaneously at - A generous financial support investigation despite the fact that the challenging perceived infractions to By SEK from Sweden to the TVO European and other rules and project, which has up to now never regulations that, if carried out, would been publicly detailed or specified by Turkey to get three EPRs?! provide unfair and uncompetitive the Swedish Authorities but mention- Despite the fact that the European advantage to a project and energy ed in the annual 2003 report of SEK Pressurized water Reactor is an source that would otherwise not be untried an untested reactor design competitive or economically viable. - Price dumping yet to be made into a prototype, Despite the claims of its supporters The FRAMATOME ANP tender offer Turkey’s Ministry of Energy has and beneficiaries, these unfair and with the above fixed price constitutes reportedly briefed journalists that illegal advantages conferred on the price dumping thus distorts the the country will seek to build not project a large number of sometimes market. It is evident that real costs will one but three EPRs. Although, there hidden privileges unavailable to be much higher than EUR 3.2 billion. has been no official confirmation of renewable and other competing energy Already mandatory supplementary the deal as yet, Turkey is believed to sources and projects. security demands by the Finnish have been offered a special deal on nuclear authorities will increase costs price - just as with Finland. The development could be regarded as substantially. Increased material costs a crucial test of whether nuclear power such as for steel will also add to the Associate Professor Dr. Tanay Sidki is a viable energy source in the future burden. The International Energy Uyar, President of EUROSOLAR Tur- without massive aid and benefits that Agency (IEA) had already in 2003 key, Vice-President of World Wind are not available to other energy questioned the economic viability of Energy Association, board member sources and which so distort the this project. IEA emphasised that of Black Sea NGO Network and head objective of a liberalised, open and Olkiluoto 3 (the Finnish plant) will be of the energy section at Marmara fair European energy market that it “the first atomic reactor ever built in a University told the WISE/NIRS Nuc- calls the entire system into question. deregulated market, which can cause lear Monitor that Turkey did not unforeseen problems”. The report also need nuclear power. According to The main support schemes questioned stressed that all over the world atomic the professor, Turkey’s solar, wind, as state aid in this complaint are: energy projects have exceeded the small hydro, geothermal and bio- calculations planned and they have not mass potential is such that it could - A syndicated : been able to keep to the planned provide up to four times the existing Bayerische Landesbank (BLB) gave, in building schedules. [1] inefficiently used energy demand. 2003 or early 2004, a EUR 1.95 billion (US$2.5 billion) syndicated loan (more - A special transaction between TVO Turkish NGOs have expressed horror than 60 % of the whole fixed price) and Finnish communal authorities to at the reports of their government with interest of just 2.6% to the Finnish long term obligation to purchase this importing nuclear disaster to their company TVO for the purchase of the electricity at a specific price violates, country and have quickly reactivated Framatome ANP 1600 MWh EPR in EREF’s view, EC public procurement the Platform Against Nuclear Power (European Pressurised water Reactor) rules. to engage the public and secure their at fixed price of EUR 3.2 billion (US$4.1 involvement in the fight against this billion). The transaction in question is For EREF it is evident that Finland was new nuclear threat. a syndicated revolving credit of EUR chosen as a necessary test ground for a 1.95 billion with two tranches new push towards nuclear power at all It is thought that the Turkish Prime maturing in 2009 and 2011 respectively cost, especially at a dumped fixed Minister made the deal with Paris on given to TVO by Bayerische price offer by Framatome ANP to TVO a visit in July. Turkey has already Landesbank for purchase of this fixed in Finland. bought 36 Airbus aircraft from Paris price turn-key contract. The other and the additional purchase of three involved are Handelsbanken, Dr. Dörte Fouquet of the Kuhbier sprl nuclear reactors is alleged to have Nordea, BNP Paribas and JP Morgan. law firm, Brussels, presented the won Turkey France’s support in its complaint on EREF’s behalf. efforts to gain entry into the - A generous export credit guarantee European Union. The French Government budget via Contact: for further enquiries contact COFACE (French ) Dr. Fouquet at [email protected] Prof. Dr. Uyar by email, 22 December gave over EUR 610 million to AREVA, Tel: +49.I7l.8352573 or +32.2.6724367 2004; Réseau “Sortir du nucléaire” by the French public parent company of (office) email, 17 December 2004 Framatome/ANP, paid from budget

8 WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620, 24 December 2004 An Appreciation: Ted Taylor: Scientist, Man of Conscience: 1925-2004 On 28 October, Dr. Theodore B. for penetration of safeguards and theft availability of fossil fuels, and Taylor died of coronary artery disease of bomb materials. He also realized became an ardent proponent of the complications. He was 79 and had that thefts of fissile materials and necessity to develop reliance on lived in Wellsville, New York. He will construction of small “home-made” alternative energy sources. be greatly missed by those who were atomic bombs posed an ever- privileged to have known him. increasing threat of uncontrollable The writer John McPhee profiled Ted proliferation: future criminals and Taylor in his acclaimed study, The Dr. Taylor was first known as the ideologically-driven terrorists would Curve of Binding Energy: A Journey brilliant young theoretical physicist find small-scale crude devices - “dirty into the Awesome and Alarming at Los Alamos National Laboratory bombs” - effective and irresistible. World of Theodore B. Taylor, first who conceived of, and designed, published in The New Yorker small, efficient atomic bombs. In In 1965, Ted Taylor received, among magazine. addition to designing nuclear arms many honors, the prestigious Ernest for use as battlefield weapons, he co- Orlando Lawrence award for his Dr. Taylor’s many publications developed the TRIGA research “Outstanding contributions to the included The Restoration of the Earth reactors still operating at design of nuclear weapons” and “role (with C.C. Humpstone, 1973); Nuclear universities. F in development of TRIGA research Theft: Risks and Safeguards” (with reactors.” He served in the Defense Mason Willrich, 1974); and Nuclear ollowing the Soviet Union’s launch of Department and as Deputy Director of Proliferation Motivations, Sputnik 1, Dr. Taylor directed Project the Defense Nuclear Agency. Capabilities and Strategies for Orion, to develop a space vehicle Control (with T. Greenwood and H.A. powered by nuclear devices for But soon thereafter he became an Feiveson, 1977). peaceful space exploration. The outspoken, and knowledgeable, critic: Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963, a critic condemning his own creations. In the mid-1980s, on a frigid day in however, prohibited the essential From his intrigue with the potential Washington near the White House, a testing for the project. His for good that he thought atomic energy group of anti-nuclear activists transformation from nuclear held, he became deeply concerned gathered to support a fast for peace weapons enthusiast to outspoken about explosive growth of both by a fellow scientist. At the margin of nuclear energy critic accelerated in weapons and commercial applications the crowd stood Dr. Taylor, a sombre following years. of the atom. expression of infinite sadness on his face. He came to understand that his He concluded that his country “is “suitcase bombs” were changing the prepared...to launch nuclear weapons He said he feared President Reagan nature of the Cold War. International that would kill millions of innocent would reject any arms control fears were that the US and USSR bystanders,” adding, “...this is... mass agreement in his upcoming meeting might use their powerful missile- murder that cannot be justified under with Secretary Gorbachev. Few people delivered weapons of true mass any conditions.” on earth understood so well the destruction, devastating vast areas, importance of nuclear control and a initiating Nuclear Winter. Taylor later He worked successfully with local and non-proliferation treaty. Late in his said, “The real driving force in the national groups to prevent new, life, he told a colleague, “I am nuclear arms race is the weaponeers,” unlined soil trenches for so-called searching for the truth as long as I observing that they had only to “low-level” radioactive targeted for can.” present glowing expectations for Western New York and around the every new weapon to obtain approval country in the late 1980’s and 1990’s. NIRS and funding. A quiet, mild-mannered man, he Dr. Taylor’s development of compact continued to advise fellow scientists, portable bombs created a different presidents, and the public on risks of kind of nuclear threat: the dangers of future nuclear terrorism, on the nuclear proliferation. He vulnerabilities of nuclear power distinguished between hazards of plants, and on the kinds of nuclear active and “latent” proliferation, the safeguards nations would need in the latter inherent in the entire nuclear future. production system. He warned that the fuel chain, from mining to waste He formed his own consulting firms, isolation, for military and “peaceful” analyzing the consequences of global purposes, held endless possibilities warming and the impending decline in

24 December 2004, WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620 9 A CONCERNED U.S. CITIZEN’S NEW YEAR WISH: PERMANENT SHUT DOWN AT SAN ONOFRE! Right now, San Onofre Nuclear Waste Generating Station is in a bad way. Nearly everything in the whole facility is cracking apart. It is embrittled, frail, old. Its bones are hardened. Its arteries are clogged and stiff. It keeps popping and poofing, bursting and spilling, leaking, spraying, steaming, venting, dripping, gushing, pouring out poisons into our environment. (620.5660) Russell D. Hoffman - The breaking apart a delicate protein — humans). Salty air destroys most tritium released from the plant alone the very structure of life. One damaged metals. San Onofre is breaking down is a major environmental concern, DNA strand can lead to foetal far faster than “industry standards” especially for swimmers and surfers in deformities or cancer. because although many nuclear the water up and down the coast from reactors in America use fresh-water the plant. Tritium is readily absorbed San Onofre’s “steam generators” all lakes and rivers for coolant, San by all parts of the human body need to be replaced — two per plant at Onofre uses seawater. But despite San because, chemically, it is just two plants. Total cost is conservatively Onofre’s accelerated ageing, the plant’s radioactively altered water. Tritium estimated by the company at about owners are usually behind the eight has a half-life of about 12 years and US$600 million — it will probably be a ball when it comes to repairing things. while it does occur naturally, there is lot more. And they’ll have to slice into “Let it fail, then fix it quietly” seems to no good reason on earth to increase the uni-body “containment dome” to be their operating motto. the dose to humans. do the replacement, seriously and permanently weakening that structure. Transformers have exploded due to In the course of its daily operation the Additionally, the replacement parts, old age, throwing shards of glass onto plant also releases Cesium-137, unlike the originals (which were never the nearby railway and freeway. Old Strontium-90, uranium, plutonium supposed to need to be replaced, but breakers have exploded and burned, (both in a variety of isotopes) and over aged much more rapidly than causing hundred million-dollar 200 other radioactive “daughter expected), won’t even be made in outages. (But in keeping with their products” created by the nuclear chain America, subject to American motto, the 130-or so similar breakers reaction. The nuclear industry and the inspections, or made to American were NOT replaced.) lame duck, industry-flunky standards of quality (what id left of “regulators” who watch it assert that those standards, anyway). Workers have been exposed to these releases are harmless. It is radiation. Releases to the public have foolhardy to agree with them when so San Onofre’s “water heaters” also all occurred, and there have even been many of the mechanisms for damage need to be replaced (about 30 per threats of domestic sabotage directed by radioactivity is well known in the unit). Cost? Just another US$7 million against the plant — for example, from scientific community and undeniable for each plant, but still there is more: an extremely well-armed disgruntled to any unbiased observer. worker who knew the plant intimately - Pipes have been cracking — probably because he had broad access privileges When the nuclear industry started they ALL need to be replaced. In before being demoted and eventually promoting its dogma about how clean August, eroded piping led to an fired. nuclear power was, far fewer of these accident in Japan that killed five facts were established, such as the role workers (see also WISE/NIRS Nuclear It is time to SHUT SAN ONOFRE of “free-radicals” in the creation of Monitor 615.5635 “Mihama, Japan: DOWN. Its power is replaceable. Our cancer. Now, these things are much Tracking down the truth”). The cost of land and our lives are not. better known, but yet the entire replacements could reach into nuclear industry refuses to hundreds of millions of dollars, which The choice to keep San Onofre’s twin acknowledge these issues. They still would be better spent on renewable reactors generating 500 pounds of try to convince people that a little of energy solutions. extremely toxic waste every day their radiation, scattered into your because we are too lazy to build large- body randomly through pollution, - Strapping for crane lifts has aged and scale renewable energy systems is a might even be good for you. It is not. failed. This reportedly costs over US$5 deadly sin we should stop committing. One atomic decay inside your body can million to fix. But even if we did not convert to directly destroy 20,000 or more renewable energy, consider this: it is chemical bonds; creating tritium The plant is a wreck waiting to happen. fairly easy to prove that nuclear power inside your body, for instance, or Radiation ages things (including does not generate ANY “net” energy

10 WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620, 24 December 2004 whatsoever, anyway! This is reason San Onofre makes money only for its [The author is an independent enough to get rid of the plants. This immediate owners, who are practically researcher on nuclear power and has assertion stems from the incredibly GIVEN uranium fuel by the U.S. written thousands of essays on the energy-intensive processes needed to Government, which also promises (but subject with his work published in mine and refine uranium into fuel, as so far has failed) to take it away after it several different languages, in over a well as construction costs (and has been turned into radioactive waste dozen countries over the past three reconstruction costs), and dismantling (at great profit) by Southern California decades.] costs. But there are even more costs — Edison. for example, the energy that will be Source and contact: Russell Hoffman, needed to take care of the waste for San Onofre can and should be shut Concerned Citizen Carlsbad, CA the next million years, including the down NOW. While operating, it is P.O. Box 1936, Carlsbad CA 92018-1936, dismantled pieces and the “spent” fuel. thousands of times more vulnerable to USA Such equations also ignore any energy terrorism or forces of nature than Tel: +1 800 551-2726 or +1 760 720-7261 expended on caring for the millions of when it is shut down, even though the Fax: +1 760 720-7394 sick and dying that would result from fuel will still be there long after the Email: a serious nuclear accident. last watt of electricity is produced, and [email protected] it will still be a danger. But it is much Web: www.animatedsoftware.com Nuclear energy is a financial rat-hole more dangerous now, and now is a as well as a terrorist’s primary target. perfect time to cut our losses. ICRP SHOULD RECOMMEND MORE PROTECTIVE RADIATION STANDARDS This is the third article in NIRS’ series on Draft Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP-2005) and reviews the history behind radiation protection standards and CERRIE Majority and Minority Reports criticizing ICRP assumptions. (620.5661) NIRS - In 2001, the British often with little understanding of the U.S. commitment to Cold War Environment Minister established the harmful effects on biological weaponry grew, the NCRP was pressed Committee Examining Radiation Risks organisms. Doses in the tens of rem to submit recommendations to the of Internal Emitters (CERRIE, (hundreds of milliSieverts, mSv) were government but did not permit pronounced “cherry”), to review recent tolerated, legally, without realization completion of the more difficult radiation research and adequacy of of the potential injuries that appeared analysis on the internal effects of public and worker standards. The two or more decades later. radioactive materials that lingered in committee was comprised of the body. representatives of the nuclear Following the splitting of the atom industry, the radioactive recycling during World War II, the Manhattan At that time, the concern was genetic industry and nuclear critics. Project’s race to develop an atomic impacts, rather than cancers. In 1958, bomb, and the bombing of Hiroshima the NCRP recommended an annual Some of the Committee grew and Nagasaki, adverse impacts of dose limit of five rem (50 mSv) for dissatisfied and produced a Minority radiation exposures became a serious workers, assumed to be acceptable Report. Both the CERRIE Majority and medical — and political — issue. In because it was equivalent to dose Minority Reports were published in the U.S. in the early 1950s, the National limits for radium. For the public, dose October 2004 and address many of the Council on Radiation Protection and levels one-tenth as great (0.5 rem, 500 issues raised in the Draft ICRP-2005. Measurements (NCRP), a private, mrem; or 5 mSv) were deemed safe Following a brief history of radiation nuclear advocacy, advisory body, enough (by the nuclear advocates). standards below is a summary of some undertook a review of data on both of the relevant conclusions of the external doses (received by Japanese The U.S. Federal Radiation Council CERRIE Reports, especially as they survivors and collected by the Atomic published guidance in 1960, as public pertain to ICRP’s recommendations. Bomb Casualty Commission) and concerns about atmospheric bomb test internal exposures from ingestion and fallout and commercial uses of nuclear Historical Context inhalation. energy grew. The public exposure In 1895, Wilhelm Roentgen identified limit was reduced to 100 mrem/yr (1 ionizing radiation, x-rays, and their Dr. Karl Z. Morgan, chair of the NCRP mSv), and questions arose about the significance for scientific research and, internal dose subcommittee, found assumption of a “safe threshold” of later, for medical purposes. During determination of the internal radiation exposure. In 1990, the U.S. the following fifty years, uses of distributions and organ impacts far National Research Council Committee radioactive materials proliferated, more complicated than anticipated. As on the Biological Effects of Ionizing

24 December 2004, WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620 11 Radiation (BEIR V) accepted the linear further research and elucidates certain difficult to execute. no threshold hypothesis of the shortcomings of ICRP. However, the relationship of dose to response final report was published under - CERRIE recommended more (LNT). (See WISE News Communique threat and fear of litigation for integration of data collected since 1990 326-327.3261 “Beir-V Report Reassesses allegation of factual misstatements. As into ICRP recommendations, and Radiation Risks”) a result, full representation of views further study of microdosimetry, was not allowed in the report and cancer mechanisms and germline Now the ICRP proposes to reduce there were very few subjects on which mini-satellite mutations. radiation protection in several ways the committee members actually (see WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor #618 reached consensus. A subgroup of the - There is evidence that Sr-90 may and #619), even though recent Committee produced the CERRIE preferentially bind to chromosomes research indicates worse health effects Minority Report 2004. rather than evenly distribute in cells from protracted, internal, low dose and may also prefer cellular DNA. The exposures. The CERRIE Reports Biological Evidence: Conclusions committee strongly recommends more address some aspects of the current and Further Research Needed research on this and other understanding of radiation-related While a consensus eluded the CERRIE radionuclides that show unexpected risk. committee in a number of scientific properties, such as tritium and auger areas, many of their recommendations emitters, for which they say ICRP has CERRIE for further research are sound, underestimated risk. The Committee Examining Radiation necessary, and immediately relevant to Risks of Internal Emitters (CERRIE) protection of humans from radiation - Indeed, the actual concepts of was tasked to consider present risk exposure. absorbed dose become questionable, models for radiation and health that and sometimes meaningless, when apply to exposure to radiation from - In general, the committee did not considering interactions at the cellular internal radionuclides in light of find evidence for threshold doses of and molecular levels. recent studies, and to identify any radiation and the Committee rejected further research that may be needed. hormesis (the claim that a little - CERRIE recommended more use of The CERRIE Majority Report radiation is good for you). direct measure of damage to exposed recommends important and necessary people, called biodosimetric - CERRIE recommended more study on measurement, although this has both genomic instability (damage limitations. Public participation from radiation shows up in its The deadline for public comment is descendants after a cell has repaired - ICRP dosimetric models need to 30 December 2004 (Note: Time and reproduced) and bystander effects account for insufficient modeling of zone at ICRP in Sweden is ahead of (cells untouched by radiation show damage to cells and molecules, North and South America). damage as if they were hit). Both particularly for short-range radiation. effects see more damage at low doses. ICRP prefers comments uploaded - CERRIE recognized that effective dose onto its website at www.icrp.org - - The mechanisms for genomic (a calculation of radiation exposure) full link is http//www.icrp.org/ instability, bystander effect and mini- says nothing about the way in which remissvar/listcomments.asp. satellite mutations (a specific type) the radiation dose is received, or what may explain effects seen at low doses organ is most exposed or for how long. ICRP will accept comments by e- that were not expected and are not Therefore, the ICRP risk estimates mail to [email protected] OR found at higher doses. In addition, present an incomplete picture of [email protected] but prefer these phenomena may vary with each radiation damage. posting on the website to allow individual and could raise ethical other to view. questions of radiation exposure. The Epidemiological study: further study committee did not arrive at any and conclusions Draft ICRP 2005 is at www.icrp.org/ consensus on this topic. The committee investigated bomb test docs/ health data, data from reprocessing 2005_recs_CONSULTATION_Draft1a.pdf. - The CERRIE committee recognized sites such as Sellafield, and nuclear that, while it is preferable to have industry workers and their children, Please comment to ICRP by the studies peer-reviewed and published, and health studies after the Chernobyl deadline. To view the CERRIE there is a tendency within this system explosion in Europe and the Former Report (discussed in article) visit to reject evidence that does not Soviet Union. www.cerrie.org and to see the conform to existing paradigms. executive summary and order the In general, the committee concluded CERRIE Minority Report go to http// - CERRIE also recognized that data that low-level intake of radionuclides llrc.org. protection is making research more leads to some increased risk of adverse

12 WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620, 24 December 2004 health effects as a result of the internal in Greece after the Chernobyl ourselves from any suggestion that irradiation of organs and tissues. explosion, Busby et al said that studies they may indicate that current There was some dissent on this. Some are often discounted when they find standards are too stringent. This is members felt that risk models are that the highest cancer rates are not because we believe that there exists quite accurate while others thought associated with the highest doses. The sufficient epidemiological evidence to that current risk models may well authors argue that rather than discount demonstrate deleterious health-effects underestimate risks from intakes of this observation, which fails to fit any from radioactive pollution.” certain radionuclides, but by modest favored theories such as LNT, science amounts, while two members felt risks should let the actual disease incidence Busby et al conclude that in the short are substantially underestimated. findings guide them to investigate why term, the evidence of harm and the these cases may be different from the scientific insecurity of the ICRP - CERRIE concluded that an increase in theoretical model. methodology are sufficient to trigger infant leukemia was prevalent in application of the Precautionary populations exposed to Chernobyl The argument between the deductive Principle in respect of releases of nuclear fallout. The committee was and inductive methods is something radioactivity. Long-term research is divided as to whether or not current that CERRIE alludes to briefly and then needed on the implications of these risk estimates would have correctly discounts by saying this discussion was mechanisms for radiation risks, from predicted or underestimated the not within the remit or expertise of both internal and external radiation. incidence. the committee. However, choosing one of these methods over the other could Considering the conclusions reached - For childhood leukemia, the very well result in entirely different by both the CERRIE Report and the committee concluded that official risk interpretations of the same data. CERRIE Minority Report, research estimates did not underestimate Choosing to use one logic method over must be continued and, in the interim, incidence. Two members strongly the other is fundamental to scientific existing standards must not be dissented partially due to data mixing investigation and understanding of weakened. Precaution demands, which can dilute evidence of disease. that investigation. instead, that standards need to be all the more restrictive, and that - ICRP needs to recognize the The minority report concludes that radioactive materials and wastes uncertainties involved with dose and there could be errors of magnitude in already deregulated should be brought risk estimates. The committee hopes the current risk assessments due to under control. this would lead to identification of energy deposition at the cellular level. situations where the precautionary The authors then examined studies, Contact: Cindy Folkers at approach might be appropriate. which were reviewed by CERRIE, [email protected] and Judith Johnsrud offering different interpretations of at [email protected] CERRIE and its Dissenters agreed that data and conclusions, often adding Tel: +1 202-238-0002 or ICRP’s risks might be underestimated. more complete background and +1 814-237-3900 The disagreement is over the contextual information than was magnitude or mechanism of that offered in the first report. The under-estimate. minority identifies issues such as inappropriate data mixing, limiting CERRIE Minority Report assumptions about the linear-no- Two scientists on the panel, Dr. Chris threshold theory, and problems with Busby and Mr. Richard Bramhall, and recording human disease. one of the Secretariat, Dr. Paul Dorfman, produced the CERRIE In a number of cases, including health Minority Report as the Majority Report studies on weapons testing and in did not reflect their views. One coastal areas, Busby et al recommend important concern is that epidemio- further study since the Committee logical studies have inherent flaws that disbanded before being able to make the final, peer-reviewed reports complete these assessments. Further, biased. the minority said that CERRIE majority under-reported on important The minority disagrees strongly with discussions in some cases. the main report’s conclusions that risk models are fairly accurate. The The minority members sum up their dissenters raise concerns about view: “We are in broad agreement with epidemiological methods used in elements of the main report’s (CERRIE) studies referenced for this conclusion. discussion on genomic instability and Using the example of infant leukemia the bystander effect but we dissociate

24 December 2004, WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620 13 IN BRIEF Chernobyl survivors hunger strike. A Tarapur nuclear power plant due to Chernobyl cancer probe in Hungary group of St. Peterburgers exposed to restrictions imposed by the Nuclear following train deaths. Hungarian dangerous levels of radiation while Suppliers Group (NSG), of which State Railways (M-V) has denied that helping bring the 1986 Chernobyl Russia is a member. Alexander carriages coated in radioactive dust disaster under control, began a hunger Rumyantsev, Director of the Russian coming from the Soviet Union were strike on 3 December demanding an Federal Atomic Energy Agency, washed in Hegyeshalom, a city on the increase to compensation payments. explained that Russia had been able to border of Hungary and Austria, shortly The eight workers based in Sestroretsk supply 50 tonnes of enriched uranium after the explosion of the nuclear said the government had raised the to the two-unit Tarapur plant in 2001 reactor in Chernobyl. The Chief Health payments only once since 1997, by 19% on the grounds that it was an extreme Office (CHO) started investigations in in 2000, but that inflation had greatly case - India had no other fuel to Hegyeshalom, after a regional reduced the value. In 1997 victim operate its 160 MWe BWRs - and would newspaper published articles based on Sergei Kulish received compensation not be repeated. Russia’s decision reports from local citizens, about the of about 2,000 roubles a month (about could scupper plans for it to build two high incident of cancer-related deaths $330 in 1997). Now he gets 2,500 additional 1000 MWe units at the in the city in the early 1990s. M-V roubles (worth just $88.60 today). After Kudankulam nuclear power plant. claims that official records show the being given assurances that the WNA News Briefing 04.49, 5 Decem- examination of the trains in 1986, Supreme Court would consider their ber 2004 which found only two carriages demand, the men ended their hunger contaminated, which were turned back strike on 7 December. immediately. According to the St. Petersburg Times, 3 & 10 Decem- Security concerns at UK plant. regional newspaper, employees were ber 2004 Security at the Hartlepool nuclear not told about the circumstances, nor power plant in the UK has been were they equipped with the adequate questioned after armed men protective clothing. Most have since Tibetan students rally. 15 Indian-born reportedly roamed the site unchecked. died at relatively young ages. M-V has Tibetan students of the Tibetan Councillors have demanded answers initiated a committee to analyze the Student’s Alliance have set out on an after reports that people hunting situation. all India motorbike rally to demand rabbits with dogs and air rifles are The Budapest Sun, 16 December 2004 that China stop dumping nuclear waste able to access the grounds of the plant in Tibet. The rally will pass through unchallenged. Unauthorised hunters more then 28 major cities in India, scaled a perimeter fence to gain access Stalin’s waste legacy haunts covering a distance of about 8878-km to the site. British Energy denies the Tajikistan. The former Soviet republic and will conclude in Delhi by mid claims insisting the plant is secure. of Tajikistan is on the brink of January 2005. The tour will also raise Hartlepool Today, 6 December 2004 ecological catastrophe with millions of the important issue of the violation of tonnes of nuclear waste polluting its human rights in Tibet. land. Contaminated soil is left open to www.Phayul.com, 4 December 2004 Row over Dutch European the elements and nuclear waste is Commission-owned plant. Serious probably dispersed over hundreds of safety breaches were found at the EU kilometers, according to Saulius France: anti-nuclear accident Commission-owned nuclear plant in Smalys, Dushanbe based environment simulation. Action group Tcherno- Petten, the Netherlands, but it has advisor to the pan-European Organi- blaye simulated a nuclear disaster at emerged that authorities blocked zation for Security and Cooperation in the Blayais NPP by launching balloons further investigations. A police raid in Europe (OSCE). Stalin’s first Soviet from the site. Each balloon contained a September 2003 revealed dangerous nuclear bomb was made with uranium card that people could send back to the abuses of environmental and safety extracted in northern Tajikistan - some group. The results were used to give a standards at the reactor, which is 50 million tonnes of radioactive waste clear picture of how the possible owned by the European Commission’s still remain. Contamination may contamination following an accident Joint Research Centre. Dutch news- spread if earthquakes or landslides would spread. One of the balloons was paper De Volkskrant reported that the were to intensify. Radiation levels in found hundreds of kilometers from Dutch government had hindered the abandoned mines exceed the norm the plant. further judicial investigations fearing a by scores and cancer levels in the Tchernoblaye press release, 6 Decem- diplomatic incident. Since Commis- north are reportedly 250% higher than ber 2004 sion employees at Petten have legal other regions. The OSCE is calling on immunity, investigations by the Dutch the IAEA and NATO to provide funds public prosecutor were hastily stopped to decontaminate the area - the Russia to stop providing India with in March 2004. required amount is estimated at nuclear fuel. Russia will no longer be www.EUobserver.com; www.dw- hundreds of millions of dollars. able to provide nuclear fuel for India’s world.de, 6 December 2004 Taipei Times, 17 December 2004 14 WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620, 24 December 2004 Hidden costs of Temelin construction. licenses will be given to 10 ageing first buying and producing more The construction costs for the Temelin generation Soviet-designed nuclear conventional armaments thereby NPP are much higher than the 97.6 reactors. The decision to delay shut raising bilateral tensions and mistrust. billion Czech Crowns (US$ 4.6 billion) down and extend the lives of plants The CNDP calls on New Delhi and given as the official figure by operator such as Leningrad, Kola and Islamabad to rapidly move towards 1) CEZ. According to an Austrian Novovoronezh was described as separating warheads from all delivery government commission the real costs extremely dangerous by Russian NGO systems and making such procedures are much higher and may have Ecodefense. Bringing safety levels up transparent and verifiable. 2) surpassed 170 billion crowns (US$ 8.0 to modern standards is not possible on Establishing on both sides of the billion). The CEZ amount is low these plants that were designed and border a zone of non-deployment of because important costs, already erected long before the Chernobyl nuclear capable delivery systems. 3) A identified by the commission in 1998, disaster. permanent bilateral test ban pact. 4) were deliberately excluded. CEZ also Ecodefense press release, 16 Decem- Establishing joint teams of Indian and neglected to calculate the effect of ber 2004 Pakistani scientific personnel to interest. Further hidden costs include periodically visit nuclear-related site preparation work, the construction facilities in both countries. of interim waste storage and safety India & Pakistan fail to agree nuclear South Asians Against Nukes (SAAN) upgrade projects. CBMs. The Indian Coalition for press release, 17 December 2004 www.oberoesterreich.com, 3 Decem- Nuclear Disarmament and Peace ber 2004 (CNDP) expressed great disappointment at the failure of recent official talks between India and Putin gives new life to Chernobyl- Pakistan to come up with meaningful type reactors. Russian President nuclear confidence-building measures Vladimir Putin has said that new (CBMs). Both governments continue NIRS/WISE offices and relays WISE Amsterdam Tel: +43 732 774275; +43 664 2416806 WISE Sweden P.O. Box 59636 Fax: +43 732 785602 c/o FMKK 1040 LC Amsterdam Email: [email protected] Barnängsgatan 23 The Netherlands Web: www.atomstopp.com 116 41 Stockholm Tel: +31 20 612 6368 Sweden Fax: +31 20 689 2179 WISE Czech Republic Tel: +46 8 84 1490 Email: [email protected] c/o Jan Beranek Fax: +46 8 84 5181 Web: www.antenna.nl/wise Chytalky 24 Email: [email protected] 594 55 Dolni Loucky Web: www.folkkampanjen.se NIRS Czech Republic 1424 16th Street NW, #404 Tel: +420 604 207305 WISE Ukraine Washington, DC 20036 Email: [email protected] P.O. Box 73 USA Rivne-33023 Tel: +1 202 328 0002 WISE Japan Ukraine Fax: +1 202 462 2183 P.O. Box 1, Konan Post Office Tel/fax: +380 362 237024 Email: [email protected] Hiroshima City 739-1491 Email: [email protected] Web: www.nirs.org Japan Web: www.atominfo.org.ua Tel/Fax: +81 82 828 2603 NIRS Southeast Email: [email protected] WISE Uranium P.O. Box 7586 Peter Diehl Asheville, NC 28802 WISE Russia Am Schwedenteich 4 USA P.O. Box 1477 01477 Arnsdorf Tel: +1 828 675 1792 236000 Kaliningrad Germany Email: [email protected] Russia Tel: +49 35200 20737 Tel/fax: +7 95 2784642 Email: [email protected] WISE Argentina Email: [email protected] Web: www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium c/o Taller Ecologista Web: www.antiatom.ru CC 441 2000 Rosario WISE Slovakia Argentina c/o SZOPK Sirius Email: [email protected] Katarina Bartovicova Web: www.taller.org.ar Godrova 3/b 811 06 Bratislava WISE Austria Slovak Republic c/o Plattform gegen Atomgefahr Tel: +421 905 935353 Mathilde Halla Fax: 421 2 5542 4255 Landstrasse 31 Email: [email protected] 4020 Linz Web: www.wise.sk Austria

24 December 2004, WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor 620 15 and atwww.nirs.org. WISE Amsterdamhomepage:www.antenna.nl/wise (pdf format).Backissuesareavailablethroughthe be obtainedbothonpaperandinanemailversion available atwww.nirs.org).The a JapaneseeditionispublishedbyWISEJapan(both Ukrainian versionispublishedbyWISEUkraineand A RussianversionispublishedbyWISERussia,a Amsterdam website(www.antenna.nl/wise/esp). lation ofthisnewsletterisavailableontheWISE mation inEnglish20timesayear. ASpanish trans- The sustainable energy. nuclear power, radioactive waste, radiation,and environmental organizationsconcernedabout information andresourcecentersforcitizens forces in2000,creatingaworldwidenetworkof Netherlands. NIRSandWISEAmsterdamjoined up thesameyearandishousedinAmsterdam, The WorldInformationServiceonEnergywasset founded in1978 andisbasedinWashington, DC. The NuclearInformation&ResourceServicewas $250/year forinstitutions. 11).Subscriptions are$35/yrforindividualsand subscribe tothe US andCanadianreadersshouldcontactNIRSto website aswell. for! You candownloadthepetition fromtheNIRS' send youasmany cangetsignatures www.nirs.org oraskus forpaper copies--we'll for aSustainableEnergy Future,onlineat again. As afirststep,pleasesign thePetition last Congress--withyourhelp.Weneedhelp to thenuclearpowerindustry. We beatthemback proposal thatwouldgivebillionsofyourdollars we canexpectthereturnofanewenergybill Congress isreturninginJanuary, andthatmeans and mailingaddress.Orcallusat202-328-0002. sage [email protected] vert yoursubscriptionatnocost,justsendames- NIRS saves onprintingandpostagecosts. To con- least aweekormoreearlierthanthemail--and format. You receive your issuesmuchsooner--at receive theircopiesbye-mailinAdobeAcrobat.pdf We encourageourNorthAmericansubscribersto Petition foraSustainableEnergyFuture Receive theNuclearMonitorbyE-Mail! Receive theNuclearMonitorbyE-Mail! Receive theNuclearMonitorbyE-Mail! Receive theNuclearMonitorbyE-Mail! Receive theNuclearMonitorbyE-Mail! Nuclear Monitor THE NUCLEARMONIT THE NUCLEARMONIT THE NUCLEARMONIT THE NUCLEARMONIT THE NUCLEARMONIT Receiving theNuclearMonitor Receiving theNuclearMonitor Receiving theNuclearMonitor Receiving theNuclearMonitor Receiving theNuclearMonitor Nuclear Monitor publishesinternationalinfor- Nuclear Monitor (address seepage OR OR OR OR OR can

The NUCLEAR MONITOR Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1424 16th Street NW, #404 Washington, DC 20036

First Class Mail