This site will close end of May,2008 NEW BLOG AT: http://todays-nuclear-news.blogspot.com/

Entries from November 18, 2007 - November 24, 2007

RADIOACTIVE EXPOSURE AT TEST SITE: Workers' claims may be reopened

Audit unearths flaws in assessment documents
http://www.lvrj.com/news/11753916.html

Compensation cases of more than 700 Nevada Test Site workers who blamed their illnesses on exposure to radioactive materials could be reopened after an audit found flaws in the documents used to assess them.

Peter Turcic, director of the Labor Department's Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, said any denied case affected by changes being made to the documents will be returned to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, for revisions in radiation dose estimates.

Those cases in question will be "sent back to NIOSH immediately in order to give claimants adequate due process," Turcic said in a telephone interview.

He said the total number of cases, 730, doesn't include 53 that were awaiting decisions and will be returned to NIOSH. Nor does the total include another 180 returned previously to NIOSH for dose-estimate revisions.

NIOSH officials acknowledged last week that an audit conducted two years ago by a contractor, Sanford Cohen and Associates, resulted in a "total rewrite" of at least two of six sections of the test site's technical basis document, also known as the site profile.

Larry Elliott, director of the NIOSH Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, said the number of dose reconstructions that will have to be reworked remains to be seen.

"We don't know how many that will be until we complete revision of the document," he said. "It could be all or none."

Each dose reconstruction typically costs between $1,000 and $5,000, depending on the claimant's work history. The task involves evaluating how much radiation a person was exposed to and how much radioactivity entered a person's body based on the time and location where he or she worked, activities that took place and any dosimetry and employment records that exist.

One section of the site profile document contains historical information about tests and activities involving radioactive materials or releases.

If dose reconstructions show that workers' cancers are more than likely caused by their workplace exposures, then they stand to receive $150,000 each in compensation plus reimbursements for medical costs.

As of last week, the Labor Department had paid $18.9 million to 161 former test site workers or their survivors after dose reconstructions showed their illnesses probably were linked to exposure to radioactive materials at the test site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

If new information warrants any changes, a review will be conducted to determine whether compensation is warranted in cases previously denied, Chris Ellison, a NIOSH communications team leader, wrote in an e-mail last week.

She said NIOSH staff members are revising the site profile and the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health is reviewing it.

Lynn Anspaugh, a Henderson health physicist and former Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientist who is a consultant to the audit firm, said significant information was missing from the test site's profile even though some of it had been well known for decades and can be found easily on the Internet. "They're going to have to go back and re-examine every claim that's been denied," he said.

One example, he noted, was the lack of disclosure about operation of the Bare Reactor Experiment Nevada, also known as the BREN tower, in Area 4 of the test site from 1962 to 1966. The site profile document references the BREN tower only in Area 25 but doesn't mention that the unshielded reactor was used in Area 4 of Yucca Flat. It was hoisted up and down the tower, which was 55 feet taller than the Empire State Building, to estimate radiation doses received by survivors of the atomic bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan.

Anspaugh said program officials need to find out how operations were conducted there involving the BREN tower and determine whether there was a potential for exposure of workers traveling on the main road through the area and in nearby camps where they spent time on the job.

The site profile fails to mention that after the BREN tower was dismantled in 1966 and moved to Area 25, it was used for Operation HENRE (High Energy Neutron Reactions Experiment) to develop information for the Atomic Energy Commission's biomedical research program.

"Not even considering the BREN reactor, they have made substantial changes in the method for dose reconstruction. These changes have not yet been approved by the advisory board, and we understand that additional changes are on the way," Anspaugh said.

Ellison said NIOSH officials only "recently found out about the activity in the BREN reactor from 1962 to 1966. We are continuing to update the site profile and will include this information," she wrote. Anspaugh said one flaw with the site profile is that no "site expert" is listed for the test site, one who could be held accountable for documenting all events that could have resulted in doses to the workers.

When asked about this, Ellison wrote that the document lists "subject experts" but didn't explain why there was no specific "site expert" for the Nevada Test Site other than to say, "We have also consulted with a variety of site experts ... and will continue to do so as issues arise."

John Funk, a former test site worker whose radiation cancer claim has been denied and appealed since the program's inception in 2001, alerted NIOSH officials two weeks ago about incomplete information regarding the BREN tower.

Funk is chairman of the non-profit advocacy group Atomic Veterans and Victims of America. He said he's pleased that NIOSH is revising the test site's profile "but not satisfied yet because the recent disclosure of the BREN tower operating in Area 4 ... is grounds for another total rewrite of the technical basis documents and the site profile."

"So does that mean we will have to wait another two years to get the BREN tower issues cleared up?" Funk asked.

"And I also wonder why NIOSH was recommending only last month to deny Nevada Test Site workers special exposure status (to eliminate the need for many dose reconstructions) when they knew damn well these changes would impact that decision," he said.

Contact reporter Keith Rogers at krogers@reviewjournal.com or (702) 383-0308.

Posted on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 07:20PM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint

Ralph Nader takes another look at Nevada’s issues and finds the state is still being exploited

The raider returns
Ralph Nader takes another look at Nevada’s issues and finds the state is still being exploited
http://www.newsreview.com/reno/Content?oid=599933
By Dennis Myers
dennism@newsreview.com
More stories by this author...
Outside a Ralph Nader appearance at UNR's new student union, Republican students objected to his being invited. One sign read, "Hey UNR! We are TIRED OF YOUR LIBERAL BIAS." Note the spelling of the word "balanced."
PHOTO BY DENNIS MYERS

"How many of you have heard of Interface Corporation?" the speaker asked.

Four hands went up.

"And how many of you have heard of Halliburton?" he asked.

Every hand went up.

Ralph Nader had made his point—in journalism, bad news drives out bad. His audience knew all about the rogue corporation operating in Iraq but little of the Georgia carpet manufacturer that is a profitable success while still cleaning up after itself with a massive recycling program for its raw materials.

The hair that was jet black when General Motors was siccing private detectives on him is now salt and pepper, but the lanky, stooped-shoulder posture and dull black suit that bespeak his spartan lifestyle are the same. At 73, Nader still draws crowds, as he drew 234 people to an appearance that marking the opening of the new student union at the University of Nevada, Reno.

He praised the building in typical Nader fashion, not for its architecture or amenities but for its planned photovoltaic features and its pocketbook impact, praising the inclusion of a credit union instead of a bank. He delighted the audience by pronouncing Nevada correctly and by calling the campus by its original name—"You notice I say the University of Nevada. Enough of Las Vegas, huh? My only pandering tonight."

Outside, young Republican protestors objected to his presence. Inside, a Democratic audience member denounced Nader for running against Al Gore and taking away "his" votes.

If offending the two party system is a credential, Nader has something for everyone—harsh criticism of government to offend Democrats and harsh criticism of corporations to offend Republicans.

He isn't new either to UNR, where he has spoken before, or to Nevada, whose issues he has regularly dealt with. For years, Nader has had the nasty habit of being right too soon to suit Nevada politicians.

At a 1973 governor's conference, he denounced the Atomic Energy Commission, the agency that told the public that atomic testing in Nevada was not harmful. Nevada Gov. Mike O'Callaghan, a Democrat, bristled. He told Nader, "I've probably worked with the AEC more than any other governor... I've gone to them with some tough questions and they've always come up with the answers." Nader responded that he couldn't believe O'Callaghan's attitude "when the federal government is using his state as a guinea pig. Why doesn't the state of Nevada demand more public participation in the AEC's decision-making process?" Disclosures of the AEC's misconduct in Nevada were yet to come. (The AEC is now folded into the U.S. Department of Energy, which is trying to make Nevada's Yucca Mountain into a nuclear waste dump.)

In 2000, he incurred the wrath of Nevada's U.S. Sen. Harry Reid for running for president against Reid's pal Al Gore. But Nader has long since seen his work as moving beyond the political arena and seen politicians as part of the problem. After succeeding in getting numerous major pieces of legislation through Congress early in his career, Nader found that administrations of both parties were reluctant to enforce them and he turned his attention to more direct action through citizen groups and in local communities.

His remarks at UNR probably won't endear him to Nevada politicians, either, because they included condemnation of the Mining Law of 1872: "They [mining corporations] get free, virtually free ... your gold, your molybdenum, your silver."

Prodding politicians
His view of the foot dragging of the political process and the unwillingness of politics to enact sweeping changes to deal with great threats was one of his topics at the student union. One such sweeping change, he said, would have eliminated the need for the Yucca Mountain waste dump: Stop generating the waste.

"How do you deal with leaded gasoline? You get rid of it," he said. "You don't bring it down ten percent every year."

But usually it doesn't happen that way, Nader said. The politicians and regulators waver, unwilling to order such sweeping changes because they have "big fund raisers with the polluters in Washington and elsewhere" and the needed strict compliance standards are never issued. Thus, allowable levels of toxic pollution are permitted.

Using existing technology to enhance the energy derived from existing sources would solve much of the U.S. energy problem, he said, but timid politicians won't require it.

"Material science is so developed in our country and other countries that there are really vast, vast efficiencies possible where you can get 10 times more work out of a certain amount of natural resources, whether it's timber or whether it's oil or whether it's gas..."

Nader quoted two scientists: "Reducing waste represents a vast business economy. The U.S. economy is not even 10 percent as energy efficient as the laws of physics allow. Just the energy thrown off as waste heat by U.S. power stations equals the total energy use in Japan."

Most of the crowd was receptive to Nader, but during the question period one audience member denounced him for allegedly denying the presidency to Gore. "Haven't you any shame?" the man asked Nader. The normally imperturbable Nader flared, telling the man to stand to hear his answer.

"We are not second class citizens, sir, because we are third party or independent candidates. We have an equal right to run. ... Those are our First Amendment rights, the right to run as a candidate, the right to vote. ... If you're a Democrat, tell your fellow Democrats that they've become very good in recent decades at electing very bad Republicans because they whine, and they carp, and they sell out to the corporations."

The crowd cheered wildly at hearing the mild-mannered activist express outrage.

Nader said Harry Truman in 1948 also had a third-party opponent, Henry Wallace. "You know what Harry Truman did? He didn't whine, he didn't carp. He took the issues, domestic issues, away from Henry Wallace."

Dispelling apathy
Nader devoted the bulk of his remarks to trying to motivate the members of his audience, particularly the students. Never again in their lives, he said, will they have the freedom of action they have a students, much less the assets they have—student newspapers, meeting halls, laboratories.

Of his mixed audience of young and not so young, he asked, "How does the campus awaken on this? ... They've got 15,000 or so days before they turn 65, a little over 2,000 weeks. Did last week go quickly? You haven't seen anything yet. Ask your parents and grandparents. There's no time, you know, to spend 10 years to 'find yourself' in your 20s. You're adults. You've got high levels of idealism. You're not afraid of taking on new technology. You know how to use the internet. And you've got the students who came before you to stand on their shoulders, the students who did the civil rights struggles and the environmental... You've got to be less self-indulgent, less making excuses for yourself." Other groups with fewer numbers—abolitionists, suffrage workers, labor organizers—accomplished more with fewer numbers and at risk of life, he said.

He also said they have better prospects of success than they realize.

"Remember when they said the tobacco industry was invincible? ... There are dozens of examples like that. ... Why? Because a lot of people—like the Mississippi River, which starts with a few drops of water in northern Minnesota and becomes the rivulet and then the rivulets become brooks and the brooks become streams and the streams become rivers and the rivers become tributaries and then you've got the Mississippi River—because enough people objected to smokers blowing smoke in their face."

Posted on Thursday, November 22, 2007 at 02:10PM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint

Anti-nuclear drum beats on

The Canberra Times
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/antinuclear-drum-beats-on/1088299.html

Anti-nuclear drum beats on
Jenna Price



HELEN CALDICOTT is on the peace path.

Dr Caldicott, near 70, is determined to stop nuclear power in Australia and she has chosen the federal election to make her fight as public as possible. She was in Sydney last week promoting her latest book, Nuclear Power Is Not The Answer but also to get her anti-nuclear message across.

"This is the most dangerous election we have ever had and it is the most serious election Australia has ever faced," she says.

Australia has signed up to the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, and has also agreed to take radioactive waste from overseas. She says that as a member of the partnership, Australia will eventually export enriched uranium for other countries to use in their reactors to generate electricity, then in line with the core principle of the partnership, Australia will take back and store the resultant waste.

Dr Caldicott is Australia's leading anti-nuclear campaigner and is a member of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the group which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985. She won the first Australian Peace Prize last year and was named one of the 20th century's most influential women by the Smithsonian Institution.

But despite all those plaudits, she has had trouble getting an audience with politicians from either side. She sent a copy of Carbon Free and Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for US Energy Policy, a document produced by the Nuclear Policy Research Institute in the United States, to both the shadow minister for the environment, Peter Garrett; and the Leader of the Opposition, Kevin Rudd; but neither has responded. And she has certainly never had any success in persuading either the Prime Minister or the Minister for the Environment.

And Dr Caldicott says that it is not only politicians who are reluctant to hear the anti-nuclear message; she says that getting her message out to the public is becoming increasingly difficult.

"Australians are not well-educated in this area," she says.

For her the most important thing is for Australians to understand what the nuclear issues are all about and she says that we have lessons to learn from the European experience.

In 1986, one of the reactors at a nuclear plant just outside Chernobyl exploded and the radioactive plume drifted over Europe and even to some parts of North America.

Dr Caldicott says that when people live near reactors they are at risk from nuclear contamination; and the Federal Government's plan to have 25 nuclear reactors along the east coast is highly dangerous.

"If Howard's plan goes ahead, we will be one of the most nuclearised countries in the world," she says.

"The whole of Europe is contaminated and I don't eat European food.

"We don't want to take that risk."
Posted on Sunday, November 18, 2007 at 01:42PM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint