In Worst Nuclear Accident Since Chernobyl At Least 20 Russian Sailors DIE HORRIBLE NUCLEAR DEATH

During the 2008 Presidential Campaign, John McCain routinely LIED about the safety of the Nuclear Navy, deliberately mislead Americans regarding the safety of nuclear energy...well, as we all sit safely in our homes tonight, Russia is hiding the location and name of a naval vessel where 20 sailors have died a horrible nuclear death, with at least 20 others severely injured, perhaps suffering from severe nuclear burns or sure to be FATAL over exposure to radioactive particulates...which raises the question, is the world in the middle of a Naval China Syndrome as a Russian sea going vessel spews its ruptured onboard reactor's nuclear particulates into the world's oceans? Is this the first example of what is to come as America's own aged and brittle reactors give up the ghost and explode when exposed to Thermal Shock? WE NEED DETAILS RUSSIA, NOT COVER UPS!

At least 20 die in accident on Russian nuclear sub

MOSCOW, Nov. 8, 2008 (Reuters) — At least 20 people died and 21 were injured in an accident on board a Russian nuclear-powered submarine, Russian news agencies said on Saturday. ... > full story
http://www.nukestrat.com/russia/subpatrols.htm

Soviet/Russian Nuclear Submarine Patrols 1981-2006

The annual number of patrols performed by Russian nuclear-powered submarines has plummeted from 235 in 1984 to less than 10 today. In 2002, the strategic submarine force did not manage to send a single boat on deterrent patrol. (click on graph to download PDF version)

Patrol Areas

During the Cold War, the patrol areas for Soviet ballistic missile submarines gradually changed as new capabilities were introduced. Most important was the range of the missile, which permitted the submarines to pull back into patrol areas ("bastions") closer to the Soviet Union.

Delta IV Class Ballistic Missile Submarine

Russian nuclear submarines are spending most of their life at pier side.

Demand That Government Gives Us Truth on Human Health and Safety Risks Regarding Indian Point

Picture of DTRA Mobile Sheltering Device For Medical Staff...where is OURS?

The government has its own agenda where nuclear energy is concerned, and from what we can tell, they stand fully ready to DUPE the public in their quest for their own selfish goals...problem is,they are playing Russian Roulette with our safety. Below is a letter we have just sent out too various agencies of our Federal Government, and we recommend those concerned with Indian Points continued operation use it as a model to create inquiry letters of your own.

Dear Dr. James Tegnelia
Major General Ramdal R Castro
DTRA Office of Inspector General
FOIA Office for DTRA, NRC, DHS,FEMA
Chairman of NRC
Secretary-Department of Homeland Security (or lack thereof.)
FEMA
Secretary-Department of Energy
Hugo Teufel III


My name is Sherwood Martinelli, a citizen stakeholder living within three miles of a nuclear facility owned by the commercial enterprise Entergy, and commonly known as Indian Point. It is common knowledge in our area, that in the case of a nuclear incident and/or terrorist attack, that the NRC (as is outlined in various official documents including their fatally flawed DBT) have the following expectations, or lack thereof:

1. In the case of a fast moving event at the nuclear facility, NRC's Sam Collins has admitted that evacuation of citizens would not be workable/possible, and citizens would be sheltered in place. Further, the various governmental agencies charged with Emergency Response have admitted this as well in establishing a new wedge policy wherein only a 2.5 mile pie shaped wedge determined to be MOST AT RISK would be evacuated in a fast moving nuclear event with all others ordered sheltering in place.
2. NRC, and it's licensee would rely heavily on first responders, law enforcement and military aid in dealing with the situation. In the case of Indian Point, the inadequate military base just up route nine, and perhaps West Point would be called into action to provide aid, or in the case of a terrorist attack military support and fire power.

Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, NRC and various agencies at local, state and federal levels have attempted to fabricate a public belief that we are safe from the effects of a radioactive event being sheltered in place, and in fact and deed the NRC has used that very criteria to justify in part their decision not to include evacuation plans, and terrorist attacks on the facility in their decision making process during the license renewal application process for their licensees for the aforementioned Indian Point reactors. They have coupled this reasoning with flawed and biased modeling written by the nuclear licensees lobbyist (NEI)that shows the likelihood of an attack on a nuclear reactor is so small as to be almost mathematically impossible. Assorted information on other government sites categorically refute these false assumptions by the NRC and NEI.

Living in New York, having been down in New York (not at Ground Zero) on Sept 11, 2001 I was/am more than skeptical, and so have done my due diligence in conducting my own investigation/research into matters directly and/or indirectly associated with nuclear incidents, terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities, and evacuation plans, specifically giving careful attention to the now preferred method of protecting human health and safety through sheltering in place during a catastrophic event. No more damning condemnation of the shortcomings of shielding in place could be found than the CDC report that discusses the level of protection for the average citizen who has been ordered to shelter in place. For a citizen sheltered in their stick frame and/or brick home in a concrete basement, the protection level is only 40 percent shielding from Radioactive fallout. For those living in residential structures with no basement, said level of protection drops to a devastatingly alarming ten percent.

Armed with this disturbing news, I began visiting a host of government sites, and found some more forthcoming than others. For instance, if you visit Condi Rice's Department of State site dealing with these issues, they state sheltering in place in the event of a Terrorist Dirty Bomb explosion and/or attack on a nuclear facility could, in a worst case scenario, last for a period of weeks, not days as is claimed and all but codified by the NRC.

Further, each for their own reasons, it became apparent in my research, that the DOD, DOE, NRC,NEI, the Nuclear Industry and various other corporate and governmental agencies under the guise of National Interest, and National Security have been intimately, if not incestuously involved in pushing/moving forward the agenda of a Nuclear Renaissance both here in America and abroad with GNEP being used as placebo to assure us as citizens that our Federal Government is finally coming up with a plan to deal with the waste streams from the nuclear industry (both military and civilian). It (GNEP) at best is good intentions gone astray, and at worse, a governmental boondoggle that leaves WMD's (leaking spent fuel pools, and aging failing reactors) inadequately guarded and protected in and around MAJOR (emphasis added) population centers, while the NRC, blindly ignoring basic truths continues the wrongful rubber stamping of reactor license renewal applications, while turning a blind eye to known public health and safety concerns. For instance, the population living within a 50 mile radius of Indian Point exceeds 21 million citizens, and in the case of a significantly nuclear event at Indian Point, some estimates say we could see a immediate death toll running into the tens of thousands...that risk in the name of a Nuclear Renaissance is unacceptable, as is the inadequate protections of shielding citizens in place.

It also became apparent as I looked into these related issues, that First Responders, including members of our military tagged to be a part of the response team dealing with a National Emergency such as a significant nuclear incident/accident (as almost happened when the truck carrying nuclear materials from Japan tipped over on I-95 in North Carolina-yes, the story got partially out before and exclusion zone was thrown up) and/or a terrorist attack at a nuclear facility are being told a different truth than members of the general public, being given a different set of instructions regarding what they need in the way of equipment to be adequately protected than what is being distributed out to members of the general public. The polar opposite realities are not both possible, one or the other is a lie.

Today I called up the DTRA after doing some extensive reading on their web site, and examining their various and assorted course offerings and asked your spokesperson, a reticent and stubborn Mr. Gaines a very straightforward question, which he (like all other agencies I have spoken to) stealthily avoided giving a direct answer to. If first responders need to wear super protective clothing , self containing breathing apparatus, and a dosimeter device in responding to a nuclear event, would civilians ordered to be sheltered in the affected area require that same level of equipment/protection to adequately protect their own health and safety? If medical staff and personal working in a nuclear fallout area need to be protected by being placed in one of the self contained sheltering vehicles such as the one pictured on your web site, wouldn't citizens in the exclusion zone need a similarly personal shelter to have adequate protection of their health and safety?

Mr. Gaines tried to avoid answering the question with a dodge when he stated, "Our agency is concerned with, charged with aiding members of the DOD in performing their task as relates to terrorist threat reduction, or aiding them (DOD) in responding to a nuclear event if our help is requested from the DHS, so I cannot speak to issues of civilian protection. Undeterred, I took a different tack by rephrasing the question. Would you send your agency's personnel into an nuclear incident area without the equipment mandated and/or recommended by your agency's guidelines, to which he replied, "We don't deploy personnel without adequate protective gear. (Iraq aside?) I pointed out, that was not the question asked, at which point he got belligerent, and said he was not willing, could not go there...as in truthfully and honestly answering an American citizen stakeholder's straight forward question?

As a result of this government run around, and deliberate avoidance in honestly answering a stakeholder citizen's questions, I am taking the step of formalizing my inquiries in this email. As citizen stakeholders living near a nuclear facility, we should know the full extent of the risks we are facing when government asks/demands that we play host to a nuclear facility. As allowed in the broadest interpretation of your agency's rules and regulations (individually and/or collectively) this letter is to be interpreted as A) inquiry, B) FOIA request, and C) and allegation. I would like the following questions asked, and as a part of the answer, please include any and all underlying lying documents used in formulating the answer/response, including citations of law, inter/intra office memos, emails, studies and or reports.

1. If first responders need to wear super protective clothing , self containing breathing apparatus, and a dosimeter device in responding to a nuclear event, would civilians ordered to be sheltered in the affected area require that same level of equipment/protection to adequately protect their own health and safety? If not, please explain with specifics why not, and why your agency finds these differing levels of personal protection acceptable.

2. If medical staff and personal working in a nuclear fallout area need to be protected by being placed in one of the self contained sheltering vehicles, such as the one pictured on DTRA web site, wouldn't citizens in the exclusion zone need a similar personal shelter to have adequate protection of their health and safety? If not, please explain with specifics why not, and why your agency finds these differing levels of personal protection acceptable.

3. Would you send your agency's personnel into a nuclear incident area without the equipment mandated and/or recommended by your agencies guidelines? If not, please in detail explain your decision, specifically identifying the risk that said personal would/could face in said potentially contaminated area if they did not have these adequate health and safety protections and equipment.

4. Please identify any and all known safety, security and structural concerns/problems you are aware of, and/or are researching/examining as relates to the continued safe operation and protection of America's nuclear facilities, including Commercial Nuclear Reactors and their leaking spent fuel pools. Please specifically identify known and/or suspected risks to public health and safety in the event of a nuclear accident and/or successful terrorist attack at a nuclear facility, with special attention given to the public risk regarding commercial nuclear reactors.

5. What inadequacies and/or potential problems is the government aware of as relates to A) community evacuation plans, and B) sheltering in place in the case of a nuclear incident and/or terrorist attack on a nuclear facility, and what levels of potential loss and/or harm have been identified (human life, long term health effects, infrastructure loss and/or contamination, financial losses, specifically as affects private citizens since the Price Anderson act leaves us with no form of protecting our assets in the case of a nuclear event and/or a terrorist attack on a nuclear facility.

As a citizen stakeholder living within 3 miles of a governmentally licensed and policed nuclear facility that has applied for a 20 year license renewal, and should be entitled by law to honest and forthright answers to these questions, so that I can fully and completely evaluate the true risk I and my community are being asked to take in continuing to play host to two aging, failing nuclear reactors that are already threatening human health and/or the environment as they leak strontium 90 and tritium into both the area ground water, and the Hudson river.

Respectfully Submitted

Sherwood Martinelli
351 Dyckman
Peekskill, New York 10566

For those activists receiving a copy of this letter...please feel free to forward this to your elected officials, and/or other activists involved in this issue.

This letter also being posted to the Green Nuclear Butterfly blog...please feel free to distribute it to your list serves.

Official Request for Fee Waivers:

For the following reasons, Sherwood Martinelli requests a full and complete waiver of any and all fees associated with the FOIA components of this document.

1. Purpose-To ascertain full risks I, as a stakeholder face in living near a nuclear facility, and distribute said information to the public so they as well can understand their risks as we face the potential re-licensing of the failing Indian Point Nuclear Reactors. Said distribution will occur has occurred through my NRC recognized advocacy group, GNB (Green Nuclear Butterfly) at public events, such as last month's NRC open house in our community where the NRC gave us a presentation table, as well as our blog.

2. The information and answer requested in this document will be used first to educate the public TRUTHFULLY about the risks associated with specifically, Indian Point, and additionally said information will be used as is practical in our plans to act as and intervener in Entergy's license renewal application process.

3. If the information gained reinforces our/my initial findings regarding public safety as relates to a fast nuclear event (terrorist attack of nuclear facility), there is a probabilistic chance that the members of the General Public in and around the host community of Indian Point will become far more active and plugged into the regulatory process, and in demanding the closure of said facility.

4. We currently interact with, communicate (through our blog, public outreach, and phone) daily with over 150 people...on average, 80 percent of these contacts are disseminating our material for the first time. As the license renewal process moves forward, we have the very real capability (thanks to the Internet) of having direct involvement with potentially millions of stakeholders within 50 miles of Indian Point who oppose its license renewal application.

5. As answered before, we distribute this information at public events, formal NRC events/meetings, and via the Internet, and do not charge a fee for our distributed information.

6. My private interests in this information are only as a stakeholder living within 3 miles of a nuclear event.

For these reasons, it is requested that any and all fees associated with the FOIA components of this document be waved in their entirety.

Sherwood Martinelli

The Lie Of Safe, Secure, Vital-Tokaimura Criticality Accident

When Is The Next Chernobyl?

You have heard the lies from the NRC, Entergy, the nuclear industry as they try to tell us that Nuclear Energy is safe, secure and vital, as they try to sell us on re licensing aging, ever more dangerous reactors, and pitching citizen funding of up to 200 more reactors. They would have you believe that there are NO DEATHS associated with the industry, no major accidents since Chernobyl, which they blame on a shoddy antiquated reactor, and worker error.

It's a nice white lie told by nice well meaning Corporate Executives concerned with their corporate bottom lines. Problem is, a cursory glance through Internet links shows you the MAGNITUDE of their lies and deceit. Tonight, we give you information on the Tokaimura Criticality Accident, and call on Congressman John Hall, Congressman Maurice Hinchey, Congresswoman Nita Lowey, and on all the Representatives in Congress of communities hosting these aging reactors to pass legislation that will order the NRC to conduct a comprehensive Independent Safety and Security Assessment of every single nuclear reactor in America.

Further, we call on these Congressmen and women to include as a part of this CO-SPONSORED legislation a moratorium on all re licensing activities until such time as every one of these Independent Safety and Security Assessments have been completed.

Tokaimura Criticality Accident
http://www.uic.com.au/nip52.htm
Nuclear Issues Briefing Paper # 52

June 2000
On 30 September 1999 three workers received high doses of radiation in a Japanese plant preparing fuel for an experimental reactor. Two of the doses proved fatal.

The accident was caused by bringing together too much uranium enriched to a relatively high level, causing a "criticality" (a limited uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction), which continued intermittently for 20 hours.

A total of 119 people received a radiation dose over 1 mSv from the accident, but only the three operators' doses were above permissible limits, and two of these have since died.

The cause of the accident appears to be "human error and serious breaches of safety principles", according to IAEA.

A Part of The Critical Time Line: For Full Time Line

SEPTEMBER 30, 1999
note: all times reported in Japanese Standard Time, or 13 hours ahead of Eastern Daylight Time, except where noted

10:35 AM
Various media sources report that a radiation leak was detected, its cause not immediately known. Police denied reports that a fire had broken out.

11:15 AM
A Kyodo News Chronology (released on October 1) reports that the Japanese Science and Technology Agency received the first report on the accident from JCO.

11:33 AM
The Kyodo News Chronology reports that the accident was reported to the Ibaraki Prefecture.

11:35 AM
Asahi Shimbun.
Monitoring for Gamma Rays begins.

12:41 PM
The Kyodo News Chronology reports that police blocked roads near the plant and banned entry within a radius of 200 meters around the plant.

3:18 PM
The Kyodo News Chronology reports that Tokaimura village authorities issued an evacuation advisory to 50 families living within a 350 meter radius of the plant.

3:35 PM
Asahi Shimbun"Poor Preparation Delays Neutron Testing"
The Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute begins monitoring neutron levels at 14 locations around the facility, six hours after the accident.

4:00 PM
IAEA Press Release. "Accident at the Tokaimura Fuel Conversion Plant."

IAEA learned of the accident. The IAEA Emergency Response Unit immediately made contact with Japanese authorities in order to closely follow the situation.

Japan Times. "Tokai Nuclear Accident Goes Critical; Remains out of Control."

Prefectural authorities in the adjacent town of Naka said the radiation level was rapidly increasing, based on observations of monitoring posts inside the town.

5:00 PM
The Associated Press, "Radiation levels remain high after nuclear accident."

According to the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2-4 millisievert of radiation per hour or 10,000 to 20,000 times the normal level-was detected inside the processing facility as of 5 pm. The government's Nuclear Safety Commission said there might have been a continuing "criticality," as there continued to be high levels of radiation seven hours after the accident.

Sodium 24, a radioactive substance, was detected in the vomit of three of the victims.

The government decided to set up a task force headed by Science and Technology Agency chief Akito Arima to deal with the accident.

5:37 PM
Citizen's Nuclear Information Center, a Japanese nongovernmental organization, reports that initially, an atmospheric radiation count of 0.84 mSv/hour (10,000 times of the annual dose limit) was monitored, but the local government has announced that the radiation count is back to normal. The Science and Technology Agency announced that it was a criticality accident.

6:00 PM
Citizen's Nuclear Information Center reports that the head of Tokai villages stressed the following at a press conference: the atmospheric radiation count has not decreased around the site; there is a possibility that nuclear fission is still occurring at the moment; and the plant's structure is intact.

7:00 PM
Citizen's Nuclear Information Center reports that the Tokaimura municipal officials said up to 4.5 millisievert of neutrons per hour was detected near the circumference of the plant shortly after 7:00 pm. Village officials also said Cesium-138 was detected near the plant.

The Kyodo News Chronology reports that the central government set up a crisis management task force headed by Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi.

IAEA Press Release.
"Radiation Accident in Japan."
While the cause of the accident remains under investigation, it is known that it occurred when workers were transporting a mixture of liquid nitric acid containing 19 percent enriched uranium to a precipitation container. A "flash criticality" occurred.

At its highest point, the dose rate at the facility boundary was measured to be around 4 millisievert/hour.

The three seriously irradiated workers received a dose of more than 8 Sv.

8:00 PM
Citizen's Nuclear Information Center reports that the facility where the accident occurred is a commercial plant where enriched UF6 gas is converted to UO2 powder for further processing. The pellet fabrication is done in another plant nearby.

8:30 PM
The Kyodo News Chronology reports that Ibaraki Governor Masaru Hashimoto issued an evacuation advisory to about 200,000 residents living within a 10 kilometer radius of the plant.

9:00 PM
Citizen's Nuclear Information Center reports that:

The radiation count is still high and not even JCO workers can enter the site. No one is aware of the situation inside the plant and nothing is being done. It is very likely that criticality is ongoing.

Two of three workers hospitalized are suspected to have been seriously exposed due to a sudden increase of white blood corpuscle experienced by both of them. 160 people have evacuated to a community center. The evacuees will have to spend the night at the center. Atmospheric radiation count was 0.7 milisievert per hour (mSv/h) at 3 pm. Normal count is 1 mSv/year.

11:00 PM
The Associated Press, "Nuke Accident serious, may be continuing, Nonaka says."

Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiromu Nonaka said, "There are concerns that the situation is continuing and is affecting a larger area than was believed earlier in the day."

Another NEAR MISS...Nuclear, Safe, Secure, Vital My Butt

Just in from the Washington Scandal...the Bush, Bilderberg, two nuke goose step with the NRC dance card partner Entergy...too harsh? Should I tone it down a bit?

Tuesday, January 9, 2007
America Dodges Another Nuclear Tragedy...NUKE SUB COLLIDES with Japanese OIL TANKER

The DOE, DOD, NRC, NEI, Entergy and the entire Nuclear Industry love playing Russian Roulette with the lives of innocent human beings, both here and around the world as the black gloved elite of the Bilderberg Conference march us ever closer to a one world government shared with us by George Bush the first as he tipped his hand, showing if but briefly the vile, insidous plans of a future global monarchy owned and control by Big Business, and global corporate interests, a world where the safety, security and health of the masses takes a back seat to profits and absolute power.

Last month it was a truck load of uranium oxide tipped over on I-95, and two nuclear reactors shutting down for no apparent reason. Now, in January we averted an accident of apolyptic proportions off the coast of Iran when an American nuclear powered fast-attack USS Newport News submarine RAMMED into A OIL SUPER TANKER! Surely I am not the only one going OH MY FORKING GAWD! Think about it folks...we have a ocean going nuclear reactor ramming into a SUPER TANKER filled with millions of gallons of crude oil! WAKE UP FOLKS...it would not have taken much more of and accident than this one to have wreaked irreparable harm on the world environment, as we watched in horror a combined oil, nuclear explosion of unprecedented magnitude shroud the Middle East in god knows what kind of a fall out as hundreds if not thousands of miles of shore line were destroyed!

The time to STOP THE RUSSIAN ROULETTE IS NOW...we need to shut down aging and failing nuclear reactors, need a morritorium on any new reactors until the scientist telling us Nuclear Energy is safe can actually make it so, instead of feeding us lies.

Updated:2007-01-09 13:32:59

U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship
AP

TOKYO (Jan. 9) - A U.S. nuclear-powered submarine collided with a Japanese oil tanker in the Straits of Hormuz, through which 40 percent of the world's oil supplies travel, officials said.

No one was hurt in the accident that happened Monday night in the 34-mile wide straits, which are bordered by Iran and Oman and serve as the entrance to the Persian Gulf.

Damage to the fast-attack USS Newport News submarine and the supertanker was light and there was no resulting spill of oil or leakage of nuclear fuel, officials from the U.S. Navy and the Japanese government said.

Both ships remained able to navigate, Navy officials said.

The bow of the submarine was traveling submerged when it hit the stern of the supertanker Mogamigawa as the vessels were passing through the Straits, causing minor damage to the Japanese vessel, the U.S. Navy and Japan's Foreign Ministry said. The Japanese government said it was informed of the crash by the Navy and the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo.

Nuclear Industry Petitions Congress...We Want To Rape America

Al Gore's Inconvenient truth...an appropriate name for what the Green Nuclear Butterfly is bringing out into the light of day. Question is, where is Al Gore on this important issue, where does he stand on Nuclear Energy, on the DOE's Nuclear 2010 plan that calls for the NRC to rubber stamp the re licensing of almost every ailing, aged Nuclear Reactor in the current fleet, where does he stand on the devious plan to build 400-700 Nuclear Reactors around the world.

The FIX IS IN...we have Retired Admiral Skip Bowman (who was in charge of the Navy's entire nuclear program) now acting as the hired gun of the Nuclear Industry's lobbying arm, National Energy Institute. testifying before Congress about the need for CONTINUED FUNDING of the DOE's Nuclear Power 2010 plan, a plan who's birth father is George W. Bush. Without actually speaking the words, Skip Bowman makes it clear what he, the NEI, the DOE and the NRC expect Congress to do...go along with the plan to fund the rebirth of the nuclear industry, to pass legislation that will force American taxpayers to subsidize over time the Nuclear Industry to the tune of 4-7 TRILLION DOLLARS.

His testimony starts off from the very beginning talking about the need for new Nuclear Capacity...no discussion of exploring other alternative earth friendly energies, just a discussion wherein diminishing oil and gas supplies coupled with the reality of global warming makes Nuclear the obvious choice, and then chiding Congress to continue funding the nuclear industry at unprecedented levels. Let's explain this...the nuclear industry claims they do not have the necessary funding to create design details that the NRC requires to approve a new reactor design...instead, they want us as American citizens to pay the cost of the industry's RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

Now, the nuclear energy industry as a whole, through out their various assorted company's and supportive groups (NEI, WNA to name two) have over the past ten years or so spent over TWO BILLION DOLLARS lobbying our federally elected officials. Perhaps that money would have been better spent doing the research they are now claiming needs to be done? Perhaps Entergy would have been better off spending all the money ($400 million) they set aside for stock buy backs into research, better off taking the money they give to groups like Peekskill's Paramount Theatre in an attempt to buy favor on doing this research and development, instead of asking us the tax payer to pay their tab?

Bowman stated, that the industry has accelerated their spending on NP2010, and they would like Congress in turn to accelerate government spending on the program...sort of the chicken and the egg argument, with the nuclear industry saying, "We want to build new reactors" but "we want the government to pay for the DESIGNS...oh, and while we are on the subject, we are also going to want the government to give us VERY LOW INTEREST LOANS to build these reactors, and last but not least, hold us harmless for civilian financial damages should there be a major nuclear incident from one of these new reactors, or any of the older ones."

It would be nice if the above were the only DEMANDS that SKIPPER BOY BOWMAN had for our 110th Congress, but hold on folks, seems that the nuclear industry is also very concerned about some of the RISKS THEY FACE from overly burdensome NRC regulations, those on the books, and those that might be added to the books as new regulations are created...it interferes with their plans. Dancing around coming out straight with what he wanted, Skip instead said just enough to let our Congressmen/women read between the lines...he wants, the nuclear industry wants the new generation of reactors they are wanting to build grand fathered in under the old existing less stringent 10 CFR rules and regulations. Congress, moving quickly he says would help the Nuclear Industry to move forward EXPEDITIOUSLY. In short, he wants new reactors granted a waiver from new stricter siting criteria.

As mentioned above, Skip Bowman then expressed his concern that the industry could not afford to build these NEW reactors, that the money (as in investors) was not there. Faced with this truth, he instead wants Congress to write some new legislation that would allow various companies (ENTERGY/NuSTART) to borrow the money from the government at very cheap interest rates, and to guarantee the loans. Now, I know I am a DUMB OLD FARM BOY, but seems to me, that if we really have no choice but to BUILD all these new nuclear reactors, and they are going to be built with TAX PAYER DOLLARS, that we should do away with the profit mongers, and have the reactors OWNED BY THE PEOPLE of America, instead of being built to profit a few money whores within the small circle of the rich and elite. After all, we are taking ALL THE RISKS. Mind you, Green Nuclear Butterfly is not endorsing a new generation of reactors, but if such a reality is forced upon us, and if it is our money building them, then we should own them ourselves. It is suggested here that EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN write, call, fax and email their elected officials stating you are against IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS that would assure the eligibility of large projects such as the 200 new reactors that the nuclear industry wants to build with our money.

Bowman completed his presentation to Congress by suggesting Congress needed to take action to fix the nuclear waste disposal problem...in short, pass a federal law forcing the waste on the folks out west, mandating that YUCCA MOUNTAIN become the defacto national nuclear waste dump site. Well isn't that nice of our Admiral Skip Bowman? It gets better...not only does Skipper Boy Bowman want YUCCA MOUNTAIN to play host for the nuclear industry's waste streams, but he wants the 70,000 Metric Ton limited removed as well....it's simply not enough! How much waste does Bowman want stored at Yucca Mountain you ask? He wants it open ended, wants us to trust the powers that be to make technical decisions as they go along...sort of like with all the spent fuel rod storage facilities now bursting at the seems with re stacked, overly crowded conditions, begging for a major accident at every single reactor in America...OH YEAH, there's a great one for Congress to consider. Let's KILL NEVADA!

He closed with a rather STARLING ADMISSION, though probably did not mean to. He was pushing Congress to support the Nuclear Energy Partnership initiative in a broad bipartisan way, and to pass legislation that allows for more flexibility in the nuclear process, one that can accommodate technological successes and failures (and there will be both)....OK, stop right there. There will be successes, and there will be FAILURES. Wait a minute America...are you willing to have your community play RUSSIAN ROULETTE by having one of these reactors in your CITY? Are you willing to turn the other way and go along with the NRC when they force another city to play RUSSIAN ROULETTE? Are you fine knowing one of us is DOOMED to be a FAILURE?

Before you buy into the LIE of GREEN NUCLEAR, it is strongly suggested you start doing some serious homework on this subject, as it could mean the deaths of millions of people, generations of children born with horrid birth defects, generations of elevated cancer rates, as it only takes ONE SERIOUS ACCIDENT, and as it is, we have been lucky in narrowly avoiding numerous MAJOR INCIDENTS at these sites, and those are just the ones that the NRC and the nuclear industry have not been able to keep secret, and out of the public domain.

Don't TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT...READ THE UGLY TRUTH

DEATH TRAPS

A major portion of my life has been spent in Ohio, it is why I have such an intimate knowledge of some of the history that is the Nuclear Industry...as much as the NEI, and the nuclear industry itself would like you to believe otherwise, Commercial Nuclear, and WAR NUCLEAR are one and the same beast. The history of nuclear is an ugly one, but please do not take the Green Nuclear Butterfly's word for this, read the story for yourselves, EDUCATE YOURSELVES, then plug into our movement. As a child, I used to deliver news papers for the Dayton Daily News, so it gives me some pleasure to share with you a history of the horror that is the Gaseous Diffusion Plants that was written by them. Visit the links below, read the story, hear the words of those who carry the sickness that is the clean, safe, green, vital Nuclear Energy...trust me, you will be horrified when the truth is set before your eyes.

Video of Survivor
Three must read articles

Speak With The Dayton Daily News:

Lynn Hulsey
Reporter
Dayton Daily News
(937) 225-7455

CASEnery exposed

Dear Friends - Please note that the Vermont Chamber of Commerce and Vermont Energy Partnership are members of Patrick Moore's phony clean energy group, which is entirely funded by the Nuclear Energy Institute. See below for full expose. The Vermont Energy Partnership is a front group of VY nuclear supporters spreading the NEI SPIN and pro nuclear dogma.

Expose of Patrick Moore’s group:

Clean and Safe Energy Coalition

From SourceWatch (Project Center for Media & Democracy) December 22, 2006 update

The Clean and Safe Energy Coaltion is a public relations campaign for new reactors launched April 24, 2006, funded by the trade association, the Nuclear Energy Institute, and headed by former Bush Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Christine Todd Whitman and Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, who left that group in 1986. [1]

Contents

• 1 Mission Statement


• 2 Members
  
  
  
  • 2.1 Organizations
  
  
  • 2.2 Individuals


• 3 Funding


• 4 External Links

Mission Statement

According to the group's website, "The Clean and Safe Energy Coalition (CASEnergy Coalition) supports the increased use of nuclear energy to ensure an environmentally clean, safe, affordable and reliable supply of electricity. Nuclear power enhances America's energy security and economic growth, helps attain cleaner air and improves the quality of life, health and economic well-being for all Americans." [2]

Members

Organizations

As of May 5, the website listed the following organizations as members [3]:

• ABB [4]


• AFL-CIO, Building & Construction Trades Department


• African American Environmentalist Association


• Alliance for Sound Nuclear Policy


• AmerenUE


• American Boiler Manufacturers Association


• American Energy Independence


• American Homeowners Grassroots Alliance


• American Iron and Steel Institute


• American Nuclear Insurers


• AREVA, Inc.


• Associated Equipment Distributors


• B&D Consulting


• Bechtel Power Corporation


• Blackledge Furniture


• CMS Energy


• Conference of Minority Transportation Officials


• Constellation Energy


• Consumers First, Inc.


• ConverDyn


• Cornell University


• Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S.


• Dominion


• DTE Energy


• Duke Power Company


• Edison Electric Institute


• Electric Consumers' Alliance


• Entergy Corporation


• Exelon Corporation


• FirstEnergy Corp.


• Florida Power & Light


• GE Energy


• General Atomics


• Greenspirit Strategies Ltd.


• H.O.P.I. Consulting


• Illinois Energy Association


• International Access Corporation


• International Brotherhood of Boilermakers


• International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers


• International Brotherhood of Teamsters


• International Paper


• iNuclear


• Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce


• Maracor Software & Engineering, Inc.


• NAC International


• National Association of Manufacturers


• National Enrichment Facility


• New England Energy Alliance


• North American Young Generation in Nuclear


• North Carolina State University, Department of Nuclear Engineering


• Nuclear Energy Institute


• Nuclear is Our Future


• The Outlaw Group


• PG&E Corporation


• PNM Resources


• Progress Energy


• Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG)


• RWE Nukem, Inc.


• Sandia National Laboratorie s


• Scientech, LLC


• 60 Plus Association


• Sheet Metal Workers' International Association


• Southern Company


• Sterling Heights Area Chamber of Commerce


• Talisman International, LLC


• Thorenco, LLC


• University of Florida, Department of Nuclear and Radiological Engineering


• University of Missouri-Columbia, Nuclear Science and Engineering Institute


• University of Tennessee, Nuclear Engineering Department


• U.S. Chamber of Commerce


• USEC, Inc.


• Vermont Chamber of Commerce


• Vermont Energy Partnership


• Westinghouse Electric Company


• WOLFCO, Inc.

Individuals

The group listed the following "sampling of individuals" as of May 5, 2006 [5]:

• Iowa State Representative Philip Wise


• New Hampshire State Representatives Caitlin A. Daniuk and Michael Rollo


• Michigan State Senator Buzz Thomas


• Reverend Willie Toone - North End Church of God and Christ, Michigan


• Reverend Charles Williams - Michigan


• Greg Fedon - Warren Jaycees - Michigan


• Barney Bishop, President, Associated Industries of Florida


• Brownstone, Michigan Town Supervisor Arthur Wright


• Denis Beller, Professor, University of Las Vegas


• Mike Hamby - Former Executive Director of the Florida Democratic Party


• Keith Bullen - Volt Technical Services


• Jim Scaratino -
Coalition for New Mexico Wilderness

• Berol Robinson -
Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy

• Christopher Yeaw - United States Naval War College

Funding

In April 2006 a spokesman for the NEI told New York Times reporter, Matthew L. Ward,
that it was providing all the funding for the group but refused to state what the budget was. [6]

External Links

• Coalition's website


• Ward, Matthew L., "Ex-Environmental Leaders Tout Nuclear Energy", New York Times , April 25, 2006.


• Coalition's mission statement on its website accessed May 5, 2006


• "False Fronts: Why to look behind the label", Editorial, Columbia Journalism Review, May/June 2006.


• " Press Rapped for Coverage of Nuke Front Group", O'Dwyers PR Daily (sub req'd), July 12, 2006.


• Ben Lando, " Analysis: Democrats, greens nuclear fans?," United Press International, October 20, 2006.


• Scott Peterson, "Power Failure", Columbia Journalism Review, Letter to the Editor, , November/December 2006, page 6. (Not available online). (Peterson is Vice-President of the Nuclear Energy Institute).


• Frank Mankiewicz, "Power Failure", Letter to the Editor, Columbia Journalism Review, November/December 2006, page 6. (Not available online). (Mankiewicz is Vice-Chairman of Hill and Knowlton, which works for the NEI).

Retrieved from
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_and_Safe_Energy_Coalition

Categories: Environment Front groups Nuclear PR United States

[~PR – Greenwashing] [~PR]

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that really matter." ~MLK