A. MOX Utilities: Good News/Bad News

1. The Good News
In an surprise announcement on April 7th, Virginia Power Co. pulled out of the Duke-Cogema-Stone & Webster MOX consortium citing corporate restructuring as the reason for the decision. The Richmond VA-based utility would have used MOX fuel in its North Anna 1 & 2 power plants located near Mineral, Virginia.

In response to a question about the pullout, Thomas E. Capps, President and CEO of Dominion Resources (owner of Virginia Power) stated at Dominion's April 28th shareholders' meeting, "When we were in, we thought it was economic. We're out because we don't think so." Dominion's connections to MOX were recently in the news in New York when it bid on two nuclear reactors (FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3) and environmentalists publicly raised the prospect of plutonium fuel use in New York.

This leaves the US Dept. of Energy with "just" four reactors for its MOX program - those owned by Duke Energy and located in North and South Carolina. DOE has not made a decision about how to address this change. Some options are finding a new utility to replace Virginia Power, expanding the number of Duke reactors to be used, or possibly increasing the percentage of plutonium in the fuel rods used in the four remaining reactors.

2. The Bad News
On April 20th, Duke shareholders soundly defeated a proposal to ban the use of plutonium fuel in Duke reactors. Many anti-MOX organizations have worked over the last months trying to educate Duke shareholders on the proposal and encourage their opposition. The proposal gained just 4.5% of the vote, compared to last year's vote of 7.7%. This percentage means the proposal cannot be brought before Duke shareholders for another three years.

Robin Mills, of the Maryland Safe Energy Coalition, was the primary filer of the petition. He recently wrote:

One of those new contacts is the great-grandson of one of the founders of Duke Energy who has vowed to sell his stock if the company does not reject MOX.

Robin also noted that last year two companies with significant holdings in Duke that expressed support for the MOX ban, Scudder and TIAA-CREF, together sold nearly 8 million shares of their Duke stock in the last year -- a significant number of shares that could account for the large percentage drop in the vote.

Though the vote was certainly a disappointment, we knew we were taking on Goliath (and unlike David, we weren't even armed!) We also know (and Duke will soon find out) that we have a lot of fight left in us and a lot more angles from which we continue to fight MOX, and our numbers are growing all the time. Onward and upward!

MORE INFORMATION:

1. On VA Power pullout:

   -"Virginia Utility Abandons MOX Project"
   Augusta Chronicle (Georgia)
   http://augustachronicle.com/stories/040800/met_066-4792.000.shtml

   -Nuclear Control Institute press release:
   www.nci.org/pr4700.htm

2. On Duke Energy vote:

   -"Duke Vote Validates MOX Plan"
   Rock Hill Herald (South Carolina)
   www.heraldonline.com/search/story/0,1956,153269,00.html
   (If link expires, try "www.heraldonline.com" and search for "MOX")

   -"Founder's Relative Opposes Duke Plan"
   Charlotte Observer (North Carolina)
   www.charlotte.com/observer/0420nukes.htm

B. Judge Denies Injunction on Parallex Shipments

A motion for a preliminary injunction that would have blocked Russian MOX fuel shipments to Canada was rejected by Judge Richard Enslen in a decision in US District Court in Kalamazoo MI on April 7th.

Plaintiffs in the case included Michigan anti-MOX groups and individuals, several Canadian tribes and organizations, and several national and regional US organizations, who argued that the MOX shipments from Russia under DOE's "Project Parallex" violated the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Enslen argued that such treaties are between governments, not private citizens and governments.

A similar request to halt US shipments of MOX to Canadian reactors was denied last December, when Enslen argued that the presumed nonproliferation benefits of the MOX program outweighed environmental considerations. In the April 7th decision he repeated, however, that he believed the Dept. of Energy violated the law by failing to conduct an adequate environmental study on the impacts of the program. Shipments of test assemblies of Russian MOX fuel are likely to occur this fall, according to the DOE.

In a related note, the DOE announced in mid-April that the amount of plutonium coming to Canada from Russia under the Parallex Program will be around 600 grams -- five times more than originally expected. The Canadian Environmental Law Association is calling for a renewed public discussion on the shipment, or at least a debate in Parliament, as this is a significant departure from the amount figured in the original analysis by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.

MORE INFORMATION:

Copy of the original lawsuit and Motion for Preliminary Injunction: www.nirs.org.

(Thanks to Kay Cumbow of Citizens for a Healthy Planet and Alice Hirt for providing this information.)

C. Activists Take a Sound Bite Out of MOX

Over a dozen activists from southeast states gathered in Knoxville TN on April 10-11 for a hands-on media training and strategy session conducted by Linda Gunter and Scott Denman of the Safe Energy Communication Council (SECC). Participants learned essential media basics, had a chance to see their presentations on video, received personal critiques of their work, and heard from a local journalist for the real behind-the-scenes perspective. This was also a great chance for MOX activists, new and old, to meet each other, get energized, and share strategies and ideas.

Many thanks to Paloma Galindo and host organization Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance for helping with logistics and housing. The group crafted an impressive media strategy for the coming year, complete with hooks, lines and sinkers! What does fishing have to do with anti-MOX media work? Contact SECC to find out more -- they can work with your group or coalition to design a similar training: Linda Gunter: 202-483-8491 *813, or .

(Thanks to Linda Gunter of SECC and Christine Witkowski for this information.)

D. Raising the Plutonium Safety Bar

Is DOE doing enough to minimize the risks of plutonium packaging, handling, storage, and shipping given recent findings about plutonium? Inquiring minds would like to know…(and want some changes if not).

From a letter to John Conway, Chair of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB), signed by nearly twenty groups and individuals, April 24, 2000:

The letter requests that DNFSB investigate past assumptions about DOE's plutonium handling, packaging, storage and shipping in light of this new information and determine what corrective actions may need to be taken to ensure workers, neighbors of plutonium storage sites, and people living along transport routes are provided the maximum protection possible.

For a copy of the complete letter, see: www.wand.org/issuesact/moxbbdart1_4-29.html. For more information contact LeRoy Moore, Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center, 303-444-6981 or leroymoore@earthlink.net.

E. Steamed About MOX in Savannah

On March 25th Citizens for Environmental Justice (CFEJ) held a bi-state conference on MOX in Savannah, GA, attended by 111 people from up and down the Savannah River corridor. CFEJ Executive Director Dr. Mildred McClain opened the event recalling a comment she heard from DOE that "the black community is not interested in MOX," making note of the packed room of mostly African American attendees.

Presentations were given by both pro-MOX (DOE and Cogema) and anti-MOX (WAND and NIRS) speakers, with DOE receiving a particularly stiff line of questioning from audience members who demanded to know why they, who are most impacted, had never been informed about this program before "final" decisions had been made. Questions about the siting of SRS for the MOX program, health risks of plutonium, and hazards of transportation were numerous.

Though the Record of Decision on the program was released in January, participants were reminded there are still many ways to stop MOX. During the day, the group was also treated to an inspiring and rousing talk from Rev. Richard Bright from Atlanta (entitled "What's in the Dirt Can Hurt!") and a moving presentation by Janice Johnson, representative of EULDF, the group fighting the racial discrimination case at SRS (see below). As a follow-up to the conference, CFEJ will release a community statement opposing MOX. More information: CFEJ: 912-233-0907.

F. Job Opening

Carolina Peace Resource Center, Columbia SC
Director/Administrative support person.

Flexible job with negotiable duties.
Full or part time. Salary commensurate with experience and with other nonprofits.

Qualifications:
Well organized person with a commitment to peace and social justice, experience with progressive, grassroots organizations, ability to work with a consensus board, communication and computer skills, fundraising/grant writing experience, volunteer recruitment and supervision, and bookkeeping experience.

Send cover letter and resume to:
CPRC / PO Box 7933 / Columbia SC 29202
or email: cprcrogers@earthlink.net

A. BNFL: Chapter…?

From the company whose plutonium problems no longer need introduction,* here's the update from scandal-plagued/reprocessor/MOX fabricator British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. (BNFL) since the last Nix MOX Bulletin Board:

*(If you've been fortunate enough to have missed the earlier drama, see www.wand.org./issuesact/nixmox-index.html for back issues of the Nix MOX Bulletin Board discussing BNFL.)

• March 22: A coalition of over 40 environmental and public health groups call on DOE to "suspend and debar" BNFL from DOE contracts, citing BNFL's dismal safety and environmental record. The next day DOE Sec. Bill Richardson announces that "Business as usual is over with BNFL," ordering an investigation into the company.

• March 24: Switzerland halts shipments of fuel rods to BNFL for reprocessing, citing concern over safety lapses. Denmark calls for an end to all reprocessing in northern Europe, citing BNFL's safety record.

• March 25: Former UK Cabinet minister Dr Jack Cunningham calls for a halt to BNFL's privatization plans.

• March 26: DOE halts plans to build a plutonium waste incinerator in Idaho which had been contracted to BNFL. The remainder of the waste processing contract remained intact, however. Meanwhile, British Energy, BNFL's last major reprocessing customer, announces it will dramatically reduce its commitment to reprocessing at Sellafield. Also: details of a sabotage attack at Sellafield reveal remote control cables connected to maintenance equipment were found damaged at the end of the previous month.

• March 27: Greenpeace releases report stating quality control for MOX fuel fabrication in the UK, Belgium and France is dangerously inadequate.

• March 28: German gov't publicly accuses BNFL of lying in a March 16 press release that stated Germany was considering lifting its ban on importing reprocessed fuel from Sellafield. The German ministers stated, "BNFL's press release is as reliable as its forged test results."

• March 29: UK Energy Minister Helen Liddell announces BNFL privatization plans are delayed until late 2002.

• March 30: BNFL admits if may have to think the "unthinkable" and switch to storing rather than reprocessing nuclear waste.

• March 31: Greenpeace announces it has obtained an unpublished Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) study showing reprocessing at Sellafield exposes the public to more radiation than would storage of waste, saying the findings support Denmark's initiative to end nuclear reprocessing.

• April 1: New research released shows flasks used by BNFL to transport radioactive material can only withstand fire for less than 3 minutes.

• April 2: UK Environmental Agcy. says BNFL safety problems extend far beyond Sellafield and have caused seriously problems at its nuclear power plants across the country.

• April 2: A leaked report funded by the Irish gov't shows young children living in coastal areas around Sellafield are up to four times more likely to develop a brain tumor, and incidents of leukemia in all ages are 60% higher than average while total cancer rates are 40% higher.

• April 6: BNFL admits breaching safety regulations at Sellafield in a nitric acid leak incident that injured three workers in March 1999.

• April 11: BNFL Inc. announces its Hanford clean-up project will cost $13 billion, nearly twice the original estimate and an increase of $6.1 billion.

• April 11: UK says it WILL consider taking back MOX fuel from Japan.

• April 13: Mike Lawrence, BNFL's general mgr. for clean-up at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, announces his resignation, citing frustration at his role as mouthpiece for BNFL days after a much-criticized announcement that clean-up costs for BNFL's vitrification project had nearly doubled.

• April 13: Report released showing women living downwind BNFL's Hinkley Point nuclear power plants in Somerset have double the chance of getting breast cancer.

• April 14: UK says it WILL NOT consider taking back MOX fuel from Japan.

• April 18: BNFL responds to three damning Nuclear Installations Inspectorate reports released in Feb., announcing management changes and the firing of three executive directors and the replacement of seven non-executive directors from the BNFL Board by the end of the year. Seventy new jobs would be created to ensure safety. The response is attacked by environmentalists as "too little too late."

• April 23: BNFL wins contract with Russia to clean up Arctic submarine bases.

• April 24: BNFL ups its Hanford cost estimates to $15.2 billion, now $8.3 billion over original estimates. Half of the cost would pay for BNFL's financing of the project.

• April 26: DOE Sec. Richardson rejects BNFL's new Hanford bid, saying the "unacceptable and unexplained budget escalation" raised questions about BNFL's ability to clean up the site and that he may seek another contractor.

MORE INFORMATION:

Bill Weida of Global Resource Action Center for the Environment has written several papers on DOE's privatization programs, including the Hanford program. See: http://gracelinks.org/gracelinks/nuke/econ.html, "Privatization Giveaway," 1997.

(Thanks to David Lowry, Pete Roche of Greenpeace UK, Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment, and Alliance for Nuclear Accountability for background stories and information.)

B. Cogema is Not Immune

While BNFL fights to save its reputation, Cogema, the French nuclear corporation that has the main contract for MOX work in the US, has been implicated as well, though its safety and environmental data are far more difficult to access publicly and much remains unknown:

• March 29: German gov't orders nation-wide safety check on MOX fuel obtained from Cogema. Germany has 19 nuclear power plants, 2/3 of which are licensed to use MOX. The fuel is provided by Cogema, Belgonucleaire, and until a recent ban, BNFL.

• April 2: Inhabitants of the Channel Islands raise concerns about Cogema's plans to expand reprocessing at LaHauge. Cogema wants to increase the amount of waste it can process from 1,600 to over 2,000 tons per year, and storage from 12,000 to 15,000 tons. Samples of waste water from the La Hague facility show it is 17 times more radioactive than sea water, and research has shown a strong link between elevated levels of childhood leukemia and proximity to the plant.

• April 28: After making an independent analysis of water samples taken from the end of the La Hague reprocessing facility discharge pipe, Greenpeace announces the plant is exceeding release limits. Levels of Cobalt 60 were also found to be 560 times that allowed by the 1996 European Union directive on ionising radiation. Cogema denies the claim and continues to seek expansion of its reprocessing facility and an increase in allowable discharges.

(Thanks to David Lowry and Pete Roche for background stories and information.)

C. Russian MOX and Plutonium News

1. One step forward, two steps back

   We've heard it from DOE a million times: "The US has to dispose of plutonium using MOX because it's what Russia wants and otherwise they will not get rid of their plutonium"

   The argument has numerous faults, but is blatantly ludicrous in light of the fact that Russia has now confirmed in writing that it will use its plutonium disposition facilities to help it continue to increase its plutonium stockpile. In a paper presented in mid-March in Washington, Russia's Ministry of Atomic Energy (Minatom) states: "The fuel and power plants developed for the operation on weapons plutonium will be subsequently redirected to the use of civil plutonium." In the same paper, Minatom projected the civil plutonium stock will grow from 30 to at least 41 metric tons and as high as 147 metric tons by 2030.

   So-called "civilian plutonium" can and has been used to make nuclear weapons. If Russia continues to separate plutonium from civilian spent fuel while it is also disposing of a few dozen tons of weapons plutonium, the plutonium stockpile can only grow as there will be more produced than can be handled in reactors or through immobilization.

   Tell us again why we must use MOX?

   (This information provided by Tom Clements of NCI.)

2. Mixed Messages from Minatom

   Follow if you can:

   • On or near April 4th, Russia signed a draft agreement with DOE calling for a bilateral moratorium on reprocessing civilian spent fuel.

     But…

   • On April 11th (one week later) the Associated Press reported an announcement by Minister of Atomic Energy Yevgeny Adamov and First Deputy Minister Valentin Ivanov that Russia "intended to carry out" a plan to import 20,000 metric tons of foreign spent fuel for reprocessing in Russia. This is projected to bring in some $21 billion in revenues over 10 years -- an amount nearly equal Russia's entire 1999 federal budget.

     It would also make a hefty contribution to existing plutonium stocks, which currently stand at about 30 metric tons. With this announcement, no mention was made of the agreement to halt reprocessing drafted one week earlier. Further, Russia probably does not have the reactor capacity to use up the MOX fuel in the disposition program at a fast enough rate -- adding more MOX fuel through a civilian plutonium program will certainly result in plutonium surpluses. (To confuse things even more, the fuel identified in the draft plan is primarily controlled by United States, which will not ship fuel to Russia for reprocessing.)

   The fuel import plan is not new and will not likely disappear any time soon. Activists in Russia are working to oppose it (see Nix MOX Bulletin Board for March 22nd, 2000: www.wand.org/issuesact/nixmox-index.html). At the same time, DOE may be pushing to finalize the reprocessing moratorium in time for the Clinton-Putin summit June 4th and 5th.

   Do not adjust your set -- this situation is inherently unclear.

   
   For a copy of the draft agreement and the AP article, see: www.wand.org/issuesact/moxbbdart2_4-29.html

   (This information provided by Tom Clements of NCI and Tom Cochran of Natural Resources Defense Council.)

   <><><><><><><><><><><><>

   D. Update on Tokaimura Accident

   The Sept. 30 criticality accident at the Tokaimura uranium processing plant in Japan has claimed its second victim. Masato Shinohara, a 40-yr. old worker at the plant who received roughly eight sieverts of radiation during the incident, died of multiple organ failure in late April. Another worker, Hisashi Ouchi, age 35, died in December. He had received 17 sieverts of radiation. A third worker survived the accident and was released from the hospital in December.

   Though the accident triggered evacuations, panic and stress among neighbors of the plant, and radiation exposure to 439 workers and residents in the area, it has been given a "Level Four" rating (on a scale of zero to seven) on the International Nuclear Event Scale by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Level Four indicates the possibility of a fatality inside the plant, but "no significant risk" outside the plant.

   See item III-E below for information related to this issue.

   (Thanks to Pete Roche of Greenpeace UK for this information.)

   ---

   III. PLUTONOIUM DISPOSITION PROGRAM NEWS

   A. Public Meeting on NUREG 1718

   The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will hold a public meeting "to discuss the staff's resolution on comments received" on its Draft Standard Review Plan for construction of a MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility (NUREG 1718) on Tuesday, May 9th, 10:00 a.m. at NRC Headquarters, 11555 Rockville Pike, One White Flint North, Room O-9B4 in Rockville, MD.

   Last month, Ruth Thomas of Environmentalists Inc. in Columbia, SC submitted a petition to NRC calling for the withdrawal of NUREG 1718 pending initiation of administrative proceedings to evaluate shortcomings of the document. The NRC dismissed the petition on the grounds that Agency guidance documents do not require adjudicatory hearings. EI's petition will instead be considered as a comment on the document. EI is continuing its fight, as its specific request for withdrawal of the document was not addressed in NRC's response.

   Ruth invites and encourages any group that feels it can participate in this action to either submit their own petition or contact her to find out how they can help and get involved. Her number: 803-782-3000. She emphasizes that NRC's public meeting is no substitute for formal proceedings into the problems contained in NUREG 1718. She also notes that although EI filed the original petition, NRC did not inform them of the meeting in their reply, though notice was sent to a group that wrote in *support* of her petition. As of this writing, the meeting has not been posted in the Federal Register or on NRC's website.

   Along with other regulations, NUREG 1718 establishes criteria by which safety provisions in a license application for a MOX fabrication plant will be evaluated. Future hearings on license applications for a MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility will, in part, fall back on these criteria. Your input at this early stage is important.

   <><><><><><><><><><><><>

   B. New Contact at OFMD

   March 1st marked the first day of operations of the newly created National Nuclear Security Agency (NNSA) under which falls the Office of Fissile Materials Disposition.

   Along with the change comes a new contact person in the office. Replacing Bert Stevenson is Ken Sprankle, 202-586-7113, . Our anonymous reviewer says: "He seems like a nice guy and is approachable." Why not give him a call and let him know you're out there?

   (Thanks to Tom Clements, anonymous reviewer.)

   <><><><><><><><><><><><>

   C. Racial Discrimination Lawsuit at SRS

   Hundreds of supporters turned out on April 26th in Columbia, SC at a preliminary hearing on the racial discrimination lawsuit being brought against four Savannah River Site contractors by 99 African American employees. The suit alleges black workers have not only been denied promotions and faced harassment at the plant, but have, against their will, been put in higher risk jobs than white workers, resulting in higher radiation exposures.

   The hearing was to determine if the case can be heard as a class action suit. The judge will make a decision within 30 days. If it is not ruled to be a class action suit, each of the 99 plaintiff's cases will be heard individually. EULDF is pushing for a class action ruling.

   HOW YOU CAN HELP:

   1. Raise Funds:
      Employees United Legal Defense Fund (EULDF), who represents the 99 plaintiffs, desperately needs financial assistance to fight this case. The Dept. of Energy (and therefore taxpayers like you) is paying all the legal costs incurred by the multi-billion dollar corporations named in the suit. Any assistance to EULDF is deeply appreciated. Checks can be made out to EULDF and mailed to: Janice D. Johnson, Rt. 1, Box 490, Collins, GA, 30421. (Ms. Johnson is an employee of SRS and core member of EULDF and welcomes inquiries and assistance with this case. Her number is: 706-733-6665.)

   2. Raise your voice:
      LETTERS TO THE EDITOR in support of these plaintiffs to your local paper or even to national papers such as the New York Times or LA Times are still vital and are being requested by EULDF organizers. Outside support is crucial in raising media and public awareness of this case. For a draft letter (courtesy of Mary Olson at Nuclear Information Resource Service Southeast Office), see: www.wand.org/issuesact/moxbbdart3_4-29.html".

      LETTERS TO DOE SEC. RICHARDSON are also needed, requesting that **no tax dollars be used to fight this case on behalf of the contractors.** Send to: Secretary Bill Richardson, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585, or fax: 202-586-4403.

   **Please send a copies of your letters, (whether published or not in the case of letters to editors), to Pat Ortmeyer so that they can be forwarded to EULDF for their records. **

   Thank you!

   MORE INFORMATION:

   -Background articles on this lawsuit: EULDF website, www.euldfinc.org.
   -Article on 4/26 hearing: http://augustachronicle.com/stories/042700/met_140-5118.000.shtml

   <><><><><><><><><><><><>

   D. The High Price of Clean-up

   On April 14th, the Dept. of Energy released new cost estimates of cleaning up the nuclear weapons complex. The bill comes in between $168 and $212 billion, up 44% from previous estimates due to what DOE says is a better understanding of what it will take to do the job.

   Across the complex, DOE must clean up 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated groundwater, 100 million gallons of highly radioactive liquids, 2,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel, and about 18 metric tons of weapons plutonium.

   The bill for the Savannah River Site, where the MOX program will be located, is $36.8 billion, up from $29.7 billion in 1998. The cleanup deadline is 2038. It doesn't take the Merry Maids to tell you that it might be best to just skip that MOX plant to make sure any new contamination is kept to a minimum.

   <><><><><><><><><><><><>

   E. More NRC Meetings of Note

   1. ATLANTA, GA:
      Discuss assessment of performance at Duke Energy's McGuire Nuclear Station

      Tues. May 2nd, 10:30 am - 12:30 pm
      NRC Region II
      61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 24T20
      Atlanta, GA
      Verify meeting status: Robert Carroll (404) 562-4511

      
      

   2. ATLANTA, GA:
      Discuss assessment of performance at Duke Energy's Catawba Nuclear Station

      Tues. May 15th, 1:00 - 3:00 pm
      NRC Region II
      61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 24T20
      Atlanta, GA
      Verify meeting status: Robert Carroll (404) 562-4511

      
      

   3. ROCKVILLE, MD:
      Briefing on Lessons Learned from the Nuclear Criticality Accident at Tokaimura and the Implications on the NRC's Program.

      Mon. May 8th, 10 am:
      NRC One White Flint N.
      Commissioners' Conf. Rm.
      11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD
      Verify meeting status: 301-415-1292

   ---

   IV. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND RESOURCES
   

   A. Fundraiser / Raffle / Darned Good Time

   Robin Mills, primary filer of the proposal to Duke Energy to ban the use of plutonium fuel and unflappable anti-MOX activist, was shot in the chest during an armed robbery attempt at his home in Baltimore, MD on Jan. 21st. Miraculously, he survived the attack (even attended a Nix MOX meeting in DC in mid-Feb.) but faces a massive hospital bill of nearly twelve thousand dollars. He has no insurance.

   Robin is holding a musical fundraiser on his birthday, Monday, May 1st to help raise funds for his hospital bills. Join him for live music, fun folks, and a raffle to win the following: 1st prize: A solid gold coin; 2nd prize: Two 1922 silver dollars; 3rd prize: Three SB Anthony Dollars. Tickets are $10 each. Party will be held at 1443 Gorsuch Ave. #3, Baltimore, MD.

   Even if you can't make the party or don't have time to buy a raffle ticket, you can still contribute to helping Robin out. More info: 410-662-8483. Donations or raffle ticket money can be mailed to the above address, zip code: 21218.

   Thanks for your help!

   <><><><><><><><><><><><>

   B. Coming Soon….

   Look for a new "PSR Monitor" on MOX from Physicians for Social Responsibly coming soon. Info: Kimberly Roberts at the PSR national office, , 202-898-0150.

   <><><><><><><><><><><><>

   C. Economics of MOX

   See http://gracelinks.org/gracelinks/nuke/econ.html for resources on the economics of MOX, including:
   "Mixed Oxide Fuel (MOX), Issue Paper, August 1999," and "Citizen's Guide to Using Plutonium as MOX (June 10, 1997)"
   (You might want to contact the author for updates to these papers.)

   ---

   See Nix MOX Bulletin Board for:
   March 22, 2000
   February 25, 2000

   Return to Nix MOX Bulletin Board Index

   ---

   The MOX BULLETIN BOARD is compiled by Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) Education Fund. For comments, suggestions, or to add or remove names from this distribution list, contact Pat Ortmeyer, WAND Field Director for Nuclear Waste Issues, at port@bigsky.net or 406-327- 0785. Feel free to forward this bulletin, and please include acknowledgment of WAND.