MonitoRadio Daily Program; [1986-04-29]

A government commission has been set up to investigate what caused the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power station in the Ukraine where we have to examine and efforts are being applied to eliminate the consequences of the accident and help the victims. That's how radio muskow described the accident of the Soviet nuclear power plant in the Ukrainian city of Chernobyl, and it's our top story on this edition of Monitor Radio for Tuesday, April 29th. I'm James Nelson Goodsell, with the latest on the Soviet radiation leak, here's Tom Sheerholz. Official Soviet reports now indicate the nuclear disaster in the Ukrainian city of Chernobyl has forced the evacuation of four communities and killed two people. Other unofficial, unconfirmed reports put casualties at upwards of 2 ,000 people. Late today, U .S. arms control administrator Kenneth Adelman told Congress that U .S. intelligence indicates the Soviet claim of only two deaths wholly understates the gravity of the accident. Adelman says information now reaching the U .S. indicates that temperatures in the reactor have reached as high as 7 ,000 degrees Fahrenheit. He said also that the reactor will continue to burn for several more days.

Another ranking administration official, speaking anonymously, says the Soviet plant clearly experienced a meltdown of the reactor's core. In addition, the source said, as of this morning, another reactor adjacent to the one already melted might be in some danger. Arms control administrator Adelman added, beside the immediate risk of radioactive contamination in the air, a major water source for the city of Kiev lies adjacent to the reactor and could become contaminated if the reactor burns down to the water level. Meanwhile, in Western Europe, nuclear experts in West Germany and Sweden say the Soviet Union has asked for help in fighting a fire at the plant. International communication about the accident is proceeding through diplomatic channels. Today, the U .S. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Rosanne Ridgeway, met with a Soviet official after that meeting a briefing for reporters. The United States is prepared to make available to the Soviet Union, humanitarian, and technical assistance in dealing with this accident. The U .S. is seeking additional information on the accident and requests the closest possible coordination among all concerned countries. State Department spokesman Charles Redman also said the U .S. Embassy in Moscow

has been in contact with Americans known to be in the area affected by the nuclear disaster. I'm Tom Scherholz. Around the world, the news is focusing on the Chernobyl nuclear accident in the Soviet Ukraine, but Soviet officials are releasing little about the incident, and the few facts that are known are being filtered through the official Soviet Broadcasting Service, Radio Moscow. A government commission has been set up to investigate what caused the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power station in the Ukraine, where we have to examine, and efforts are being applied to eliminate the consequences of the accident and help the victim. The lead disaster was the first one at Soviet nuclear power plant in more than 30 years. The use of nuclear energy for people's preferences is a vital necessity for humanity, because of the gradual exhaustion of conventional fuels. The rapid measures are

being carried out to guarantee the power reactors' reliability and safety. Nevertheless, our observance, as it accidents and many others at nuclear power facilities in Western countries shows that the application of nuclear power used for people's preferences can be dangerous. All the more obvious, what a horrible threat nuclear weapons and their testing pose to the nation. Standing by now in Moscow, the monitors Gary Thatcher. Gary were still not hearing many details of what would appear to be a major nuclear accident. Gary, we understand that

radio Moscow is calling this a disaster, and some of the reports we're getting suggest that it's a much larger trouble than has earlier been indicated. Do we have any further information? Are there any hints in the Soviet press? Surprisingly enough, radio Moscow has been out in front of this. They have used the term disaster, perhaps indicating for the first time, giving an early warning that something major was going to be an off later on. When we actually got the announcement of official primland reaction, it wasn't at all clear exactly the extent of this, but radio Moscow has hinted that the situation is very serious. In terms of what we're going to get, it's anybody's guess. The Soviet Union is coming under tremendous pressure from the West, not only Western diplomats, but the Western press as well, to come clean and establish the full extent of this disaster that happened in the Ukraine. Gary, how do you see this crisis as being managed as a reflection of Gorbachev's leadership? As you know, Mikhail Gorbachev has been pressing for what's called gluttonous,

which is openness in the Soviet -electicon. It means to come more forward with all the details of the problems facing the country. In this case, we've seen a spectacular failure of that policy. We've seen an attempt to manage the news, and it's failed basically because the incident is not one of the proportions that can be managed. The radioactive cloud is drifted across much of Scandinavia, causing the background radiation level to soar across countries like Finland and Sweden. The Soviets have simply not been able to contain that satellite photos, obviously, are showing some extent of the disaster that's happened in the Ukraine. The Soviets have been pressured all around to come forward with more details, and they've simply not been able to stonewall as much as they've tried. In terms of what this means diplomatically, it's clearly damaged the Soviet standing. This is a country that has to be accepted as an equal partner, a country that can be trusted, and yet what's happened is when the crunch has come. The Soviets have not proven themselves to be very forthcoming and very open at all with the people that they're courting as they're very allies. So it's probably

been very damaging, and I would suspect that the after -effects are going to be felt for months to come. Well, certainly in the short term, but now what about the long term? What effects are there there? In the long term, the demand will clearly grow for more openness in the part of the Soviet authorities when it comes to their civilian nuclear program. The Soviets are believed to have about 30 operating nuclear plants, only two of which have been open for international inspection and those two only within the last two years. The Chernobyl plant has not been one of those. So the Soviets are going to be pressed to allow more international inspection. It's been told through various parts of the official literature that the Soviets do not even believe, in some cases, in nuclear reactor containment vessels, that they believe they have a technical means to stop a radiation leak or to stop a runaway nuclear reaction without the use of the kind of massive containment vessels that are used in American nuclear plants. If that's so, then they're sitting on more

potential trouble. Clearly, they'll be a push for the Soviets to be more open and to pull these plants open for inspection, so the outside world can see precisely what's going on. Thanks very much. We've been talking with Gary Thatcher in Moscow. In the meantime, the State Department says that the U .S. is offering technical and humanitarian assistance to the Soviet Union in the wake of the nuclear power accident in the Ukraine. And two Soviet embassy officials met this morning with the top State Department official in Washington. The monitors George Moffat is in our Washington Bureau and George, what more do we know about that meeting? Well, we know at this point, Jim, that at least two offers of help have come from the United States. White House Chief of Staff Don Regan, who was traveling with the President in Guam this morning on his way to the Far East, was the first to offer it. Sometime later in the morning, that offer was repeated to the Soviet Charger in Washington by Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Roseanne Ridgeway. So far as we know, that meeting was requested by the Soviets, but we also know that they offered few details

about the unfolding disaster in the Soviet Union. Well, was there any specific U .S. offer we mentioned technical and humanitarian assistance? What does this mean? Well, no one's saying exactly what's been offered. I've spoken to several officials at the Energy Department and at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. They say the kind of assistance that's needed will depend on just exactly what kind of situation we've got. As someone says, this could turn out to be nothing more than a major industrial accident. But if large quantities of vision material have been released in the process, and that's a whole different matter, they say as a minimum what would be required would be some sophisticated monitoring equipment to measure and track the problem, obviously there'll be some need for medical help. The most immediate need apparently is help in extinguishing a stubborn graphite fire that's been raging for some time. George, down the road apiece, what diplomatic fallout can we have from this? Well, it's obviously hard to say at

this point Jim, but we can say two things with some degree of confidence. One is that this certainly has to be something of an embarrassment for the Soviets to have to come to the West for help under these circumstances. But there's clearly a chance here for some measure of Soviet American cooperation that could retrieve relations from the long fall that started just after the Reagan Gorbachev summit last fall. And in that sense, possibly this could turn out to be a blessing in disguise. George Moffat in Washington, the official statement from the Soviet news agency TAS says that the, quote, radiation situation at the Soviet power plant, quoting here again, has been stabilized. However, because so few details are known, scientists are expressing concerns over the long term implications of the Soviet nuclear power plant accident. I'm Ken Barkas in Washington, where nuclear scientists and officials are concerned about the Chernobyl accident and the speed at which the Soviets are releasing information about it. Coalition of public interest groups wasted no time in calling for a more complete disclosure of the causes and

consequences of the accident. Pointing out that relatively high levels of radiation are being detected 1 ,000 miles from the accident site. Robert Pollard is a nuclear power expert with the union of concerned scientists. He says, we're still not sure how many of the four reactors that Chernobyl have been affected and explains what most likely occurred. The temperature in the reactor for whatever reason got extremely high, which caused the breakdown of the fuel, which is the only way you can get a very large quantity of radiation released. Also, indication of high temperature is, in fact, the fire because the graphite must get extremely hot before it would burn. Reports of that fire heightened concern. Natural Resources Defense Council spokesman Tom Cochran says high levels of radiation could be preventing crews from fighting any fire. If there is one, he warns that it could keep spreading radioactive gases. The fire itself, depending on the size of the fire, will

continue to release volatile fusion products that are in other areas of the reactor, so that this could be sort of an ongoing viewing type operation that would continue as long as the fire were burning. Cochran says that could be for days or even weeks. It's expected that the cloud could reach the US by this weekend. Experts are unsure of its potential hazard, though many expect the radiation will largely be dispersed by then and not pose a serious health risk. Scientists point out that Chernobyl plant lacks certain safety devices common in US facilities, devices like containment buildings surrounding the reactor to trap leaking gases. But they are reportedly four nuclear reactors in South Carolina and one in Washington State, all run by the Department of Energy, which have no containment building. Washington is more than two decades old and, like the Soviet plant, uses graphite for cooling. Some anti -nuclear activists

say those plants aren't safe and should be shut down. This accident comes at a time when the US nuclear industry is pressing for changes to some existing regulations. Union of concerned scientists, Ellen Weiss, caution against those changes. We call on the United States Congress and the NRC to hold its current effort to deregulate nuclear safety by feeding up the licensing process for new nuclear plants and limiting the public's ability to raise safety issues about those plants by arresting impossible barriers to measures which would improve safety in operating plants by strictly limiting liability for nuclear accidents. Congress is scheduled to hold hearings tomorrow on a bill which would limit the nuclear industry's financial liability in the case of an accident. Ken Barkas in Washington. It's been seven years since Three Mile Island, the worst accident at a commercial nuclear power plant in the US. Clearly, the Soviet nuclear accident at Chernobyl has once again raised the question of safety at these

mammoth power plants fueled by atomic energy. I think that nuclear energy is a good thing. However, like anything else, it has to be controlled properly. I think it would be a good thing if the Soviet Union and the United States got together on nuclear energy put their best minds to it and worked out a system where they got together with the thing and made it work for everybody and made it work for peace. I think nuclear energy is a good thing, but I think that we're not ready for it. We don't know how to dispose of it or we don't know how to contain it. We're all in the same situation. All the plants here are prone to the same problems that the Soviets have. You know, they're all near very highly populated areas, generally, too. Nuclear energy is a knowing situation anyway because there's no way to get rid of it. It's radioactive for thousands a year. The first thing it brings to mind for me is making public any accident so that safety precautions can

be activated immediately and that keeps something like that secret. Well, I think it's a difficult question to answer since I work with the utility company. I feel that nuclear energy here would probably tend to be safer because of the media. Because the media really hops on the people, nuclear people, then they'll tend to be more safety, take more safety precautions. Now, human nature being what it is, I think that if you don't have the media getting after the people, then you know, chances are that you're going to have these new people know things. Although many of these concerns are founded in fact, experts maintain that much of what we think we know is still largely a matter of speculation. And scientists tell us that one thing is certain. The more we know about what happened at Chernobyl, the better we are poised to prevent such accidents in the future. You're listening to Monitor Radio, the broadcast service

of the Christian Science Monitor. I'm James Nelson Goodsell. Tom Sheerholz now has a look at other developments in the news. NASA announced today that searchers have recovered a long -sought section of Challengers' right booster rocket containing the lower half of the joint that caused the shuttle to explode. With the recovery of this section, NASA says it has the debris it needs for the shuttle investigation and that the search for additional debris has ended. With an eye on the Soviet nuclear accident, a coalition of US anti -nuclear groups is warning that something similar could happen in the United States. The groups want tighter regulations for an industry they say should be dismantled entirely one day. They're also calling for an international probe into the Soviet accident and they criticize Moscow for not promptly warning neighboring countries. Before leaving on his trip for the Far East, President Reagan said his visit was supposed to celebrate the fact that the

winds of freedom are blowing among the non -communist countries of Southeast Asia. But the President's idealism got a rebuke as he and a corps of reporters arrived at his first stop today on the Indonesian island of Bali. David Cook reports. When the charter plane carrying the White House press corps arrived in Bali, uniformed Indonesian officials escorted to Australian broadcast reporters from the plane and told them they would have to leave the island on the next plane to Tokyo. Indonesian President Suharto has banned Australian journalists from covering the President's visit in response to a story in an Australian newspaper comparing Suharto's regime with the way Ferdinand Marcos ruled the Philippines. After resting tomorrow, President Reagan meets Thursday with Suharto and with foreign ministers from six Asian democracies. This is David Cook and Bali for monitor radio. Reports out of Bali now indicate that in addition to the two Australian journalists expelled by Indonesia, another reporter from the New York Times has been asked to leave after writing stories critical of Indonesian President Suharto. Though the Soviet Union's attention is no doubt riveted on the nuclear disaster near Kiev,

Soviet officials can be glad for a sign of progress in relations with the U .S. Today, Soviet air service to the United States resumed for the first time in five years. A plane from the Soviet airline Aroflot left Moscow this morning, bound for Washington and a jetliner from Pan American Airways flew from New York to Moscow. Under a new agreement, airlines from each country will make four -round trip flights weekly. In the Chilean capital of Santiago, a bomb went off this morning near the residence of the American ambassador. Police have confirmed that the bomb caused some damage. There's one reported injury. The United States aircraft carrier Enterprise sailed through the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean today, providing the U .S. Sixth Fleet with a third carrier in the region. Sources said the Enterprise was ordered to the Mediterranean to relieve the carrier Coral Sea and allow it to sail for home. The Dow Jones industrial average dropped sharply today down 17 .86 points to close at 18 .25 .89. The volume was 149 million shares. I'm Tom Sheerholz. In Tokyo today, a bomb exploded in a park and sabotaged disrupted high -speed train services.

All this, as Emperor Hirohito celebrated his 85th birthday and his 60th year on the throne of Japan. Meredith Lewis in Tokyo has more. A spring shower surrendered to sunshine as thousands of people on the grounds of the Imperial Palace cheered bonsai, bonsai, meeting long life. The object of their cheering was Emperor Michinomia Hirohito. The 60th anniversary of Hirohito's reign is 85th birthday, making him the longest living Japanese monarch. Speaking slowly, Emperor Hirohito said what pleases me most is the fact that the nation has accomplished postwar reconstruction and prosperity. In courtly Japanese understatement, Hirohito said the most unpleasant time for him was the era during World War II. The Emperor's birth ushered in with the Japanese regard as the Shoah period. In Japanese, Shoah means era of enlightenment and peace. But the fact that the Emperor did little to stop Japanese militarism and the huge losses Japan inflicted and both suffered during World War II has not diminished his

popularity with the people. Every year thousands of people wait for hours to catch a glimpse of a frail figure of a man standing behind bulletproof glass. Earlier in the day a young man was injured seriously when a bomb he was carrying exploded in a public toilet. Leftist radicals have also promised to disrupt the imperial ceremonies because they regard the Emperor as a war criminal. But their violence was contained to minor damage, a bullet train service, which was halted temporarily in Osaka. The Emperor's day ended after he attended a gathering of ranking government officials, diplomats, and about 6 ,000 special invited guests. Mayor de Clua's monitor radio in Tokyo. This past weekend, the first of eight hearings on the destruction of chemical weapons was held by the U .S. Army in Hermiston, Oregon. Hermiston is just two miles from the chemical weapons storage facility at

Yumatilla. Congress has mandated that all chemical weapons must be destroyed by September 30th, 1994. During the next month, the U .S. Army will hold hearings for public input at the seven other bases where chemical weapons are stored. Alan Sipporen has this report. The Yumatilla Army Depot is located in a barren and desolate section of north central Oregon. But it is not entirely isolated. Interstate 84, the main east -west highway in Oregon, runs right by the Depot. The bunkers that store the deadly chemicals are discernible from the road. But security is tight and access is close to impossible. The chemical munitions, nerve gas, and blister agents are stored in reinforced concrete bunkers, called igloos. Each igloo is secured by a giant steel door. Behind these doors, the Yumatilla personnel have secured a perfect record. There

has never been an accident. And Friday night, when the Army invited public comment, the Yumatilla Depot performance translated into an overwhelming vote of confidence. Representatives from the local Chamber of Commerce, the City Council, and several civic groups all spoke in favor of a plan calling for the on -site destruction of the chemical munitions. Whitey Shrows is the mayor of Hermesty. I think it's pretty well proven that the personnel of this depot have managed it and handled affairs for since its inception right at the World War II time. And it has gone literally without accident or problems. And it has positive, very positive, community support. And we feel that if anybody could handle this enormous task, it could best be handled with the proven personnel that we have here. Because Congress has mandated that all chemical weapons must be destroyed by September 30th of 1994, continued storage is not an option. The Army is considering the three plans.

The first plan calls for one single incineration site, almost certainly at Tuella, Utah, because over 42 % of the nation's chemical munitions are already stored there. No more than 12 % of the nation's total is stored at any other single storage facility. But if the Army decides on one incineration site, over 50 % of the nation's chemical munitions would have to be transported through some part of 20 different states. The Army's second plan calls for two regional disposal sites, one at Tuella and the other at Aniston, Alabama. This plan would cut down on the amount of transportation necessary, but it would still require that 43 % of the nation's chemical munitions travel through 16 different states. It's the danger from transport inherent in both plans that have the people in the Umatilla area concerned. We think most of us that the risk of some unforeseen incineration would certainly be heightened the one just hard to move it. Same thing happens with your car. It really has an accident when it's sitting still. And it

certainly just doesn't make any sense to us that you would put that stuff on wheels, bringing in about the many variables of trying to move it from various points throughout the country. So we're in favor of the onsite option. The onsite option is the third plan. It would completely eliminate the transporting of chemical munitions by constructing separate incineration facilities at each of the eight weapons storage sites. 100 % of the testimony at Hermiston favored plan three. Colonel Farrell Thomasy is the commander for the U .S. Army, toxic and hazardous materials agency. He says that the testimony in Hermiston has to be kept in the proper perspective. We have a long way to go before that final decision can be made, so it's one piece of the puzzle. It's a very significant part of it because it is a unified position for one part of the United States. Curiously, the single voice of dissent at the hearings came from a man from outside the area. Larry Caldwell is from Richland, Washington, which is about 30 miles away, but his

Caldwell says downwind from the Umatilla Depot. The Richland visitor agrees with the residents of Hermiston that the chemical agents should not be moved. His criticism is with the Army hearings process. I'm not too impressed with the Army's efforts to involve the public because it seems to me that the Army wants to involve the public as little as possible. Although they put on a front like this, I think most of this is just PR. Colonel Thomas, he says the Army is sincere in wanting to know what the public thinks. He says they are also required by law to hold the hearings. There is one final point of concern, the cost. Aaron Novick was one of the scientists involved in the development of the atomic bomb. Two years ago, the government enlisted his experience along with a number of other top scientists in evaluating the nation's chemical storage facilities. Novick believes a high level of safety can be achieved, but at considerable expense. These things are expensive to do because you have to provide elaborate safety precautions for the people. I did hear figures for the cost

of what the verb is to demilitarize a single shell in its well over a thousand dollars. The Army isn't saying how many shells there are, but they have released some preliminary cost estimates. Those figures indicate that no matter which plan is chosen, the cost will at least approach the $2 billion range. However, the difference in cost between the three plans is relatively minimal. And given the highly toxic nature of the munitions and the threat to human life, cost is not likely to be a significant factor in the final decision. Seven more hearings will be held during the next four weeks with the last one scheduled for May 22nd in Aniston, Alabama. Reporting for Monitor Radio, this is Alan Seporn. And that's all for this edition of Monitor Radio. We'll be back tomorrow, hope you'll join us. From Boston, I'm James Nelson Goodsell. Monitor Radio is a broadcast service of the Christian Science Monitor

for Public Radio and is funded in part by Wang Laboratories. We put people in front of computers. If you have any comments or questions regarding this program, call a right care of this station.