***************************************************************** 08/02/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.183 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 [southnews] MI6 Head Asked UN Inspectors to Lie About WMD 2 US: [progchat_action] Spinning 16 words into basis for war 3 Las Vegas SUN: Egypt Denies Telling U.S. of Iraqi WMD 4 UPI: New MI6 head facing fresh accusations - 5 US: Press Action: Two Traditions: WMD and Official Disinformation 6 Asia Times: Iran unbending on nuclear hard line 7 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Chinese Envoy in Seoul to Discuss North K 8 US: Wisconsin State Journal: Let wind blow into energy mix 9 US: Idaho Statesman: Alternative energy festival offers some fun les 10 US: Press Action: The Secret That the Government Kept for 30 Years 11 Las Vegas SUN: Few Injured, Ill Troops Get Disability Pay 12 JoongAng Daily: Park's 1970s nuclear arms program revealed NUCLEAR REACTORS 13 US: Spotlight Put On Nationwide Fire Hazard At U.S. Nuclear Power Pl 14 Guardian Unlimited: Battle for British Energy hots up 15 Times of India: Code of conduct on safety of nuke research reactors 16 US: NRC: NRC Proposes $24,000 Fine Against Westinghouse for Alleged 17 US: The Mercury: ACE talk tackles nuclear power 18 Planet Ark : Smokescreen Plan Questioned 19 Gateway To Russia: The Nuclear Fashion Season 20 UK News & Star: N-power ‘needs support’ 21 US: NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting August 17 on Issues Associated w 22 US: NRC: Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generat 23 US: NRC: LOCA technical requirements 24 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th NUCLEAR SAFETY 25 US: Coast Guard 26 US: heraldtribune.com: 'No one has tried to find me' 27 The Globe and Mail: Plutonium from 1954 nuclear tests builds in Japa NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 28 NRC: NRC Staff Makes Its Yucca Mountain Documents Available NUCLEAR WEAPONS 29 [NYTr] Vietnam Supports Ban on Atomic Weapons US DEPT. OF ENERGY 30 [du-list] Fw: USEC/DU cleanup Piketon and Beyond 31 DenverPost.com: EDITORIALS Trouble at Los Alamos 32 kgw.com: Nuclear plant near Hanford remains shut down 33 lamonitor.com: Congressional panels look at lab OTHER NUCLEAR 34 [Fwd: [du-list] DU in the news - 3rd Aug. 04] 35 [du-list] Project Censored on continued Depleted Uranium 36 [du-list] DU in the news - 2nd Aug. 04 37 Google News Alert - nuclear 38 The Inquirer: Strangelove's Nuclear Librarian 39 PRESS RELEASE: New Book Facilitates understanding of Weapons of ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [southnews] MI6 Head Asked UN Inspectors to Lie About WMD Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 23:39:46 -0500 (CDT) ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/7gSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> The new head of MI6 tried to persuade weapons inspectors in Iraq to harden up a report on their hunt for weapons of mass destruction, it was claimed yesterday. Scarlett asked for 'lies' in WMD report By Andrew Woodcock Independent (UK) 02 August 2004 The new head of MI6 tried to persuade weapons inspectors in Iraq to harden up a report on their hunt for weapons of mass destruction, it was claimed yesterday. John Scarlett suggested that the Iraq Survey Group report should include claims about Saddam Hussein's supposed arsenals - which had already been proven unreliable, an unnamed member of the ISG was quoted as saying in The Mail on Sunday. Mr Scarlett - who takes up his role as head of the secret intelligence service this week - sent a confidential email to the head of the ISG on 8 March with a list of 10 "golden nuggets" for possible inclusion in the report, it was claimed. His suggestions were rejected. But after pressure from the US and Britain, the ISG produced only a bland, 20-page document about the failure of their 1,400-strong team to find any trace of WMD in Iraq, rather than the expected 200-page analysis, The Mail on Sunday said. The Foreign Office declined to comment in detail on the allegations, referring questions on the ISG report to the organisation itself. Among the "nuggets" supposedly put forward by Mr Scarlett were claims that Saddam had a secret smallpox programme, that Iraq had developed mobile chemical weapons laboratories and that it possessed or was building a "rail gun" as part of a nuclear project. ISG officials were said to be "stunned and dismayed" by the request.The ISG member was quoted as saying: "Inclusion of Scarlett's nuggets would have been grossly manipulative of the truth. Let's face it, he wanted us to include lies. "Everything Scarlett wanted in was based on very old evidence which we had painstakingly investigated and shown to be false," he said. http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=546966&host=3&dir=62 _______________________________________________ Organising the UK and US Labour Movements Against War and Occupation www.wildfirejo.org.uk Public Meeting with US Labor Against the War Co-Convenor Gene Bruskin Welcomed by Greg Tucker, RMT, National Train Crew Secretary Thursday 5th August, 7pm Friends Meeting House 173 Euston Road, London NW1 (opposite Euston Station) Entrance Free/Donation #2 All welcome US Labor Against the War has played a key role in promoting opposition to war and occupation among US trades unionists. USLAW has more than 80 affiliated national and local unions, regional labour bodies and allied labour organisations representing more than three million US workers. On 13 July the California Federation of Labor, representing more than two million members, voted overwhelmingly to "demandan immediate end to the US occupation of Iraq" and to affiliate to USLAW. On 25 June, the annual convention of the 1.4 million member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) called on Bush to "bring our troops home from Iraq now" by near unanimous vote. On 22 June, the 1.6 million-member Service Employees International Union (SEIU) unanimously passed a resolution backing USLAW. Gene Bruskin's visit offers people in Britain a unique chance to learn about anti-war opposition within US trades unions. Gene will also talk about USLAW's efforts to support Iraqi trade unions. The meeting, organised by Iraq Occupation Focus, will be a chance to forge closer links between British and US trade unionists who oppose the continuing war and occupation in Iraq. There will also be a slide show by US Labour journalist and photographer David Bacon on USLAW's fact-finding mission to Iraq and a video speech from Stewart Acuff, National Organising Director AFL-CIO, on supporting workers rights in Iraq. Gene is visiting the UK from August 4-7 in order to meet with anti-war trade union leaders and activists and to build links between US and UK trades unionists opposed to the ongoing war and occupation in Iraq. www.uslaboragainstwar.org The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/southnews/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: southnews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 2 [progchat_action] Spinning 16 words into basis for war Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 14:54:50 -0500 (CDT) SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Spinning 16 words into basis for war Sunday, August 1, 2004 The Bush administration's mishandling of Iraqi weapons issues remains a national embarrassment. No spinning of isolated facts in recent reports can change the erroneous grounds for war. The administration's defenders would love to change the discourse. Some think discrediting former Ambassador Joseph Wilson is the key. Wilson raised important early doubts about the administration's judgment on Iraqi weapons in a July 2003 article about his mission to check accusations that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger. The administration quickly admitted that the accusation never should have been included in President Bush's State of the Union speech. Still, using a trail of statements, findings and interpretation, critics now suggest Wilson should apologize. Some serious people still legitimately feel there could have been an Iraqi purchase inquiry. The critics mistake disagreements for dishonesty. A Senate Intelligence Committee report raises some doubts about the importance of Wilson's trip and his recollections. The committee found Wilson's report "unimpressive" and "ambiguous" -- not at all the smoking gun. Wilson also was wrong in assuming his information went to Vice President Dick Cheney; but the report says Cheney should have been briefed. Beyond that, Wilson can appear self-promotional, and caustic, even bombastic, as critics gleefully trumpet. But, much as they might wish, his personality isn't the issue. Still, Wilson's information was important. His skepticism should have helped the administration better answer questions about Iraq and its weapons' program. GOP senators' claims that Wilson's wife, CIA agent Valerie Plame, suggested him for the job rests on modest evidence; there's more substantial evidence to the contrary. In any case, a suggestion wouldn't have been improper. The fuss is largely irrelevant. Even if the Niger incident should prove belatedly true, it didn't amount to an imminent danger to the United States. As best anyone can tell, the alleged weapons threats just aren't there. That's the administration's central embarrassment, but perhaps not the last tied to this issue. A criminal probe into the leaking of Plame's identity continues. ) 1998-2004 Seattle Post-Intelligencer -- to the source: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/184289_wilsoned.html NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for research and educational purposes. http://www.duckdaotsu.org a proud mediachannel.org affiliate International Progressive Publications Network ask us about the freedom underground or subscribe to Taoist meditations send an email with "subscribe" or "freeground" in the subject line "War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige as the warrior does today." - JFK ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ***************************************************************** 3 Las Vegas SUN: Egypt Denies Telling U.S. of Iraqi WMD ASSOCIATED PRESS CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - Egypt on Monday denied remarks by retired U.S. General Tommy Franks that President Hosni Mubarak told him that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. "Such a claim is void of truth," Egyptian presidential spokesman Magad Abdel Fattah told the official Middle East News Agency. In an interview with the U.S. Parade magazine to promote his book, "American Soldier," to be released this week, Franks recalled that both Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah told him two months before the Iraq war that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons. In Jordan, a Royal Palace official who refused to be identified said: "His Majesty did not have information that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction." In its Sunday edition, Parade quoted Franks - who led the U.S.-led war against Iraq - as saying that Mubarak told him Saddam would use the weapons against American troops in case of war. "What happened was that Franks asked the president for an assessment of reports on Iraq's possession of WMDs, and the president simply said that Egypt had been following the developments in Iraq, but it could not confirm whether Iraq possessed any weapons of mass destruction or whether these could be used against U.S. forces in case of U.S. military interference in Iraq," Abdel Fattah said. The Bush administration launched the Iraq war in March 2003 to topple Saddam because he allegedly had weapons of mass destruction. No such weapons were found. -- ***************************************************************** 4 UPI: New MI6 head facing fresh accusations - (United Press International) August 02, 2004 London, England, Aug. 2 (UPI) -- The first job of Britain's new top spy may be just hanging on to the post he has occupied for mere hours. John Scarlett, a veteran of MI6, began serving Monday as the leader of the Secret Intelligence Service, the Times of London reported. But already he finds himself against yet another damaging allegation about falsifying intelligence to help Tony Blair. Most recently he has been accused of trying this past March to distort a crucial report by the Iraq Survey Group, the international body set up to hunt for Saddam Hussein's supposed arsenal of banned armaments. Scarlett was still head of the Joint Intelligence Committee when he suggested confidentially that the ISG add to its report "golden nuggets" to prolong the idea that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. One of these alleged "nuggets" was that Iraq was developing smallpox weapons. He also wanted mention that Iraq had mobile biological weapons laboratories and sophisticated equipment for use in nuclear weapons research. Observers say that this latest accusation could force Tony Blair to fire Scarlett as politically "damaged goods." [UPI Perspectives] ***************************************************************** 5 Press Action: Two Traditions: WMD and Official Disinformation http://www.pressaction.com Monday, August 02, 2004 (59 Years After Hiroshima) By Mickey Z. "It is an atomic bomb. It is the greatest thing in history. -President Harry S. Truman, August 6, 1945 Congress should endorse the use of all necessary means to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Husseins weapons of mass destruction. -John Edwards, September 2002 We are approaching August 6, 2004, the 59th anniversary of the U.S. terror bombing of Hiroshima, and its apparent that the history and use of WMD is still not fully understood. With Good War references and rhetoric bandied about by politicians and pundits of all stripes, its instructive to consider how the U.S. and its allies, 60 years ago, allegedly engaged in a life-and-death battle to prevent a tyrant from wielding WMD. Working at Los Alamos, New Mexico, writes historian Kenneth C. Davis, atomic scientists, many of them refugees from Hitlers Europe, thought they were racing against Germans developing a Nazi bomb. Surely, if it were possible for the epitome of evil to produce such a weapon, it would be the responsibility of the good guys to beat der Führer to the plutonium punch. While such a desperate race makes for excellent melodrama, the German bomb effort, it appears, fell far short of success. Thanks to the declassification of key documents, we now have access to unassailable proof that the race with the Nazis was a fiction, says Stewart Udall, who cites the work of McGeorge Bundy and Thomas Powers before adding that, According to the official history of the British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), those agents maintained contacts with scientists in neutral countries. These contacts, by mid-1943, provided enough evidence to convince the SIS that the German bomb program simply did not exist. Despite such findings, U.S. General Leslie Groves, military commander of the Manhattan Project, got permission in the fall of 1943 to begin a secret espionage mission known as Alsos (Greek for grove"). The mission saw Groves men following the Allies armies throughout Europe with the goal of capturing German scientists involved in the manufacture of atomic weapons. While the data uncovered by Alsos only served to reinforce the prior reports that the Third Reich was not pursuing a nuclear program, Groves was able to maintain enough of a cover-up to keep his pet project alive. In the no-holds-barred religion of anti-communism, the Good War enemy was never fascism. Trumans daughter, Margaret, remarked about her dads early presidential efforts after the death of FDR in April 1945, My fathers overriding concern in these first weeks was our policy towards Russia. What will Bush daughters be confessing about their Dad one day? The most commonly evoked justification for the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan was to save lives, but was it true? Would such an invasion even have been necessary? Finally, were the actions of the United States motivated by an escalating Cold War with the Soviet Union? Here are the facts that dont mesh with the long-accepted storyline: Although hundreds of thousands of Japanese lives were lost in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the bombings are often explained away as a life-saving measureAmerican lives. Exactly how many lives saved is, however, up for grabs. (We do know of a few U.S. soldiers who fell between the cracks. About a dozen or more American POWs were killed in Hiroshima, a truth that remained hidden for some 30 years.) In defense of the U.S. action, it is usually claimed that the bombs saved lives. The hypothetical body count ranges from 20,000 to millions. In an August 9, 1945 statement to the men and women of the Manhattan Project, President Truman declared the hope that this new weapon will result in saving thousands of American lives. The presidents initial formulation of thousands, however, was clearly not his final statement on the matter to say the least, remarks historian Gar Alperovitz. In his book, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth, Alperovitz documents but a few of Trumans public estimates throughout the years: + December 15, 1945: It occurred to me that a quarter of a million of the flower of our young manhood was worth a couple of Japanese cities ..." + Late 1946: A year less of war will mean life for three hundred thousandmaybe half a millionof Americas finest youth." + October 1948: In the long run we could save a quarter of a million young Americans from being killed, and would save an equal number of Japanese young men from being killed." + April 6, 1949: I thought 200,000 of our young men would be saved." + November 1949: Truman quotes Army Chief of Staff George S. Marshall as estimating the cost of an Allied invasion of Japan to be half a million casualties." + January 12, 1953: Still quoting Marshall, Truman raises the estimate to a minimum one quarter of a million and maybe as much as a million, on the American side alone, with an equal number of the enemy." + Finally, on April 28, 1959, Truman concluded: the dropping of the bombs ... saved millions of lives." Fortunately, we are not operating without the benefit of official estimates. In June 1945, Truman ordered the U.S. military to calculate the cost in American lives for a planned assault on Japan. Consequently, the Joint War Plans Committee prepared a report for the Chiefs of Staff, dated June 15, 1945, thus providing the closest thing anyone has to accurate: 40,000 U.S. soldiers killed, 150,000 wounded, and 3,500 missing. While the actual casualty count remains unknowable, it was widely known at the time that Japan had been trying to surrender for months prior to the atomic bombing. A May 5, 1945 cable, intercepted and decoded by the U.S., dispelled any possible doubt that the Japanese were eager to sue for peace. In fact, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey reported shortly after the war, that Japan in all probability would have surrendered before the much-discussed November 1, 1945 Allied invasion of the homeland. Truman himself eloquently noted in his diary that Stalin would be in the Jap War on August 15th. Fini (sic) Japs when that comes about. Many post-Hiroshima/Nagasaki sentiments questioned the use of the bombs. I thought our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives, said General Dwight D. Eisenhower while, not long after the Japanese surrender, New York Times military analyst Hanson Baldwin wrote, The enemy, in a military sense, was in a hopeless strategic position. Such then, was the situation when we wiped out Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Need we have done it? No one can, of course, be positive, but the answer is almost certainly negative. Was it the cold logic of capitalism that motivated the nuking of civilians? As far back as May 1945, a Venezuelan diplomat was reporting how Assistant Secretary of State Nelson Rockefeller communicated to us the anxiety of the United States government about the Russian attitude. U.S. Secretary of State James F. Byrnes seemed to agree when he turned the anxiety up a notch by explaining how our possessing and demonstrating the bomb would make Russia more manageable in the East ... The demonstration of the bomb might impress Russia with Americas military might. General Leslie Groves was less cryptic: There was never, from about two weeks from the time I took charge of this Project, any illusion on my part but that Russia was our enemy, and the Project was conducted on that basis. During the same time period, President Truman noted that Secretary of War Henry Stimson was at least as much concerned with the role of the atomic bomb in the shaping of history as in its capacity to shorten the war. What sort of shaping Stimson had in mind might be discerned from his Sept. 11, 1945 comment to the president: I consider the problem of our satisfactory relations with Russia as not merely connected but as virtually dominated by the problem of the atomic bomb. Stimson called the bomb a diplomatic weapon, and duly explained: American statesmen were eager for their country to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip. The psychological effect [of Hiroshima and Nagasaki] on Stalin was twofold, proposes historian Charles L. Mee, Jr. The Americans had not only used a doomsday machine; they had used it when, as Stalin knew, it was not militarily necessary. It was this last chilling fact that doubtless made the greatest impression on the Russians. It also made an impression on J. Robert Oppenheimer, the scientific director at Los Alamos. After learning of the carnage wrought upon Japan, he began to harbor second thoughts and he resigned in October 1945. In March of the following year, Oppenheimer told Truman: Mr. President, I have blood on my hands. Trumans reply: Itll come out in the wash. Later, the president told an aide, Dont bring that fellow around again. Why did we drop [the bomb]? pondered Studs Terkel at the time of the fiftieth anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. So little Harry could show Molotov and Stalin weve got the cards, he explained. That was the phrase Truman used. We showed the goddamned Russians weve got something and theyd better behave themselves in Europe. Thats why it was dropped. The evidence is overwhelming. And yet you tell that to 99 percent of Americans and theyll spit in your eye. Theyll also spit in your eye if you point out that the U.S. has waged several nuclear wars ... against Japan in 1945, against Iraq from 1991 to present, in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, and on military bases like Vieques. Or if you point out that the U.S. and Britain did not call for a military strike after Saddams infamous gassing of Kurds* at Halabja in March 1988 ... in fact, both nations continued support for Hussein. Some will still spit in your eye if you mention the absence of WMD in Iraq today. Americans are rather fussy about their WMD. We, of course, can have them, a few allies can openly possess such weapons, and well deftly look the other way when Israels plutonium slip shows. Russia? Well, as long as they stay away from that communist stuff. As for tyrants like Hitler and Hussein: no way. The world simply cant risk having WMD in the hands of those likely to use them, right? (*Commonly referred to as the gassing of his own people, its essential to clarify that if the Kurds were Husseins people, then the Palestinians are Sharons people, the Zapatistas are Vicente Foxs people, the Tibetans are Hu Jintaos people, the Chechens are Putins people, the Seminoles were Andrew Jacksons people, and the Puerto Ricans who were bombed and radiated with depleted uranium are Bushs people.) Advanced Search [http://www.pressaction.com/news/search/] ***************************************************************** 6 Asia Times: Iran unbending on nuclear hard line Asia's most trusted news source for the Middle East atimes.com By Safa Haeri PARIS - Continuing its policy of confrontation, the Islamic Republic of Iran confirmed on the weekend that it had resumed building nuclear centrifuges, but at the same time said it was still holding back on enriching uranium, although this assurance is open to serious doubt. "We still continue suspension on uranium enrichment, meaning that we have not resumed enrichment," Foreign Affairs Minister Kamal Kharrazzi said at the end of talks with his counterpart from neighboring Azerbaijan, adding, however, that Tehran was not committed to any agreement with three European powers - the United Kingdom, France and Germany - on not building centrifuges. An Iranian government spokesman, Hamid Reza Asefi, said that since the Europeans did not fulfill promises to close Iran's nuclear dossier at the energy agency's June meeting, Iran felt no obligation to abide by an agreement that demanded Iran suspend manufacturing and assembling parts used in nuclear activities. Officials from the European Union's "big three" met with an Iranian delegation in Paris last Thursday and Friday, and emphasized their wish to see a halt to Iran's work on the nuclear fuel cycle. Washington strongly suspects Iran is using a civilian nuclear program as a cover for a secret nuclear weapons project. It has been lobbying for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, to refer Iran's nuclear case to the UN Security Council, which could impose sanctions. According to contacts who spoke to Asia Times Online, the Iranians resumed enriching uranium on June 19, contrary to the official line that they had suspended this activity. The weekend talks in Paris were to prepare the ground for a September meeting of the board of governors of the IAEA, which is expected to discuss Iran's program. Neither the Iranians nor the Europeans would comment in detail on the latest talks, although some sources described them as "tense, but frank". A spokesman for the British and German foreign affairs ministries expressed "displeasure" at Iran's attitude, saying that they "do not understand the Iranian moves". However, the hardline evening daily Keyhan, one of the mouthpieces of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, said on Saturday in Paris that the European trio demanded that Iran should agree to "never get out of the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty]" and inform the UK, France and Germany "systematically and in an orderly manner" about its nuclear activities. "According to a four-page document, Iran would reiterate Britain, France and Germany's right of concern over any deviation by Iran from its peaceful atomic activities to military purposes," the paper said under the title, "Does majlis [parliament] know?" Observers told The Asia Times Online that considering the position of Hoseyn Shariatmadari, the editor of the newspaper, a high-ranking intelligence officer specializing in interrogating political and intellectual dissidents and an advisor to Khamenei, who has the final word on all major issues, "he has easy access to confidential and classified documents". Iran was also required to cooperate with the UK, France and Germany for detente in the Middle East on the one hand and fighting terrorism in the region on the other, and also coordinate the control of all its imports and exports with the three above-mentioned powers, Keyhan reported. "What the Europeans are asking Iran is tantamount to an unconditional surrender, worse than any of the agreements the Western colonial powers imposed on Iran under the dark eras of the Qajar and Pahlavi dynasties," Keyhan added, deliberately twisting history by not mentioning that the agreements it mentioned were imposed by czarist Russia on the Qajar kings. The United States, Israel and some European governments claim that the final aim of the ruling Iranian ayatollahs is to use civilian nuclear projects for producing the atomic bomb, an allegation that Tehran rejects forcefully, insisting that the projects are mainly for producing much-needed electricity. But they do not explain that if this is the case, why then not use natural gas to build electrical power stations, as Iran has the largest reserves after Russia and it is much cheaper, cleaner and safer than atomic processes, particularly one based on the aging and less reliable Russian technology that Iran uses? "We were holding these [Paris] talks to reach further understanding and create more confidence in the direction that we are not seeking nuclear weapons," Kharrazzi said. "At the same time, we will insist on our legitimate rights," he added, referring to building nuclear-powered electrical plants. "Each side was holding firm on its earlier and stated positions. It was deceiving, but no one was expecting any real breakthrough," the source told Asia Times Online on condition of anonymity. Diplomats in Vienna revealed last week that Iran had broken seals inspectors the IAEA had placed on installations at the huge Natanz site, 350 kilometers south of Tehran, designed to enrich uranium hexafluoride, which, when processed in centrifuges, can be enriched to low levels for power generation or high levels for nuclear weapons. Experts say that while one needed 2,500 centrifuges to produce military-grade uranium, Natanz could accommodate 5,000 units. "The Iranians might be telling the truth that they are not making the atomic bomb, but the fact is that their civilian programs are so sophisticated that very quickly, maybe in less than six months, they could also be used for military purposes," another source told Asia Times Online on condition not to be named for security reasons. Talking to reporters during his recent tour of the Middle East, US Secretary of State Collin Powell made it clear that US patience on the issue was running out, saying "it is more and more likely" that the matter will have to be referred to the Security Council. "Now Iran has made it clear that they do not intend to abide by all of those commitments, my three foreign-minister colleagues [in Europe] are concerned about this and they are working on the problem, and I stay in close touch with them. But I have made it clear to them that we believe they must insist on their commitments being met. And they have to factor it into any other actions the European Union might be thinking of taking, either in the economic sphere, the political sphere or elsewhere. It is a very troubling development," Powell said. Coupled with a flurry of recent statements by lawmakers from the conservatives-controlled majlis, as well as articles in hardline newspapers, Kharrazzi's ambiguous announcement reflects Iran's growing displeasure with Europe's "Big Three". "The Americans and their European allies are preparing the ground for the silent overthrow of the Islamic Republic on the pretext of the Iranian nuclear file, using it as a pressure instrument," warned Keyhan. While threatening that they would not ratify the Additional Protocol to the NPT, hardline members of the majlis also press the government constantly to defy both the IAEA and the Europeans, expel UN inspectors and resume uranium enrichment. "The protocol - that allows nuclear inspectors to visit all Iranian nuclear sites, installations and projects at any time and without restrictions - had been imposed on Iran by the evil chain made of the IAEA, the Americans, Europeans and Zionist lobbies, despite all international laws and regulations, including the IAEA's rules," Keyhan wrote, adding that the final objective of Europe's "Big Three" was "nothing less than destabilizing the Islamic Republic". Last week, Mohamoud Mohammadi, deputy chairman of the majlis' Foreign Policy and National Security Commission, warned that the ratification of the Additional Protocol was "conditional to the IAEA approving our use of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes". "The fear is that the Additional Protocol could be used as a tool for political pressure. If they treat our dossier in a purely technical fashion, then we will cooperate," he said, adding, "The majority of my colleagues in the parliament think this way." And on Monday, the official IRNA news agency published an interview with Mohammad Mousavian, head of foreign policy of Iran's Supreme Council on National Security, warning that "either Europe agrees to close Iran's file at the IAEA and transfer nuclear technology to Iran - in response Iran will ratify the Additional Protocol - or we cancel all previous agreements." He added that in the present circumstances, if the matter of signing the protocols were raised in majlis (controlled by the conservatives), it would be thrown out. Safa Haeri is a Paris-based Iranian journalist covering the Middle East and Central Asia. (Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Online, 4305 Far East Finance Centre, 16 Harcourt Rd, [http://www.atimes.com/atimes/policies.html] ***************************************************************** 7 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Chinese Envoy in Seoul to Discuss North Korean Nuclear Standoff Updated Aug.2,2004 11:18 KST Ning Fukui/AP A senior Chinese official is in South Korea to discuss preparations for another round of six-party talks about North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Ning Fukui arrived in Seoul Sunday and will meet with South Korean officials before departing Tuesday for similar talks in Tokyo. Japan, China, the two Koreas, Russia and the United States agreed in June at the last round of talks in Beijing to meet again by the end of September. Three rounds of talks have failed to produce much progress. Mr. Ning met with his U.S. counterpart Joseph DeTrani on Thursday. Mr. DeTrani said the United States remains flexible, but will not change its stance that Pyongyang's nuclear programs must be addressed to end the standoff on the Korean Peninsula. VOA News ***************************************************************** 8 Wisconsin State Journal: Let wind blow into energy mix 12:43 am 8/02/04 Wind power, once considered nothing more than a novelty promoted by environmentalists, is now headed toward the mainstream as a power source in Wisconsin. In fact, wind turbines will account for 20 percent of the electric generating capacity coming on-line in the state over the next six years, if plans are fulfilled. Improving technology, government subsidies and a need for local generating capacity are helping to drive wind's power in the power marketplace. Just last week Madison Gas & Electric Co. and Wisconsin Public Power Inc. of Sun Prairie agreed to buy electricity from a wind farm planned east of Waupun. Wisconsin Power & Light Co. of Madison is looking to buy more wind power. WE Energies of Milwaukee is involved in plans for three wind farms. But it's important to remember, these are plans. If the plans are to be put into practice, action is required at the federal, state and local levels. �It's essential for Congress to renew the wind energy production tax credits program. The program, which expired in 2003, makes it financially feasible to construct wind farms. Wind farm plans are on hold until the tax credits are renewed. As an element of national energy policy, the tax credits program is a smart investment in renewable energy. The credits also allow wind to compete with oil and other energy sources that have their own tax advantages. The tax credits program has been passed by both houses as part of a corporate tax bill that is awaiting final clearance by a conference committee. Wisconsin's congressional delegation should take a leading role in ensuring that the tax credits program does not fall victim to a last-minute snafu. �The state should maintain its support of wind energy through its program to pay towns and counties in which wind farms are located and its encouragement of renewable energy sources. Legislators should do their part by endorsing the recommendations of Gov. Doyle's Energy Efficiency and Renewables Task Force. The task force earlier this week called for Wisconsin's utilities to be required to generate 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources, including wind, by 2015. That's more than double the current percentage. The requirement wisely provides an escape clause, should meeting the requirement prove too expensive for ratepayers. �Local governments and residents should make sure that planned wind farms are not scuttled by a not-in-my-backyard reaction. A plan to build a wind farm in Fond du Lac County is now threatened by a lawsuit filed by a local group. The lawsuit calls wind turbines a public nuisance. Not every site is suited to hosting a wind farm. But Wisconsin cannot progress if the communities adopt the attitude that wind energy is beneficial - but only so long as the wind farms are placed somewhere else. The same not-in-my-backyard trap awaits a high-voltage power transmission line that should be built from Madison through southwestern Wisconsin. That line, still in planning, could bring to Wisconsin wind-generated power from Iowa and Minnesota, unless opposition short-circuits the plan. Wind power should not be oversold. To meet demand for electricity, Wisconsin must continue to build coal and natural gas plants, and it should drop its moratorium against the construction of nuclear plants. But wind can make an important contribution to the state's energy mix, if it gets federal, state and local encouragement. Copyright 2004 Wisconsin State Journal ***************************************************************** 9 Idaho Statesman: Alternative energy festival offers some fun lessons 08-02-2004 [http://www.idahostatesman.com U.S. energy use by source Coal 22.6% Oil 39.1% Gas 23.7% Nuclear 8.1% Hydroelectric 3.9% Other renewables 2.5% Source: Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook, 2004. Sponsors Sponsors and organizations that will have exhibits at the Alternative Energy Festival include the Idaho Department of Water Resources, Department of Environmental Quality, the city of Boise, ValleyRide, COMPASS, INEEL, Idaho Power, Boise State University and the University of Idaho. Time and location The Alternative Energy Festival runs Friday through Sunday at the Discovery Center of Idaho, 131 Myrtle St., Boise. On Friday at 7 p.m. is a panel discussion. On Saturday, exhibits, activities and discussions will run from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Sunday hours are noon to 4 p.m. Environment at Work Learn how businesses are becoming more environmentally friendly in Ken Dey's Environment at Work column Wednesday in Business. Joe Kolman [jkolman@idahostatesman.com] The Idaho Statesman | Edition Date: 08-02-2004 This week's tip will save you $5. All you have to do is go to the Treasure Valley's first Alternative Energy Festival at the Discovery Center of Idaho. While there you can race a solar-powered car, build a windmill, eat a sun-baked snack and blast off a hydrogen rocket. And rumor has it that Boise Mayor Dave Bieter, a former football player, will try to scrunch himself and a couple of other area mayors into a Volkswagen Bug that runs on mustard. And if that alone isn't worth the price of admission, which is free, every one who attends will receive a coupon for a $5 discount on a $15 vehicle emissions test, which is required for most Ada County vehicles. The festival, which runs Friday through Sunday, is the work of several organizations around the valley and statewide that that have a stake in reducing the amount of fossil fuels we use. Besides a limited supply of oil, fossil fuel burners contribute heavily to the air pollution that sometimes hangs over the Treasure Valley. Visitors to the exhibits can see and learn about a Toyota Prius hybrid car, the mustard-powered VW and a bus that runs on natural gas. There will also be booths explaining the concepts of geothermal, wind and solar power. Friday's panelists When the "Engineer of the Century" talks, it's probably a good idea to listen. And he will be talking at 7 p.m. Friday in Boise. Paul D. MacCready, inducted into the Academy of Achievement in 1982, is the inventor of the first human-powered flying machine. MacCready is also the inventor of the Gossamer Penguin and Solar Challenger, the first successful solar-powered aircraft, as well as a sun-powered car. MacCready will lead a panel discussion about alternative energy. Other panelists and their topics include: "Air Quality and Public Health"  Uwe Reischl, director of Center for Health Policy, Boise State University "Economics and Efficiency of Energy Systems"  David Hawk, director, Energy Natural Resources, Simplot "Overview of Energy Research in Idaho"  Jon Van Gerpen, biological and agricultural engineering, professor and department head, University of Idaho "Hydrogen Cell Development"  John Kolts, program manager, INEEL and Argonne National Laboratory-West, program manager for Nuclear Hydrogen; Walter N. Sato of the Office of Research &Development, Department of Energy "Solar Energy and Beyond"  Scott Gates, Energy Service Program specialist, Idaho Power ***************************************************************** 10 Press Action: The Secret That the Government Kept for 30 Years http://www.pressaction.com Sunday, August 01, 2004 By Rosemarie Jackowski [image] Currently the United States has so many military bases around the world that it is almost impossible to get an accurate count of the exact number. Author Chalmers Johnson states that the U.S. has 6,000 bases in 130 different countries. The history of the acquisition of many of these bases shows a clandestine, nefarious, and cruel attitude toward the people who originally occupied the locations where the bases now are. The official word used by the Pentagon to describe bases in other countries is Footprint. What could be more arrogant than one country putting its footprint on another sovereign nation? The history of the U.S. base on Diego Garcia is of special interest now. The base was built by Halliburton and commissioned on March 20, 1973. Exactly 30 years later, on March 20, 2003, the Shock and Awe bombing campaign was launched from Diego Garcia. This base has been a recent topic of discussion in the British House of Commons. The people who inhabited Diego Garcia, until the United States forced them to leave, are now seeking justice. Court documents reveal that a policy of ethnic cleansing by the U.S. government has continued for over 30 years. The following are quotes from a CBS 60 Minutes special on Diego Garcia: + "Total evacuation. They [the U.S.] wanted no indigenous people there." + "[T]hey werent allowed to take anything with them except a suitcase of their clothes..." + "The people of Diego Garcia say they left paradise and landed in hell when they were dumped in the urban slums of Mauritius..." + "No one helped them resettle or pay for the homes they lost. They were forced to become squatters in a foreign land. Jeannette Alexis family was one of the last to leave: My father was told that we had to leave the island because the Americans were moving in and it wasnt safe to remain on the island anymore." + "officials ordered their pets to be exterminated. They were gassed with exhaust fumes from American military vehicles. + "And for the next 30 years, the world never knew what happened to Diego Garcias original people. + "No outsiders are allowed onto Diego Garcia, so this secret stayed hidden until one of the exiled islanders, Olivier Bancoult, started organizing his community. So three years ago, Olivier traveled to London to take the British government to court. His big break came when he and his lawyer, Richard Gifford, found secret documents that had recently been declassified that described the agreement between the United States and British governments to build the base on Diego Garcia. These British documents reveal that colonial officials thought no one would notice if they deported the islanders. Another British document confirms that evicting the people and leaving the island to the seagulls was done at the request of the United States. It reads: The United States Government will require the removal of the entire population of the atoll by July. Uncovering the paper trail brought Gifford and Bancoult a stunning victory. Britains highest court ruled that deporting Diego Garcias native population was illegal. So last August, the islanders appealed directly to President Bush. Olivier Bancoult, Jeannette Alexis and the rest of the islanders say they will never give up. Now they are suing both the U.S. and British governments for compensation and the right to return..." The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution sets forth the principle of fair compensation in eminent domain cases. It could be argued that the Diego Garcia case is not covered by the U.S. Constitution because Diego Garcia is not part of the U.S. That very argument would make the case for reparations because that is precisely the point. Diego Garcia is not a part of the U.S. and therefore the U.S. government never had any rights of ownership there. The belligerent occupation of Diego Garcia by the U.S. has been a violation of fundamental principles as laid out in the U.S. Constitution, a violation of international law, a violation of U.S. treaties, and a violation of human rights. Does the secret history of the United States in Diego Garcia show that U.S. foreign policy is based on the belief that some people are inferior? Is this a racist policy? Or is it just that human rights will always be secondary to the desires of the U.S. military? The former inhabitants of Diego Garcia want the freedom to occupy their own country. This freedom has been taken away by the U.S. Do not look for the facts of this clandestine operation in any U.S. history textbook. Our government has been masterful at keeping the secret for 30 years. Some documents were declassified and then found in 1999 only because of a judicial process in Britain. (Now additional information is available on CBS News's website [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/12/60minutes/main558378.s html] . Correspondent Christiane Amanpour reported on this story for CBS.) Thus far, the U.S. has made no apology, has paid no reparations, and has permitted no judicial remedy. Will the government of the U.S. ever allow the people of Diego Garcia to return to their homeland? Will the people of the United States join with others around the world and work toward the immediate closing of the base at Diego Garcia? Will the U.S. government clean up the hazardous materials on the base, and pay reparations to all of the original inhabitants? Will a filmmaker ever produce a documentary of this, one of the greatest stories of our time? Will lawyers in the U.S. answer the call and write amicus briefs, so that justice, which has been delayed for so long, will now be possible? Will a team of international lawyers ever assemble, and bring this case to the World Court? After more than 30 years, it is now time to let the people of Diego Garcia go home. Rosemarie Jackowski lives in Bennington, Vt. She was arrrested in a peaceful protest against the U.S. invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003 and is currently awaiting trial with the possibility of a prison sentence. She can be reached at dissent@sover.net [dissent@sover.net] . Copyright 2002-2004 Press Action [http://www.pressaction.com] ***************************************************************** 11 Las Vegas SUN: Few Injured, Ill Troops Get Disability Pay By LARRY MARGASAK ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - Nearly one-third of the National Guard and Reserve troops returning from war with illnesses or injuries are forced to wait more than four months to learn whether they'll be compensated under the military's disability system. That's only one problem in a compensation system that can be as unforgiving as the battlefield. Fewer than one in 10 applicants receives the long-term disability payments they request. The Army knows the troops are unhappy. But military officials say soldiers do not understand that their disability system measures fitness for duty, not the degree of one's sacrifice. Most soldiers applying for disability pay - 56 percent in the Army's case - are leaving service with a one-time, lump-sum payment some say is inadequate. Jesus Oliveras, a chief warrant officer in an Augusta, Ga., reserve unit, was among those ordered back to duty without compensation. Oliveras said doctors wrote on his records that he had a hearing loss. He contends they gave little recognition to his real problems: debilitating back and shoulder injuries. Despite those injuries, the maintenance technician volunteered for service in Iraq. "At times I felt lousy, as a second-class citizen, especially coming from a war zone," Oliveras said. "They sent us to fight an enemy and when we returned, we had to fight another enemy - us." Oliveras said he accepted the fit-for-duty ruling because he is eligible for regular military retirement in three years. The military's disability system resembles workers' compensation and long-term disability in the private sector. It pays people when they have illnesses and injuries that are job-related. The military, however, looks at a much narrower set of circumstances than insurers or the Department of Veterans Affairs. It only evaluates ailments that make a soldier unfit for duty in his or her specialty. For example, can an infantryman still run? The more generous VA compensation system considers all service-connected medical conditions. Soldiers who receive disability compensation from the military also can apply to the VA for disability pay. The military compensation is needed, however, to tide a soldier over while waiting for the VA. The department recently was averaging 171 days to make initial disability decisions. When the VA's disability compensation kicks in, it usually replaces military pay. Recipients cannot benefit from both systems at the same time. In the military system, the Army says, many soldiers misunderstand that pain by itself won't win them compensation. "You can't be retired on pain claims alone," said Dennis Brower, legal adviser to the Army Disability Agency. "Pain is unmeasurable. It's subjective." The Army does not keep statistics on the dollar amounts of disability payouts because they are based on a formula that includes a percentage assigned to each soldier's disability. But it does maintain records on how many applicants for long-term disability receive compensation. The majority, 56.1 percent, were given a one-time, lump-sum payment in 2003. Seventeen percent received nothing because they either were declared fit for duty or determined to suffer injuries unrelated to their service or due to negligence. An additional 17.1 percent received temporary disability payments that can be reviewed within five years. And just 9.8 percent won long-term disability pay that lasts for life. Lavoda Anderson of Ninety-Six, S.C., said she suffered a life-altering injury to her back while under fire in Iraq last year. In constant pain, she was jolted anew when the Army calculated her compensation for medical retirement at $13,400. "I feel I was treated very unfairly," said Anderson, who did not return to her prewar job as a dialysis technician and is raising her 4-year-old daughter. "I didn't get adequate care. I feel like I'm useless most of the time." Brower, the lawyer for the Army disability agency, said, "You can't give higher disability ratings to soldiers who you feel emotionally deserve it. It would be nice to give every soldier 100 percent (disability), but as a taxpayer, you might not like that." Soldiers, particularly National Guard and Reserve members, also complain about long delays in medical diagnosis and treatment before they can receive a determination of disability. Col. Michael Deaton of the Army surgeon general's office said that as of late June, 32 percent of the activated Guard and Reserve members were in a medical holdover status more than 120 days. That compares with 41 percent in November. A program that allows soldiers to be treated near where they live has helped to reduce waiting times for medical care, he said. Spc. John Ramsey, a deputy sheriff in Orange County, Fla., had medical bills in the thousands of dollars and was dogged by creditors. Meanwhile, the state and federal governments fought over responsibility for his shoulder injuries suffered in Iraq. "My wife and I and two kids were put through hell because of this," Ramsey said. Sgt. John Beard of Jacksonville, Fla., who returned from Iraq with shrapnel wounds in his back, legs and face, said he painfully waited in long lines for processing. On one occasion, confronting an irritable soldier handling pay records, Beard said, "I snatched my orders out of his hands and left." Staff Sgt. Dwayne Fitzpatrick of Orlando, Fla., won his appeal of an initial offer of a one-time, $23,000 severance payment. He qualified instead for a disability payment of $1,300 a month. "They dangle some money in your face, so many soldiers will take it and run," he said. "They low-ball everybody. I'm looking at the long term." --- On the Net: Army Disability Agency https://www.perscom.army.mil/tagd/pda/pdapage.htm. Army Medical Command [http://www.armymedicine.army.mil/default2.htm] . -- ***************************************************************** 12 JoongAng Daily: Park's 1970s nuclear arms program revealed SUWON Breaking 24 years of silence, a top nuclear expert in South Korea has revealed blueprints for a classified nuclear arms project during the Park Chung Hee administration. Professor Kim Chul of Ajou University, who was in charge of the nuclear fuel reprocessing project of the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute in the 1970s, said Sunday that he has kept two books of plans and actual blueprints of the Park administration's efforts to build nuclear arms. Mr. Kim, 65, said the state-run atomic energy institute commissioned Saint Gobain Techniques Nouvelles of France to draw up plans for the project in the early 1970s. "In my private archive, I have kept two books of concepts and designs of the nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities, dated Oct. 1, 1974, and blueprints dated Jan. 10, 1975, completed by Saint Gobain," Mr. Kim said. Some classified documents that were made public in the past indicated that the Park administration was pursuing a nuclear weapons program. Mr. Kim's revelation, however, is the first direct evidence revealing how far South Korea went with its nuclear arms project. Experts noted Mr. Kim's revelation proved the Park administration's determination to develop nuclear weapons. "The concept plans, kept by professor Kim, contain information about an NRX reactor, which can be used to extract weapons-grade plutonium," a nuclear specialist here said. NRX stands for National Research Experimental Reactor. South Korea attempted to buy an NRX reactor from Canada, but the plan was scrapped in December 1975. The 200-page concept plan details the design of nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities as well as required budgets and manpower. Mr. Kim also has blueprints of various stages of plutonium purification, extraction, storage and transfer. "If the project went ahead as planned, we could have completed plutonium reprocessing facilities in the early 1980s," said Mr. Kim. After the United States notified South Korea of plans to withdraw 20,000 American troops from the peninsula in 1970, the Park administration began its nuclear arms development project despite pressure from Washington to stop the effort. President Park was assassinated in October 1979, and the Chun Doo Hwan administration publicly declared that it would not pursue a nuclear weapons program. by Eum Tae-min, Ser Myo-ja myoja@joongang.co.kr> 2004.08.02 Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use | ***************************************************************** 13 Spotlight Put On Nationwide Fire Hazard At U.S. Nuclear Power Plants Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 16:09:01 -0400 Contact: Paul Gunter, Director, Reactor Watchdog Project, 202-328-0002,pgunter@nirs.org The cover story for the August issue of The Progressive magazine, Fire Hazard: Bush Leaves Nuclear Plants At Risk, focuses on the lack of federal oversight and enforcement on fire protection violations at nuclear reactors. Many critics believe a pro posed federal policy to bring current regulations into compliance with current industry-wide violations of those regulations for the protection of reactor shutdown systems in the event of fire or attack would significantly reduce safety margins at commercial atomic reactors. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is lowering the fire protection bar at nuclear power plants to bring its regulations into compliance with widespread nuclear industry violations," said Paul Gunter, Director, Reactor Watchdog Project, for the Washington, DC-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service. "The federal retreat from fire code enforcement simultaneously raises the risk to public health, safety and security around the nation's nuclear powe r stations," he stated. At issue is an effort by NRC and the Nuclear Energy Institute to circumvent enforcement of federal fire code(2) that mandates the protection of electrical cabling so that no single fire can knock out both the primary and backup reactor safe shutdown equipment. Industry-wide violations, dating back as far as 1992 when NRC declared a widely deployed fire barrier system "inoperable,"(3) have largely been forgiven and forgotten by both industry and NRC. Instead of req uiring nuclear utilities to upgrade and maintain physical fire protection features at atomic reactors, NRC and NEI are seeking to abandon the requirement by substituting "operator manual actions" that would allow operators to sacrifice unprotected remote control systems to a fire and instead dispatch station personnel throughout the reactor facility to manually turn valves, pull circuit breakers, or flip switches to shutdown the reactor. M any reactor operators, in lieu of complying with fe deral fire code, have quietly adopted complex manual action strategies that were later revealed to be unapproved by NRC, unanalyzed for reactor and worker safety, and illegal under federal law. Under pressure from an industry-wide strategy to flood NRC with fire code exemption requests should the agency proceed with enforcement action, NRC is now seeking to change the law on mandatory physical protection of control room operated reactor safe shutdown systems by introducing an option to adopt interim criteri a for "feasible" operator manual actions. NRC plans to codify operator manual actions in a later rulemaking. NRC is abandoning front line fire protection features at nuclear power stations and falling back to what should be considered desperate last ditch efforts, just to provide industry with a less costly compliance strategy," said Gunter. "There is no assurance that workers sent into the reactor to manually operate safety equipment won't encounter hazardous conditions, such as fire, smoke, radiation, or even terrorists, that prevent them from accomplishin g vital tasks," he said. "That's why qualified fire barriers for electrical cable protection and separation were mandated to provide adequate safe shutdown margins in the first place," he concluded. NRC documents referenced in The Progressive article were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by NIRS. To date, NIRS has discovered a growing documentation of fire code violations at U.S. reactors including: Arkansas Nuclear One 1 & 2, Beaver Valley 2, Comanche Peak 1 & 2, Crystal River, Davis-Besse, Diablo Canyon 1 & 2, Fort Calhoun, Grand Gulf, McGuire 1 & 2, Palo Verde 1, 2 & 3, River Bend, Sequoyah 1 & 2, Shearon Harris, St. Lucie 1 & 2, Turkey Point 3 & 4, and Watts Bar. http://www.nirs.org/reactors/Fire-OMA-NIRSComments-InterimCriteria-FRN11262003.htm">http://www.nirs.org/reactors/Fire-OMA-NIRSComments-InterimCriteria-FRN11262003.htm A HREF="http://www.progressive.org/august04/cusac0804.html">http://www.progressive.org/august04/cusac0804.html Chapter 10 Code of Federal Regulation Part 50 Appendix R III.G.2 mandates that when redundant safe shutdown circuitry for the control room operated shutdown of the reactor appear in the same fire zone, one system must be physically protected by one of three options; 1) a qualified three-hour fire barrier; 2) a one-hour fire barrier used in conjunction with smoke detectors and automated sprinkler systems or; 3) physical separation of the redundant control, powe r and instrumentation cable by twenty feet with no intervening combustible and used in conjunction with detection and suppression equipment. (3) Bulletin No. 92-01, "Failure of Thermo-Lag 330 Fire Barrier Systems To Maintain Cabling in Wide Cable Trays and Small Conduits Free From Fire Damage," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 24, 1992. ***************************************************************** 14 Guardian Unlimited: Battle for British Energy hots up David Gow Tuesday August 3, 2004 The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk] The battle for control of British Energy, the stricken nuclear operator, intensified yesterday when bondholders accused Polygon, the hedge fund trying to secure a better deal for shareholders, of signing up to the original financial rescue package. Ahead of what is expected to be a stormy annual meeting on Thursday, bondholders alleged that Polygon, which now holds 5.6% of BE, was among the 88% of creditors that signed the 5bn government-backed restructuring deal in October 2003. They claimed that the fund, as an original signatory, had a contractual duty to back the deal along with other creditors and its current efforts to unravel it raised questions about its integrity. "A company which signs up to something in one capacity, making money, and then walks away and does something completely different in another capacity prompts you to call into question what it is up to," well-placed market sources said. But Polygon insisted it was acting in the wider interests of shareholders, including 230,000 retail investors, who stand to emerge with just 2.5% of the restructured nuclear operator if the European commission approves the rescue package this autumn. "This is a complete red herring," a spokesman said. "We have been completely upfront and don't have any bonds." He refused to comment, however, on whether Polygon had held bonds in BE "over the last couple of years". Bondholders stand to emerge with at least 34% of BE under the complex restructuring deal which may or may not breach EU rules on state aid. The government, which initially gave BE a 650m credit facility to prevent its collapse into administration two years ago, will get 65% of cash flow if Brussels approves the deal, and can convert this into equity. Polygon, which only recently converted its 5.6% "economic control" into full stock, is backed by Invesco Perpetual, an investment fund owning 6%, in pushing for an alternative plan. That proposal would see 30% of a restructured BE given back to shareholders while bondholders would be bought out with 750m in cash. The company, government and bondholders reject this option, saying the current deal is the only way of saving the group. Sources close to Polygon insist that shareholders are being "fleeced" because BE's financial position has improved with the near-doubling of wholesale power prices in the past year. Conceding that BE was "on its knees" when the October 2003 deal was signed, they said: "But there was no mechanism in the restructuring which would allow people to change their minds when the facts change ... Investors are getting no share of the upside in a company worth 1bn on the implied value given by its bonds." The nuclear operator insisted, however, that shareholders stood to get 2.5% and 5% on warrants - much better than in comparable restructuring packages such as Marconi's. "There won't be any renegotiation and I can't see the government putting up any more money," an insider said, reaffirming the company stance that investors will get nothing if the deal falls. The board says it will delist the shares if shareholders vote down the restructuring at an extraordinary meeting in late autumn. Polygon says new listing rules will preclude this but BE insists it will get a waiver. The group, which on Friday cut its planned output for this year because of reactor problems, is said to be generating cash and has repaid all government loans, but says its future is "far from rosy". Graphics The Mox ships' journey around the world (pdf) [http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2002/09 /17/nuclear_ship.pdf] Nuclear map of Britain US nuclear map Useful links British Energy [http://www.british-energy.com/] Department of Trade and Industry [http://www.dti.gov.uk/] British Nuclear Fuels Ltd [http://www.bnfl.co.uk/website.nsf/default.htm] Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament [http://www.cnduk.org/] Greenpeace [http://www.greenpeace.org/homepage/] HSE nuclear glossary [http://www.hse.gov.uk/nsd/ilrwglos.htm] UK atomic energy authority [http://www.ukaea.org.uk/] National Radiological Protection Board [http://www.nrpb.org.uk/] Friends of the Earth [http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/climate/press_for_change/dump_nuc lear/index.html] World Nuclear Association [http://www.uilondon.org/] World Nuclear Transport Institute [http://www.wnti.co.uk] [UP] Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 15 Times of India: Code of conduct on safety of nuke research reactors - [http://www.indiatimes.com] PTI[ MONDAY, AUGUST 02, 2004 07:27:48 PM ] NEW DELHI: International community has worked out a code of conduct on safety of nuclear research reactors which will go before the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for adoption in Vienna next month. The Board of Governors of IAEA has already approved the code this March and now it would be considered by the General Conference of the IAEA for adoption next month. The code is a non-binding international legal agreement where states determine their own level of commitment to its guidance, an official release said. The need for an overarching code of conduct came following a resolution adopted at the IAEA General Conference in 2000. This was prompted by safety concerns especially in view of many of the world's research reactors approachng the end of their originally planned life spans, according to the Director of the Nuclear Installation Safety of IAEA Ken Brockman. Increased fear of terrorist threats following 9/11 also underscored the necessity for a code of conduct, Brockman said. Almost half of world's 272 nuclear research reactors still operate using highly enriched uranium, a key ingredient for nuclear explosives. Nuclear research reactors were excluded from the convention on nuclear safety when it was drawn up in early nineties. Copyright 2004 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. | ***************************************************************** 16 NRC: NRC Proposes $24,000 Fine Against Westinghouse for Alleged Violations at Commercial Nuclear Fuel Plant in Columbia, S.C. News Release - Region II - 2004-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-04-041 July 30, 2004 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] civil penalty against Westinghouse Electric Company for alleged violations of nuclear safety requirements at its commercial nuclear fuel plant in Columbia, S.C. NRC officials said the proposed civil penalty is based on a Severity Level II problem comprised of eight alleged violations resulting from the companys discovery of uranium ash deposits in a plant incinerator off-gas system that exceeded allowable limits. The NRC said there were no actual adverse consequences as a result of the problem. The amount of ash would not have supported a nuclear reaction, or criticality, at the concentration and shape in which it was found. However, the agency said the potential safety consequences were significant because the company failed to establish, implement and maintain all criticality control systems as required. The Westinghouse Columbia Nuclear Fuel Plant has no reactor but manufactures low-enriched uranium fuel for use at commercial nuclear power plants. A criticality accident at this type of facility would involve a sudden, localized burst of radiation in a production area inside the plant due to having too much fissile material in one place in a container of the wrong shape. The NRC said the alleged violations were categorized collectively as a Severity Level II (the agencys second most serious) violation because, although no adverse consequences occurred, the factors involved collectively resulted in a significant increase in the likelihood of a nuclear criticality event. NRC officials said the company has taken steps to preclude a recurrence of the problem and that Westinghouse has 30 days from receipt of the notification of the proposed civil penalty to pay it or to protest it, in whole or in part. Last revised Monday, August 02, 2004 ***************************************************************** 17 The Mercury: ACE talk tackles nuclear power Evan Brandt ebrandt@pottsmerc.com 08/02/2004 POTTSTOWN -- Members of the Alliance for a Clean Environment are hoping to make a big noise Tuesday about the future of nuclear power in America. It was back in 2001 that Vice President Dick Cheneys energy task force proposed taking another look at nuclear energy. A number of specific initiatives were proposed including relicensing existing nuclear power plants, changing standards and restrictions involving nuclear power, and even the construction of new plants. The last new nuclear power plant was ordered built in 1978, a year before the Three Mile Island disaster changed nuclear powers social dynamic forever. Certainly the Pottstown area is familiar with debates about nuclear energy. There arent many places in the area from which either the twin cooling towers of Exelons Limerick Nuclear Generating Station or the column of water vapor that perpetually emanates from them cant be seen. When the Limerick project was first proposed in the early 1970s, it bred fierce opposition and support within the community. One of those who spoke out against the plant was Ernest Sternglass, a professor of radiological physics. On Tuesday afternoon, hell be back. Sternglass has been invited by ACE to speak in Pottstown and his presentation will begin at 2 p.m. in the community room of Montgomery County Community Colleges West Campus on College Drive. The talk is free and open to the public. Sternglass subjects will include radioactive emissions and their affect on childrens health, disposal and transportation of nuclear waste, "hidden costs," the threat posed by terrorism, and "converting nuclear power plants to safer energy sources," according to an ACE flier. He is the author of three works, "Low-Level Radiation," 1972; "Secret Fallout," 1981 and "Before the Big Bang," 1997. Long an opponent of the Pottstown Landfill in West Pottsgrove and the Occidental Chemical poly-vinyl chloride plant in Lower Pottsgrove, ACE has infrequently turned its focus publicly to Exelons Limerick Nuclear Generating Station. But in 2003, a study of the areas baby teeth by Joseph Mangano, director of the National Radiation and Public Health Project, raised concerns that have now been taken up by ACE. Called the "Tooth Fairy" project, Manganos study measured the amount of strontium-90, considered a byproduct of nuclear energy by many, in baby teeth sent to him by area parents. Usually limiting itself to local environmental issues, this talk will also include a rare thing for ACE -- a tentative step into national politics. There are 103 nuclear power plants operating in the nation today, the majority of them in the eastern half of the country. Combined, they provide 20 percent of the nations electricity, second only to coal and ahead of natural gas, according to PBS News Hour with Jim Lehrer. The Christian Science Monitor estimated the cost of building a new plant today at somewhere near $1 billion. Proponents argue that nuclear power reduces reliance of fossil fuels and reduces the emission of carbon and green house gases into the atmosphere. "By renewing and expanding existing nuclear facilities, we can generate tens of thousands of megawatts of electricity at a reasonable cost, without pumping a gram of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere," Bush said when releasing his energy plan in 2001. Of course the plants are not without their pollution problems. Primary among these is spent nuclear waste, a radioactive substance, the disposal of which has been a political hot potato for decades. Currently, some 400 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel is stored at plants, making them an increasingly attractive target for terrorists. In light of potential threats, Exelon recently unveiled plans to improve security at its plant along the Schuylkill River. The Mercury 2004 ***************************************************************** 18 Planet Ark : Smokescreen Plan Questioned GERMANY: August 2, 2004 BERLIN - A system to protect German nuclear power stations from terrorist attacks by surrounding them in a smokescreen won't be effective enough, Environment Minister Juergen Trittin was quoted as saying. German energy firms E.ON, RWE, EnBW and Vattenfall Europe have asked utilities and arms firm Rheinmetall to supply and build a defense system to counter attacks that use passenger aircraft. Trittin told the Financial Times Deutschland newspaper the plan would help reduce the likelihood of a disaster but more needed to be done. "The smokescreen plan, in its current form, is not sufficient to significantly improve the protection of nuclear power plants," he said. "We have therefore asked state authorities to come up with improvements." Countries with nuclear plants worldwide have been investigating how to protect their reactors from attacks after militants flew planes into buildings in New York and Washington DC in September 2001. Some countries have considered installing anti-aircraft missiles at power plants. Rheinmetall will equip Germany's 18 active nuclear reactors with smoke machines. At the touch of a button, the reactors will be enveloped in smoke within seconds, depriving pilots of visibility. The system, which has been tested successfully, could be in operation by the end of 2005. Power companies have declined to give any more details on the system, however, for fear of diminishing its effectiveness. Approval from local authorities in the relevant German states must still be obtained. The companies expect to obtain the go-ahead as early as this year. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 19 Gateway To Russia: The Nuclear Fashion Season - News From Russia [http://www.gateway2russia.com] 02 August 2004 13:39 Fifty years ago, the Obniskaya Nuclear Power Station, the first in the world, was put into operation. Today, after nearly two decades of crisis, nuclear power is again on the rise Irik Imamutdinov and Dan Medovnikov [Alexander Rumyantsev, Head of the Federal Atomic Power Agency and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences] An interview with Alexander Rumyantsev, Head of the Federal Atomic Power Agency and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences - Every technology has its own life cycle. At first, it expands furiously, then reaches a plateau and stagnates. Occasionally but very rarely, technologies get a new lease on life. After Chernobyl, the spell of peaceful atom was broken and the nuclear power industry ground to a halt. However, judging by a host of signals coming from several national economies, nuclear power is back on the agenda, in part because the public opinion is changing once again. - Your observation is correct. Finland is a good example. We conducted a public opinion poll there, and the majority of the population supported construction of a nuclear power station, and so did the parliament. Lets not forget that the pragmatic Finnish technocrats clearly realized that the situation could change again, so they decided to take advantage of the favorable conditions to get the most energy possible, and the contract went to the biggest reactor. Look at what is happening in Eastern Europe and in Central Asia. Two years ago, Iran made a statement at an IAEA General Convention in front of all the delegates, saying We are developing large-scale nuclear engineering and welcome all countries to participate in the project. The capacity of the notorious nuclear power station in Bushehr is 1 GW, and now the Iranians want to put six times as much into operation. India has ambitious plans, too: it plans to put 20 GW of nuclear capacity into operation, or in other words, a new reactor block each year. China will increase nuclear power from 8 to 36 GW by 2020. Russias energy strategy until 2020 also states that nuclear power will grow at a faster pace in the European part of Russia than traditional power plants. Recovery has begun in the US as well. Bush called on the nation to develop the hydrogen economy and large-scale nuclear power engineering needs high-temperature gas nuclear reactors. And of course, there is South Korea and Japan where nuclear power hasnt experienced any slowdown at all. - But the world nuclear powers are extremely wary of some countries nuclear ambitions, since some reactors can turn out weapons-grade plutonium and all of them can be used to make dirty bombs. Personnel at local nuclear power stations are skilled atomic specialists who have learned to handle fissionable materials. In the end, almost everyone knows how to use the technology now, and if some country with nuclear facilities really wants to build nuclear weapons, it will this is a major deterrent factor for nuclear power development in the world. - Countries that are economically developed and scientifically and technically advanced, like Japan or Germany, can easily create these technologies and weapons. South Africa was in the process of creating them and, perhaps, could have but it gave up activities voluntarily. Israel neither confirms nor admits officially that it possesses nuclear weapons. However, the overwhelming majority of countries simply dont need nuclear status. What would, say, Monaco stand to gain from the bomb? Nuclear status would only ruin the countrys economy. As a matter of fact, we have discussed these topics extensively with IAEA General Director Mohamed El-Baradei. I fully agree with his stance: we have the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The countries that signed this Treaty are entitled to develop civilian nuclear programs. Those that already have them are obliged to help. Please note that they are obliged to help. And the Iranian problem is more likely an inadequate reaction on the part of certain states. Since apart from Iran, there are other countries unable to make a nuclear reactor. What do they all need? They need the nuclear powers to guarantee long-term supplies of fuel with unconditional return of spent fuel to the country of origins or to some international consortium. In this case, they would enjoy all the benefits of atomic power and nuclear technologies, while dirty bombs would remain a tabloid fantasy. - Isnt that a bit too optimistic? After all, in the decades the NPT has been in effect (it was signed in 1968), the number of nuclear powers has increased by perhaps three countries (if we add Israel to India and Pakistan). - By only three, while without the NPT and IAEA monitoring this number could well have jumped to ten. Incidentally, control is quite efficient. There were rumors very recently that in Iran some building had been demolished and a layer of soil removed. The IAEA inspection team immediately arrived on site, examined it, and found out that the work had nothing to do with nuclear matters. - We began our interview with the statement that atomic power is experiencing a renaissance. However, even if all goes well, traditional technologies graphite-uranium and heavy water reactors (- ) as well as the breeder reactors invented fifty years ago will be used for the next twenty years. Its clear that innovation cycles in power engineering are very long but something will definitely have to change in about fifty years. - I cant predict what will happen in fifty years because we are at the stage of scientific and technological development that could enable scientists to change the worlds power strategy fairly quickly in one or two decades depending on economic and political conditions. There are a lot of possibilities even if we dont take controlled thermonuclear and hydrogen power into account for the time being. It cannot be ruled out that new coal processing technology will be developed, and there is much more coal on the planet than oil and gas. We have yet to handle certain fuels properly and there are offshore reserves of hydrocarbons that could last for ages. The question is when it will be feasible to develop them. According to many experts, large-scale atomic power engineering also has a fair chance. But they also point out the limits of uranium deposits. Once again, its a question of market conditions. The uranium that costs less than $40 per kilo is in short supply. If the price were, say, $100 per kilo, uranium could be extracted from seawater. We shouldnt forget about huge reserves of nuclear weapons material either. Of course, breeders were invented long ago, but they are the reactors that can use weapons-grade materials to meet civilian energy needs. And if you want to know my opinion, I believe that fast reactors have very good prospects. - What do you think about attempts to find environmentally friendly ways to produce atomic power? If a real breakthrough in this area came, would the future of atomic power look simply brilliant? No radioactive waste whatsoever, no problems with waste disposal and so on. - Im familiar with one of the winning projects at Russian Innovations Competition this year. It received the White Book Prize and carries the ambitious name of Clean Technology for Producing Atomic Energy. Its not nonsense. Indeed, nuclear reactions could with certain probability go along the channel that would produce waste that would quickly transform into stable isotopes in other words, there would be no long-lived isotopes at the end at all. The question is how to critically increase probability of nuclear reaction passing along these very channels (which scientists refer to as reaction mode)? In terms of technical implementation, its a fantasy for the time being that makes controlled thermonuclear reactions look like a chapter from a science history textbook. Still, this research is worthwhile and challenging. It is necessary for independent research teams to confirm the results. - A nuclear project is a splendid example of rapid innovation: just few years are needed between basic scientific discoveries and industrial implementation. In what other areas of science, in your opinion, can we expect something similar today? - Another well-known and no less splendid example comes to mind, namely the link between research in semiconductor physics and information technologies. Today, the highest hopes are for biotechnologies and medicine first and foremost, with treatments for diseases that so far have been considered incurable, for example, cancer. As for physics, the scientific community is looking forward to the launch of a new super-booster a large particle collider at CERN. It will either confirm or disprove ideas determining the so-called standard model of the modern theory of structure of matter. This directly concerns the theory of intra-nuclear interactions theory and cosmogonic principles as well. Strange as it may sound, these experiments could turn into another innovation breakthrough. Remember, in 1937, five years before the launch of the first nuclear reactor, Rutherford argued that nuclear power would find practical application in about two or three centuries. [http://www.expert.ru/] [http://www.gateway2russia.com/subscr.php] ***************************************************************** 20 UK News & Star: N-power ‘needs support’ 4:57 - 3 August 2004 Government needs to take political decisions to secure the future of nuclear power. Brian Watson has worked at the BNFL site for over 30 years and stepped down on Friday. Sellafield will now rely on decommissioning work. Mr Watson has been head of the site for the past five years. BNFL said he had been instrumental in restoring the site’s reputation after the mox scandal and successfully paving the way for the transition to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority in April 2005. Barry Snelson, Mr Watson’s deputy at Sellafield, will take over. Mr Watson said: “I do think there are some political decisions that the UK government does have to take if there’s going to be a very long term future for Sellafield.” news@cumbrian-newspapers.co.uk [news@cumbrian-newspapers.co.uk] or post it on our Forums ***************************************************************** 21 NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting August 17 on Issues Associated with Large Loss-of-Coolant Accidents News Release - 2004-09 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-090 August 2, 2004 stakeholders on August 17 in Rockville, Md., to discuss issues relating to the possible use of risk information in setting requirements for addressing large-break loss-of-coolant accidents at nuclear power plants. The meeting will be held in the Auditorium at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. The discussions will assist NRC staff in formulating a regulatory analysis for a possible rulemaking. Documents describing the basis for the rulemaking will be available on the Internet at this address: http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/ [http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/] . Members of the public are invited to participate by discussing these issues with NRC staff at designated points during the meeting. For more information on the meeting, contact George Mencinsky at 301-415-3093 or via email at gjm@nrc.gov [gjm@nrc.gov] . Last revised Monday, August 02, 2004 ***************************************************************** 22 NRC: Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generating FR Doc 04-17476 [Federal Register: August 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 147)] [Notices] [Page 46187-46188] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02au04-76] Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), part 50, appendix R, section III.G.2.b. for Facility Operating License No. DPR-22, issued to Nuclear Management Company, LLC (NMC), for operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (Monticello), located in Wright County, Minnesota. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would authorize an exemption from the automatic fire suppression system requirements of 10 CFR part 50, appendix R, section III.G.2.b. as it applies to Fire Area IV/Fire Zone 1F. Fire Area IV/Fire Zone 1F corresponds to the Monticello torus compartment, located at elevation 896 feet, 3 inches of the reactor building. The proposed action is in accordance with NMC's exemption request of September 15, 2003, as supplemented February 24, 2004. The Need for the Proposed Action NMC requested this exemption as a result of internal assessments of the Monticello's Fire Protection Program. NMC determined that the existing exemption from 10 CFR part 50 appendix R, section III.G.2.b (granted in 1983) for the torus compartment did not bound the existing plant configuration and the current Monticello Appendix R safe shutdown analysis. Accordingly, the NMC resubmitted its request for a permanent exemption for this area. [[Page 46188]] Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC staff reviewed NMC's exemption request and will issue a safety evaluation documenting its review. The review found that the Division 1 and Division 2 components of the core spray, residual heat removal (RHR) cooling, suppression pool level transmitter, and suppression pool temperature monitoring systems (SPOTMOS) are separated in Fire Area IV/Fire Zone 1F by at least 75 feet. The NRC staff concluded that the area wide automatic fire suppression is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of appendix R, section III.G.2.b, for the suppression pool torus area at Monticello considering the following: The minimal amount of fixed and transient combustibles present; The separation between redundant trains of core spray valves, RHR cooling valves, and suppression pool level transmitters; Smoke and temperature detector provisions; The ability of SPOTMOS to continue to operate with at least one RTD on one train in the operable-but-degraded mode for any fire in fire zone 1F that involved both conduit trains. The details of the NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided as part of the letter to NMC transmitting the NRC staff's decision on the exemption request. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use of any different resource than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for Monticello dated November 1972. Agencies and Persons Consulted On July 22, 2004, the NRC staff consulted with the Minnesota State official, Nancy Campbell of the Department of Commerce, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see NMC's exemption request of September 15, 2003, as supplemented February 24, 2004. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [ pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of July 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. L. Raghavan, Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-17476 Filed 7-30-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: LOCA technical requirements RIN 3150-AH29 FR Doc 04-17477 [Federal Register: August 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 147)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 46110-46111] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02au04-12] Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Availability of draft rule conceptual basis, draft rule language and notice of public meeting. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is making available the draft rule conceptual basis and the draft rule language for a new Sec. 50.46a, and conforming changes to Sec. Sec. 50.34, 50.46, 50.46a (to be redesignated as Sec. 50.46b), 50.109, and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criterion 35, concerning emergency core cooling systems (ECCS) for light-water nuclear power reactors. The amended regulations would permit power reactor licensees to implement a voluntary risk-informed alternative to the current requirements for analysis of loss-of-coolant accidents and for ECCS in 10 CFR 50.46. The availability of the draft rule conceptual basis and draft rule language is intended to inform stakeholders of the current status of the NRC's activities to risk-inform 10 CFR 50.46, but the NRC is not soliciting formal public comments on the information at this time. The NRC has scheduled a public meeting for August 17, 2004, at which stakeholders are invited to inform the NRC of possible nuclear power plant modifications that might be sought under such a rule and their associated costs and benefits. The NRC plans to use this information in preparing the regulatory analysis for the rule. DATES: A public meeting is scheduled on August 17, 2004, at 9 a.m. in the Auditorium of the NRC's offices located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Should it become necessary to change the date or time of this meeting, the NRC will provide the revised information in a meeting notice posted on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/meeting-schedul e.html#NRR [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-m eetings/meeting-schedule.html#NRR] . ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in the Auditorium of the NRC's offices located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The draft rule conceptual basis and draft rule language can be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://ruleforum.llnl.gov] . Along with other publicly available documents related to this rulemaking, the draft information may be viewed electronically on public computers in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, Room O-1 F21, and open to the public on Federal workdays from 7:45 a.m. until 4:15 p.m. The PDR reproduction contractor will make copies of documents for a fee. Publicly available NRC documents created or received in connection with this rulemaking are also available electronically via the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The draft rule conceptual basis and draft rule language are available under ADAMS accession number ML042080299. If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC PDR Reference staff at (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737 or by e-mail at PDR@nrc.gov [ PDR@nrc.gov] . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Dudley, Policy and Rulemaking Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: (301) 415-1116; Internet: rfd@nrc.gov [rfd@nrc.gov] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a staff requirements memorandum dated July 1, 2004, the Commission directed the staff to propose a risk-informed alternative rule to the current requirements in 10 CFR 50.46. The NRC is making preliminary versions of the draft rule conceptual basis and draft rule language available to inform stakeholders of the current status of the NRC's activities to risk-inform 10 CFR 50.46. This draft rule conceptual basis may be subject to significant revisions during the rulemaking process. To meet the Commission's schedule, the NRC is not soliciting early public comments on this draft rule conceptual basis and draft rule language. No stakeholder requests for a comment period will be granted at this stage in the rulemaking process. Stakeholders will have an opportunity to comment on the rule conceptual basis and rule language when it is published as a proposed rule. Under this risk-informed alternative, the NRC would establish requirements, in a new Sec. 50.46a, which would divide the existing spectrum of LOCA pipe break sizes up to the double-ended rupture of the largest reactor coolant system pipe into two regions. Each region will be subject to different ECCS analysis requirements, commensurate with likelihood of the break. Loss-of-coolant accidents in the smaller break size region (up to and including a ``transition break size'') will be analyzed by the methods, assumptions and criteria currently used for LOCA analysis; accidents in the larger break size region (from the transition break size up to the double-ended rupture of the largest reactor coolant system pipe) may be analyzed by less stringent methods based on their lower likelihood. Although loss-of-coolant accidents for breaks larger than the transition break size will become beyond design- basis accidents, the NRC will promulgate regulations ensuring that licensees maintain the ability to mitigate pipe breaks up to the double-ended rupture of the largest reactor coolant system pipe. Since LOCAs in the larger break size region would be required to be mitigated, such accidents would remain separate from severe accidents, which are addressed by voluntary industry guidelines. Licensees who perform new LOCA analyses using the new risk-informed alternative requirements may find that their plant designs are no longer limited by certain parameters associated with previous analyses. Changing these limitations could enable licensees to [[Page 46111]] propose a wide scope of design or operational changes up to the point of being limited by some other parameter on any of the required analyses. Potential changes might include increasing power, modifying core peaking factors, removing some accumulators from service, eliminating fast starting of one or more emergency diesel generators, etc. Some of these design and operational changes could increase plant safety. In order to ensure that any design and operational changes do not unacceptably reduce plant safety margins or unacceptably increase risk, the rule will require that any potential increase in risk associated with plant modifications is small and consistent with the Commission's Safety Goal Policy Statement (60 FR 42622, August 15, 1995). The risk-informed 10 CFR 50.46 option will also establish a design change evaluation process. The evaluation process will generally involve the criteria for risk-informed license amendments similar to those in Regulatory Guide 1.174 (ADAMS Accession No. ML023240437). The rule would require monitoring of plant risk to ensure that the bases for any facility changes made under this rule are maintained. The rule would require that proposed facility changes be reviewed and approved by the NRC via the routine license amendment process,\1\ including any needed changes to the facility's technical specifications. Potential impacts of the plant changes on facility security will be evaluated during the process for license amendment reviews. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \1\ Requirements for this process are specified in 10 CFR 50.90. They include public notice of all amendment requests in the Federal Register, an opportunity for affected persons to request a public hearing, preparation of an environmental analysis, and a detailed NRC technical evaluation to ensure that the facility will continue to provide adequate protection of public health and safety after the amendment is implemented. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- The NRC intends to periodically evaluate LOCA frequency information. If estimated LOCA frequencies significantly change, the NRC may revise the transition break size. In such a case, the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109) would not apply. Similarly, if future evaluations of LOCA frequency invalidate the bases for a design change made by a licensee, that licensee would be required to change the facility and/or procedures or make other compensatory changes elsewhere to reduce facility risk to acceptable levels. In such cases, the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109) also would not apply. The NRC's current concept regarding the rule framework, the associated technical bases, and early draft rule language will be posted on the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://ruleforum.llnl.gov] . This draft rule conceptual basis and draft rule language are preliminary and may be incomplete in one or more respects. This early draft information is being released to inform stakeholders of the current status of the 10 CFR 50.46 rulemaking. Periodically, the NRC may post updates to the draft rule conceptual basis or draft rule language on the rulemaking Web site. At the public meeting on August 17, 2004, the NRC would like to obtain information about the potential costs and benefits of the above rule changes in order to complete the regulatory analysis for the proposed rule. After licensees and other stakeholders review the draft rule conceptual basis and draft rule language posted on the NRC Web site (http://ruleforum.llnl.gov [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://ruleforum.llnl.gov] ), the NRC would like to obtain information as described below. 1. Estimate the number and type of plants that might pursue this voluntary option. Estimate the costs of performing the ECCS reanalyses at these plants. 2. Provide the estimated number and types of plant design changes that would be permitted by the ECCS reanalyses at these plants (on a per unit basis) and the estimated costs of any decision analyses associated with such design changes. 3. Estimate the costs of additional analyses (apart from the ECCS reanalyses) required by the proposed rule to determine the acceptability of the above design changes. These costs could include but may not be limited to (1) updating probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) to reflect the new design and to meet the PRA quality and scope requirements and (2) analyses to determine compliance with the risk acceptance criteria and the defense-in-depth criteria. 4. Estimate the number and types of plant design changes (on a per unit basis) that would meet the acceptance criteria for the additional analyses. 5. Estimate the costs of implementing the plant design changes that meet the acceptance criteria for the additional analyses. 6. Estimate any operational costs and/or savings resulting from implementing the above design changes. 7. Estimate any anticipated changes in licensee information collection, reporting, and retention burden that could result if this rulemaking is implemented. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Catherine Haney, Program Director, Policy and Rulemaking Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-17477 Filed 7-30-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 24 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the FR Doc 04-17478 [Federal Register: August 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 147)] [Notices] [Page 46187] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02au04-75] Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision. 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR part 35, Medical Use of Byproduct Material. 3. The form number if applicable: Not applicable. 4. How often the collection is required: Reports of medical events, doses to an embryo/fetus or nursing child, or leaking sources are reportable on occurrence. A certifying entity desiring to be recognized by the NRC must submit a one-time request for recognition. 5. Who will be required or asked to report: Physicians and medical institutions holding an NRC license authorizing the administration of byproduct material or radiation therefrom to humans for medical use. 6. An estimate of the number of responses: The estimated number of annual responses: 242,030 (51,309 responses from NRC licensees + 1,759 recordkeepers and 184,686 responses from Agreement State licensees + 6,332 recordkeepers). Also 23 specialty certification boards are expected to request recognition under the proposed revision of part 35 (amendment of 10 CFR part 35, ``Medical Use of Byproduct Material-- Recognition of Specialty Boards''). 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 8,091 (1,759 NRC licensees and 6,332 Agreement State licensees). 8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 1,113,217 hours (242,030 hours for NRC licensees and 871,059 hours for Agreement State licensees [an average of 138 hours per licensee] and an additional one-time burden of 128 hours for certifying boards). 9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13 applies: Not applicable. 10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 35, ``Medical Use of Byproduct Material,'' contains NRC's requirements and provisions for the medical use of byproduct material and for issuance of specific licenses authorizing the medical use of this material. These requirements and provisions provide for the radiation safety of workers, the general public, patients, and human research subjects. 10 CFR part 35 contains mandatory requirements that apply to NRC licensees authorized to administer byproduct material or radiation therefrom to humans for medical use. The information in the required reports and records is used by the NRC to ensure that public health and safety is protected, and that the possession and use of byproduct material is in compliance with the license and regulatory requirements. A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comm ent/omb/index.html] . The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by September 1, 2004. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. OMB Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0010), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3087. The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, (301) 415-7233. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. 04-17478 Filed 7-30-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 25 Coast Guard Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:16:58 -0700 [Federal Register: August 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 147)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 46101-46103] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02au04-5] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD05-03-116] RIN 1625-AA87 (Formerly 1625-AA00) Security Zone; Three Mile Island Generating Station, Susquehanna River, Dauphin County, PA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a security zone in the Captain of the Port, Philadelphia, PA zone, immediately adjacent to the nuclear power facility at Three Mile Island Generating Station. This zone is needed to ensure public safety and security from subversive or terrorist acts. This rule is intended to prevent future terrorist attacks against nuclear power facilities by denying entry into the zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or designated representative. DATES: This rule is effective on August 1, 2004. ADDRESSES: Comments and materials received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket CGD05-03-116, and are available for inspection or copying at Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Philadelphia, One Washington Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Junior Grade Kevin Sligh or Ensign Jill Munsch, Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Philadelphia, at (215) 271-4889. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory History On September 16, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Security Zone; Three Mile Island Generating Station, Susquehanna River, Dauphin County, PA'' in the Federal Register (68 FR 54177). We received one letter commenting on the proposed rule. The letter requested clarification on the coordinates of the proposed security zone. In addition the following temporary final rule was published in the Federal Register: ``Security Zone; Three Mile Island Generating Station, Susquehanna River, Dauphin County, PA'' (68 FR 33399, June 4, 2003). This temporary final rule established a security zone around the Three Mile Island Generating Station, Susquehanna River, Dauphin County, PA. The original effective date of the temporary final rule was to expire at 5 p.m. (EST) on January 24, 2004. The effective date has been extended through July 31, 2004 (69 FR 10616, March 8, 2004). Background and Purpose Terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, inflicted catastrophic human casualties and property damage. These attacks highlighted the terrorists' ability and desire to utilize multiple means in different geographic areas to increase their opportunities to successfully carry out their mission, thereby maximizing destruction using multiple terrorist acts. Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and Flight 93, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued several warnings concerning the potential for additional terrorist attacks within the United States. The threat of maritime attacks is real as evidenced by the October 2002 attack on a tank vessel off the coast of Yemen and the prior attack on the USS COLE. These attacks manifest a continuing threat to U.S. assets as described in the President's finding in Executive Order 13273 of August 21, 2002 (67 FR 56215, September 3, 2002) that the security of the U.S. is endangered by the September, 11, 2001 attacks and that such disturbances continue to endanger the international relations of the United States. See also Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to [[Page 46102]] Certain Terrorist Attacks, (67 FR 58317, September 13, 2002); Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect To Persons Who Commit, Threaten To Commit, Or Support Terrorism, (67 FR 59447, September 20, 2002). The U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) in Advisory 02-07 advised U.S. shipping interests to maintain a heightened state of alert against possible terrorist attacks. MARAD more recently issued Advisory 03-06 informing operators of maritime interests of increased threat possibilities to vessels and facilities and a higher risk of terrorist attack to the transportation community in the United States. The ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq have made it prudent for U.S. ports and waterways to be on a higher state of alert because the al Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide. Due to increased awareness that future terrorist attacks are possible, the Coast Guard as lead federal agency for maritime homeland security, has determined that the Captain of the Port must have the means to be aware of, deter, detect, intercept, and respond to asymmetric threats, acts of aggression, and attacks by terrorists on the American homeland while still maintaining our freedoms and sustaining the flow of commerce. A security zone is a tool available to the Coast Guard that may be used to limit vessel traffic in a specific area to help protect vessels from damage, injury, or terrorist attack. The Captain of the Port of Philadelphia has determined that this security zone is necessary to protect the public, ports, and waterways of the United States from potential subversive acts. This security zone is similar to the existing temporary security zone established for waters around nuclear power facilities in Ocean County, NJ, (69 FR 5282, February 4, 2004) and Salem County, NJ, (69 FR 5277, February 4, 2004) which became effective final rules on March 5, 2004. Discussion of Comments and Changes During the public comment period we received one comment requesting clarification of the coordinates concerning this security zone. This information was provided prior to publication of the extended temporary final rule. It did not impact the need for a public meeting. The only change to the proposed rule was to add the contact information for the Security Manager at Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant. A public meeting was considered, however no requests for a public meeting were received and no public meeting was held. The Captain of the Port met with representatives from Pennsylvania's Office of the Governor, Pennsylvania Office of Homeland Security, the Pennsylvania State Police and Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission regarding the patrol and enforcement feasibility by the state of Pennsylvania. The State has agreed in principle and signed a Memorandum of Agreement related to the security zone around Three Mile Island Generating Station, notify each agency of any proposed changes, periodic patrol assistance, enforcement and investigation into any security zone violations. Federal, state and local agencies will assist the Coast Guard in enforcing this security zone. Regulatory Evaluation This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not significant under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). No changes have been made to the rule. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. There is ample room for vessels to navigate around the security zone and the Captain of the Port may allow vessels to enter the zone on a case-by-case basis with the express permission of the Captain of the Port of Philadelphia or their designated representative. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The zone is limited in size and leaves ample room for vessels to navigate around the zone. The zone will not significantly impact commuter and passenger vessel traffic patterns; the vessels may be allowed to enter the zone on a case-by-case basis, with the express permission of the Captain of the Port of Philadelphia or their designated representative. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as none were identified that will be affected by the final rule. Vessel traffic counts indicate the waterway users will continue to have the same access to the waterway as in the past, with the exception of a small remote area surrounding the waterfront near the Three Mile Island Generating Station. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If the rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Philadelphia in writing at the address under ADDRESSES. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. [[Page 46103]] Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. We invite your comments on how this rule might impact tribal governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal implication'' under the order. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant energy action'' under that Order because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, from further environmental documentation. We have considered waterside access constraints around the security zone and have determined the public can safely transit the affected waterways outside the security zone, without significant impact on the environment. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. 0 For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 0 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 0 2. Add Sec. 165.554 to read as follows. Sec. 165.554 Security Zone; Three Mile Island Generating Station, Susquehanna River, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: the waters of the Susquehanna River in the vicinity of the Three Mile Island Generating Station bounded by a line beginning at 40[deg]09'14.74'' N, 076[deg]43'40.77'' W; thence to 40[deg]09'14.74'' N, 076[deg]43'42.22'' W, thence to 40[deg]09'16.67'' N, 076[deg]43'42.22'' W, thence to 40[deg]09'16.67'' N, 076[deg]43'40.77'' W; thence back to the beginning point 40[deg]09'14.74'' N, 076[deg]43'40.77'' W. All coordinates reference Datum: NAD 1983. (b) Regulations. (1) All persons are required to comply with the general regulations governing security zones in Sec. 165.33 of this part. (2) No person or vessel may enter or navigate within this security zone unless authorized to do so by the Coast Guard or designated representative. Any person or vessel authorized to enter the security zone must operate in strict conformance with any directions given by the Coast Guard or designated representative and leave the security zone immediately if the Coast Guard or designated representative so orders. (3) The Coast Guard or designated representative enforcing this section can be contacted on VHF Marine Band Radio, channels 13 and 16. The Captain of the Port can be contacted at (215) 271-4807. The Security Manager at Three Mile Island can be contacted at (717) 948- 8208 or (717) 948-8039. (4) The Captain of the Port will notify the public of any changes in the status of this security zone by Marine Safety Radio Broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio, channel 22 (157.1 MHZ). (c) Definitions. For the purposes of this section, Captain of the Port means the Commanding Officer of the Coast Guard Marine Safety Office/Group Philadelphia, Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port to act as a designated representative on his behalf. Dated: July 20, 2004. Jonathan D. Sarubbi, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Philadelphia. [FR Doc. 04-17528 Filed 7-30-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ***************************************************************** 26 heraldtribune.com: 'No one has tried to find me' Southwest Florida's Information Leader Alexander Primrose, 81, a machinist at the American Beryllium Co. plant for 26 years, was told he had stomach cancer in 2000. His bladder quit working in 1999. By DEBI SPRINGER [debi.springer@heraldtribune.com] TALLEVAST -- Tim Brady thought he was doing his part to help the United States during the Cold War by building nuclear warheads at the American Beryllium Co. plant in Tallevast. For four years, Brady operated million-dollar pieces of machinery, and even when he noticed boils on his arms, he shrugged it off. "I was gung-ho," said Brady, 40. "I was helping stop the Cold War." Now Brady is convinced his time spent in the plant nearly cost him his life. Seriously ill for a decade, he needs monthly infusions of hemoglobin to stay alive. He's not alone. Coveted for its strength and durability, beryllium is so dangerous the government set up a program in 2000 to reimburse those who got sick from working around it. The government has approved about 12,000 claims and paid out $855 million in compensation and medical services. But nearly all of those claims came from large plants in the Midwest. Brady and other former American Beryllium Co. workers said word of the program never got to them -- only two of the more than 1,000 former plant workers have filed claims. Government officials acknowledge they have done a poor job of advertising the program and signing people up. They hope to change that in two all-day workshops scheduled at a Bradenton hotel Tuesday and Wednesday. "We're now ready to do outreach to smaller locations," said Bill Franson, who administers the compensation program for the Department of Labor. Former American Beryllium machinist Larry Paquin said he plans to go. Paquin, 58, said he has the same address as he did when he worked there from 1980 to 1985. "No one has tried to find me," Paquin said. The fine, black dust that is a byproduct of beryllium production can cause Chronic Beryllium Disease, an incurable, often fatal lung ailment. Because symptoms can take 20 years to appear, experts say there may be another 800,000 people who have berylliosis and don't know it. Paquin said in the past year his breathing has become labored and he has to face the ceiling in order to cough. He's getting thin and tires easily. Paquin said his bosses at American Beryllium never warned him about the dangers of beryllium. "There was a lot of beryllium dust in the place. It looked clean, but it was actually dirty," Paquin said. Alexander Primrose, a machinist at the plant in Tallevast from 1959 to 1985, developed stomach cancer four years ago. His bladder bladder quit functioning in 1999, and he uses a catheter twice a day. Since 2000, he has had 25 chemotherapy and 25 radiation treatments for his stomach cancer, which is now in remission. He also thinks his problems may be the result of years of exposure to beryllium dust. "We didn't know what beryllium could do," Primrose said. "I thought I was doing something good." Primrose said he could see the black dust on his hands and on his machine. He said some younger machinists would come to work, and once they learned they were working with beryllium, they'd pack up their tools and leave. Primrose is going to the meeting this week to see if he qualifies to file a claim. Federal officials said that American Beryllium Co. workers are eligible for compensation only if they have Chronic Beryllium Disease. "But we encourage anyone who worked there to apply," Franson said. Brady, whose immune system is so compromised he spends six hours a day once a month receiving a $5,400 blood infusion, said medical compensation would help. Without the infusions, Brady said he'd probably live two years. His HMO threatened to drop him several times, until his physician filed grievances. Brady, whose hands and feet are numb from a spinal infection, coughs constantly. A nonsmoker, he wheezes when he breathes. X-rays show his lungs are scarred, and he's certain it's from the four years he breathed in beryllium dust on the graveyard shift. Brady and his wife, Flor, have a 7-year-old daughter, Lorena. The couple say his health problems are difficult to cope with. Brady is forced to spend most of his free time resting on the couch. "It sucks. I can't even play with my daughter," Brady said. ***************************************************************** 27 The Globe and Mail: Plutonium from 1954 nuclear tests builds in Japan [http://www.globeandmail.com] Monday, Aug 2, 2004 Associated Press Tokyo Radioactive plutonium particles from U.S. nuclear weapons tests in the Pacific 50 years ago have been detected for the first time in Japanese waters, researchers said Monday. The particles were found in soil samples from Sagami Bay, about 50 kilometres southwest of Tokyo, researchers at the National Institute of Radiological Science said. The plutonium particles matched the fallout from the blasts at the Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands, but they pose no environmental risk, research team leader Masatoshi Yamada said. Mr. Yamada said the particles made of coral pulverized in the explosions started accumulating in the bay soon after the weapons tests, which lasted from 1946 until 1958. We believe the plutonium was washed up toward Japanese waters by the ocean current, he said. The United States conducted 66 such tests as part of Operation Crossroads. The atoll is part of the Marshall Islands, almost midway between Hawaii and Tokyo. Mr. Yamada said his team plans to conduct similar surveys at other Japanese shorelines, including on the Japan Sea and East China Sea, to determine how plutonium from the Bikini Atoll travelled to Japan over the years. If we can determine how the plutonium particles travelled around the world, we can predict what may happen in case of an emergency, such as a nuclear accident, he said. The Bikini tests are well-known in Japan because 23 Japanese fishermen were contaminated by radiation when their tuna trawler was showered by fallout in the area in March, 1954. A radio operator of the boat died at age 40 from the effects of radiation poisoning six months after the blast, followed by 11 others who died from liver ailments linked to the same cause. ***************************************************************** 28 NRC: NRC Staff Makes Its Yucca Mountain Documents Available News Release - 2004-08 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-089 July 30, 2004 future hearing on a potential application from the Department of Energy (DOE) for a high-level radioactive waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. As required, the NRC staff has certified that we have provided our documents related to the potential hearing, said C. William Reamer, director of the agencys Division of High-Level Waste Repository Safety. This is consistent with the Commissions interest in assuring the availability of information. The agency is still analyzing the July 9 decision regarding Yucca Mountain by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and its possible implications. In the meantime it is moving ahead to make its documents available on the Network in a timely manner. NRC regulations require all potential participants in the Yucca Mountain proceeding to make their documents available to other potential participants and the public in electronic form. The documents that must be made available consist of the information that a party, potential party or interested government participant intends to rely on in the licensing proceeding for a high-level waste repository, and certain other relevant information. The NRC has made more than 24,000 documents available to the agencys on-line Licensing Support Network (LSN), at www.lsnnet.gov [http://www.lsnnet.gov/] . All but about 100 of those documents have been indexed by the LSN and are available through that network. The remaining documents are available through the NRCs electronic Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html and will be indexed later on the LSN. Help in using ADAMS is available from the NRC Public Document Room at 301/415-4737 or 1/800/397-4209. NRC regulations require that the NRC technical staff make its documents publicly available within 30 days after DOE certifies that it has made its documents available. DOE made that certification on June 30. Other potential parties to a hearing must make their documents available no later than 90 days after the DOE certification. An NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will resolve disputes regarding document submittal. G. Paul Bollwerk III, chief of the agencys Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, has named the following to serve on that board: Thomas S. Moore, Chair; Alex S. Karlin and Alan S. Rosenthal. Last revised Monday, August 02, 2004 ***************************************************************** 29 [NYTr] Vietnam Supports Ban on Atomic Weapons Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 14:37:38 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Prensa Latina, Havana - August 2, 2004 http://www.plenglish.com Vietnamese President Backs Banning of Nuclear Weapons Hanoi, Aug 2 (Prensa Latina) Vietnam's President Tran Duc Luong has voiced his government"s strong backing for the struggle of peace loving forces in Japan and the world over, to stop the threat of nuclear war and abolish weapons of mass destruction. According to the Vietnamese News Agency, Tran said in a message to the 2004 World Conference against A and H bombs, slated for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, August 2-9, that the "Vietnamese people went through a lot of sacrifices and losses in their fight for national independence and freedom. Three decades have passed since the war but many people are still suffering from its terrible consequences." The Asian leader noted that Vietnamese understood better than anyone the damage and long-lasting consequences weapons of mass destruction, including A and H bombs cause on human beings, society and environment. He conveyed his sincere gratitude to friends, people and peace-loving forces in Japan and the world for their warm support and assistance to Vietnam"s past struggle for national independence and re-unification and current cause of renovation and national construction. Tran Duc Luong wished the Conference success in encouraging the anti-war movement for peace, stability, cooperation and development in Japan, the region and the world. ile/ecq Copyright (c) 2004 Prensa Latina, SA. All rights reserved. * Search the NYTr Archives at: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us 339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 30 [du-list] Fw: USEC/DU cleanup Piketon and Beyond Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:41:34 -0700 I will be in DC untill Thursday.... Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2004 2:40 PM Subject: USEC/DU cleanup Piketon and Beyond It didn't make sense to us at the time why USEC/DOE would build an entire facility to process just the amount of DU on site Piketon and Oak Ridge. I asked them if they were also going to be processing the DU from the experimental centrifuge as well or anything else, and they said they had no plans to use it for anything else than to get what was stored on site processed and out. According to the article below, they do have plans, and Piketon, Ohio will have more than a cursory involvement. The main byproduct of the DU conversion venture at the new facility they are building (They broke ground last week with Governor Taft's blessing) - 80% - is solid uranium oxide waste. The only thing they are doing to it is taking off hydrogen fluoride to sell. It is still RADIOACTIVE WASTE. Where is all of this going to go? The place they told me was taking it in Utah said they couldn't. Whose backyard is all of this going to sit in? Elisa paducahsun2_01.gif paducahsun2_02.gif 8c78ae.jpg 8c78da.jpg 8c7909.gif Friday, July 30, 2004;Paducah, Kentucky Reader Options---------------------Subscribe-Online EditionSubscribe-Print EditionCustomer ServiceContact InformationTroubleshootingAdvertise With UsClassified RatesAnnouncementsLetter to Editor Front Page ---------- News ---------- Sports ---------- Weather ---------- Obituaries ---------- Editorials ---------- Classifieds ---------- Archives ---------- Business ---------- Region ---------- Life & Leisure ---------- Religion ---------- Home & Garden ---------- Outdoors ---------- Entertainment ---------- Weddings, Engagements & Anniversaries ---------- eXtra! ---------- Snitch ---------- Food ---------- PlayFour! ---------- Newspapers in Education ---------- Events Calendar ---------- Subscribe to the Online Edition ---------- Subscribe to the Print Edition ---------- Advertise with Us ---------- Classified Rates ---------- Contact Us ---------- 8c791b.jpg USEC to buy firm that deals in storing waste nuclear fuel ---------- By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com--270.575.8650 ---------- USEC Inc. has taken a major step toward diversification by agreeing to pay $16 million in cash for NAC International, which has the largest fleet of spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste casks in the nation. On Thursday, USEC announced the purchase agreement with Pinnacle West Capital Corp. of Phoenix, whose subsidiary, El Dorado Investment Co., owns most of NAC's stock. The deal, expected to close later this year, marks USEC's first acquisition since the company was privatized in 1998. USEC spokeswoman Elizabeth Stuckle said the purchase will have no immediate direct effect on the 1,300 jobs at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, but it strengthens the company for shareholders, employees and customers. Asked if the NAC deal could eventually create more work at Paducah, Stuckle said the firm "has not ruled out" any possibilities. USEC, based in Bethesda, Md., has been seeking cleanup contracts and other ways to expand work at the plant, which it will close starting in 2010 and replace with a new gas centrifuge plant in Piketon, Ohio. After the transaction closes, NAC is expected to generate about $30 million in yearly revenue, reaping $1 million in annual earnings and positive cash flow from operations starting in 2005. "This acquisition is a strong strategic fit for USEC as we seek to strengthen our presence in the nuclear fuel cycle," said William "Nick" Timbers, president and chief executive officer. He said USEC will be able to offer broader services to utilities that buy enriched uranium for nuclear fuel. NAC is a leading provider of spent fuel storage solutions, nuclear materials transportation and fuel cycle consulting. It has handled a significant share of the Department of Energy requirements for retrieving spent foreign reactor fuel during the past 15 years. It will retain its name as a USEC subsidiary and continue to be based in Atlanta. The acquisition means being able to help utilities as they await the opening of the Energy Department's long-term nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., USEC said. NAC is developing a new spent fuel canister technology and plans to apply for licensing with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission later this year. The NAC consulting division has done a variety of federal work related to tracking nuclear materials. * E-Mail this article to a friend. All staff photographs are available for purchase. Please call 270-575-8682 or 270-575-8683. ***************************************************************** 31 DenverPost.com: EDITORIALS Trouble at Los Alamos Article Published: Monday, August 02, 2004 It's hard to get a grip on what the nation should do about the dangers of terrorism and the lapses of American intelligence and homeland security. The problems seem so big; the answers proposed by politicians so vague. We've got a concrete idea for one security measure that ought to be taken quickly. Batten down the Los Alamos National Laboratory. The story of what's been happening in the mountains of New Mexico has been tucked in the back pages for the last few weeks. In case you missed it, here's the story. On July 7, two computer disks containing classified information were reported missing from one of the facility's labs. The following week, classified research was halted while the search for the disks continued. (They still haven't been found.) Officials announced July 22 that 19 employees had been suspended. On July 23, most of Los Alamos was shut down. On the same day, officials ordered a halt to all Energy Department operations that use the same kind of computer disks. Limited operations at Los Alamos resumed last week. Rep. Diana DeGette of Denver was part of a fact-finding group that toured the lab, and Sen. Wayne Allard has introduced legislation calling for the University of California to bow out as lab manager. UC has run the lab since 1943 when the Manhattan Project put Los Alamos on the map as the nation's key research and development center for the nuclear weapons. This isn't the first time the lab has had embarrassing security breaches. As DeGette noted, "I was frankly dismayed after previous security breaches to see how these new problems could erupt." For now, the public can only guess at what's going on. Two possibilities come to mind. Worst case: Someone sinister is trying to get their hands on American WMD secrets. Best case: The absent-minded brainiacs at Los Alamos are not so good at remembering to safeguard classified materials nor keeping track of paperclips. Lab employees are being retrained in security procedures. (Officials are ending the long-standing practice of allowing employees to work four-day weeks so as to more easily track who's on the job.) Federal officials also are talking about putting management of the lab out for bid. (Two possible bidders are the University of Texas and Texas A. Know of any powerful politicians from Texas?) All possible long-term fixes should be considered. For the immediate future, we hope the appropriate security retraining is being done - and that it sinks in. Editorials alone express The Denver Post's opinion. ***************************************************************** 32 kgw.com: Nuclear plant near Hanford remains shut down | News for Oregon and SW Washington | AP Wire 08/02/2004 Associated Press Washington state's only commercial nuclear reactor remained out of service Monday following the failure of an automatic shutdown system last week. The Columbia Generating Station automatically shut down Friday morning after a high-pressure indication. Control panels then indicated that two of 185 control rods did not fully insert into the reactor, and the reactor had to be manually shut down. The rods control the reactor's operation. The failure triggered an alert in which state agencies prepared to respond if needed to help Benton and Franklin counties. State emergency officials said there was no release of radiation and no danger to the public. Technicians Monday were taking the opportunity to perform maintenance work that can only be done when the reactor is not operating, said Gary Miller, a spokesman for Energy Northwest, which operates the reactor. The reactor could be running again in a day or two, Miller said. Columbia Generating Station is a boiling water reactor that produces 1,150 megawatts of electricity, which is sold to the Bonneville Power Administration for the Northwest electricity grid. Ed Mosey, a spokesman for Bonneville Power, said Columbia Generating Station has had a good operating record. The shutdown will not cause a shortage of power, he said, but means there will be less electricity to sell on the open market. "Power prices on the market are very high right now, so whether we're buying or selling, it's going to hurt every day it's down," he said. "The longer it's out of service, the more problematic it will become from a financial standpoint." Formerly known as the Washington Public Power Supply System No. 2 reactor, Columbia Generating Station is the only one of five reactors begun in the late 1970s to be completed before construction was halted in 1982-83. The reactor is located on land leased from the U.S. Department of Energy within the boundaries of the Hanford nuclear reservation in south-central Washington state, but is a separate entity. ___ On the Net: Energy Northwest: http://www.energy-northwest.co m/main.html Belo Interactive Inc. ***************************************************************** 33 lamonitor.com: Congressional panels look at lab The Online News Source for Los Alamos [http://www.lac-nm.us] ROGER SNODGRASS roger@lamonitor.com [roger@lamonitor.com] Monitor Assistant Editor Los Alamos National Laboratory will undergo another harrowing round of scrutiny over the next few months, as federal agents begin following up on directives to investigate local safety and security violations and congressional committees vie to have the honor of grilling the laboratory's managers on behalf of the American taxpayers. A new web page apparently contains the latest information on COMPASS, the lab's formal project for coordinating stand down activities and for getting information directly to employees as the laboratory revives. COMPASS stands for Culture and Operations Model Plan and Surety System and now has an acting project director, John Bretzke, Bretzke is described by the laboratory as having seven years of experience at LANL and 23 years in the nuclear complex. Most recently he has been acting division leader for the Supply Chain Management Division, and before that he was acting deputy division leader for the Spallation Neutron Source at Technical Area 53. While serving as project director for construction of the Nicholas Metropolis Center for Modeling and Simulation Bretzke had a reputation for strong safety management, according to a Monitor story from December 2000. The article calls attention to the project's perfect safety record after its first 10 months. COMPASS will also maintain a public archive of relevant documents that can be seen by the public, mostly from the laboratory's web-based News Bulletin. Among items of interest is the news that on top of DOE and FBI investigators, three investigative committees in the U.S. House of Representatives are now on the case of the lab's missing zip drives and related problems. "While the House Energy Committee's investigative staff continues to interview Laboratory personnel to prepare for hearings, some of which may be done jointly with House Armed Services Committee," said a News Bulletin article, "House Science Committee staff members continue to request briefings on the recent Los Alamos issues." These ordeals will be compounded by agents visiting from the Department of Energy and Federal Bureau of Investigation, as requested by Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and his representatives. Another article from the COMPASS archive urges employees, students and subcontractors who feel stressed to make use of the Laboratory's Employee Assistance Program.. Exercise, diet, and vitamin B are among suggestions for fighting stress. A News Bulletin article on Friday quotes lab Director G. Peter Nanos on the urgency of the current situation. "I and you have to win the hearts and minds and bring your people on the path with the rest of us," Nanos said, In the same notice the laboratory updated its inventory of classified removable electronic memory (CREM). Two pieces of CREM from the Weapons Physics Directorate that were discovered missing on July 7, precipitated the current crisis. "Eighty-four of 122 groups who use CREM have been inventoried but have not completed all the requirements for validation by the Los Alamos Site Office," the article said. "The Laboratory is still working on the transition to lab-wide CREM libraries, acknowledging that the transition will be difficult." 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 34 [Fwd: [du-list] DU in the news - 3rd Aug. 04] Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 10:23:40 -0700 REVENGE as poetry and poetry as revenge Daily Star - Beirut,Lebanon ... against the Arab world today is unprecedented in scale - when Baghdad fell to the Moguls they did not have smart bombs and depleted uranium; when the Crusaders ... http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=4&Article_id=6845> IRAQ War Crimes Tribunal: The People will Judge George W. Bush International Action Center - USA ... The Tribunal will investigate attacks against Iraq civilians, the use of napalm, cluster bombs, and depleted uranium weapons, the illegal incarceration and ... <http://www.iacenter.org/iraq_wct0826a.htm> TWO Traditions: WMD and Official Disinformation Press Action - Arlington,VA,USA ... Chechens are Putin's people, the Seminoles were Andrew Jackson's people, and the Puerto Ricans who were bombed and radiated with depleted uranium are Bush ... <http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/mickeyz08022004/> ***************************************************************** 35 [du-list] Project Censored on continued Depleted Uranium Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:16:55 -0700 Project Censored on: http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/8.html # 8 US/British Forces Continue Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons Despite Massive Evidence of Negative Health Effects Ross Wilcock, arwilcock@sympatico.ca ***************************************************************** 36 [du-list] DU in the news - 2nd Aug. 04 Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:41:32 -0700 Newsweek - New York,NY,USA ... Washington hotel room, where he announces that he's plotting to kill Bush with either "radio-controlled flying saws," a boulder made of depleted uranium or self ... <http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5567879/site/newsweek/> WHILE the MEU goes north, I head south for the journey home[Marker ... Jacksonville Daily News - Jacksonville,NC,USA ... Nothing is wasted ' except maybe the mangled Iraqi armor barely visible on the horizon ' riddled with depleted uranium shells and leaking the same radioactive ... <http://www.jdnews.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=24447&Section=Visions> ***************************************************************** 37 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 17:32:02 -0700 (PDT) INSPECTORS, diplomats: Iran acquiring nuclear materials USA Today - USA WASHINGTON (GNS) The brewing problem of Iran's apparent plan to make nuclear weapons is approaching a flash point, threatening to create another explosive ... See all stories on this topic: CHINESE Envoy Discusses N. Korean Nuclear Standoff in Seoul Voice of America - Washington,DC,USA China's envoy on North Korea has begun discussions in South Korea on new six-way talks aimed at resolving the standoff over Pyongyang's nuclear program. ... See all stories on this topic: PLUTONIUM from 1954 nuclear tests builds in Japan The Globe and Mail - Canada Tokyo Radioactive plutonium particles from US nuclear weapons tests in the Pacific 50 years ago have been detected for the first time in Japanese waters ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR Terror Freezerbox - USA BY ALEXANDER ZAITCHIK. by Graham Allison. Back in the mid-1980s, a popular bumper sticker reminded drivers that one nuclear bomb could ruin their whole day. ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR plant near Hanford remains shut down kgw.com (subscription) - Portland,OR,USA Washington state's only commercial nuclear reactor remained out of service Monday following the failure of an automatic shutdown system last week. ... See all stories on this topic: CATAWBA nuclear plant on track to test plutonium fuel The State - Columbia,SC,USA CHARLOTTE, NC - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a preliminary finding in favor of allowing Duke Power to test a new fuel at its Catawba Nuclear ... BUSH administration opposes inspections system for anti-nuclear ... ABC Online - Australia ... HALL: While the Bush administration is issuing security alerts at home, in Geneva administration officials have told negotiators at a nuclear arms control ... See all stories on this topic: WORLD watches as US walks fine line on nuclear testing Santa Fe New Mexican - Santa Fe,NM,USA By JEFF TOLLEFSON | The New Mexican. A three-part series Sunday: The decision to stop building nuclear bombs might be one of the governments most expensive. ... See all stories on this topic: US to pin its nuclear fusion hopes on ITER Cordis News - EU ... thermonuclear experimental reactor (ITER), the United States' Department of Energy (DOE) is set to cancel work on a six year old national nuclear fusion project ... STRANGELOVES Nuclear Librarian The Inquirer - England,UK ... square foot temporary gallery, souvenir store, and a public reading room for reviewing unclassified and declassified materials relating to nuclear testing over ... This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** 38 The Inquirer: Strangelove's Nuclear Librarian Las Vegas repository By [moo@vegascommando.com] : Monday 02 August 2004, 07:39 VEGAS is full of quirky little museums, ranging from the Elvis-O-Rama to the Atomic Testing Museum. Yes, Virginia, there is indeed a museum of sorts for Atomic Testing, sponsored by the Nevada Test Site (NTS) Historical Foundation and affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution. Occupying the first floor of a building owned by the Desert Research Institute (DRI), the museum currently is made up of a 2,000 square foot temporary gallery, souvenir store, and a public reading room for reviewing unclassified and declassified materials relating to nuclear testing over the decades. A permanent 8,000 square foot exhibit is scheduled to open up in February 2005. Currently, the temporary exhibit hall holds an art exhibit by Peter Goin, "Nuclear Landscapes", and artefacts from the Nevada Test Site. Unfortunately, it wasn’t scheduled to open until the following Monday, so I was stuck on Thursday afternoon with visiting the sparsely decorated gift shop and purchasing a baseball cap or browsing the reading room. The Reading Room is a surprisingly airy and open space, with a small set of shelves, a handful of computers, a large screen TV for viewing videotape, with pictures and other knickknacks spread around the walls. Two sets of shelves are taken up with a collection of Geiger Counters and other radiological measurement tools. Jeff Gordon is the friendly librarian in charge of the NTS Historical Foundation reading room and about 800,000 unclassified and declassified documents plus film and video relating to nuclear testing. Only a portion of the material is actually on display in the reading room, with the vast majority of original media stored on the second floor of the DRI building. "You know that scene at the end of ‘Raider’s of the Lost Ark’?" asked Gordon. “It looks a lot like that, shelves and crates stacked up from floor to ceiling.” z A Department of Energy employee for a couple of decades and holding a “Q” badge among his many government photo IDs, part of Jeff’s job is going through hordes of accumulated classified material from decades of popping off weapons in the desert and declassifying it. "We’re currently going through the film and video archive," said Gordon. Video producers are frequent visitors to the collection, incorporating footage in projects ranging from quickie B-movie productions to the Discovery Channel. While off the beaten path of the Strip, the museum and reading room get their share of visitors from around the world. "We get around 30 to 40 Russians per year... One came over to visit his relative working as a performer at [Cirque du Soliet] Mystere’." As Gordon raps with me, he starts multi-tasking as a clean-cut family of six wanders in and start looking around. Gordon smoothly pops in a video tape with highlights of the first nuclear weapons test in New Mexico, a series of weapons tests in the ‘40s, and recovery efforts of "Broken Arrows" – nuclear weapons lost in accidents. While the tape runs, he’s doing a smooth color commentary, "Watch, there’s Oppenheimer in the background there, he’s the one in the floppy hat… now, this is the General picking his nose segment… OK, now this one is how not to search for radiological material,… he has his mask up, puts his hand to his mouth to shout he’s found something, then pulls his mask down. Plutonium is a short-range emitter, he has to practically be on top of it to pick it up with instruments." It’s all dead-on accurate and I am trying not to laugh in front of the enraptured family of six since I heard him rattle off some of the same patter to an earlier visitor. Should you ever find yourself in Vegas with an hour to kill, the museum is at 755 East Flamingo Road, a couple of blocks off the Strip. Otherwise, the web site is [http://www.ntshf.org/] . µ ***************************************************************** 39 PRESS RELEASE: New Book Facilitates understanding of Weapons of Mass Destruction and How Citizens Can Get Prepared. [http://www.prweb.com] August 2, 2004 Global News &Press Release Distribution Weapons of Mass Destruction, What You Should Know: A Citizen's Guide To Biological, Chemical and Nuclear Agents &Weapons edited by Gladson I. Nwanna, (Ph.D.) takes the complexities out of the subject of WMD by providing a rudimentary but comprehensive explanation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and, importantly, what citizens can do to protect themselves in the event of an attack. The book provides a comprehensive information on the subject of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The book lists and discusses various biological, chemical and radiological agents and weapons, including anthrax, sarin, VX, ricin, botulism, dirty bombs and mustard gas. It also discusses the measures that citizen's can take to minimize the risks caused by exposure to the agents or weapons. In addition, addresses various questions commonly asked about these agents and weapons in particular, those related to their effects on human health. Also included in the book are sources for additional information. Baltimore, MD (PRWEB) August 2, 2004 -- With the memories of the 9-11 incident still upon us, the on-going "war on terrorism" and the daily reminder of the dangers posed by Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), more people now than ever, particularly in the U.S., are aware and frightened by WMD and the thought that they could be used against them or launched on the U.S. Weapons of Mass Destruction, What You Should Know: A Citizen's Guide To Biological, Chemical and Nuclear Agents &Weapons edited by Gladson I. Nwanna takes the complexities out of the subject of WMD by providing a rudimentary but comprehensive explanation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and, importantly, what citizens can do to protect themselves. Weapons of Mass Destruction, What You Should Know... provides comprehensive information on the subject of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The book lists and discusses various biological, chemical and radiological agents and weapons, including anthrax, sarin, dirty bombs and mustard gas. It also discusses the measures that citizen's can take to minimize the risks caused by exposure to the agents or weapons. In addition, Weapons of Mass Destruction, What You Should Know... addresses various questions commonly asked about these agents and weapons in particular, those related to their effects on human health. Also included in the book are sources for additional information. This book should help relieve some anxiety among persons who are not technically or educationally enriched to understand the subject or who may be particularly concerned about how to react in the event of a WMD attack. The book also provides some guidance on how citizens can assist the government in the current war on terror and what they can do to prepare themselves in the event of a WMD attack Weapons of Mass Destruction, What You Should Know... Should be useful to every citizen. Americans and non-Americans alike should benefit from information contained in this book. Gladson I. Nwanna, Ph.D., a university professor and former consultant to the World Bank is also the author of several other books and the editor of "Natural Disasters and Other Emergencies, What You Should Know: A Family Planning &Survival Guide" and Weapons of Mass Destruction, What You Should Know: A Citizen's Guide To Biological, Chemical and Nuclear Agents &Weapons which are published by Frontline Publishers, www.frontlinepublishers.com. [http://www.frontlinepublishers.com.] They are also available at Amazon.com., through major bookstores nationwide or directly from the publisher at 410-922-4903. Retail Price, $39.99, ISBN #: 1-890605-14-X; 308 pages. A copy of your review will be appreciated. For Information, Interviews CONTACT, Francese Mitchelle 410-922-4903 http://www.frontlinepublishers.com [http://www.frontlinepublishers.com] Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************