***************************************************************** 12/21/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.303 ***************************************************************** 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 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Using Loophole in Nuclear Agreement 2 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Government to trim nuclear power overall 3 YWS: Seoul, Beijing to Expand Nuclear Cooperation, Resource Developm 4 YWS: (2nd LD) N. Korea Urged Not to Lose Opportunity to Resolve 5 Bangladesh New Nation: Free South Asia from nuclear danger 6 Xinhua: ROK to discuss Korean Peninsula nuclear issue with China 7 US: NRC Seeks to Make LES Public Hearings Secret 8 US: UPI: Nuke officials exclude public from hearing - 9 Nuclear Guards Could Have Been Accidently Killed In "Unheard Of" Ant 10 Russia to Test Mobile Version of Missile 11 [NukeNet] 'Clearance' System for Japan 12 Pakistan News: Pak not to allow any one to inspect its nuclear insta 13 People's Daily: IAEA sets up first cooperation center in China 14 Guardian Unlimited: Russia to Test Mobile Version of Missile NUCLEAR REACTORS 15 [du-list] Japanese Nuclear Plant Starts Test Operation to 16 US: NRC: NRC Issues Draft Safety Evaluation for North Anna Early Sit 17 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS] Why we need nuclear power 18 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee Meeti 19 Gateway To Russia: Floatation of Russia's nuclear energy concern on 20 US: NRC: Indiana Michigan Power Company; Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plan 21 ITAR-TASS: Damaged pipes of Novovoronezh reactor roof removed 22 US: Public Citizen: Nuclear Plant Licensing Hearing Should Not Be Se 23 US: NRC: Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration o 24 US: NRC: Extension of Public Comment Period: Louisiana Energy Servic NUCLEAR SAFETY 25 [du-list] 12/21 Iraq Watch Alert: 19 GIs Killed in Explosion 26 US: [FOODIRRADIATIONCA] Protect COOL for seafood 27 US: [du-list] Risk Calculator for Nevada Test Site fallout 28 Guardian Unlimited: Radon in homes kills 1,000 a year 29 Mainichi Interactive: Test using depleted uranium begins at nuclear 30 Bellona: Sea trials of Russian Delta-IV Tula postponed till spring 2 31 Bellona: Dutch Mammoet might salvage another Russian nuclear submari 32 US: Capital News 9: Group releases findings on drinking water NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 33 [NukeNet] Uranium trials begin at Rokkasho 34 NRC Seeks to Make LES Public Hearings Secret 35 US: Lowell Sun: Westford hires firm to investigate water contaminati 36 Daily Yomiuri: Rokkashomura sees 1st use of spent uranium 37 Greenpeace Japan: U.S. uranium loaded into controversial Japanese pl 38 Las Vegas RJ: NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORY: Lawsuit over Yucca project d 39 Bellona: In policy shift, UK says it will store nuclear waste from 40 Bellona: Sevmash to produce 35 casks for submarines’ spent nuclear f 41 Las Vegas SUN: Federal judge says Yucca complaint needs rewriting 42 US: RGJ: EPA takes over lead role in cleanup of mine 43 Japan Times: Nuke fuel shifted to Rokkasho plant 44 Japan Times: Rokkasho reprocessor begins tests with depleted uranium 45 IHT: Japanese begin tests on depleted uranium 46 ITAR-TASS: Ukraine to pay debt for Russian nuclear fuel in December 47 US: CBC Saskatchewan: Uranium mine gets federal approval 48 US: Cibola County Beacon: Old uranium mine investigated 49 asahi.com: NUCLEAR FUEL RECYCLING: Acid test NUCLEAR WEAPONS 50 VANUNU NOMINATED FOR NOBEL PEACE PRIZE BY LAUREATE MAIREAD US DEPT. OF ENERGY 51 UC loses nuclear weapons program (8/9) 52 DenverPost.com: Slight taint among Flats deer 53 lamonitor.com: LANL contract watched 54 DOE: Reimbursement for Costs of Remedial Action at Active Uranium an OTHER NUCLEAR 55 Politics of Oil - The Center for Public Integrity ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Using Loophole in Nuclear Agreement From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday December 21, 2004 7:01 PM By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iran is continuing with a key process used to enrich uranium, which can be used to make nuclear weapons, but it is not violating an agreement to stop such activities because of a loophole in the deal, diplomats said Tuesday. The diplomats told The Associated Press that Tehran is still turning tons of raw uranium into uranium metal. The metal is a precursor of uranium hexafluoride - a substance that can then be used to produce weapons-grade uranium. Concerns about Iran grew after revelations in mid-2002 of two secret nuclear facilities - a uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and a heavy water production plant near Arak. That led to a subsequent IAEA investigation of what turned out to be nearly two decades of covert nuclear activities, including suspicious ``dual use'' experiments that can be linked to weapons programs. Iran agreed last month to stop enriching uranium while it negotiates with France, Germany and Britain on the terms of a long-term deal to provide the country with technological help in creating a peaceful nuclear program and other forms of aid. The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency agreed to police the agreement and has placed seals on feed points at Iran's enrichment plant at Isfahan, meant to prevent new material from being introduced into the facilities. Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior diplomat familiar with Iran's nuclear dossier said those seals remained in place Tuesday, meaning Iran was only converting raw ``yellowcake'' uranium already in the pipeline into uranium metal. That, he said, was allowed under the terms of the agreement reached between the Europeans and Tehran, which permits Iran to convert all of the 37 tons of yellowcake that was already being converted when the deal was struck into a ``stable state.'' Much of those 37 tons was in the form of a liquid, and the immediate next step would be to turn it into the more ``stable state'' of uranium metal, said the diplomat. ``All of it was already in the pipeline,'' he said. A diplomat from the European Union, which was also party to the deal negotiated by France, Germany and Britain, said Tuesday that the Europeans were reserving judgment on Iran's move but it appeared not to be in violation of the suspension agreement. About three tons of this amount already was fully converted in November into the end product of uranium hexafluoride - the gas that is enriched into fuel- or weapons-grade uranium. At the time, that move raised doubts about how serious Iran was about reaching a deal on suspension. Nuclear experts say that when fully processed, the 37 tons of yellowcake can theoretically yield more than 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium, enough to make five crude nuclear weapons. The issue of enrichment is extremely sensitive as the international community tries to determine if Iran is using its nuclear program for peaceful purposes only, as Tehran insists, or trying to make weapons. The United States says Iran is working to produce nuclear weapons - something Tehran denies, saying it looks to atomic power purely as an energy source. Iran agreed to suspend its enrichment program last year, in an effort to build international trust. But that commitment eroded over the subsequent months - until the new agreement in November on suspension. --- On the Net: www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 2 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Government to trim nuclear power overall December 22, 2004 KST 14:49 (GMT+9) December 22, 2004 €Ń Yielding to pressures from environmental groups, the government said yesterday it would reduce the planned percentage of power generation from nuclear plants after 2010. The Korean Federation for Environmental Movements and other groups have argued that nuclear power generation presents a significant danger to the population and to nature with threats of radioactive leaks and difficulties in storing nuclear waste. The People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy formally recommended in October that the government should abandon plans to build more nuclear power plants. Although the government said yesterday it would maintain its plan to build eight more atomic power plants by 2015, efforts to establish other sources of power would be expanded rapidly, thus cutting the overall reliance on nuclear energy. Currently, 20 atomic power plants are operating. The Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy unveiled its revised long-term power supply plan yesterday. Under the original plan set up in 2002, the ratio of energy derived from nuclear power to the nation's total power generation capacity would rise to 29.2 percent in 2010 and to 34.6 percent in 2015. But under the revised plan, the ratio will decline from 28 percent last year to 23.8 percent in 2010. The ratio will rebound to 30.9 percent in 2015 with the construction of new atomic power plants but would slide again to 30.3 percent in 2017. "We will increase power plants using new renewable energy, such as wind and sunlight, and facilities for environment-friendly power generation, such as generation coupled with steam supply," a spokesman for the Commerce Ministry said. by Huh Kui-seek, Moon So-young symoon@joongang.co.kr> Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. ***************************************************************** 3 YWS: Seoul, Beijing to Expand Nuclear Cooperation, Resource Development YONHAPNEWS WORLD SERVICE::ENGLISH NEWS 2004/12/21 16:55 KST BEIJING, Dec. 21 (Yonhap) -- South Korea and China have agreed to further expand cooperation in nuclear energy and natural resources development, the South Korean Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy said Tuesday. Lee Hee-beom told reporters in the Chinese capital after his meeting with Zhang Yunchuan, minister of the Commission of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense, that the two sides agreed on the creation of a "nuclear technology forum" that will help expand cooperation in this field. ***************************************************************** 4 YWS: (2nd LD) N. Korea Urged Not to Lose Opportunity to Resolve Nuclear Row YONHAPNEWS WORLD SERVICE::ENGLISH NEWS "http://www.yonhapnews.co.kr/ 2004/12/21 18:16 KST BEIJING, Dec. 21 (Yonhap) -- A South Korean presidential envoy met top Chinese officials Tuesday and sought Beijing's help to revive stalled six-way talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program, South Korean officials said. South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young's four-day trip to China comes amid efforts by regional players to lure North Korea back to the negotiating table to discuss ways of resolving tension over its nuclear program. ***************************************************************** 5 Bangladesh New Nation: Free South Asia from nuclear danger Last Updated: Dec 21st, 2004 - 11:46:19 Editorial Page By Asia.-SAN-Feature Service Dec 21, 2004, 11:45 The Second National Convention of the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP), India was recently held in Jaipur, which has a glorious tradition of mobilising for peace and had hosted numerous events including the 1956 Afro-Asian Conference. It is held four years after the founding convention of the CNDP in Delhi and about six and a half years after India and Pakistan declaring themselves as nuclear weapons states following nuclear explosions in Pokhran, in India, andChagai, in Pakistan. It may be recalled that the era of nuclear threat began with the mindless atomic bombings of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the USA on 6th and 9th August 1945. We, the assembled delegates at the Convention representing the peace movements in India and coming from various corners of the country, most emphatically reaffirm our firm conviction in reiteration of our Charter 2000: 'Nuclear weapons are means of mass destruction regardless of who wields them. They are weapons of genocide. They can impose horrendous suffering on victims across generations. They destroy the ecosystem. The damage they do is lasting and incurable. The sheer scale and character of the devastation they can cause makes them a profound and distinctive evil. For this and other reasons, the possession, use, or threat of use of nuclear weapons is absolutely immoral.'We also with equal emphasis reaffirm 'that the use, threat of use, or possession of, and even preparation for making, nuclear weapons is immoral, illegal, and politically unacceptable under 'any circumstances'.' Not only that, 'nuclear deterrence' is absolutely 'abhorrent to human sentiment since it implies that a state if required to defend its own existence will act with pitiless disregard for the consequences to its own and its adversaryís people.' We note with great concern the profoundly destabilising effects of the nuclear blasts in May 98. These have been most graphically and irrefutably demonstrated through an extremely dangerous (undeclared) border war in less than a year followed by a ten month long eyeball to eyeball massive confrontation all along the international border and the LoC. These confrontations were laden with the very real threats of nuclear exchange. The rulers of these two resource-starved countries remain unwaveringly stuck with their pernicious nuclear weapons programmes, which are a tragic diversion from addressing vital social needs. Though there have been no further blasts since 1998, in the teeth of massive waves of international censure - the race for developing nuclear warhead carrying missiles goes on unabated. And the possession of nuclear weapons is given a formal status through issuance of highly deplorable nuclear doctrines - based on the spurious and extremely dangerous theory of 'nuclear deterrence'. We also note that both West Asia and Northeast Asia have emerged as the two other nuclear hotspots. The danger of unchecked spread of nuclear weapons to sundry state, and also perhaps non-state, actors through black market transfers of nuclear technology and fissile materials has exponentially escalated over the recent years. This has only brought dangerously closer the prospects of a nuclear holocaust. Most disturbing of all, the US, the original sinner, has aggressively taken to vertical proliferation, contemptuously throwing aside all international norms. They have, on the one hand embarked upon developing mini-nukes for actual use in the battlefield and, on the other, are going full steam ahead with Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) programmes - unilaterally abrogating international treaty obligations. The other nuclear weapons states have also done nothing to denuclearise. © Copyright 2003 by The New Nation ***************************************************************** 6 Xinhua: ROK to discuss Korean Peninsula nuclear issue with China www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-12-21 20:13:08 BEIJING, Dec. 21 (Xinhuanet) -- Chung Dong-young, permanent chairman of the National Security Council of the Republic of Korea(ROK), will exchange views on the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue and bilateral relations with the Chinese side during his visit to China , said Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao here Tuesday. Liu made the remarks at a regular press conference. Chung started his three-day visit to China Tuesday at the invitation of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. During his visit, the spokesman said, Chung will meet with Chinese leaders and leading members of the Foreign Ministry and the International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. The two sides will "certainly" talk about the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue. The exchange of views between the two sides will bebeneficial to the promotion of bilateral cooperation, Liu said. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 NRC Seeks to Make LES Public Hearings Secret Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:21:02 -0800 Nuclear Information and Resource Service Public Citizen For Immediate Release: Contact: Michael Mariotte, NIRS(202) 328-0002 Dec. 20, 2004 Michele Boyd, PC (202) 454-5134 NRC Move to Make Nuke Plant Licensing Hearing Secret is Illegal, Irresponsible Staff of Nuclear Industry Regulator Seeks to Shut Out Public in Wake of Agencys Security Lockdown WASHINGTON, D.C. The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) today asked an adjudicatory board to conduct a licensing hearing for a proposed nuclear fuel refinery under a protective orderwhich, if approved, would effectively make the entire proceeding secret and closed to the public, said Public Citizen and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS). This proposal is an affront to the principles of citizen participation guaranteed by law,said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. NIRS/PC have contested the application of Louisiana Energy Services (LES), a multinational consortium led by the European firm Urenco, which is seeking a permit to construct and operate a uranium enrichment plant in southeastern New Mexico. The groups charge that the companys plans fail to meet regulatory standards in the areas of radioactive waste disposal and need for the plant, among other things. The NRC says its motion is a remedy to a situation that has made it impossible for parties in this case to meaningfully participate: On October 25, the NRC unilaterally blocked public access to virtually all of the electronic documents posted on its Web site pending a security review to ensure that documents which might provide assistance to terrorists will be inaccessible. Most of these documents remain unavailable to the public. Without access to essential documents, such as communications between the applicant and the NRC, parties to the proceedingincluding the State of New Mexicoare left operating in the dark, unable to file timely and complete motions, briefs, and testimony in order to present their case before the ASLB. Pre-filed testimony is due Dec. 30, and the hearing is scheduled to begin Feb. 7, 2005. The NRC Staffs rationale for making this entire licensing case secret is that in order to meet deadlines in the context of the NRC security review, parties to the proceeding must enter into a non-disclosure agreement that would allow them access to essential documents while agreeing to keep these potentially sensitivematerialsand thus the entire proceeding in which they are consideredclosed to the public. A real solution to the problem would be to suspend the schedule of the hearing until access to NRC files is restored, as NIRS and Public Citizen have asked the Board,said Michael Mariotte, executive director of NIRS. Shutting the public out of the licensing process would violate NRC regulations, which require public hearings. It also would violate the public trust, which is served by open and transparent nuclear licensing proceedings. Such hearings are the major way the public can learn about the issuessuch as radioactive waste disposalthat arise from the proposed construction of nuclear facilities. Counsel for NIRS/PC issued a formal plea to the ASLB on Dec. 15 to suspend the schedule of the hearing until access to the hearing file is restored; formal responses to this motion are due today, but the NRC staff has filed a concurrent motion to make the case confidential. It is inexcusable that the NRC is attempting to circumvent public scrutiny in this case, and it sets a poor precedent for future licensing actions,added Michele Boyd, legislative director for Public Citizen. This unjust and inappropriate request ought to be rejected outright by the ASLB. To read the motions of the NRC staff, as well as earlier motions by NIRS/PC, please go to www.citizen.org/cmep or www.nirs.org. ### Dont forget to sign the Petition for a Sustainable Energy Future, at NIRSwebsite, www.nirs.org. Congress will be considering a new energy bill next year, and we expect it to be loaded with favorsand your tax dollarsfor the nuclear power industry. Lets let Congress know the basics of what an energy policy should look like: energy efficiency, renewables, increased mileage standardsand no nuclear power! After youve signed, please use the Send to a friendfeature, and encourage your friends and colleagues to sign too. Thanks for your help, and have a wonderful holiday season! Michael Mariotte Executive Director Nuclear Information and Resource Service This is the NIRS E-Mail Alert list. You are on this list because you signed up on our website, at a NIRS table at a concert, on a petition, or directly to NIRS. Your name and address are never sold, rented, or traded with anyone for any reason. For address changes or to unsubscribe, just send an e-mail to nirsnet@nirs.org. If you have friends or colleagues who would like to be on this list, have them send a note to nirsnet@nirs.org ***************************************************************** 8 UPI: Nuke officials exclude public from hearing - (United Press International) December 21, 2004 Santa Fe, NM, Dec. 21 (UPI) -- Federal regulators want to exclude the public from a license hearing on a proposed uranium-enrichment plant in New Mexico for security reasons. The staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing board also wants the board to keep the public from reading filings from Louisiana Energy Services, the company planning to build the plant, the Santa Fe New Mexican reported Tuesday. In addition, the staff wants all records related to the application for the plant near Hobbs be sealed and lawyers involved in the case to agree not to distribute any papers already released. New Mexico's environmental agency and the state attorney general have opposed the proposed blanket-confidentiality order. They don't oppose secrecy for information that would aid terrorists, but oppose a ban that excludes the public from the licensing process. Two watchdog groups -- the Nuclear Information and Resource Service and Public Citizen -- also oppose the move they contend would essentially keep the public out of the hearing. [UPI Perspectives] ***************************************************************** 9 Nuclear Guards Could Have Been Accidently Killed In "Unheard Of" Anti-Terror Exercise Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:52:34 -0500 As always, confusion and fear reign when situations like this arise. It's yet another monument to human hubris that technology of this extraordinary power and lethality are extant. Nuke Terror Site: http://www.tmia.com/sabter.html See 3 excellant articles in the January/February 2002 "Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists": http://www.thebulletin.org http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/21/national/21nuke.html?oref=login Security Drill at Weapons Plant Raises Safety Questions By MATTHEW L. WALD Published: December 21, 2004 AK RIDGE, Tenn., Dec. 16 - In the predawn hours of Sept. 2, at the plant that stores the nation's stockpile of highly enriched uranium, guards wearing body armor and carrying loaded submachine guns were dispatched to intercept a group of men who had apparently set off an intrusion alarm. But the target group turned out to be a second team of guards, who were conducting a mock attack with laser-tag equipment. Advertisement The armed guards, a "shadow force" maintained in reserve during such drills, rushed through the dark, ready, people involved said, to shoot at a group whom they believed were intruders. Such a deployment is virtually unheard of, security experts said, and had it led to a shooting, the incident could have destroyed the ability to hold such drills, a crucial tool in determining if the plant is adequately defended. The plant, called Y-12, is owned by the Department of Energy but is defended by a contractor, Wackenhut. "For two minutes, it was mass confusion," said one of the guards on duty that night. "People asked several times, 'Is this a drill?' Nobody would clarify." He and another guard involved in the incident agreed to speak only on condition of anonymity, saying they had been threatened with firing if they spoke with outsiders about the incident. The incident was not the only problem drill at the plant, which is part of the Oak Ridge complex, near Knoxville. In January, the inspector general of the Energy Department reported that during a similar laser-tag drill at the weapons plant in 2003, the team playing defense performed unexpectedly well. The reason, the inspector general said, was that the defenders appeared to have gotten advance knowledge of the attack plans, including which building would be attacked and whether a diversionary tactic would be used. The results were "tainted and unreliable," the inspector general found. The Energy Department official in charge of the site, William J. Brumley, and a Wackenhut official, Martin Anderson, said neither problem was serious. Both said that no one was ever in danger in the Sept. 2 incident, although Mr. Anderson said that the confusion raised anxiety levels and that communications that night could have been "crisper." Security here is not only a matter of keeping intruders out, Mr. Brumley said. Technicians still maintain nuclear warheads, and security is also a matter of making sure that nothing is smuggled out, he said. The intruder threat is not limited to theft. A suicidal terrorist who gained access to the uranium here might be able to assemble it in a few minutes into a nuclear explosive, and detonate it on the spot, experts say. Though Y-12 is a weapons plant, the drill incident may have implications for the civilian nuclear industry. Earlier this year the trade association that represents the power reactor operators hired Wackenhut to help conduct similar "force-on-force" drills at the 63 nuclear power plant sites. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved the contract in the hope that Wackenhut would bring more expertise to the drills, which in the past have varied widely by site. Wackenhut provides security at about half the plants. During security drills at Y-12, the plant is vulnerable because half the people on duty are carrying laser guns, not real weapons, and are distracted by the exercise. A second guard involved in the Sept. 2 exercise said that from the chatter on the radio, the guards had concluded that "it was time to go fight." A third person involved that night, apparently either a guard or a supervisor, submitted an anonymous letter to the union safety officer calling the error that sent armed guards out to chase unarmed colleagues "an almost fatal tragedy," because the guards could have seen the exercise players firing their laser-equipped guns, which are made from real guns, and would have shot them. As they had trained, the guards came at the site of the alarm from two directions, people on duty that night said. Officials at Wackenhut and at the Energy Department acknowledge that while there was an error, there was little danger of a killing because the players were alerted to the problem quickly, when the dispatcher called a "code October," which meant that the players should halt the exercise immediately, and the members of the "attack" team decided to hide themselves inside a building to avoid their oncoming comrades. For reasons that are disputed by participants, it took much longer to alert the shadow force. Outside security experts had a harsher assessment. Peter Stockton, who was a special assistant to the secretary of energy in the Clinton administration and is now with the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group in Washington, said: "When you introduce live ammo in one of these things, it can be a disaster. If somebody had come around the side of the building, chances are they would have been killed." Mr. Stockton said he had observed about 75 such drills over the years and had never seen a shadow force sent to track people during a drill, although they are often dispatched because a mechanical alarm system has activated somewhere. The two guards who agreed to speak about the Sept. 2 event said they heard the dispatcher say "armed suspects" over the radio link, but according to Wackenhut and Energy Department managers, the dispatcher said, "I have people in the area." The anonymous letter referred to four armed adversaries. An official of the guard's union said investigators from the inspector general's office recently began questioning guards about their training, to determine whether Wackenhut had provided all the training that it told the government it had. Some guards say that their time for target shooting and for physical conditioning had been cut back; one said that the records the investigators showed him indicated he had had firearms drill time that he never had. The inspector general's office said it would not comment, and a Wackenhut official said he was unaware of the investigation, although he said the government sometimes audited training records. Drills and firearms training were suspended for a while in the fall, because two weeks after the September drill, guards who were supposed to be using blank rounds to practice discharging and reloading their weapons turned out to have at least one live bullet in their supply. Someone shot a live round through a wall and then through a refrigerator in the next room. The Y-12 plant, which employs about 400 guards, who are referred to as guards but dress like commandos, is ringed with watchtowers that look like the control tower for a small airport, except that the glass is obviously heavier-duty, and fencing protects the tower from someone throwing a grenade up to the window level. The 800-acre heart of Y-12 is surrounded by a two-and-a-half mile barrier of steel walls, fences, barbed wire, motion sensors and cameras, which enclose a jumble of rusting, decrepit buildings. Some of the buildings date from World War II, and workers there enriched uranium for the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. The name Y-12, like those for many Manhattan Project factories, and the Manhattan Project itself, was selected to give no clue about its function. Wackenhut's contract was due to expire on Dec. 31 but has been extended for three months while Energy Department officials decide whether it should be renewed for a few years, or re-bid, or whether the guard force should be integrated into the main contractor work force. Mr. Brumley, the Y-12 site manager, said that merging the guards with the main work force might help with the job of controlling materials as they are moved around the plant. Employees pass through metal detectors on the way out as well as on the way in, and quantities of uranium as small as drill shavings must be accounted for, he said. ***************************************************************** 10 Russia to Test Mobile Version of Missile Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:38:50 -0500 Mothersalert Home: http://www.mothersalert.org http://www.mothersalert.org/moreinfo.html http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Russia-Missile-Test.html Russia to Test Mobile Version of Missile By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: December 21, 2004 ARTICLE TOOLS E-Mail This Article Printer-Friendly Format Most E-Mailed Articles 1. U.S. Slips in Attracting the World's Best Students 2. Lake Wobegon? It's Where Men Are Persistent 3. Essay: The Strongest Force? Any Parent Can Tell You 4. Op-Ed Columnist: Make No Mistake 5. The Great Divide | A Missing Generation: Rural Exodus for Work Fractures Chinese Family Go to Complete List Filed at 1:40 p.m. ET MOSCOW (AP) -- Russia will test-fire a mobile version of its Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile Friday, a news agency reported Tuesday. The Topol-M system will be fired from the Plesetsk base in the far northern region of Arkhangelsk, the Interfax agency said, citing an unidentified Defense Ministry official. The test will be the last for the mobile Topol-M system, and the system will then be deployed, the official said. Topol-Ms will serve the chief weapon for Russia's strategic missile forces for a long time, he said. Topol-Ms can carry up to 2,600 pounds of warheads, have a range of about 6,000 miles and reportedly can maneuver in ways that are difficult to detect. The missile has been deployed in silos since 1998. Russian strategic forces have conducted regular test-launches of Soviet-built ballistic missiles to check their readiness. But funding shortages have left the military struggling to extend the lifetime of Soviet-built missiles. In October, President Vladimir Putin announced Russia was developing a new nuclear missile system that he said would be unlike any weapon held by other nuclear-armed country. ***************************************************************** 11 [NukeNet] 'Clearance' System for Japan Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:20:32 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) During the next Diet session, beginning in January 2005, a bill to introduce a 'clearance' system will be submitted as an amendment to The Regulation of Nuclear Reactors and Related Matters Act. Under this system, radioactive waste with less than a certain concentration of radioactivity would be treated as non-radioactive waste. . . . CNIC has problems not just with the introduction of a 'clearance' system, but with the whole package, including the proposed amendments to the existing legislation and also the proposed new law. In cooperation with other groups, we will continue to express our opposition. As part of this campaign, we are organizing a national conference to oppose these two laws. The conference will be held in Tokyo on 6 February 2005. (At this stage there are no plans for English interpreting.) To read the full article click the link below: http://cnic.jp/english/news/newsflash/clearance21Dec04.html Philip White International Liaison Officer Citizens' Nuclear Information Center 3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Phone: 81-3-5330-9520 Fax: 81-3-5330-9530 http://cnic.jp/english/ cnic@nifty.com _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 12 Pakistan News: Pak not to allow any one to inspect its nuclear installations - Rashid PakTribune.Com Ziqad 10, 1425 Hijri December 22, 2004 Tuesday December 21, 2004 (1551 PST) Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmad has said that no one would be allowed to inspect to country's nuclear installations. ISLAMABAD, December 22 (Online): Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmad has said that no one would be allowed to inspect to country's nuclear installations. He said this while responding to criticism from MMA president Qazi Hussain Ahmad and PML-N Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan against the government in a private T.V channel program here Tuesday. He held that President General Pervez Musharraf had steered Pakistan out of difficult situation flowing from Dr Abdul Qadir Khan's issue very prudently. This matter is not over yet. Still some thing is taken out of the matter, he added. However we satisfy those who raise objections, he remarked. Addressing Qazi Hussain Ahmad he said "you want Pakistan forces clash with US. It is a sheer suicide which we will not allow", he added. He maintained that General Musharraf defends Pakistani fundamentalists. General Musharraf is serving as shield for Qazi Hussain Ahmad as he is asked what is the reason that every high profile leader of al-Qaeda is arrested from the homes of those belonging to Jamaat-e-Islami, he pointed out. Despite of these facts, Qazi Hussain Ahmad always targets general Musharraf, he added. He was of the view had opposition been sincere, Maulana Fazlur Rehman would have been Prime Minister today. But the key opposition parties did not cast votes in support of Maulana Fazlur Rehman, he underlined. Citing to Government-MMA accord, he pointed out that an agreement was reached between government and MMA that latter would support security council bill. However MMA did not fulfill its pledge, he claimed. Rebutting the claim of Sheikh Rashid Ahmad, MMA president Qazi Hussain Ahmad said that religious alliance had not held out any assurance to the government of its backing on Security Council bill. The root cause of evil lies in the U-turn taken by the government on Kashmir and Afghanistan policies, he added. Sheikh Rashid Ahmad said that there would be no compromise on Kashmir issue. Peace can not be established in the region without addressing the festering Kashmir problem, he cautioned. Terming the public meetings of MMA as diminutive meetings, he said that these small-sized meeting can not do any harm to government. He described Shahbaz Sharif a moderate politician possessing flexibility in nature and on the other hand Nawaz Sharif a rigid one who is still sticking to his old stance. Challenging PML-N leader Chaudhry Nisar Ahmad in the program, the information minister said that he should note it and keep on record that Shahbaz Sharif is a man of his own politics and Nawaz Sharif his own. The future time will vindicate veracity of my notion, he added. End. Pakistan News Service © PakTribune.com Pvt Ltd 2003-2004 ***************************************************************** 13 People's Daily: IAEA sets up first cooperation center in China UPDATED: 10:27, December 21, 2004 The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has officially approved the establishment of IAEA-Zhejiang University Cooperation Center of Plant Germ Plasm Mutation Innovation and Development at Zhejiang University. This is the only cooperation center the IAEA has set up in China and the first of ten such centers the IAEA is about to set up worldwide. As learned the center would be engaged in the R of topics such as the identification and isolation of mutated crops, the effect of efficiency of directed mutagenesis and radiation on the genes of rice, the role of new mutagenesis technologies in the production of hybrid rice and the function of mutation technology in improving crops quality etc. In a bid to promote the peaceful application of atomic sciences the IAEA officially started the cooperation center program drawing experience from the World Health Organization and UN Food and Agriculture Organization. With the approval of director-general the IAEA would set up ten cooperation centers engaged in different research areas. Zhejiang University is eminent among many applicants with its traditional advantages in nuclear agricultural studies and became the first R partner of the IAEA in the world. By People's Daily Online Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 14 Guardian Unlimited: Russia to Test Mobile Version of Missile From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday December 21, 2004 6:31 PM MOSCOW (AP) - Russia will test-fire a mobile version of its Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile Friday, a news agency reported Tuesday. The Topol-M system will be fired from the Plesetsk base in the far northern region of Arkhangelsk, the Interfax agency said, citing an unidentified Defense Ministry official. The test will be the last for the mobile Topol-M system, and the system will then be deployed, the official said. Topol-Ms will serve the chief weapon for Russia's strategic missile forces for a long time, he said. Topol-Ms can carry up to 2,600 pounds of warheads, have a range of about 6,000 miles and reportedly can maneuver in ways that are difficult to detect. The missile has been deployed in silos since 1998. Russian strategic forces have conducted regular test-launches of Soviet-built ballistic missiles to check their readiness. But funding shortages have left the military struggling to extend the lifetime of Soviet-built missiles. In October, President Vladimir Putin announced Russia was developing a new nuclear missile system that he said would be unlike any weapon held by other nuclear-armed country. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 15 [du-list] Japanese Nuclear Plant Starts Test Operation to Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:21:12 -0800 Japanese Nuclear Plant Starts Test Operation to Reprocess Depleted Uranium December 21, 2004 — By Mari Yamaguchi, Associated Press http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=644 TOKYO — A nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in northern Japan started tests with depleted uranium Tuesday -- a major step in experiments aimed at reprocessing fuel to boost energy self-sufficiency here, despite a series of accidents and safety concerns. The test at Rokkasho, about 580 kilometers (360 miles) northeast of Tokyo, marked the plant's first use of radioactive materials, said Masanori Hiroo, a spokesman for plant operator Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. The 2.1 trillion yen (US$20 billion; euro14.95 billion) plant is crucial to Japan's hopes of using a reprocessed reactor fuel called mixed oxide, or MOX. Its opening -- now planned for 2006 -- is years behind schedule due to a radioactive water leak there in 2002 and protests from area residents and officials. Hiroo said the test, expected to last a year before real reprocessed fuel is introduced, involves handling possible problems. The reprocessed fuel could be used in reactors that burn a uranium-plutonium mixture -- or in more advanced fast-breeder reactors that use plutonium, and which also produce more plutonium that can be used as fuel. The government's energy policy calls for converting as many as 18 electricity-generating reactors to use MOX as a transition to fast-breeder reactors. All of Japan's MOX would be made from spent fuel rods at the Rokkasho plant, then shipped out to fuel other plants in the country. "Nuclear reprocessing is an extremely important operation that we must achieve from energy security and environmental point of view," said Japan Nuclear Fuel President Isami Kojima. "We'll place safety control as top priority as we continue efforts to improve service quality." Nuclear power is vital to resource-poor Japan's plans to become more energy independent. Its 52 active nuclear plants supply more than a third of its energy. The government wants to build 11 more reactors, boosting nuclear power to 40.7 percent of Japan's energy supply by 2010. On Tuesday, workers hauled into the plant about 53 tons of depleted uranium -- less radioactive than ordinary uranium. Japan's only other plutonium-using reactor has been closed since a 1995 accident. The country's nuclear power industry has been plagued by safety problems and shutdowns in recent years. A 1999 reprocessing plant accident outside Tokyo killed two workers and exposed hundreds to radioactivity. In the nation's deadliest nuclear power plant accident, five people were killed at Mihama in central Japan after a corroded pipe ruptured in August, spraying workers with boiling water and steam. The accidents have fanned public worries about nuclear energy and pressed the government to review its policy. On Tuesday, about 100 people gathered outside the Rokkasho plant to demand the operation be scrapped. "The reprocessing could trigger radioactive pollution," Greenpeace Japan said in a statement. "We see no justifiable reason to push forward the reprocessing project." -- Posted for educational and research purposes only, ~ in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 ~ NucNews Links and Expanded Archives - http://nucnews.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Need a home for your web domain? We recommend our provider, Hosting Direct https://support.hostingdirect.net/cgi-bin/affiliates/clickthru.cgi?id=nucnews ------------------------ 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/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 16 NRC: NRC Issues Draft Safety Evaluation for North Anna Early Site Permit Application News Release - 2004-16 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-164 December 20, 2004 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued a draft safety evaluation report (SER) for an Early Site Permit (ESP) for the North Anna site in Louisa County, Va., about 40 miles northwest of Richmond. The ESP process allows an applicant to address site-related issues, such as environmental impacts, for possible future construction and operation of a nuclear power plant at the site. The North Anna application was filed Sept. 25, 2003, by Dominion Nuclear North Anna, LLC. If approved, the permit would give Dominion up to 20 years to decide whether to build one or more nuclear plants on the site and to file an application with the NRC for approval to begin construction. NRC reviewers expect to finalize the safety evaluation by June 2005. Along with the SER, the staff must complete an Environmental Impact Statement, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards must issue a report on the ESP application, and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel must conclude its hearing on the matter before the Commission can reach a final decision on issuing the ESP. The NRC expects to finish this process in mid-2006. The 400-page draft SER contains the agency's review of the North Anna ESP application, supplemented with information submitted by Sept. 30, 2004. The NRC staff has reviewed information Dominion provided regarding the ESP site in areas including: site seismology, geology, meteorology and hydrology; risks from potential accidents resulting from operation of a nuclear plant at the site; the sites ability to support adequate physical security for a nuclear plant and proposed major features of the emergency plan Dominion would implement if a reactor is eventually built at the site. Dominion will have 21 days to review the draft SER for proprietary information. The report will then be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md. It will also be available on the NRCs Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/esp/north-anna.html. In addition, the Louisa County Library, 881 Davis Highway in Mineral, has agreed to make the draft SER available for public inspection. Last revised Monday, December 20, 2004 ***************************************************************** 17 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS] Why we need nuclear power December 22, 2004 KST 14:49 (GMT+9) 2004.12.21 The government plans to scale back the nation's reliance on nuclear plants for its electricity. Originally, plans called for the share of the nation's electricity generated by nuclear plants ĄȘ a figure that currently stands at 28 percent ĄȘ to reach 34.6 percent by 2015. Instead, the target for that year is now 30.9 percent. For this reason, the government says it will not build more nuclear plants, except for the eight that have long been in the plan. Due to opposition by environmental groups, the construction of the New Gori 1 and New Gori 2 plants, which had been scheduled to start in 2002, has yet to begin. But can we afford to reduce the share of power produced by nuclear plants? Korea imports 97 percent of its energy. In the first 11 months of this year, the nation spent $44.4 billion on imported crude oil, coal and natural gas. Due to higher international crude oil prices, importing energy has become a heavier burden. In addition, crude oil is being exhausted globally, and if the Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change takes effect, it will become more difficult to use fossil fuel. The government says it will expand the percentage of electricity generated with renewable sources, such as water power, to 13.9 percent. But this is not realistic. Currently, only 2.1 percent of our electricity comes from such sources. What's more, Korea's geography is unsuitable for generating power with water or wind. Currently, 434 atomic power plants in 31 countries supply 16 percent of the world's power. Thirty-six plants are now under construction, and another 28 plants are in the planning stages. France relies on nuclear plants for 75 percent of its electricity. Even the United States, rich in resources, has announced it will extend the period of operation of its nuclear power plants. Meanwhile, Korea, with its insufficient natural resources, irresponsibly plans to cut back on nuclear power, yielding to its opponents with no alternative proposals. Ask those who object to nuclear power whether they can offer any alternatives. For Korea, nuclear power is not a choice but a necessity. The environment is important, but cheap and safe energy is necessary for the nation's competitiveness. The government should make efforts to persuade civic groups and the public to understand the safety, productivity and necessity of atomic power. Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use | ***************************************************************** 18 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee Meeting on FR Doc 04-27844 [Federal Register: December 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 244)] [Notices] [Page 76485] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21de04-76] Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a meeting on January 26, 2005, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, January 26, 2005--8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business. The Subcommittee will review the application for an 8.5% power uprate for the Waterford Nuclear Power Station. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and Entergy Nuclear South regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Ralph Caruso (Telephone: 301-415-8065) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: December 15, 2004. John H. Flack, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. 04-27844 Filed 12-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 19 Gateway To Russia: Floatation of Russia's nuclear energy concern on agenda in 2005 The Russian energy minister has proposed floating the state-run atomic energy concern Rosenergoatom in order to increase investment needed to meet the Energy Strategy target. This requires that nuclear power generate 22-23 per cent of the country's electricity by 2020. Privatization of a strategic facility such as Rosenergoatom has to be approved by the president and would entail changes in legislation. The following is the text of report by Irina Rybalchenko and Alena Kornysheva "President discussed peaceful atom," published in Russian newspaper Kommersant on 18 December; subheadings inserted editorially: President Vladimir Putin held a working meeting yesterday with Industry and Energy Minister Viktor Khristenko, at which the prospects for developing nuclear energy were discussed. The minister suggested floating Rosenergoatom [state-run atomic energy concern] in order to increase investment in the sector. This was far from being the first time Vladimir Putin and Viktor Khristenko have discussed the question of floating the Rosenergoatom concern, which was registered in the form of a federal state unitary enterprise. It was also touched upon on Thursday [16 December] at the State Council Presidium session on nuclear energy which was held at the Kalinin AES [Nuclear Electric Power Station] in the city of Udomlya on the day its third reactor unit was commissioned (Kommersant wrote about this in detail on 17 December). Yesterday Viktor Khristenko reported to Vladimir Putin that nuclear power stations generate approximately 16 per cent of the country's electricity, while by 2020, according to the Energy Strategy, their share is to grow to 22-23 per cent. It is obvious that the Rosenergoatom concern does not have sufficient of its own funds to develop nuclear generation: Aleksandr Rumyantsev, head of the Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom), has pointed repeatedly to the funding shortfall. "We can concentrate resources abroad and construct five nuclear stations at the same time, as we are doing now, but at home we have insufficient money: The investment component in nuclear energy is enshrined in the nuclear power station tariff, and banks are reluctant to give loans to a federal state unitary enterprise," he explained to Kommersant yesterday. The flotation of Rosenergoatom (the state will own all 100 per cent of the open joint-stock company) will resolve this problem, the concern believes. "Organizationally we are ready for a transformation. Of course, a number of questions remain with regard to the registration of property, but they can be resolved quickly," Rosenergoatom Executive Director Sergey Ivanov told Kommersant yesterday. But at the same time he pointed out that the concern's official appeal to the president and government to transform the federal state unitary enterprise into an open joint-stock company has not been prepared, since "the appropriate political will does not yet exist". "This question has not yet been resolved," he summed up. Let us recall that Rosenergoatom is on the list of strategic enterprises, and the decision to privatize it has to be made by the president. In addition, the government has to make corresponding amendments to a whole package of laws, including the law "On atomic energy", which prohibits the privatization of nuclear facilities. "We hope that the amendments will be formulated finally in the new year," Mr Rumyantsev pointed out yesterday. Let us note that Rosatom will be faced with another serious task in the new year, to which Anatoliy Chubays, head of the Unified Energy System of Russia Russian Joint-Stock Company, drew attention at Thursday's session of the State Council Presidium. He suggested that Russian nuclear scientists study the question of switching nuclear energy to a more flexible system of energy supplies. "Nuclear energy means a constant base load, regardless of the time of day or day of the week. However, market conditions demand a flexible system for reacting to demand," Mr Chubays pointed out. He urged his colleagues to imitate the experience of other countries - France, for example, where the share of nuclear energy stands at more than 80 per cent and where successful use is made of a flexible system. "So as not to create threats in nuclear power and to fit in with the new, market conditions, this question must be raised in earnest right now," Mr Chubays emphasized. Source: Kommersant, Moscow BBC Monitoring © Copyright Gateway to Russia 2003 ***************************************************************** 20 NRC: Indiana Michigan Power Company; Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, FR Doc 04-27845 [Federal Register: December 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 244)] [Notices] [Page 76483-76485] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21de04-74] Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of amendments for Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74, issued to Indiana Michigan Power Company (the licensee) for operation of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP), Units 1 and 2, located in Berrien County, Michigan. Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Sections 51.21 and 51.32, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would be a full conversion from the current technical specifications (CTS) to a set of improved technical specifications (ITS) based on NUREG-1431, ``Standard Technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants,'' Revision 2, dated June 2001. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated April 6, 2004, and the information provided to the NRC staff through the joint NRC-Indiana Michigan Power Company CNP ITS Conversion Web page. To expedite its review of the application, the NRC staff issued its requests for additional information (RAIs) through the CNP ITS Conversion Web page and the licensee addressed the RAIs by providing responses on the Web page. Entry into the database is protected so that only the licensee and NRC reviewers can enter information into the database to add RAIs (NRC) or providing responses to the RAIs (licensee); however, the public can enter the database to read the questions asked and the responses provided. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.4 regarding written communications for license amendment requests, and in order to have the database on the CNP, Units 1 and 2, dockets before the amendments would be issued, the licensee will submit a copy of the [[Page 76484]] database to the NRC after there are no further RAIs. The public can access the database through the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov by the following process: (1) Click on the tab labeled ``Nuclear Reactors'' on the NRC home page along the upper part of the web page, (2) then click on the link to ``Operating Reactors'' which is under ``Regulated Activities'' on the left hand side of the web page, (3) then click on the link to ``Standard Technical Specifications'' which is on right hand side of the page, and (4) finally click on the link to ``Comments on the application and responses by D. C. Cook,'' near the bottom of the web page, to open the database. The RAIs and responses to RAIs are organized by ITS Sections 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1 through 3.9, 4.0, and 5.0, which are listed first, and the beyond scope issues (BSIs) 1 through 35, which are listed later. For every listed ITS section or BSI, there is an RAI which can be read by clicking on the ITS section or BSI number. The licensee's responses are shown by a solid triangle adjacent to the ITS section or BSI number. To read the response, click on the triangle. To page down through the ITS sections to the BSIs, click on ``next'' along the top of the page or on ``previous'' to return to the previous page. The Need for the Proposed Action The Commission's ``Proposed Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors'' (52 FR 3788), dated February 6, 1987, contained an Interim Policy Statement that set forth objective criteria for determining which regulatory requirements and operating restrictions should be included in the technical specifications (TS). When it issued the Interim Policy Statement, the Commission also requested comments on it. Subsequently, to implement the Interim Policy Statement, each reactor vendor owners group and the NRC staff began developing standard TS (STS) for reactors supplied by each vendor. The Commission then published its ``Final Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors'' (58 FR 39132), dated July 22, 1993, in which it addressed comments received on the Interim Policy Statement, and incorporated experience in developing the STS. The Final Policy Statement formed the basis for a revision to 10 CFR 50.36 (60 FR 36953), dated July 19, 1995, that codified the criteria for determining the content of TS. The NRC Committee to Review Generic Requirements reviewed the STS, made note of their safety merits, and indicated its support of conversion by operating plants to the STS. For CNP, Units 1 and 2, NUREG-1431 documents the STS and forms the basis for the CNP, Units 1 and 2, conversion to the ITS. The proposed changes to the CTS are based on NUREG-1431 and the guidance provided in the Final Policy Statement. The objective of this action is to rewrite, reformat, and streamline the CTS (i.e., to convert the CTS to the ITS). Emphasis was placed on human factors principles to improve clarity and understanding. The ITS Bases section has been significantly expanded to clarify and better explain the purpose and foundation of each specification. In addition to NUREG- 1431, portions of the CTS were also used as the basis for the development of the CNP, Units 1 and 2, ITS. The NRC staff discussed plant-specific issues (i.e., unique design features, requirements, and operating practices) with the licensee. Relocated specifications include those changes to the CTS that relocate certain requirements which do not meet the 10 CFR 50.36 selection criteria. These requirements may be relocated to the Bases section, updated safety analysis report, core operating limits report, operational quality assurance plan, plant procedures, or other licensee-controlled documents. Relocating requirements to licensee- controlled documents does not eliminate them, but rather, places them under more appropriate regulatory controls (i.e., 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3), and 10 CFR 50.59) to manage their implementation and future changes. The proposed action is necessary to allow the licensee to implement the ITS. The ITS are based on standard Westinghouse Technical Specifications and have been implemented by several utilities. They are considered an improvement over the CTS. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC staff has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the proposed TS conversion would not increase the probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and would not affect facility radiation levels or facility radiological effluents. Specifically, the proposed TS changes will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types or amounts of any effluent that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites because no previously undisturbed area will be affected by the proposed TS changes. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action and, thus, the proposed action will not have any significant impact to the human environment. 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 resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the CNP, Units 1 and 2, dated August 1973. Agencies and Persons Consulted On November 19, 2004, the staff consulted with Mr. Ken Yale of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official agreed with the conclusions of the NRC. 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 the licensee's letter dated April 6, 2004, and the information provided to the NRC staff through the joint NRC-Indiana Michigan Power Company CNP ITS Conversion web page. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records [[Page 76485]] 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/' 'adams.html''. (Note: Public access to ADAMS has been temporarily suspended so that security reviews of publicly available documents may be performed and potentially sensitive information removed. Please check the NRC Web site for updates on the resumption of ADAMS access.) 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. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of December 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Margie Kotzalas, Acting Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-27845 Filed 12-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 21 ITAR-TASS: Damaged pipes of Novovoronezh reactor roof removed 21.12.2004, 16.48 NOVOVORONEZH, Voronezh Region, December 21 (Itar-Tass) - After the damaged roof parts of Reactor No. Five of the Novovoronezh nuclear power plant were dismantled, they were taken to a special storage place. All the 109 pipes are low radioactive, and they will be kept and monitored in the storage place for a long time, reactor supervisor Viktor Boldyrev told Itar-Tass on Tuesday. Defects in the roof pipes were detected during examination after scheduled repair in September 2004. The pipes are used to bring under control radiation in the reactor. The Rosenergoatom commission that investigated the incident said that the cracks in the pipes were caused by a production defect. The roof pipes of the reactor, the first in domestic nuclear plant construction, were made in 1978. The cracks appeared in the metal after many years of work. The technology to weld pipes was changed for other reactors, and it ruled out possibility of such a defect to appear, Boldyrev said. The new technology will be used to assemble new pipes on the roof. The repair will be completed in early 2005, and the reactor is expected to be restarted on February 19. The one-million-kilowatt-capacity reactor began working at the Novovoronezh plant in May 1980. The planned 30-year service period expires by 2010, but plant specialists believe it can be extended for 15-20 years longer. Two reactors of the total capacity of 800,000 kilowatt work at the plant at present. Radiation at the plant and around it is within the normal levels. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 22 Public Citizen: Nuclear Plant Licensing Hearing Should Not Be Secret Dec. 20, 2004 Nuclear Plant Licensing Hearing Should Not Be Secret Industry Regulator Seeks to Shut Out Public in Wake of Agencys Security Lockdown WASHINGTON, D.C.  The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) today asked an internal adjudicatory board to conduct a licensing hearing for a proposed nuclear fuel plant under a protective order that, if approved, would effectively make the entire proceeding secret and closed to the public, said Public Citizen and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS). This proposal is an affront to the principles of citizen participation guaranteed by law, said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program.   This action would leave the public in the dark. NIRS and Public Citizen are contesting the application of Louisiana Energy Services (LES), a multinational consortium led by the European firm Urenco, which is seeking a permit to build and operate a uranium enrichment plant in southeastern New Mexico.  The groups charge that the companys plans fail to meet regulatory standards in the areas of radioactive waste disposal and need for the plant, among other things. The NRC says its motion is a remedy to a situation that has made it impossible for parties in this case to meaningfully participate: On Oct. 25, the NRC unilaterally blocked public access to virtually all of the electronic documents posted on its Web site pending a security review to ensure that documents which might provide assistance to terrorists will be inaccessible.  Most of these documents remain unavailable to the public. Without access to essential documents, such as communications between the applicant and the NRC, parties to the proceedingincluding the state of New Mexicoare unable to file timely and complete motions, briefs and testimony to present their case before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.  Pre-filed testimony is due Dec. 30, and the hearing is scheduled to begin Feb. 7, 2005. A real solution would be to suspend proceedings until access to NRC files is restored, as NIRS and Public Citizen have asked the board to do, said Michael Mariotte, executive director of NIRS.  Shutting the public out of the licensing process would violate NRC regulations, which require public hearings.  Such hearings are the major way the public can learn about the issuessuch as radioactive waste disposalthat arise from the proposed construction of nuclear facilities. NIRS and Public Citizen filed a motion on Dec. 15 asking the licensing board to suspend the schedule of the hearing until access to the hearing file is restored. Formal responses to this motion are due today, but the NRC staff has filed a motion to make the case confidential. It is inexcusable that the NRC is attempting to circumvent public scrutiny in this case, and it sets a poor precedent for future licensing actions, added Michele Boyd, legislative director for Public Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program.  This unjust and inappropriate request ought to be rejected outright by the licensing board. To read the NRC's motion, click here. ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of FR Doc 04-27846 [Federal Register: December 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 244)] [Notices] [Page 76481-76483] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21de04-73] Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82 issued to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the licensee) for operation of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2 located in San Luis Obispo County, California. The proposed amendments would revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.17 and TS 4.3 for Cycles 14-16 to allow installation and use of a temporary cask pit spent fuel storage rack (cask pit rack) for DCPP Unit Nos. 1 and 2. The total spent fuel pool (SFP) storage capacity for each unit would be increased to 1478 fuel assemblies for Cycles 14-16. Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes to temporarily increase the spent fuel storage capacity with a cask pit rack were evaluated for impact on the following previously evaluated events: 1. A fuel handling accident (FHA). 2. A heavy load drop into the cask pit. 3. A loss of spent fuel pool (SFP) cooling. 4. A stored fuel criticality event. 5. A seismic event. The probability of a FHA is not significantly increased by the proposed changes, because the same equipment (e.g., the spent fuel handling crane) and procedures will be used to handle fuel assemblies and the frequency of fuel movement will be essentially the same, with or without a cask pit rack. The FHA radiological consequences are not significantly increased because the source term of a single fuel assembly will remain unchanged, and the cask pit rack will be installed at the same water depth as the existing SFP racks, with the same iodine decontamination factors assumed in the FHA analysis. The structural consequences of dropping a fuel assembly on a cask pit rack were evaluated and found to be acceptable. In accordance with NUREG-0612 [``Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants''], heavy load drops are not required to be postulated if a single failure-proof crane is used for heavy load movements. If drops are postulated, then the consequences must be acceptable. PG plans to install a single failure-proof crane in accordance with NUREG-0612, prior to heavy load movements associated with the cask pit rack and platform. In the event that a single failure-proof crane is not available, PG has also performed heavy load drop analyses for the cask pit rack and platform, which have shown acceptable results in accordance with NUREG-0612. Therefore, the probability and the consequences of a heavy load drop in the cask pit are not significantly increased. The probability of a loss of SFP cooling is unaffected and its consequences are not significantly increased with the cask pit rack installed. With the cask pit rack installed, loss of forced cooling results in a sufficient time-to-boil for the operator to recognize the condition and establish SFP makeup to compensate for water lost due to pool bulk boiling, and thereby maintain a sufficient water blanket over the stored spent fuel. The probability and consequences of a stored fuel criticality event are not increased by the addition of a cask pit rack. The reactivity analysis for the new cask pit rack demonstrates that reactivity remains subcritical (below 0.95) for the worst-case fuel- mispositioning event with credit for soluble boron. The probability of a seismic event is unaffected and its consequences are not increased with the cask pit rack installed, because the structural analysis of the cask pit rack demonstrates that the fuel storage function of the rack is maintained during a seismic event. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed change to add a cask pit rack does not alter the operating requirements of the plant or the equipment credited in the mitigation of design basis accidents, nor do the proposed changes affect any of the important parameters required to ensure the safe storage of spent fuel. A new rack material (MetamicTM) is introduced into the pool under these changes; but, based on testing results, there are no mechanisms that create a new or different kind of accident. The NRC has also approved the use of MetamicTM generically for SFPs. The same equipment (e.g., the spent fuel handling crane) and procedures will be used to handle fuel assemblies for the new cask pit rack as are used for existing spent fuel storage. The fuel storage configuration in the cask pit rack will be similar to the configuration in the existing SFP storage racks, and a fuel drop or mispositioning event in the new racks does not represent a new or different kind of accident from fuel handling and mispositioning events previously evaluated. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The effect of the proposed change on current margins of safety was evaluated for spent fuel storage functionality and criticality, spent fuel and SFP cooling, and SFP/cask pit structural integrity. The design of the new cask pit rack uses proven technology which preserves the proper safety margins for spent fuel storage to provide a coolable and subcritical geometry under both normal and abnormal/accident conditions. The rack design complies with 10 CFR 50 Appendix A General Design Criterion (GDC) 62, the O.T. Position for Review and Acceptance of Spent Fuel Storage and Handling Applications, Regulatory Guide 1.13, and ANSI/American Nuclear Society (ANS) 52.2. Handling of the cask pit rack and its platform in accordance with the defense-in-depth approach of NUREG-0612 with temporary lift devices designed to ANSI N14.6 preserves the proper margin of safety to preclude a heavy load drop in the cask pit. The proposed SFP cooling system design basis is consistent with the previous licensing basis in FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report], Section 9.1, for SFP temperature limits during normal and abnormal core offload conditions. The rack and SFP thermal-hydraulic analyses demonstrate that the proposed SFP cooling system design basis is met, and that no bulk boiling will occur in the cask pit rack or SFP with minimum cooling available. In the event [[Page 76482]] of a loss of SFP cooling, there will be sufficient time for operators to identify the condition and initiate makeup flow or restore cooling to preserve fuel-cooling capability. The criticality analysis demonstrates that the effective neutron multiplication factor (keff) is less than 1.0 for normal conditions with unborated water and less than 0.95 with 500 ppm of soluble boron, at a 95 percent probability with a 95 percent confidence level. Further, the reactivity effects of abnormal and accident conditions have been evaluated. To assure that under credible abnormal and accident conditions the reactivity will not exceed 0.95 at a 95 percent probability with a 95 percent confidence level, a soluble boron level of 800 ppm will be required to be maintained. The structural analyses for the cask pit rack and platform and adjacent structures show acceptable results during seismic motion. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60- day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30- day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestors/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. [[Page 76483]] Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(i)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by email to . A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to Richard F. Locke, Esq., Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O. Box 7442, San Francisco, California 94120, the attorney for the licensee. The Commission hereby provides notice that this is a proceeding on an application for a license amendment falling within the scope of section 134 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), 42 U.S.C. 10154. Under section 134 of the NWPA, the Commission, at the request of any party to the proceeding, must use hybrid hearing procedures with respect to ``any matter which the Commission determines to be in controversy among the parties.'' The hybrid procedures in section 134 provide for oral argument on matters in controversy, preceded by discovery under the Commission's rules and the designation, following argument of only those factual issues that involve a genuine and substantial dispute, together with any remaining questions of law, to be resolved in an adjudicatory hearing. Actual adjudicatory hearings are to be held on only those issues found to meet the criteria of section 134 and set for hearing after oral argument. The Commission's rules implementing section 134 of the NWPA are found in 10 CFR part 2, subpart K, ``Hybrid Hearing Procedures for Expansion of Spent Fuel Storage Capacity at Civilian Nuclear Power Reactors.'' Under those rules, any party to the proceeding may invoke the hybrid hearing procedures by filing with the presiding officer a written request for oral argument under 10 CFR 2.1109. To be timely, the request must be filed together with a request for hearing/petition to intervene, filed in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309. If it is determined a hearing will be held, the presiding officer must grant a timely request for oral argument. The presiding officer may grant an untimely request for oral argument only upon a showing of good cause by the requesting party for the failure to file on time and after providing the other parties an opportunity to respond to the untimely request. If the presiding officer grants a request for oral argument, any hearing held on the application must be conducted in accordance with the hybrid hearing procedures. In essence, those procedures limit the time available for discovery and require that an oral argument be held to determine whether any contentions must be resolved in an adjudicatory hearing. If no party to the proceeding timely requests oral argument, and if all untimely requests for oral argument are denied, then the usual procedures in 10 CFR part 2, subpart L apply. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendments dated November 3, 2004, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, . 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, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of December 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Girija Shukla, Project Manager, Section Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-27846 Filed 12-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 24 NRC: Extension of Public Comment Period: Louisiana Energy Services FR Doc 04-27847 [Federal Register: December 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 244)] [Notices] [Page 76485] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21de04-75] National Enrichment Facility AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Extension of public comment period. SUMMARY: The NRC is extending further the public comment period for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Proposed National Enrichment Facility (NEF) in Lea County, New Mexico (NUREG-1790). The notice of availability of the DEIS appeared in the Federal Register on September 17, 2004 (69 FR 56104), with the public comment period to end on November 6, 2004. On November 9, 2004, the NRC extended the public comment period until December 18, 2004 (69 FR 64983). On October 25, 2004, the NRC suspended public access to its Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) database accessible through the NRC's Web site and initiated an additional security review of publicly-available documents to ensure that potentially sensitive information is removed. This security review is ongoing and the exact date of its completion is not certain. However, from October 25, 2004, until December 6, 2004, members of the public continued to have access to the DEIS through NRC's project- specific Web site (http://www.nrc.gov/materials/fuel-cycle-fac/lesfacility.html ). Members of the public also had access to the Environmental Report (ER) submitted by Louisiana Energy Services (LES) for the NEF through the same Web site until November 28, 2004. The links to the DEIS and the ER were suspended on December 7, 2004, and on November 29, 2004, respectively, while the NRC staff conducted its security review of these documents. By this notice, the public comment period on the DEIS is being extended further until January 7, 2005. This extension of the public comment period will allow members of the public an additional opportunity to obtain relevant documents in order to comment on the DEIS. The NRC staff will make available on its project-specific Web site redacted copies of the DEIS, the ER, and LES's responses to NRC staff requests for additional information related to the ER. Redacted versions of these documents are expected to be accessible beginning on December 23, 2004. Interested members of the public may obtain copies of additional publicly-available documents for review and/or copying by contacting the NRC Public Document Room. The NRC Public Document Room is located at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, MD, and can be contacted at 800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737 or pdr@nrc.gov. Members of the public are invited and encouraged to submit comments to the Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Mail Stop T6-D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Please note Docket No. 70-3103 when submitting comments. Written comments submitted by mail should be postmarked by January 7, 2005, to ensure consideration. Comments mailed after that date will be considered to the extent practical. Comments will also be accepted by e-mail to nrcrep@nrc.gov, or by facsimile to 301-415-5397, Attention: Anna Bradford. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general or technical information associated with the license review of the National Enrichment Facility, please contact Timothy Johnson at (301) 415-7299. For general information on the NRC environmental review process, please contact either Anna Bradford at (301) 415-5228 or James Park at (301) 415-5835. Dated at Rockville, MD, this 15th day of December 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. B. Jennifer Davis, Chief, Environmental and Low-Level Waste Section, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 04-27847 Filed 12-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 25 [du-list] 12/21 Iraq Watch Alert: 19 GIs Killed in Explosion Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:21:22 -0800 Ugly the War: Iraq Watch Specials From Peace No War Network December 21, 2004 URL: _http://www.PeaceNoWar.net_ (http://www.peacenowar.net/) 19 GIs Killed in Explosion Deadliest Single Attack on U.S. Troops Since Start of Iraq War By MICHAEL McDONOUGH, AP Dean Hoffmeyer, Richmond Times-Dispatch / AP Tending to the wounded after the attack BAGHDAD, Iraq (Dec. 21) -- An explosion tore through a soft-sided mess tent during lunch hour at a military base near the northern city of Mosul on Tuesday, and officials said at least 20 people were killed - the deadliest attack on a U.S. base in Iraq since the start of the war. A spokesman for U.S. military headquarters in Baghdad said 19 of the dead were American soldiers, which would make it the deadliest single strike against U.S. troops in this country. However, a military spokesman in Mosul said 14 U.S. troops died in the blast, which came just four days before Christmas. A radical Sunni Muslim group, the Ansar al-Sunnah Army, claimed responsibility for the attack, which wounded about 60 people and left the tent floor littered with lunch trays and puddles of blood - the latest in a week of deadly strikes across Iraq that highlight the unwavering power of the insurgents in the run-up to the Jan. 30 national elections. President Bush said the attack should not derail the elections and that he hoped relatives of those killed know that their loved ones died in ''a vital mission for peace.'' ''I'm confident democracy will prevail in Iraq,'' he said. Inside the tent, U.S. soldiers reacted quickly. With people screaming and thick smoke billowing, soldiers turned their lunch tables upside down, placed the wounded on them and gently carried them into the parking lot, said Jeremy Redmon, a reporter for the Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch embedded with the troops in Mosul. A U.S. military official said authorities believe the damage was caused by at least one large-caliber artillery round or rocket. Another official said it was possible the explosive had been planted. Portland (Maine) Press Herald photographer Gregory Rec, who was sleeping about a quarter-mile from the mess hall when he was awakened by the loud explosion, said he rushed to the scene, where a soldier told him ''he heard a whoosh, he looked up and saw a fireball halfway between the ceiling and the floor.'' The blast at Forward Operating Base Marez came hours after British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a surprise visit to Baghdad and spoke of a ''battle between democracy and terror.'' White House spokesman Scott McClellan, responding to a question about how Iraqis will be able to safely get to some 9,000 polling places if U.S. troops can't secure their own bases, said there was ''security and peace'' in 15 of Iraq's 18 provinces. Mosul, Iraq's third-largest city, was relatively peaceful in the immediate aftermath of the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime last year. But insurgent attacks in the largely Sunni area have increased dramatically in the past year - particularly since the U.S.-led military offensive in November to retake Fallujah from militants. Like most mess halls at U.S. bases in Iraq, the meal area at Base Marez is covered with a tent. Insurgents have fired mortars at the mess hall more than 30 times this year, Redmon said. Mortar attacks on U.S. bases, particularly on the huge white tents that serve as dining halls, have been frequent in Iraq for more than a year. Just last month, for example, a mortar attack on a Mosul base killed two troops with Task Force Olympia, the reinforced brigade responsible for security in much of northern Iraq. Bill Nemitz, a columnist with the Portland Press Herald who was embedded with the troops in Mosul, told CNN that he heard ''a lot of discussion'' about the vulnerability of the tent. Lt. Col. Paul Hastings, a spokesman for Task Force Olympia, acknowledged the tent's vulnerability and told CNN the military is building a new dining facility at the base - a concrete structure that Nemitz said was supposed to have been ready for Christmas. ''There is a level of vulnerability when you go in there and you don't feel like there's a ... hard roof over your head,'' Hastings told CNN. Base Marez, also known as the al-Ghizlani military camp, is three miles south of Mosul and is used by both U.S. troops and the interim Iraqi government's security forces. It once was Mosul's civilian airport but is now a heavily fortified area surrounded by blast walls and barbed wire. Its two main gates are guarded by U.S. troops; Iraqi National Guard members man checkpoints outside to prevent cars from getting close without being searched. Casualty reports fluctuated throughout the day, with military officials and others giving conflicting figures. Lt. Col. Steven Boylan, spokesman for the Coalition Press Information Center, the military headquarters in Baghdad, said 19 U.S. troops were killed, along with three other soldiers of unknown nationality, and that 57 people were wounded. Hastings, however, said about 20 people died, including 14 American troops, and about 60 were injured. ''The number is very chaotic, we've had different numbers,'' Hastings said. Halliburton Co., a Houston-based company whose subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root supplies food service and other support activities for U.S. troops in Mosul, said seven of its employees and subcontractors were killed in the blast. Their nationalities were not disclosed. Earlier, Brig. Gen. Carter Ham, commander of Task Force Olympia, said U.S. military personnel, American and foreign nationals and Iraqi soldiers were among the dead. ''It is indeed a very, very sad day,'' Ham said. Redmon said the dead included two soldiers from the Richmond-based 276th Engineer Battalion, which had just sat down to eat. The force knocked soldiers off their feet and out of their seats as a fireball enveloped the top of the tent and shrapnel sprayed into the area, Redmon said. Scores of troops crammed into concrete bomb shelters, while others wandered around in a daze and collapsed, he said. ''I can't hear! I can't hear!'' one female soldier cried as a friend hugged her. A huge hole was blown in the roof of the tent, and puddles of blood, lunch trays and overturned tables and chairs covered the floor, Redmon reported. Near the front entrance, troops tended a soldier with a serious head wound, but within minutes, they zipped him into a black body bag, he said. Three more bodies were in the parking lot. ''It was very hard to watch and very chaotic but at the same time what amazed me was that within 20 minutes the worst of the wounded, the ones who needed the most attention, were out of there. It was just a remarkable effort by all the soldiers involved. From what I could see they performed flawlessly.'' In addition to the two soldiers in the Richmond unit, two soldiers from Maine National Guard's 133rd Engineer Battalion were killed and 12 were wounded, the Portland Press Herald reported. Redmon and photographer Dean Hoffmeyer are embedded with the 276th Engineer Battalion, a Richmond, Va., National Guard unit that can trace its lineage to the First Virginia Regiment of Volunteers formed in 1652. George Washington and Patrick Henry were two of its early commanders. Henry created the unit's motto, ''Liberty or Death.'' The base is also used by members of the Stryker Brigade, based at Fort Lewis, Wash., a military official said. The Ansar al-Sunnah Army claimed responsibility for the attack in a statement on the Internet. It said the attack was a ''martyrdom operation'' targeting a mess hall. Ansar al-Sunna is believed to be a fundamentalist group that wants to turn Iraq into an Islamic state like Afghanistan's former Taliban regime. The Sunni group claimed responsibility for beheading 12 Nepalese hostages and other recent attacks in Mosul. Before Tuesday, Mosul was the scene of the deadliest single incident for U.S. troops in Iraq. On Nov. 15, 2003, two Black Hawk helicopters collided over the city, killing 17 soldiers and injuring five. The crash occurred as the choppers maneuvered to avoid ground fire. Dean Hoffmeyer, Richmond Times Dispatch / AP Cpl. Nathan Almquist is comforted by a member of his unit as he stands near the body of a comrade. AP-NY-12-21-04 17:42 EST Photos of U.S. Military Torture in Abu Ghraib Prison _http://www.peacenowar.net/Iraq/News/April%2004-Photos/Abu%20Ghraib.htm_ (http://www.peacenowar.net/Iraq/News/April%2004-Photos/Abu%20Ghraib.htm) For more photos and Videos from Iraq, visit: "Report from Baghdad" July, 2003 _http://www.actionla.org/Iraq/IraqReport/intro.html_ (http://www.actionla.org/Iraq/IraqReport/intro.html) ============================================================= Peace, No War War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate Not in our Name! And another world is possible! Information for antiwar movements, news across the World, please visit: http://www.PeaceNoWar.net Please Join PeaceNoWar Listserv, send e-mail to: peacenowar-subscribe@lists.riseup.net Please Donate to Peace No War Network! Send check pay to: ActionLA/SEE 1013 Mission St. #6 South Pasadena CA 91030 (All donations are tax deductible) <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> *To Translate this page to Arabic, please visit ajeeb.com: http://tarjim.ajeeb.com/ajeeb/default.asp?lang=1 *To Translate this page to French, Spanish, German, Italian or Portuguese, please visit Systran: http://www.systransoft.com/ <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> **"Report From Baghdad" CD-ROM** Pacifica Radio KPFK Los Angeles Reporter Lee Siu Hin's July 2003 trip to U.S. occupied Iraq. An interactive CD-ROM with articles, photos, audio and video interviews includes: people of Iraq, U.S. military, human rights workers, religious leaders and more! Please Visit the Website: _http://www.actionla.org/Iraq/IraqReport/intro.html_ (http://www.actionla.org/Iraq/IraqReport/intro.html) Each CD costs: $15.00 plus $3.50 S/H (work both PC and Mac) The CD sells will be benefit the Baghdad Independent Media Center, ActionLA, and PeaceNoWar.net *Additional donations are welcome, and it will be tax deductible. For more information, tel: (213)403-0131 e-mail: info@ActionLA.org URL: www.ActionLA.org Send check/money orders to: ActionLA/SEE 1013 Mission St. #6, South Pasadena, CA 91030 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ 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/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 26 [FOODIRRADIATIONCA] Protect COOL for seafood Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:21:05 -0800 Take Action to Protect Country of Origin Labeling for Seafood! The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has finished its rules mandatory country of origin labeling (COOL) for seafood. (COOL for seafood is set to be implemented in the spring, two years sooner than such labeling for other products.) The public has the opportunity to comment on these rules, but the January 3rd deadline is fast approaching. These rules will allow consumers to know where their seafood comes from and if it is farm-raised or wild-caught. Some farm-raised seafood, such as farm-raised shrimp, is grown with a host of chemicals to combat diseases, algae and pests that run rampant in the intensive shrimp ponds. Many of those chemicals are banned in the United States because of serious health threats to consumers. Unfortunately, the USDA has released rules that fall short of implementing a strong labeling program. * Processed Foods are exempt under these rules - more than 50% of the seafood sold in the U.S. is "processed" according to the USDA's definition. "Processed" includes canned salmon, cooked shrimp and breaded frozen seafood. * The USDA omitted up to 90% of retailers from requirements to notify consumers which country their seafood comes from and how it is raised because they have less than $750,000 in annual receipts. * The USDA has no enforcement mechanism in place and will charge business an insignificant fine if they are found to violate the rules. The USDA is not implementing the law, as set out by Congress, and they need to be held accountable. Send them an email and tell them to implement country of origin labeling so consumers can make an informed choice when purchasing seafood, whether it be at a fish market or at a supermarket. Send them an email at: http://capwiz.com/pc/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=6771021 The email is as below: Country of Origin Labeling Program Room 2092-S Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA STOP 0249 1400 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20250-0249 cool@usda.gov RE: Docket No. LS-03-04 I am writing to urge you to strengthen the final interim rules for the country of origin labeling for fish and shellfish, so the law is implemented as Congress intended. As a consumer, I have the right to know where my seafood comes from so I can make an informed decision as to what seafood to buy. Some seafood, such as shrimp, is farmed with chemicals that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has banned in the United States. Some chemicals, such as chloramphenicol and nitrofurons, are used around the world to raise shrimp in coastal farms for exportation to the U.S. Chloramphenicol is linked to human aplastic anemia, intestinal problems, and neurological reactions; while nitrofurons have been found to be carcinogenic. Recent scientific studies have determined that farm raised salmon contains contaminants harmful to human health. Given these concerns, I have the right to know what I am eating and to make an informed choice. Specifically, I urge you to narrow the rule's definition of processed foods, to insure that canned seafood, breaded and cooked products are labeled with their country of origin and method of production. According to your interim final rule, 50% of the shrimp sold in the United States is breaded, but according to the USDA definition, breaded shrimp would be exempt from labeling. Shrimp is the number one seafood choice in the United States, and it is unacceptable that half of it be exempt from country of origin labeling. I also urge you to require small businesses to comply with the law, since up to 90% of seafood is sold in small business, according to the USDA research. Lastly, I urge you to develop a comprehensive enforcement and penalty system that would deter companies from not complying with the law. As a consumer, as a member of the public, I have the right to know where all of my seafood comes from and if it is farm raised or wild caught. Sincerely, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tracy Lerman Senior Organizer Public Citizen, California Office 1615 Broadway, 9th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 ph: 510-663-0888 x 103 f: 510-663-8569 tlerman@citizen.org http://www.citizen.org/california ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ********** If you do not wish to recieve these emails in the future, please send a email to tlerman@citizen.org with "unsubscribe foodirradiationca" in the subject line. ***************************************************************** 27 [du-list] Risk Calculator for Nevada Test Site fallout Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:20:28 -0800 This item made www.buzzflash.com We need calculators for the Pacific tests, Marralinga, Chernobyl and USUK DU. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Welcome to the Individual Dose and Risk Calculator for Nevada Test Site fallout -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This calculator estimates the radiation dose from I-131 absorbed by your thyroid gland from nuclear tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The calculator also estimates your risk of thyroid cancer from this exposure. Testing was conducted at the NTS from 1951 through 1992. However, only the above-ground tests conducted from 1951 through 1962, and some of the underground tests conducted from 1961 through 1970, produced appreciable I-131 fallout in the continental United States and are included in this calculator. To use this calculator, you will need to supply: a.. your date of birth and gender b.. the states and counties that you lived in between 1951 and 1971 c.. the primary type of milk that you drank (cow or goat) Note: Before you start the calculator, we urge you to read the Summary Information to learn more about the tests, about I-131 exposure, and about thyroid cancer risks. If you were born after 1971, you were not affected by tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site. Your estimated I-131 dose from these tests is zero. You do not need to use the calculator. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ 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/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 28 Guardian Unlimited: Radon in homes kills 1,000 a year James Meikle, health correspondent Wednesday December 22, 2004 The Guardian A thousand people in Britain die each year from lung cancer caused by radon, a colourless, odourless radioactive gas that gets trapped in their homes. A study published yesterday suggested it was responsible for nearly 20,000 deaths annually in the European Union, and smokers, who already have a 16% risk of early death from lung cancer in Britain, faced a radon threat 25 times greater than non-smokers. The gas, caused by disintegration of uranium in soil and rocks, fails to disperse in small buildings, creating particles that can damage cells lining the airways and lead to cancer. Since lungs of smokers are already damaged, the danger is far greater. The findings could lead to changes in building rules for new homes to protect against radon, as well as far tougher advice to householders on making existing buildings safer. The study, funded by the European commission and Cancer Research UK and led by Oxford University experts, reveals radon's threat to health begins at far lower concentrations than the levels above which UK residents are at present advised to improve ventilation. An estimated 100,000 homes fall into this bracket but only one in 10 owners carry out remedial works such as providing more air bricks and installing fans. The study, published in the BMJ Online First medical journal, pools information from 13 smaller studies across nine European countries, including one for the south-west of England. These were not large enough to assess risk reliably, nor could they differentiate between smokers and non-smokers, but pooling them enabled researchers to compare 7,000 people who had developed lung cancer with 14,000 who did not. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 29 Mainichi Interactive: Test using depleted uranium begins at nuclear fuel reprocessing plant 12-21-2004 AOMORI -- A test run using depleted uranium began at a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant here on Tuesday, marking a major step toward implementing Japan's policy on nuclear fuel recycling. Officials of Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. plan to use a total of 53 tons of depleted uranium in the initial run at the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture. Depleted uranium's radioactivity levels are lower than natural uranium and other types of spent nuclear fuel, they added. The Rokkasho plant is the core of Japan's nuclear fuel reprocessing program that is designed to extract plutonium and uranium from spent nuclear fuel and use extracts as fuel to operate nuclear power plants. The test run that began on Tuesday is intended to check the facility's equipment over a one-year period, officials said. After the depleted uranium tests finish, Japan Nuclear Fuel is set to carry out active tests using spent nuclear fuel. The firm plans to begin reprocessing spent nuclear fuel operations in July 2006, after the active tests. Energy policymakers had planned to burn extracted plutonium at the Monju fast-breeder reactor, but the plan was suspended after an accident at Monju forced it to shut down. (Mainichi Shimbun, Japan, Dec. 21, 2004) © 2004 The Mainichi Newspapers Co. ***************************************************************** 30 Bellona: Sea trials of Russian Delta-IV Tula postponed till spring 2005 The sea trials were originally scheduled for November-December 2004, but the scarce funding led to the equipment supply delays, Interfax reported referring to the source at the Zvezdochka shipyard. 2004-12-20 17:51 The shipyard’s representative, however, said they would follow the schedule in 2005. The upgrade of K-114 will allow the submarine to operate 10 years more. The project 667 Tula, Delta-IV, was built at the Sevmash plant in 1987 K-114 sub is one of the last Soviet built subs. Sevmash built it in 1987. Tulagot its name in 1995 together with the sponsorship from the city of Tula. Before Tula the shipyard has successfully repaired Verhoturye and Ekaterinburg, the subs of the same class. The same type Bryansk is in the plant’s dock at the moment, Interfax reported. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 31 Bellona: Dutch Mammoet might salvage another Russian nuclear submarine The Dutch Company Mammoet will likely participate in raising the K-159 submarine from the bottom of the Barents Sea. 2004-12-21 13:11 A Company official told Interfax in the end of November that the Russian Malakhit Design Bureau, which is planning the raising of the submarine, has invited Mammoet to participate in the project but an official invitation will not likely be issued until Russia resolves the crucial financing issue. The salvage operation was originally planned for July-August 2005 but then was postponed for indefinite period due to the financial problems. The estimated cost of the operation is from $80m to $90m. The official did not rule out the possibility that Malakhit is engaged in similar talks with other companies. No significant decisions are likely to be made before the end of the year, he said. It may be important for Russia that Mammoet gained a unique experience while raising the Kursk nuclear-powered submarine, the official said. He added that Mammoet is prepared to provide assistance again, reported Interfax. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 32 Capital News 9: Group releases findings on drinking water 12/21/2004 2:08 PM By: Capital News 9 web staff Clean Water Action, an environmental advocacy group, released a report last Thursday that shows tests by the state DEP now indicate nine communities that have elevated levels of the chemical perchlorate in their drinking water. This includes Mount Greylock Regional High School in Williamstown . The group is blaming the EPA for not regulating the contaminate. Copyright ©2004 TWEAN News Channel of Albany, L.L.C d.b.a. Capital News 9 ***************************************************************** 33 [NukeNet] Uranium trials begin at Rokkasho Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:19:12 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Uranium trials officially commenced this morning (Tuesday 21st) at Japan's first commercial reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture. The unloading of thirty-one tons of depleted uranium at Mutsu-Ogawara Port on the morning of Monday 20th was greeted by protests from people concerned about the risks of proliferation and radioactive pollution posed by the operation of the plant. The concerns held by 80% of the citizens of Aomori remain unresolved and there is still no prospect of using the 40 tons of plutonium that Japan already owns, let alone the plutonium that will be extracted at Rokkasho. Inevitably it will just be added to the existing stockpile. By moving this one step closer to commencing commercial operations at Rokkasho, Japan is going against the commitment it made to the international community to not hold excess stockpiles of plutonium*. Although the trials have officially started, all that really means at this stage is that the depleted uranium has been moved from the storage area to the area where it will be dissolved in nitric acid. Active trials using live spent fuel are planned to begin in December 2005 and the plant is scheduled to commence operations in July 2006, but if past experience is any indication, problems will arise during the trials and schedules will be delayed. Links to a couple of related articles have been posted on our 'commercial media' page: http://cnic.jp/english/news/mediaetc/index.html *This commitment was originally made in 1993 to reassure the international community in regard to its shipments of plutonium and it appears in basic policy documents since then. Philip White International Liaison Officer Citizens' Nuclear Information Center 3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Phone: 81-3-5330-9520 Fax: 81-3-5330-9530 http://cnic.jp/english/ cnic@nifty.com _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 34 NRC Seeks to Make LES Public Hearings Secret Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:08:17 -0500 NUCLEAR INFORMATION AND RESOURCE SERVICE

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

Public Citizen

 

For Immediate Release:                                                  Contact: Michael Mariotte, NIRS(202) 328-0002

Dec. 20, 2004                                                                                       Michele Boyd, PC (202) 454-5134

 

NRC Move to Make Nuke Plant Licensing Hearing Secret is Illegal, Irresponsible

 

Staff of Nuclear Industry Regulator Seeks to Shut Out Public in Wake of Agency’s Security Lockdown

 

            WASHINGTON, D.C. – The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) today asked an adjudicatory board to conduct a licensing hearing for a proposed nuclear fuel refinery under a “protective order” which, if approved, would effectively make the entire proceeding secret and closed to the public, said Public Citizen and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS).

 

“This proposal is an affront to the principles of citizen participation guaranteed by law,” said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen’s Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program.

 

NIRS/PC have contested the application of Louisiana Energy Services (LES), a multinational consortium led by the European firm Urenco, which is seeking a permit to construct and operate a uranium enrichment plant in southeastern New Mexico.  The groups charge that the company’s plans fail to meet regulatory standards in the areas of radioactive waste disposal and need for the plant, among other things.

 

            The NRC says its motion is a remedy to a situation that has made it impossible for parties in this case to meaningfully participate: On October 25, the NRC unilaterally blocked public access to virtually all of the electronic documents posted on its Web site pending a security review “to ensure that documents which might provide assistance to terrorists will be inaccessible.”  Most of these documents remain unavailable to the public.

 

            Without access to essential documents, such as communications between the applicant and the NRC, parties to the proceeding—including the State of New Mexico—are left operating in the dark, unable to file timely and complete motions, briefs, and testimony in order to present their case before the ASLB.  Pre-filed testimony is due Dec. 30, and the hearing is scheduled to begin Feb. 7, 2005.

 

            The NRC Staff’s rationale for making this entire licensing case secret is that in order to meet deadlines in the context of the NRC security review, parties to the proceeding must enter into a non-disclosure agreement that would allow them access to essential documents while agreeing to keep these potentially “sensitive” materials—and thus the entire proceeding in which they are considered—closed to the public.

 

            “A real solution to the problem would be to suspend the schedule of the hearing until access to NRC files is restored, as NIRS and Public Citizen have asked the Board,” said Michael Mariotte, executive director of NIRS.  “Shutting the public out of the licensing process would violate NRC regulations, which require public hearings.  It also would violate the public trust, which is served by open and transparent nuclear licensing proceedings.  Such hearings are the major way the public can learn about the issues—such as radioactive waste disposal—that arise from the proposed construction of nuclear facilities.”

 

            Counsel for NIRS/PC issued a formal plea to the ASLB on Dec. 15 to suspend the schedule of the hearing until access to the hearing file is restored; formal responses to this motion are due today, but the NRC staff has filed a concurrent motion to make the case confidential.

 

            “It is inexcusable that the NRC is attempting to circumvent public scrutiny in this case, and it sets a poor precedent for future licensing actions,” added Michele Boyd, legislative director for Public Citizen.  “This unjust and inappropriate request ought to be rejected outright by the ASLB.”

 

            To read the motions of the NRC staff, as well as earlier motions by NIRS/PC, please go to www.citizen.org/cmep or www.nirs.org.

 

###

 

Don’t forget to sign the Petition for a Sustainable Energy Future, at NIRS’ website, www.nirs.org. Congress will be considering a new energy bill next year, and we expect it to be loaded with favors—and your tax dollars—for the nuclear power industry. Let’s let Congress know the basics of what an energy policy should look like: energy efficiency, renewables, increased mileage standards—and no nuclear power! After you’ve signed, please use the “Send to a friend” feature, and encourage your friends and colleagues to sign too. Thanks for your help, and have a wonderful holiday season!

 

Michael Mariotte

Executive Director

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

 

 

This is the NIRS E-Mail Alert list. You are on this list because you signed up on our website, at a NIRS table at a concert, on a petition, or directly to NIRS. Your name and address are never sold, rented, or traded with anyone for any reason.

 

For address changes or to unsubscribe, just send an e-mail to nirsnet@nirs.org. If you have friends or colleagues who would like to be on this list, have them send a note to nirsnet@nirs.org

 

 

 ***************************************************************** 35 Lowell Sun: Westford hires firm to investigate water contamination December 21, 2004 Lowell, MA Article Last Updated: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - By Meaghan Wims, Sun Staff WESTFORD The town has signed a contract with an environmental firm that will investigate the source of perchlorate contamination in town and determine whether additional homes are at risk. Comprehensive Environmental Inc., of Milford, Mass., and Merrimack, N.H., will do the work, funded by a $55,000 appropriation by voters at the October Town Meeting. Perchlorate is a chemical used in blasting materials that can cause health problems in sensitive populations, such as those with thyroid conditions or pregnant women, and it is a suspected carcinogen. Tests in August found unhealthy levels of perchlorate 545 parts per billion (ppb) compared to the state's acceptable 1 ppb in the well owned by Kenneth Winchester at 1 Emily Way. Perchlorate was also found in the Cote well near North Street, one of the town's eight wells. Winchester's house is located near two sites with tainted groundwater: The town's new highway garage off North Street and a quarry owned by the Tresca Corporation, where blasting had been done until it was suspended more than a year ago. Those sites are suspected as the cause of the contamination, but no source has been officially named. Samples of other private wells have been clean, but perchlorate can "travel rapidly and readily in groundwater," CEI's President Eileen Pannetier wrote in a letter to Town Manager Steven Ledoux. Private wells and swimming pools are susceptible to the perchlorate plume, Pannetier wrote. "While there is no guarantee that the perchlorate will move in a predictable way due [to] the nature of groundwater flow in fractured areas, any prevention of contamination that can be done will be highly cost-effective in the long term," she wrote. The firm will provide a map of the areas most at risk and its recommendations for future sampling and preventative actions. Standing ponds will be tested for perchlorate and runoff. The firm will also look into the stormwater runoff into the Cote well and how the well could be treated and protected. All this work will be used to detail potential sources of the contamination. The state Department of Environmental Protection is continuing to investigate the issue. DEP is planning another sampling of residential wells and surface water this week or next to determine if the plume is moving, spokesman Ed Coletta said yesterday. "We're still moving forward with the investigation and hope to have a better idea of the plume itself after the round of sampling is done," he said. Meanwhile, Town Manager Steven Ledoux said the town is close to signing an agreement with Kenneth Winchester. Town voters approved $31,000 to tie Winchester's home into the town's water supply. But before that, the town seeks an agreement with Winchester that would prevent him from holding the town responsible for the contamination or any health problems his family may suffer. Winchester said he does not want to sign such an agreement. "We've been through this for six months," he said. "They know who the source is. It's pretty black and white." For the last six months, his family has used bottled water for cooking and drinking. The tap water is brown and their clothes smell. "It's a nightmare," Winchester said. "The line should have been put in two months ago. We just want our water," he said. "It's just real simple: Put the water line in and everyone's happy." A new report by Clean Water Action found trace amounts of perchlorate in eight other Massachusetts communities, including Tewksbury. The chemical is on the federal Environmental Protection Agency list of "monitored" substances being watched for potential health risks. Meaghan Wims' email address is mwims@lowellsun.com. © 1999-2004 MediaNews Group, Inc. ***************************************************************** 36 Daily Yomiuri: Rokkashomura sees 1st use of spent uranium Yomiuri Shimbun A test run using spent uranium started Tuesday at a spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant, finally getting the nation's nuclear fuel cycle plan rolling. At about 9:30 a.m. at the central control room of the plant in Rokkashomura, Aomori Prefecture, plant manager Jun Shibuya instructed workers to move a uranium container into position. About 50 officials of Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd., which operates the plant, watched the test run begin. About 31 tons of uranium powder in two-meter-high, 1.3-meter-wide containers were delivered to the plant Monday from a nuclear facility in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture. It is the first time for a test to be conducted using radioactive material. JNFL plans to test-run the plant for a year. JNFL President Isami Kojima said: "I'm deeply moved to see my dream come true. We'll work on the test as carefully as ever, putting safety first." The plant is the nation's first commercial installation that can separate and extract plutonium and uranium from spent nuclear fuel. The plant is under construction and JNFL plans to officially start operations in July 2006. JNFL was effectively given the green light to operate when a government panel reviewing the nation's long-term nuclear energy plan last month endorsed the policy of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel rather than burying it. About 1,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel are discharged from nuclear power plants in Japan every year. Reprocessing makes it possible to reuse plutonium and uranium in spent nuclear fuel. It offers resource-poor Japan potential access to a secure energy source virtually in perpetuity. The plant will be able to reprocess 800 tons of fuel a year. Even though reprocessing costs are expected to be higher than the cost of burying spent fuel rods, the panel put priority on securing stable energy supplies and conserving nuclear resources over economic efficiency. Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 37 Greenpeace Japan: U.S. uranium loaded into controversial Japanese plutonium reprocessing plant 2004/12/21 Greenpeace Japan Press Release Greenpeace calls for cancellation of dangerous program [21 December 2004, Rokkasho, Aomori, Japan] Activists from Greenpeace protested this morning at the Rokkasho Nuclear Reprocessing plant, located in northern Japan, as the operator introduced nuclear material into the plant for the first time. The plant will eventually be used to produce plutonium, a key component of nuclear weapons. Japan already has approximately 40 tons of plutonium, but does not have a reactor that burns plutonium fuel. The Greenpeace banner reads "Do not start reprocessing" in Japanese and English. Japanese Nuclear Fuel Limited, the plant operator announced that they will start uranium tests on December 21st. Some 150 protesters from all over Japan got together to protest against the plant's commissioning. "Start of the uranium commissioning means the start of radioactive contamination. We should stop reprocessing before the contamination gets worse. There is no concrete plan to use plutonium produced from Japanese reprocessing. There is no justification to produce plutonium." Said Atsuko Nogawa, nuclear campaigner of Greenpeace Japan. Some 30 tons of depleted uranium arrived by ship in the morning of 20th. Some of uranium was originally supplied by the United States, despite warnings that it is sanctioning plutonium proliferation. Additional Japanese origin depleted uranium will also to be used for the commissioning. "Plutonium production by Japan must stop, and spent nuclear fuel should be treated as nuclear waste. We already have stockpiled several thousands nuclear weapons worth of Plutonium (about 40 tons). If full scale operation of Rokkasho reprocessing starts it will keep adding 7,000-8,000 kilograms of plutonium yearly. The Bush administration has signed off on these tests, despite knowing the dangers in this region from nuclear proliferation. Both the Japanese government and U.S. administration need to rethink their dangerous plans, before it's too late" Nogawa ATSUKO continued. The Rokkasho plant has taken 20 years to build and is a relic before it even opens. While it was being built, the use of plutonium to generate electricity has proven to be a failure by other countries on economic, environmental and proliferation grounds. Commercial scale of reprocessing is already done by UK and France. The French plant operated by Areva/COGEMA has failed to secure contracts with its national utility, EDF beyond 2007. Rokkasho was built with French technology and workers. Uranium commissioning is expected to take 12 months, to be followed by spent fuel tests, scheduled for December 2005. However, given the many problems experienced over the years during construction of the multi-billion dollar plant, it is expected that there will be further delays. For background information see: http://www.stop-plutonium.org/ For further information, please contact: Greenpeace Japan Atsuko Nogawa, Nuclear campaigner +813 5338 9800, mobile phone +81 903654 4035 Kazue Suzuki, Campaign Director +81 90 2249 1502 Keiko Shirokawa, Media Officer, +81 90-3470-7884 Greenpeace Japan N F bldg.2F 8-13-11 Nishi-Shinjuku, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Zip code160-0023, Japan Tel. 03-5338-9800 Fax. 03-5338-9817 Map ©Greenpeace/Greenpeace Japan 1989-2002 ***************************************************************** 38 Las Vegas RJ: NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORY: Lawsuit over Yucca project dust Tuesday, December 21, 2004 returned Judge wants revised complaint by Jan. 10 By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL A complaint against Yucca Mountain contractors that claims they exposed workers and visitors to toxic dust during construction of a tunnel at the planned nuclear waste site was too long and overstated, a federal judge ruled Monday. U.S. District Judge James Mahan directed attorneys for Gene Griego, of North Las Vegas, and seven others in the class action lawsuit to submit a revised complaint with less hyperbole for a Jan. 10 hearing on the case to allow Bechtel National, Bechtel SAIC and a host of contractors to rebut the revised complaint. "He called it a public relations document," one of Griego's attorneys, Joe Egan, said about after Monday's hearing. "I can tell you I wrote every word of it." Griego said the decision to allow a revised complaint to go forward was a victory of sorts because the judge didn't throw it out but instead found it had potential merit for litigation. A spokeswoman for Bechtel SAIC said the company "was gratified that the court decided to strike the improper complaint." "We are hopeful that they will file a document that is appropriate for a court of law," said Bechtel SAIC spokeswoman Beatrice Reilly. Griego, a retired Los Alamos, N.M. employee, worked as a tunnel supervisor when the five-mile exploratory tunnel was bored into the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. He blames his chronic lung ailments on inhaling dust that contained silica and the cancer-causing, fibrous mineral, erionite, and a sister mineral, mordenite, during the tunnel excavation. In his complaint, Egan wrote that his clients were deliberately "grossly contaminated" by toxic dust "and they took measures to deceive workers and visitors by hiding, doctoring or failing to accumulate key data on actual workplace conditions." Egan had argued in court papers that a reference to the Hawk's Nest incident that perhaps killed as many as 1,500 tunnel workers who were exposed to silica dust during the mid-1930s in West Virginia "provides background and historical material directly relevant to the wrongdoing alleged in this case." Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 39 Bellona: In policy shift, UK says it will store nuclear waste from foreign reprocessing customers In a measure that overturns a 30-year-old policy not to keep intermediate-level foreign nuclear waste on its own soil, the British government has decided to store Japanese, German, Italian, Spanish, Swiss and Swedish nuclear waste in a bid to help pay for the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) own unresolved nuclear waste problems, government and media sources have reported. Britain's Sellafield nuclear facility in Cumbria. Erik Martiniussen/Bellona Charles Digges, 2004-12-21 14:16 The trade off under the new plan is that the UK will return larger amounts of high level radioactive waste to British Nuclear Fuel’s, (BNFL) overseas reprocessing customers while keeping larger amounts of intermediate level waste products for storage within the UK. BNFL spokesman Alan Hughes welcomed the government’s decision and said it would mean up to 3,000 cubic metres of radioactive waste would now not need to be shipped back to its place of origin. Hughes also added that the carbon emissions that would be saved by reducing shipments of the bulkier low- to intermediate-level waste back to its countries of origin as an environmental benefit. “We are sending extra high level waste, more than the customer would ordinarily have received,” under the old plan, said Hughes in a Monday telephone interview with Bellona Web. “This will result in much fewer shipments.” According to a December release by the UK’s Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), which okayed the decision, the overall amount if intermediate level waste (ILW) to remain is estimated at 1.4 percent of Britain’s overall ILW inventory. Hughes added that the increase in shipments of high level waste will mean a corresponding decrease of up to 4 percent of high level waste in the UK. But the new practice also means that very long-lived, high-activity radioactive waste from Sellafield will be shipped by sea to Japan. The European continental customers of Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Sweden and Italy will receive it by ferries and trains. The Department of Trade and Industry has said in statements to the media that using armed police and transports mounted with guns to escort the high level waste minimises the risk. The total distance that movements of intermediate-level waste will undergo will be reduced by some 715,000km, according to Nuclear Engineering magazine. Although the volumes of waste in the UK will be greater under the new scheme, the amount of radioactivity in the UK will remain the same and the number of waste shipments will be dramatically reduced, said Hughes. “There will be no net radioactive burden for Britain,” he said. The decision to retain ILW in Britain, announced in a House of Commons statement last week, was taken by Patricia Hewitt, the UK’s secretary for trade and industry. Hewitt hailed the shift in policy, saying in a statement that: "The benefits are both environmental and economic." She said the additional income for storing the ILW—up to Ł680 million—would be "used for nuclear clean-up which will result in savings for the UK taxpayer over the longer term." But there is still the problem of higher volumes of intermediate-level waste to address, said Nils Bűhmer, a nuclear physicist with Bellona. “Although the UK will be carrying the same radioactive burden, there will be an increase in the volume of the waste to be stored,” said Bűhmer. “The UK should therefore speed up its search for a final solution for this extra waste.” Where to store the extra waste But it remains as yet unclear as to where the increased amounts of ILW will be stored. Britain’s current storage site, at the Drigg sight in Cumbria near Sellafield, is according to almost all accounts nearly full. Following the governments announcement to keep more ILW, Britain’s Environmental Agency published plans for a review of authorisations held by BNFL for it’s radioactive storage site at Drigg. Jean McSorley, an anti-nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace, told the Guardian that: "The government is trying to encourage Japanese utilities, and others, to sign more reprocessing contracts at Sellafield knowing that they will not have to have their nuclear waste returned." According to British media and government officials, the government has set up a committee to find a way of disposing of high- and intermediate-level nuclear waste safely. It has considered 20 options, including burying the waste in the Antarctic and firing it at the sun. No preferred method has been established, but the most likely method to be selected will be the less fantastic and more traditional approach of storing the waste above ground, or disposal below ground in geologic repositories, a spokesman for DTI told Bellona Web in a telephone interview Monday. It should be noted however, that no country in the world is yet employing deep geologic repositories—widely regarded by scientists as the safest method for disposing of nuclear waste and spent nuclear fuel—for the deposit of nuclear, though the United States’ Yucca Mountain facility is the closest such facility to being put into use. Sweden is also close to breaking ground on its own facility, but Britain’s recent decision may deflate the urgency of such a project for Swedish authorities. Currently overseas high and intermediate nuclear waste is stored at the Sellafield site either in the form of glass blocks, untreated highly active liquid waste, or in drums of solid waste. It is mixed up together with UK waste but British Nuclear Fuels keeps a log of how much radioactivity had been allocated to each country. Government historically opposes keeping ILW Previous to last week’s announcement, both Labour and Conservative governments had been in agreement about returning highly dangerous waste arising from the reprocessing of foreign nuclear fuel in the THORP facility at the Sellafield Plant in Cumbria to its country of origin along with the reconstituted fuel. Successor governments have agreed with this decision, which amounts to shipping some 225 shipments of radioactive waste back to the countries that have sent their fuel for reprocessing to Britain. Last week’s decision, however, overturns that policy, meaning that the bulk of the radioactive waste will be kept and must somehow disposed of in Britain. The notion of shipping intermediate-level waste back to countries of origin in place of high level waste—known on officially as “waste substitution”—has been under consideration by British officials since the early 1990s,and was codified in a 1995 white paper issued by DTI. Opposition in Parliament Opposing politicians and environmental groups have been quick to warn that Britain is running a high risk of becoming a “nuclear dumping ground.” Hughes flatly refuted this, saying British legislation prohibits the import of nuclear and radioactive waste purely for the purposes of storage unrelated to reprocessing activities. Last week's decision, he said, means that the foreign waste that will remain in Britain will be exchanged for significantly smaller quantities of waste of higher radioactivity produced by British reactors—up to 38 shipments worth. DTI officials told Bellona Web that this trade amounts to an equal quantity of radioactivity. Critics in Parliament, though, pointed out the prospect of the British waste being hijacked by terrorists. Llew Smith, Labour MP for Blaenau Gwent, last week asked a written question of Ms Hewitt about her assessment of any increased terrorist threat. "Intermediate level waste is bulky and difficult to handle but shipments of high level waste in smaller cannisters might be an attractive terrorist target," he in remarks reported by the Guardian. DTI officials told Bellona Monday they were not aware if Hewitt had replied to Smith yet. Gordon MacKerron, head of the government's committee on radioactive waste management, said in remarks to British media: "Of course the volumes of nuclear waste we will have to deal with in Britain will be substantially greater [...] but overall because of the large existing volume of UK waste it will not make a big difference in percentage terms. "In practical terms it does not make a lot of difference to our overall nuclear waste problem." Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 40 Bellona: Sevmash to produce 35 casks for submarines’ spent nuclear fuel The Severodvinsk-based navy shipyard Sevmash has been awarded an order to fabricate 35 transportation casks (TUK) for storage and shipment of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear submarines, ITAR-TASS reported in November. 2004-12-21 16:06 The contract was signed between Sevmash plant and the representatives of the US CTR program. This was voiced by Sevmash’s director general Vladimir Pastukhov. “We are also trying to win the tender for the similar work for Murmansk Shipping Company”, Pastukhov said. In the past the shipyard fabricated 24 casks under the ex-Minatom-placed order. It cost US$ 3.5 million. The money was allocated by the Threat Reduction Agency under the U.S. Department of Defense within the tri-lateral American-Russian-Norwegian program for Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation (ÀÌĆŃ). The experts believe Russia should produce more than 200 casks till 2010 to accommodate spent nuclear from all the retired submarines. The special collection sites for temporary storage (50 years max.) for these casks are to be built at the Russian navy bases. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 41 Las Vegas SUN: Federal judge says Yucca complaint needs rewriting Today: December 21, 2004 at 9:42:37 PST By Jace Radke LAS VEGAS SUN Attorneys who filed a lawsuit against Yucca Mountain contractors for allegedly failing to warn workers about the dangers of silica dust will have to file an amended complaint in U.S. District Court after a federal judge dismissed the original suit Monday. U.S. District Judge James Mahan said that he believes the allegations made in the original complaint are serious and should be examined through the discovery process, but said that the complaint needed to be amended to remove unnecessary language that would be more at home in a press release than a lawsuit. "I'm not real happy with the complaint," Mahan told Joe Egan, the Washington, D.C.-area lawyer who filed the lawsuit. "This is pretty juvenile stuff for a lawyer. "This public relations language does not pass muster." Egan said that he did not intend for the complaint to come off like a press release designed to attract media attention, leaving Mahan disbelieving. "Come on, I didn't just fall off the turnip truck," Mahan said. Mahan pointed out conclusionary statements in the complaint, as well as several quotations that aren't attributed to anyone. Mahan said that the hyperbole has to be cut from the complaint, and that the complaint should be short and to the point, detailing the plaintiff's beef with the defendant. Egan apologized for the excessive language and said that he would file an amended complaint by Jan. 10. Egan said that the complaint was meant to serve notice to Yucca workers that they were lied to by contractors as part of a fraud by concealment. The class action lawsuit was first filed in March on behalf of former Yucca Mountain employee Gene Griego and others who were involved with Yucca drilling or were otherwise exposed to silica in the mountain tunnel from 1992 to 2003. Griego worked at Yucca from 1993 to 2002 and was diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease last year. The lawsuit lists nine corporate defendants -- contractors involved with Yucca tunneling and research, including Bechtel National Inc., Bechtel SAIC Co., Parsons Brinckerhoff Construction Services and Kiwet Construction. Tami Azorsky, an attorney for the defendants, told Mahan that Egan's complaint should not be a preview of the evidence in the case, and should be a simple concise statement. Mahan said that he would not have read the original complaint to the jury if the case were to go to trial. Once an amended complaint is filed by Jan. 10 the defendants will have 30 days to reply, Mahan said. While the amended complaint and reply are being drafted, discovery should continue, Mahan said. ***************************************************************** 42 RGJ: EPA takes over lead role in cleanup of mine Scott Sonner ASSOCIATED PRESS 12/20/2004 11:03 pm Jay Kurowski/RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency assumed the lead role Monday in directing the cleanup of an abandoned, contaminated copper mine in Northern Nevada. The federal agency is assuming primary responsibility for the cleanup of the former Anaconda copper mine under a provision of the Superfund law because of growing health and safety concerns, EPA officials said. Federal officials said they decided to grant the state’s request because of the complexity of the contaminants at the site near Yerington, about 55 miles southeast of Reno. “As lead agency, we will be able to use the Superfund law to address technical issues at the site,” said Keith Takta, director of EPA’s Superfund program for the Pacific Southwest region based in San Francisco. Until now, EPA, the Bureau of Land Management and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection shared responsibility for cleaning up several metals — copper, lead, arsenic and mercury — and radioactive materials, including uranium and thorium. Leaders of neighboring tribes, Yerington residents and an environmental group, Great Basin Mine Watch, have expressed concerns about the potential dangers and complained that the cleanup was moving too slowly under the committee approach. Officials for Atlantic Richfield Co. confirmed Monday they’ve more than doubled the number of households around the mine they are providing with bottled water as a safety precaution to a total of 140. Samples taken at the mine this past summer showed levels of radiation in soil samples as high as 30 times above the EPA standard, EPA officials. Earlier this year, ground-water testing of drinking water wells around the 6-square-mile mine site showed uranium concentrations four times greater than the EPA standard. One well on the site that is not used for drinking water had uranium 200 times the standard. The uranium apparently is present in high concentrations as a byproduct of decades of processing copper in leach ponds with sulfuric acid. Anaconda produced copper at the mine for about 30 years until 1978. The new owner, Arimetco, went bankrupt and abandoned the site in 2000, which left Atlantic Richfield primarily responsible for cleanup as the past owner. Since then, the state, EPA and BLM — which owns half the land — had directed the cleanup under an agreement that was “very cumbersome,” said Kathleen Johnson, chief of Federal Facilities and Site Cleanup in the EPA’s regional Superfund division in San Francisco. “There were essentially three agencies that were all trying to make things happen. With EPA in the lead, the roles are more clear,” she told the Associated Press. “We will continue to work with BLM and NDEP, but because one agency is designated the lead it will help facilitate faster work,” Johnson said. Although the change is taking place under the authority of the Superfund law, EPA does not intend to designate the mine as a Superfund site, she said. Dan Cummings, a spokesman for Atlantic Richfield’s parent company BP, said the company has not been formally notified of EPA’s new role but that good progress had taken place over the past several months. He said NDEP previously had opposed giving up its role as the lead regulator. “Obviously, NDEP has had a change of heart,” Cummings said. Gov. Kenny Guinn asked EPA for the change on Dec. 10. The move, based partly on new concerns about the potential for ground-water contamination, “is the best way to protect human health and the environment,” Guinn said. Atlantic Richfield has been providing bottled water to residents who requested it since last spring as a safety precaution. Cummings said 83 households belonging to the Yerington Paiute Tribe recently were added to the 57 households already receiving water from Atlantic Richfield. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 43 Japan Times: Nuke fuel shifted to Rokkasho plant Tuesday, December 21, 2004 AOMORI (Kyodo) Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. began moving depleted uranium Monday into its nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture, one day before the start of a test operation, company officials said. [News photo] A container of depleted uranium is offloaded for transport Monday from a freighter here at Mutsu-Ogawara port. The test run -- expected to last for about a year -- is aimed at checking various operations and equipment performance prior to an "active test" using spent nuclear fuel, the officials said. JNFL expects it to take several days to transport some 53 tons of depleted uranium to the plant by truck, including the 31 tons unloaded from a freighter Monday at Mutsu-Ogawara port, also in the village of Rokkasho. Antinuclear groups staged protests around the port as the containers of depleted uranium were offloaded. The Rokkasho-based JNFL has compiled a preparatory list of 190 possible problems that could arise in the course of the test run, including the leakage of radioactive substances. The nuclear fuel-reprocessing plant for extracting uranium and plutonium from nuclear fuel burned at atomic power plants is a key element of Japan's nuclear fuel-cycle policy. The test run using depleted uranium has been postponed a number of times for reasons such as leakage of water from the nuclear fuel storage pool, faulty construction and a fatal accident in August at the Mihama nuclear power plant in Fukui Prefecture. The Rokkasho plant, under construction since April 1993, will become Japan's first commercial plant for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. The Japan Times: Dec. 21, 2004 (C) All rights reserved The Japan Times Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 Japan Times: Rokkasho reprocessor begins tests with depleted uranium Wednesday, December 22, 2004 AOMORI (Kyodo) Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. on Tuesday began tests using depleted uranium at its nuclear-fuel reprocessing plant in Aomori Prefecture, taking a step toward introducing a key component of the nation's nuclear fuel cycle program. [News photo] Members of civic groups brave snow to protest attempts to reprocess depleted uranium Tuesday in front of a Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. plant here. The uranium test to assess operations at the Rokkasho plant is expected to last about a year, after which JNFL will conduct an active test using spent nuclear fuel, company officials said. JNFL hopes to begin actual operations at Japan's first commercial plant for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel in July 2006. Opponents of the 20-year-old project have cited safety concerns and the high cost of reprocessing spent fuel, estimated to be 1.5 to 1.8 times costlier than burying the fuel. The facility will extract uranium and plutonium from spent nuclear fuel generated at nuclear power plants nationwide. The extracted uranium and plutonium can then be reused as fuel. JNFL plans to reprocess 800 tons of spent fuel a year. In the test that began Tuesday, JNFL intends to find defects and problems in the facility's equipment by using a dummy fuel assembly and pulverized depleted uranium, which were transported from Tokai, Ibaraki Prefecture. Test activities involve feeding about 800 kg of pulverized depleted uranium into a uranium supply tank. Based on similar tests in France and Britain, JNFL anticipates a number of problems to arise. It has compiled and made public a list of 190 possible problems, including the leakage of radioactive substances from pipe joints and valves. The Japan Atomic Energy Commission opted last month to continue pursuing the nuclear fuel cycle program. It had been under review following a series of accidents and problems, including revelations of faulty construction at the Rokkasho plant and a fatal steam pipe rupture in August at the Mihama nuclear plant in Fukui Prefecture. JNFL's nuclear-fuel reprocessing plant is a key component in the cycle plan. Following the commission's decision, JNFL and the governments of Aomori Prefecture and Rokkasho signed a safety agreement on Nov. 22, spelling out ways to ensure the safety of residents and protect the environment during the uranium test as well as to provide prompt notification in the event of an accident. As the current test uses depleted uranium, which has lower radioactivity than natural uranium, there is no danger of a major nuclear accident. But there is still concern that radioactive material might leak outside the plant. Local residents are worried about possible accidents and the effect on the area's image, particularly concerning agricultural products. About 100 protesters gathered Tuesday outside JNFL's main gate to protest the test, shouting, "Stop the uranium test immediately," and "Don't turn Aomori Prefecture into a nuclear garbage dump." JNFL officials are concerned that if radioactive substances leak outside the plant, it would alarm the residents and make it difficult to win their approval to go ahead with the nuclear-fuel reprocessing plans. "If we encounter a situation in which (radioactive substances) leak into the environment or multiple workers are exposed to radioactivity, it would become difficult to start full-fledged operation" of the plant, a senior official of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry reckoned. The Federation of Electric Power Companies asked Aomori to host the plant in 1984. Construction began in 1993, and in 2000, its operator began bringing in spent fuel. But there have been several operational delays due to a series of problems, including a radioactive water leak from the spent fuel storage pool and revelations of faulty construction. The Japan Times: Dec. 22, 2004 ***************************************************************** 45 IHT: Japanese begin tests on depleted uranium The Associated Press December 22, 2004 Step toward greater energy production A nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in northern Japan started tests with depleted uranium Tuesday, a step toward Japan's greater energy self-sufficiency, despite a series of accidents and safety concerns.. The test at Rokkasho, about 580 kilometers, or 360 miles, northeast of Tokyo, marked the plant's first use of radioactive materials, said Masanori Hiroo, a spokesman for the plant's operator, Japan Nuclear Fuel.. The plant, costing „2.1 trillion, or $20 billion, is crucial to Japan's hopes of using mixed oxide, or MOX, a reprocessed reactor fuel. . The plant's opening, now planned for 2006, is years behind schedule because of a radioactive water leak there in 2002 and protests from area residents and officials.. Hiroo said the test, expected to last a year before real reprocessed fuel is introduced, involves handling possible problems.. The reprocessed fuel could be used in reactors that burn a uranium-plutonium mixture or in more advanced reactors, called fast-breeder reactors, that also can produce more plutonium for fuel.. The government's energy policy calls for converting as many as 18 electricity-generating reactors to use MOX as a transition to fast-breeder reactors. All of Japan's MOX would be made from spent fuel rods at the Rokkasho plant, then shipped out to fuel other plants in the country.. "Nuclear reprocessing is an extremely important operation that we must achieve from energy security and environmental point of view," said Isami Kojima, president of Japan Nuclear Fuel. "We'll place safety control as top priority as we continue efforts to improve service quality.". Nuclear power is considered important by many people in resource-poor Japan's plans to become more energy-independent. Its 52 active nuclear plants supply more than a third of its energy.. The government wants to build 11 more reactors to increase nuclear power to 40.7 percent of Japan's energy supply by 2010.. On Tuesday, workers hauled into the plant about 53 tons of depleted uranium, which is less radioactive than ordinary uranium.. Japan's only other plutonium-using reactor has been closed since an accident in 1995.. The country's nuclear power industry has been plagued by safety problems and shutdowns in recent years. A reprocessing plant accident outside Tokyo killed two workers in 1999 and exposed hundreds to radioactivity. In the nation's deadliest nuclear power plant accident, five people were killed at Mihama in central Japan after a corroded pipe ruptured in August, spraying workers with boiling water and steam.. The accidents have fanned public worries about nuclear energy and pressed the government to review its policy.. On Tuesday, about 100 people gathered outside the Rokkasho plant to demand that the operation be scrapped.. "The reprocessing could trigger radioactive pollution," Greenpeace Japan said in a statement. "We see no justifiable reason to push forward the reprocessing project.". International Herald Tribune All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 46 ITAR-TASS: Ukraine to pay debt for Russian nuclear fuel in December 21.12.2004, 09.34 KIEV, December 21 (Itar-Tass) - The national atomic power-generating company Energoatom (Kiev), incorporating all the four operating Ukrainian nuclear power stations, will pay the debt to Russian TVEL Corporation by the year-end for nuclear fuel deliveries, Minister of Fuel and Energy as well as Energoatom president Sergei Tulub said in an interview with Prime-Tass on Monday. According to the minister it was planned initially to resolve this problem thanks to a credit of ten million US dollars from Ukrsibbank, Kharkov. Under conditions of limitations on granting credits, imposed late in November, Energoatom won support from the Ukrainian National Bank, but implementation of these understandings was delayed due to the appointment of a new head of the Ukrainian National Bank. Besides, Ukrsibbank is ready to extend five million dollars in credits. In the minister’s opinion, the company will return the debt for Russian fuel probably thanks to funds to be received for supplies of electricity in January as prepayment. According to the minister, Energoatom owes 21.05 million dollars for nuclear fuel by the start of December over the disruption of payments in the Ukrainian power industry in connection with the political crisis. The TVEL management warned Energoatom with a telegram of a possible disruption in the production process over the present debt, Tulub noted. In the minister’s words, Energoatom failed to receive 25 million dollars from the power market in October-November. The figure already topped 17 million dollars in December. The Ukrainian nuclear power stations run on Russian nuclear fuel. Energoatom is now engaged in talks on nuclear fuel deliveries from Russia in 2005 for all the 15 power units. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 47 CBC Saskatchewan: Uranium mine gets federal approval http://www.cbc.ca Last Updated Dec 21 2004 08:14 AM CST PRINCE ALBERT – Cameco now has a green light to build a uranium mine in northern Saskatchewan. The mining company has been talking about building a mine at Cigar Lake for almost 20 years. The project moved forward this week with the federal regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, approving construction. Cameco spokesperson Lyle Krahn said the Cigar Lake mine is the second largest uranium deposit known in the world today. "For Cameco it means a significant increase in the amount of uranium and ultimately a significant amount of income," he said. Development of the mine is a joint venture between Cameco, Cogema and two Japanese companies. Krahn said the partnership will have to decide if they will, in fact, begin construction. A formal announcement is expected this week. A mine at Cigar Lake could provide about 200 jobs for the next 30 or 40 years. If all goes as planned, the mine could be in production by 2007. Copyright © CBC 2004 ***************************************************************** 48 Cibola County Beacon: Old uranium mine investigated Tuesday, December 21, 2004 SANTA FE - New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) officials announced recently that they have ordered ground water investigations and remediation at two former uranium mines in northwest New Mexico - the North East Church Rock mine northeast of Gallup and the Section 27 mine north of Grants. Neither mine is currently in operation. The Section 27 mine is located about 35 miles north of Grants between the Ambrosia Lake fill and the sandstone mine, according to NMED geologist Jerry Schoeppner. The mine was operated by United Nuclear Corporation (formerly known as Kerr-McGee) from 1970 to 1977, and its mineral rights are currently owned by Newmont Gold Corporation. A NMED press release stated that the Section 27 mine is being investigated because pollutant concentrations of total dissolved solids, boron and high pH in the ground water there exceed New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission standards. Schoeppner said no radiation has been detected yet in ground water at the site. In addition to ground water sampling, which will seek to discover how deep and wide the contamination has spread, soil samples will also be taken from nearby waste piles that might directly or indirectly affect the ground water even after cleanup has been completed, he added. The state is just now starting stage one of the cleanup process. Ground water and soil samples will be taken in about March, Schoeppner said. The public will have an opportunity to comment about 90 days after NMED receives information about the results of the stage-one investigation. Stage two of the abatement plan will include a proposal for cleaning up the contamination. For more information, call Schoeppner at (505) 827-0652 or NMED communications director Jon Goldstein at (505) 827-0314. By Marian Hamilton Copyright © 2004Cibola County Beacon. ***************************************************************** 49 asahi.com: NUCLEAR FUEL RECYCLING: Acid test The Asahi Shimbun The Rokkasho reprocessing plant begins a crucial test to determine the viability of extracting plutonium from spent nuclear fuel. `There is no risk of a chain reaction occurring (with depleted uranium) ... .' JAPAN NUCLEAR FUEL OFFICIAL ĄĄDiscussing the safety of the test The government's program to recycle spent nuclear fuel kicks into high gear today when the country's first commercial reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture, finally begins tests using uranium. Much attention is focused on the tests: Any flaws or accidents that reveal the potential for radioactive contamination could jeopardize the entire recycling plan. Over the next year, the plant, built and operated by Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd., is expected to run tests using about 53 tons of depleted uranium left over from the enrichment of natural uranium to make fuel. Originally scheduled to begin in June of last year, the tests were delayed by the discovery in 2002 of construction flaws in the pool used to store spent fuel. The reprocessing facility, built at a cost of 2.14 trillion yen, is located on a vast 3.8-million-square-meter compound in a remote site in the northern part of the prefecture. In its final stage, the test will involve extracting plutonium from spent fuel that is cut into small pieces several centimeters in size and chemically treated with nitric acid. Because the plutonium can then be used as fuel in reactors, the recycling program has been hailed as an answer to the nation's problem of energy security. The hope is to process up to 800 tons of the 900 to 1,000 tons of spent fuel produced at power plants every year, yielding about 4.5 tons of plutonium. Initially, the plutonium was meant for use in fast-breeder reactors, but plans changed after an accident at the nation's sole prototype fast-breeder reactor, Monju, in 1995. Now, the plan is to mix plutonium with uranium for use as a fuel in conventional light-water reactors. Since its major facilities were completed in 2001, the Rokkasho plant has geared up for operations in stages, first by running tests with water and chemicals. The latest test involving depleted uranium will determine whether the spent fuel can be safely cut up into pieces and dissolved in nitric acid. The final stage, called the active test, in which spent fuel is actually reprocessed, is scheduled to begin in December 2005. This month, Japan Nuclear Fuel sought to reassure locals in leaflets handed out to each of the 4,000 households in the Rokkasho area. The company says that the test will only raise by an estimated one-10,000th the level of naturally existing radioactivity in the area. The company also took the unusual step of posting on its Web site 190 potential emergency scenarios, including possible leaks of low-level radioactive wastewater from pipe joints and breakdowns of the machinery used to cut the spent fuel into pieces. In each case, however, the company concluded that the environment would not be seriously affected. The depleted uranium to be used in the test contains less fission-prone uranium-235 than does natural uranium and is thus easier to handle. ``There is no risk of a chain reaction occurring (with depleted uranium) and no need to even think about people being seriously exposed to radioactivity,'' said an official with Japan Nuclear Fuel. Because of the low risk, depleted uranium has been used in tests at other nuclear facilities. However, when the Tokai Reprocessing Plant for research and development, run by the Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute in Ibaraki Prefecture, conducted a uranium test for 19 months from 1975, 39 incidents of minor trouble involving the substance were reported. Government officials are eager to avoid a repeat of the sodium leaks that plagued the Monju prototype fast-breeder reactor in the 1995 accident. It was that accident that led the government to suspend development of fast-breeder reactors for commercial use. A similar serious accident at Rokkasho could spell the end of the nation's nuclear fuel recycling program. In June, the government's Atomic Energy Commission brought together experts to debate whether the current nuclear fuel recycling plan should proceed. They concluded last month that although the current plan is more costly than not recycling spent nuclear fuel at all, it was a good plan and should proceed. But some nuclear experts warn it will take two to three years to fix problems that may arise during the uranium test and that the Rokkasho facility may miss the target date of July 2006 to start operations. The Rokkasho facility can anticipate running into trouble. The French company Cogema, which offers technical support to Japan Nuclear Fuel, has reported about 1,500 troubling incidents of some kind at the company's nuclear recycling plants since the 1990s. Hideyuki Ban, co-director of the Citizens' Nuclear Information Center, cautioned the Atomic Energy Commission's panel that the Rokkasho facility may fail to function even up to half of its capabilities. And unless the uranium test is an overwhelming success, the power companies may once again urge that the recycling program be scrapped altogether. Because it requires such careful handling to prevent radioactive contamination, utilities operating nuclear power plants have been concerned about taking the next step of reprocessing actual spent nuclear fuel. Decommissioning costs also begin to mount. It is estimated it would cost 450 billion yen to decommission Rokkasho after the uranium test. But the cost jumps to an estimated 1.55 trillion yen if spent fuel is processed.(IHT/Asahi: December 21,2004) [Copyright Asahi Shimbun. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 50 VANUNU NOMINATED FOR NOBEL PEACE PRIZE BY LAUREATE MAIREAD Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:20:45 -0800 QmaguireZXmordechaiXvanunuXQinfoX&QactionXalertX44QdecemberX2i2oo4QfromXtheusQcampaignXtoQZ X-Temp-Subjectphrase2: YES prize X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on darwin.ctyme.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=ADDR_FREE,BAYES_00, FORGED_RCVD_HELO,FROM_ORG,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,SUBJ_PHRASE2,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=no version=3.0.2 Free Mordechai Vanunu - Info & Action Alert #44 - December 21, 2004 From the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu http://www.vanunu.com and http://www.nonviolence.org/vanunu/ ** PLEASE FORWARD TO SYMPATHETIC LISTS ** 1) Whistleblower Vanunu Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize by Laureate Mairead Maguire 2) Write to Mordechai Vanunu ========================================== [On December 19, over 40 journalists, including seven T.V. cameras, attended a standing room only press conference in East Jerusalem to hear Mairead Maguire, Mordechai Vanunu and Issam Makhoul. Below is the press release issued afterwards by the International Campaign to Free Vanunu.] PRESS RELEASE INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO FREE VANUNU WHISTLEBLOWER VANUNU NOMINATED FOR NOBEL PEACE PRIZE BY LAUREATE MAIREAD MAGUIRE KNESSET MEMBER CALLS FOR VANUNU'S FREEDOM In a press conference held in East Jerusalem on December 19, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire (Ireland), announced that she is nominating Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu for the prize in 2005. Vanunu has been nominated for the prize every year since 1989. Maguire received the Nobel Prize in 1976, in recognition of her work for peace in Ireland. "Mordechai Vanunu has paid a heavy price in order to protect us all from nuclear weapons. We are all indebted to him for telling the truth to power and I have come to thank him on behalf of his human family," Maguire said. Explaining that she had arrived in Israel from a women's peace conference in Jordan, Maguire urged Israelis and Palestinians to work nonviolently for peace. The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate urged the Israeli government to free Vanunu from the restrictions that keep him hostage in Israel and to "let Mordechai come home for Christmas." Maguire added, that she would continue to nominate Vanunu for the award "until he gets it." Issam Makhoul, Member of the Israeli Parliament (Knesset), who in February 2000 initiated the first parliamentary debate on nuclear policy ever to be held in Israel, stated: "Only those who struggle for total disarmament of the Middle East, including Israel, of all weapons of mass destruction - nuclear, biological and chemical - has the moral right to condemn Iran for its nuclear project. The countries that equip Israel with the means to launch nuclear warheads, that supply it with submarines and enable it to develop its missiles, do not have the moral right to condemn the Iranian nuclear project. Anyone who opposes the Iranian project must also oppose the Israeli nuclear arsenal. "Along with Mordechai Vanunu, I and other Israeli activists refuse to be silenced. We continue to demand, that our government reveal the truth about its WMDs, enable a full international inspection of all WMD sites and dismantle its arsenal. To this end, we are currently involved in organizing an international conference on a nuclear-free Mediterranean area, to be held in April 2005. This date marks the first anniversary of Vanunu's release from prison. This date will hopefully mark the beginning of an anti-nuclear movement in Israel. "Mordechai Vanunu is not a traitor, he is an Israeli hero. The nuclear bomb does not protect Israel, it endangers Israel." Mordechai Vanunu , recently elected rector of Glasgow University in Scotland, described the restrictions that were imposed on him when he was released from 18 years imprisonment, in April 2004, the subsequent police harassment and threats to which he has been subjected, and the impact that they have on his ability to rebuild his life. Asked why he refuses to speak to the Israeli media in Hebrew, Vanunu answered - in Hebrew: "The government of Israel refuses to recognize my human rights. I am prohibited from speaking to foreigners. I say to the Israeli public: I am not your enemy. All I want is for Israel to abolish its nuclear weapons, to respect the rights of the Palestinian people and to let me go free." Continuing in English, Vanunu stated, that he has no further secrets to reveal about Israel's nuclear reactor and that he demands the right to express his anti-nuclear views, to speak freely to the media and to write his prison memoirs. All he wants for Christmas, Vanunu said, was to be free to leave Israel and celebrate with his adoptive family in the USA. Contact information: In Israel: Rayna Moss: Tel. 972-507-368236, email: legalese@netvision.net.il In the USA: Felice Cohen-Joppa, Tel/Fax 520-323-8697, email: freevanunu@mindspring.com In Britain: Ernest Rodker, Tel/Fax: +44 20 7378 9324 e-mail: campaign@vanunu.freeserve.co.uk In Norway: Fredrik Heffermehl,Tel. +47-2244 8003 Fax: +47-2244 7616 email: fredpax@online.no www.vanunu.com www.vanunu.co.uk www.vanunu.org ============== 2) Write to Mordechai Mordechai would love to hear from his friends and supporters. You can write to him at: Mordechai Vanunu c/o Cathedral Church of St. George 20 Nablus Road PO Box 19018 Jerusalem 91190 Israel and email him at ================= If you would like to receive these alerts directly, please subscribe by sending a blank e-mail to free_vanunu-subscribe@yahoogroups.com -end- Felice Cohen-Joppa Coordinator U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu POB 43384 Tucson, AZ 85733 Phone/Fax 520-323-8697 freevanunu@mindspring.com www.nonviolence.org/vanunu ***************************************************************** 51 UC loses nuclear weapons program (8/9) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:00:20 -0600 (CST) http://www.sfbayview.com/120104/nuclearcorridor120104.shtml The 2004 election shifts the nuclear corridor to New Mexico and Texas UC Regents lose nuclear weapons program, Part 8 by Leuren Moret The Chinese Sunburn missile, called the most lethal missile in the world today, makes the U.S. Navy obsolete. Some people say Domenici is a sucker for big science. And they may be right. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., when asked at a press conference in August 2004 if his vigorous support for his states Los Alamos National Laboratory had helped create a culture of complacency that contributed to last months security and safety lapses, in Science, vol. 305, Aug. 20, 2004, p. 1103 The continuation of a misguided and obsolete nuclear weapons and nuclear energy policy is guaranteed by a second Bush term and Republicans gaining more U.S. Senate seats. A planned New Mexico-Texas nuclear corridor (see The 2004 Election in References below) can be expected to move forward with new energy and funding. The University of Texas and Texas A&M are likely partners in not only nuclear weapons research and development, but they will be involved with the development of bioweapons as well. Three of the eight primary sites for the nuclear weapons program are located in New Mexico and Texas at Los Alamos, Sandia and Pantex. Plans are underway for a new facility near Eunice, New Mexico, for a privately run uranium enrichment facility and a low-level nuclear waste dump nearby in Andrews County, Texas. A new modern pit facility for producing plutonium pits planned at a site such as Los Alamos, Pantex or the Waste Isolation Pilot Program (WIPP) near Carlsbad was recently defeated in Congress. This nuclear corridor will expand with other weapons systems development and increase the need for security and more involvement with Homeland Security and border issues. Homeland Security funds will flow into local universities, and the border will become a test zone for biometrics technologies. Surveillance, control and security technologies are a necessity for the secret research and development in the area, and they are the mandate of Homeland Security. The citizens in West Texas and Eastern New Mexico, poor regions of both states, will offer little resistance as new jobs and development in the region offer a better living. This has been a pattern for decades throughout the nuclear weapons program. A broken promise It's time to place the blame for high oil prices where it belongs on the lack of progress in energy technology. - Michael Mandel, chief economist, Business Week, Aug. 2, 2004 The only problem with this planned nuclear renaissance is that it holds a broken promise and false hope of better security and cheap energy for the United States. It is just another pork barrel project and misguided effort, which reflects the inability of the U.S. to embrace, develop and promote alternative energy sources. The truth is that nuclear weapons and conventional strategic military power are obsolete. Scalar electromagnetic weapons (see Scalar Weapons) were developed in Russia in the middle of the last century and are now held by at least five countries. The powerful electromagnetic pulse they release can quickly dud all nuclear weapons in the U.S. arsenal and fry the highly centralized electronic grid of the U.S. in 10 minutes. This would destroy the U.S. economy. There have already been terrorist attempts by the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo Buddhist sect to use them against the U.S. (see Tesla Doom Weapons). In addition, the Russian 3M-82 Moskit anti-ship cruise missile, called the SS-N-22 Sunburn by NATO, is a weapon that the U.S. Navy currently has no defense against (see The Sunburn). It has been called the most lethal missile in the world today, and Russia has sold them to India, China, Viet Nam, Cuba and Iran. The Sunburn can deliver a 200-300 kiloton nuclear payload, or a 750 pound conventional warhead, at three times the speed of sound (Mach 3) as low as 9 feet off the ground, making it invisible to radar. And it can elude enemy defenses with violent end maneuvers. It was designed to defeat the U.S. Aegis radar defense system. This missile has made the U.S. Navy obsolete and sitting ducks in any conflict where the Sunburn missile is utilized. China demonstrated this missile in full view of the multinational naval forces during exercises masterminded by the U.S. military in the Pacific last summer to demonstrate our superior military power. Instead, it played out as a military standoff. References The 2004 Election and the New Mexico-Texas Nuclear Corridor by Stefan Wray, Nov. 3, 2004, http://www.iconmedia.org. Scalar weapons: Fer de Lance, Bearden's book about scalar weapons, http://www.cheniere.org/books/ferdelance/index.html; Scalar Wars: The Brave New World of Scalar Electromagnetics, http://www.prahlad.org/pub/bearden/scalar_wars.htm. Some other articles on scalar topics: http://prahlad.org/pub/bearden/index.htm. Tesla Doom Weapons and Aum Shinrikyo by David Guyatt (1997), http://www.deepblacklies.co.uk/doom_weapons_1.htm. The Sunburn - Iran's Awesome Nuclear Anti-Ship Missile, The Weapon That Could Defeat the US in the Gulf by Mark Gaffney, Nov. 2, 2004, http://www.rense.com/general59/theSunburniransawesome.htm. Congressman Seek Resolution to Halt Russian Missile Sales to China, Federation of American Scientists, March 28, 2000, http://www.fas.org/news/taiwan/2000/e-03-28-00-11.htm, http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/moskit.htm. To read Parts 1 through 7 of this series, go to http://www.sfbayview.com/091504/ucregents091504.shtml, http://www.sfbayview.com/092204/nuclearweapons092204.shtml, http://www.sfbayview.com/092904/nuclearweapons2092904.shtml, http://www.sfbayview.com/100604/nuclearweapons100604.shtml, http://www.sfbayview.com/101304/nuclearweapons101304.shtml, http://www.sfbayview.com/110304/ucregents110304.shtml and http://www.sfbayview.com/112404/ucregents112404.shtml. Leuren Moret, a geoscientist who worked at the Livermore nuclear weapons lab where she became a whistleblower in 1991, has survived 13 years of retaliation from the Livermore Lab and the University of California and has lived firsthand the experiences of Karen Silkwood. A radiation specialist, she works around the world educating citizens, the media and lawmakers about the impact of radiation globally on the health of the public and the environment. She assisted with Al-Jazeeras recent report on depleted uranium weapons which quickly became one of the most read articles produced by the website. DU: Washingtons Secret Nuclear War can be read at http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Secret-Nuclear-War14sep04.htm. She is an independent scientist and an environmental commissioner for the City of Berkeley and can be reached at leurenmoret@yahoo.com ***************************************************************** 52 DenverPost.com: Slight taint among Flats deer Only two of the 26 animals tested at the future refuge could have posed any health risk if eaten, officials say. Critics oppose opening the former nuclear weapons site. By Theo Stein Denver Post Staff Writer Thirteen of 26 deer killed at the future Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge had detectable levels of radioactivity in their tissues, but only two had levels high enough to pose a small health risk if consumed by humans, a new study shows. Those findings support a U.S. Fish and Wildlife proposal to allow limited hunting of deer on the former nuclear weapons plant's 6,240 acres, officials said. About 150 deer inhabit the refuge. Meanwhile, a vocal contingent of citizens continues to oppose opening the Rocky Flats refuge to the public because of concerns about the human health risk from exposure to plutonium and other chemicals left in the soil. But at least one longtime Rocky Flats watchdog said the deer sampling results were reassuring. "This is a case where the best science we can apply to the facts indicates there isn't a risk," Victor Holm of the Rocky Flats Citizen Advisory Board said Monday. "This refuge will be a worthwhile addition to open space in the Boulder area." The results from the deer study, released Monday, comes after federal officials finalized a recreation plan that would permit limited hunting and hiking, biking and horseback activity. The refuge is expected to open to the public after the $7.2 billion cleanup is finished in 2006. Refuge manager Dean Rundle said low levels of plutonium, americium and uranium in the sampled deer show that limited hunting - involving roughly a dozen disabled or youth hunters per year - is appropriate. "And we would expect, in time, all those levels would decline, because the source of the pollution would be cleaned up," Rundle said. The chemicals were identified in tests of deer bone, organs and muscle tissue, according to federal biologist Mark Sattelberg. But he added that the levels of two chemicals, uranium and americium, were similar to background levels detected in deer collected near Fort Collins and at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal near Commerce City, another wildlife refuge created around a Cold War-era weapons plant. Under the worst-case scenario, a human who consumed the most highly contaminated deer for 70 years would risk a 1 in 210,000 chance of developing cancer, Sattelberg said. However, others worry about lingering health risks from radioactivity in soil and vegetation near the old Rocky Flats plant, which released plutonium byproducts and other wastes during a series of fires and spills before the FBI raid that shut the facility in 1989. Len Ackland, a University of Colorado journalism professor who wrote a book on the site's history, remains skeptical of the federal plans. He wonders what undisclosed problems have led the Department of Energy to permanently close off roughly 1,000 acres at the site, including the former industrial complex where plutonium bomb triggers were manufactured. "If one-sixth of the site is too contaminated for the Fish and Wildlife Service to take ownership, then why is the agency continuing with their plans to open (the refuge) to public use?" Ackland asked. Agency officials said they need to maintain control over that area to monitor groundwater contamination and armored soil and rock covers that will be built over contaminated areas. In addition to limited public access to trails, refuge managers will seek to improve habitat for the Preble's meadow jumping mouse and may reintroduce the sharp-tailed grouse, a chunky plains game bird. Staff writer Theo Stein can be reached at 303-820-1657 or tstein@denverpost.com All contents Copyright 2004 The Denver Post or other copyright ***************************************************************** 53 lamonitor.com: LANL contract watched MONITOR STAFF REPORT Two Colorado Universities were represented at last week's conference for companies and institutions with an interest in the contract to manage Los Alamos National Laboratory. Tom Boyd, a faculty member in the Geophysics Department of the Colorado School of Mines said in a telephone interview Tuesday that CSM was interested in developing collaborative educational programs with Los Alamos, building on past ties. "We're interested in developing graduate and intern programs," he said. The Associated Press reported that a University of Colorado System official said they were interested in partnering with a primary bidder, to help create spinoff companies from Los Alamos research. "We are not interested in being the primary bidder. That just doesn't match our interests and capabilities," said Jack Burns, vice president for academic affairs and research for the University of Colorado System. Burns declined to say who the primary bidder or the other players would be if the university decides to seek a role in the contract. He said the day-to-day operations of the lab would be handled by some institution other than Colorado. Burns met last week in Albuquerque with U.S. Department of Energy officials, who held a meeting on the draft criteria and met with interested parties. Burns said he left with the sense the DOE wants to see Los Alamos lab be more aggressive in finding commercial uses for the technology developed there. "We can help with producing some new collaborations by brokering a larger consortium in a number of areas - from basic physics to biology," Burns said. Last year, the University of Colorado System helped develop nine new companies; 12 companies started up this year, he said. The Colorado School of Mines, located in Golden, Colo., specializes in engineering and applied science. The Associated Press contributed to this story. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 54 DOE: Reimbursement for Costs of Remedial Action at Active Uranium and FR Doc 04-27864 [Federal Register: December 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 244)] [Notices] [Page 76457] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21de04-36] Thorium Processing Sites AGENCY: Office of Environmental Management, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of the acceptance of Title X claims for reimbursement in fiscal year (FY) 2005 and the acceptance of plans for subsequent remedial action. SUMMARY: This Notice announces the Department of Energy (DOE) acceptance of claims in FY 2005 from eligible active uranium and thorium processing sites for reimbursement under Title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. For FY 2005, Congress has appropriated approximately $80 million for reimbursement of certain costs of remedial action at these sites. Because of the amount of unpaid approved claims within the current reimbursement ceilings (approximately $56 million), DOE plans to accelerate the FY 2005 reimbursements to licensees in advance of the April 30, 2005, regulatory deadline, subject to availability of congressional appropriations for prior year claims that have been previously approved. The approved amount of claims submitted during FY 2004 will be paid by April 30, 2005, subject to the availability of funds. If the available funds are less than the total approved claims, these payments will be prorated, if necessary, based on the amount of available FY 2005 appropriations, unpaid approved claim balances (approximately $56 million), and claims received in May 2004 (approximately $25 million). This notice also announces the DOE acceptance of plans for subsequent decontamination, decommissioning, reclamation, and other remedial action (Plans for Subsequent Remedial Action). If Title X licensees expect to incur remedial action costs for remedial action after December 31, 2007, licensees must submit a Plan for Subsequent Remedial Action during calendar year (CY) 2005 or 2006, and DOE must approve a Plan submitted by a licensee by the end of CY 2007, if the costs incurred after CY 2007 are to be eligible for reimbursement. DATES: The closing date for the submission of claims in FY 2005 is May 2, 2005. These new claims will be processed for payment by April 29, 2006, together with unpaid approved claim balances from prior years, based on the availability of funds from congressional appropriations. Plans for Subsequent Remedial Action may be submitted anytime after January 1, 2005, but no later than December 31, 2006. ADDRESSES: Claims and Plans for Subsequent Remedial Action should be forwarded by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Service Center, Environmental Programs Department, PO Box 5400, Albuquerque, NM 87185-5400, or by express mail to the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Service Center, Environmental Programs Department, H and Pennsylvania Streets, Albuquerque, NM 87116. All claims should be addressed to the attention of Mr. Gilbert Maldonado. Two copies of the claim should be included with each submission. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Gilbert Maldonado at (505) 845-4035 of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Service Center, Environmental Programs Department. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE published a final rule under 10 CFR part 765 in the Federal Register on May 23, 1994, (59 FR 26714) to carry out the requirements of Title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (sections 1001-1004 of Pub. L. 102-486, 42 U.S.C. 2296a et seq.) and to establish the procedures for eligible licensees to submit claims for reimbursement. DOE amended the final rule on June 3, 2003, (68 FR 32955) to adopt several technical and administrative amendments (e.g., statutory increases in the reimbursement ceilings). Title X requires DOE to reimburse eligible uranium and thorium licensees for certain costs of decontamination, decommissioning, reclamation, and other remedial action incurred by licensees at active uranium and thorium processing sites to remediate byproduct material generated as an incident of sales to the United States Government. To be reimbursable, costs of remedial action must be for work which is necessary to comply with applicable requirements of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 7901 et seq.) or, where appropriate, with requirements established by a State pursuant to a discontinuance agreement under section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2021). Claims for reimbursement must be supported by reasonable documentation as determined by DOE in accordance with 10 CFR part 765. Funds for reimbursement will be provided from the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund established at the United States Department of Treasury pursuant to section 1801 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2297g). Payment or obligation of funds shall be subject to the requirements of the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341). Authority: Section 1001-1004 of Public Law 102-486, 106 Stat. 2776 (42 U.S.C. 2296a et seq.). Issued in Washington DC on this 14th of December, 2004. David E. Mathes, Office of Commercial Disposition Options, Office of Logistics and Waste Disposition Enhancements. [FR Doc. 04-27864 Filed 12-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 55 Politics of Oil - The Center for Public Integrity [Politics of Oil] December 22, 2004 Big Oil Wields Ultra Deep Influence Industry demands tax breaks, regulatory changes to hunt for oil at the bottom of the sea. By Laura Peterson WASHINGTON, December 20, 2004 — In the spring of 2001, at a cocktail party on Capitol Hill, a staff member of the House Committee on Science brought up a subject of great interest to a lobbyist for the Gas Technology Institute, a Chicago-area organization that provides research and development for the natural gas industry: Rep. Ralph Hall, an 11-term Texas Democrat who sat on both the science committee and the Committee on Energy and Commerce, was interested in ultra-deepwater drilling and research collaborations between industry and government. In fact, the staffer let on, the science committee was drafting a bill proposing that the government subsidize technology for extracting natural gas and oil from hard-to-reach sources such as sand, rock and the deepest waters of the Gulf of Mexico. This no doubt came as welcome news to the GTI lobbyist, as the organization was already working on developing deepwater drilling technology. And the news would only get better: GTI eventually contributed language to the legislation, which was later incorporated in the 2003 comprehensive energy bill as a program that would allocate more than $2 billion for research into “ultra deepwater and unconventional natural gas technology.” But if GTI’s constituents stood to gain from the measure, many lawmakers saw it as yet another gift to an industry with plenty of market incentive to go after valuable hydrocarbons itself. Now, as Congress places a new energy bill atop its list of priorities for the upcoming session, Gulf-state legislators are shrugging off the skeptics and again promoting the program as beneficial for American energy independence, not to mention hometown jobs. Sidebar U.S. Pushed to Ratify Deep Sea Treaty Dry Land Opinions may differ on exactly when the Earth will pass its peak in oil production, but there is consensus that the day is unnervingly near: the U.S. Department of Energy and the International Energy Agency date it sometime after 2030 , while controversial “peak oil” theorists place it at 2008. In even the most optimistic scenario, humans will have extracted more than half the earth’s oil within the next three decades, after which oil production will begin its inevitable decline. Yet the world’s energy needs will be almost 60 percent higher at that time, according to the IEA. That peak will arrive even faster in the United States, the Energy Department says. U.S. petroleum production will reach its apex at 9.8 million barrels per day in 2009, falling to 8.8 million barrels per day by 2025. Yet domestic demand will increase by almost 40 percent in that period. Similarly, demand for natural gas is projected to increase by 40 percent, while domestic production will only increase by 14 percent. This double whammy of declining production and increasing demand is creating an even greater dependence on imported energy: Net oil imports, which rose from 37 percent of total U.S. petroleum consumption in 1980 to 56 percent in 2003, are projected to account for 68 percent of consumption in 2025. Twenty-one percent of America’s gas will be imported by that year as well. U.S. leaders call this dependence on foreign energy a major national security concern, because of the vulnerability to supply disruptions. Insurgency campaigns in Iraq, pipeline sabotage in Colombia and civil unrest in Nigeria are just a few recent examples of supply interruptions that helped push the price of oil to record highs. Reducing U.S. energy dependency has been a chief priority of administrations dating back to the oil shocks of the 1970s. Reducing dependency on foreign sources of energy means, above all, squeezing every last drop out of domestic ones. But America’s onshore sources are nearly tapped out: oil production from wells on land, for example, fell by 30 percent between 1986 and 1996. Luckily, the United States holds claim to one of the world’s richest oil deposits: the Gulf of Mexico. Digging Deep At the ocean’s edge, the earth gently slopes away from shore before dropping off sharply—a shallow undersea plain known as the continental shelf. International maritime law grants nations certain sovereign rights over their continental shelves; these submerged regions generally fall within the “exclusive economic zones” created by the United Nations Law of the Sea, which extend countries’ territory about 230 miles off their shores. In 1983 President Ronald Reagan established the U.S. exclusive economic zone, in the process creating the world’s largest EEZ: U.S. territorial waters, including those off the Atlantic and Pacific oceans as well as the Gulf of Mexico, constitute an area two-thirds the size of all 50 states combined. Most of that territory is off limits to the energy industry, however: In 1990 President George H. W. Bush placed a moratorium on offshore exploration in 80 percent of the U.S. exclusive economic zone, a ban extended by President Bill Clinton until 2012. Most offshore wells around the world are drilled on the outer reaches of the continental shelf. Early offshore wells were drilled in just a few hundred feet of water, but by the 1980s prospectors had moved into “deep” waters (defined by the U.S. Department of Energy as beyond 1,300 feet), using 3-D seismic imaging to help find reserves beneath the ocean floor. Current technology permits “ultra-deep” drilling that has bored wells under as much as 10,000 feet of water. The Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 requires companies to pay a royalty on each unit of oil and gas produced on U.S. territory. The Minerals Management Service (MMS), created as a bureau of the Department of the Interior to manage and distribute these royalties, today takes in some $6 billion a year. Much of that comes from the sea: Deepwater drilling accounted for more than 60 percent of the production in the Gulf of Mexico, and offshore drilling provided 30 percent of total U.S. oil production in 2002. What’s more, experts believe that the ultra-deepwater reservoirs of the Gulf, particularly in the western portion, could potentially produce as much oil and natural gas as the North Slope of Alaska. But the technology taking the industry into ever-deeper waters comes at a price. Drilling in the extreme temperatures and pressures beneath the ocean presents myriad technical challenges. For example, oil hot from the earth’s core can become so cold upon reaching the sea bed that it can’t move through pumps. This makes ultra-deep drilling exorbitantly expensive, with rigs often costing upwards of $1 billion. As a result, only the “supermajor” companies—such as Brazil’s Petrobras, British Petroleum, Royal Dutch/Shell, ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco—have sufficient resources to invest in ultra-deep research and development. Several smaller companies that provide equipment and other services to the industry also develop technology for ultra-deep drilling, although this is generally through contracts with larger companies. The Deepwater Royalty Relief Act of 1995, which cut royalties owed to the government for oil and gas drilled on federal lands from depths of 200 meters or more, was signed into law by President Bill Clinton as a way to encourage investment in ultra-deep exploration. The act led to a burst of deepwater exploration, but, according to a 2000 Department of Energy report, development was still “not proceeding fast enough to meet the economy’s growing demand or to slow the increasing reliance on imported supplies of oil.” A 2004 MMS report blamed a recent drop-off in deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico on the relative affordability of foreign ventures and the fact that operators don’t have access to many parts of the Gulf. The DOE’s solution was to lend the industry a helping hand. According to that 2000 report, “Offshore Technology Roadmap for the Ultra Deepwater Gulf of Mexico,” ultra-deepwater reservoirs have “the potential to stabilize energy supplies and reduce U.S. dependence on imported sources,” and required incentives such as “targeted royalty relief, R tax credits, and matching research dollars.” Unconventional Solution When the White House asked congressional committees to construct a comprehensive energy bill in 2003, Hall and the House science committee submitted H.R. 238, which would provide billions to develop and commercialize DOE energy technologies. The ultra-deep program found a powerful ally in House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who, staffers say, saw an added benefit in energy industry jobs, which had declined along with oil production. In an April 2004 hearing of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee, DeLay testified that the program would provide maximum benefits for government in the form of royalties, and industry in the form of research dollars that would allow companies to drill deeper. “Too often, government research programs are limited by size and scope, by the vagaries of the budget cycle, and by the lack of adequate incentives for public/private partnerships,” he said. The initiative is essentially two separate programs, one for offshore research and development and another for onshore. Under each, the energy department would establish a consortium of industry, government and university representatives to recommend candidates for federal contracts to conduct research and bring it to U.S. energy companies. The consortia are also empowered to disburse funds and manage contracts. Consortia members are required to disclose any financial interests in companies that applied for contracts; however, they (or the companies they worked for) are not barred from applying for contracts. Proponents say the program would pay off for taxpayers by generating both energy and tax revenue. The Bureau of Economic Geology, a research operation housed at the University of Texas, estimated that royalties from the oil and gas produced from ultra-deep and unconventional methods would pay for the program several times over by 2025, an analysis affirmed by the International Energy Agency. Critics on the Hill, however, worried that the funds allocated to the consortia might vanish before resulting in taxable oil or gas. The program was drafted as a “direct spending” bill, meaning funds would pass directly from the Minerals Management Service to its own account. Together, the programs would receive up to $150 million a year through 2013 from MMS continental shelf royalties. An additional $500 million would be available to the program through annual appropriations, but the primary funding would not be subject to annual review, raising congressional suspicions that the program could become another unwatched, unregulated money pit. If so, it would have been in good company: the Energy Security Act of 2003 contained nearly $24 billion in tax incentives for oil and gas production, including nearly $18 billion in new research programs. The bill passed comfortably in the House, but the Senate stripped out the ultra-deep program before killing the bill in November 2004. In Hill testimony, several members of Congress questioned why the U.S. government should offer help to an industry that saw record receipts and profits in recent years. ExxonMobil, for instance, posted $17.7 billion in income in 2000and recorded profits unmatched by any other U.S. corporation, while the oil giant’s third quarter earnings in 2004 were $5.7 billion, its highest ever. “There are something on the order of 12 rigs in the Gulf today that are drilling to a depth of 5,000 feet or greater,” Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) pointed out at an April 2004 hearing on the program. “Why [should] we be continuing to put research and development funding into an application that has achieved commercial status?” Industry representatives argue that the high costs—and risks—of ultra-deep exploration put a damper on both production and profits. “The technical challenges facing the large oil and gas producers in ultra-deep water is of such a magnitude today, that they can and will
shift their investment and exploration portfolio towards other opportunities” outside the U.S., Arthur Weglein, director of the Seismic Research Program at the University of Houston, testified at the hearing. U.S. government investment in ultra-deep water R would, he added, “help serve the near- and long-term interests of our country.” Yet studies show the energy industry is still investing a good amount of money into deep and ultra-deep drilling: A report by the U.K.-based industry consultants Douglas-Westwood projects worldwide spending on deepwater wells to increase by 22 percent to $56 billion over the next five years. The Gulf of Mexico and Africa account for 70 percent of this expenditure. In addition, the government itself already spends millions on oil and gas research and development: DOE’s Fossil Energy Research and Development program spent $672 million in 2004, including $43 million on gas programs and $35 million on oil programs. “I’m not sure we need any more help on perfecting ultra-deep drilling because industry is doing it—they figured it out,” Matt Simmons, an energy consultant and head of a Houston-based investment banking firm specializing in the energy industry, says. “If the government created a new pool of energy research and development funds, could anything good come out of it? Yes, but you need a judicious administrator or it becomes a pork barrel; it gets created, no one pays attention, and the majors say, ‘Let’s cut out our R budget and use this.’ That would be a shame.” In fact, some of the bill’s opponents were super-major oil companies themselves, which stand to lose what they consider proprietary technology. According to documents filed with the House of Representatives, ExxonMobil lobbied on H.R. 238 in 2003, although the documents don’t say whether it lobbied in favor or against it. But Hill staffers say the super-majors were not particularly vocal in their protest, as the energy bill was certainly beneficent for the energy industry overall. In fact, a wide range of industries that would benefit from the program turned out to testify or lobby on its behalf, such as the Independent Petroleum Association of America—a lobbying group representing smaller oil companies—and universities with petroleum engineering programs that stood to win federal research contracts, such as the University of Houston and New Mexico Tech. Overall, parties with a stated interest in energy policy spent $388 million lobbying Congress in 2003, the year of the energy bill’s journey. The Next Frontier Staffers for Hall (who has since joined the Republican Party) and DeLay say the legislators will make every effort to keep the program in the next energy bill. They will likely face a steep challenge: Senators named the high cost and profusion of pork the main factors behind the death of the last bill. But the energy industry will doubtlessly reinvigorate its efforts in support of the program. One enterprise in particular is the Hill favorite to score the lucrative contract for managing federal contracts on behalf of the consortium: the Gas Technology Institute. Whether or not the program makes it into the law that will direct the country’s future energy policy, it demonstrates how anxiety over energy shortfalls is compelling the U.S. government to put itself front and center in the race toward the earth’s final energy frontiers. Despite energy companies’ claims that overwhelming demand doesn’t provide sufficient incentive for investment in technology that will lead to the next great gusher, with this program the U.S. government may be throwing money at a solution rather than a problem. © 2004, The Center for Public Integrity. All rights reserved. IMPORTANT: 910 17th Street, NW · 7th Floor · Washington, DC 20006 · Tel. (202) 466-1300 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************