*****************************************************************
12/22/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.304
*****************************************************************
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 [NYTr] Iran 'will defend nuclear sites'
2 BBC: Iran 'detained 10 atomic spies'
3 GP: Nuclear Iran: Race Against Time
4 MN: U.S. trying to produce fake nuclear documents implicating Iran
5 EUbusiness: EU-US cooperation on Iranian nuclear question
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Has Detained Over 10 on Spy Charges
7 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Chung: North should abandon nuclear weapons
8 YWS: Ban Expresses Regret at Lack of Progress on Nuclear Talks
9 YWS: Seoul Urges U.S., N. Korea to Make Historic Decision on Nuke Ro
10 ITAR-TASS: Russia, US note importance of Korean peninsula nuclear fr
11 UN Nuclear Watchdog UN New Project For Peaceful Use Of Technology
12 The Hindu: Kalam justifies India's nuclear programme
13 BBC: Breaking the Khan network
14 Indian Express: India must have veto rights - PM
15 DAWN: Terrorism, N-issue discussed with Russia -
NUCLEAR REACTORS
16 US: APP.COM: Utility execs say merger will improve nuclear plants
17 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th
18 Scotsman.com: Investors Back British Energy Shake-Up
19 US: Vermont Guardian: States nuclear response plan flawed
20 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AH58 Minor rule changes
21 US: NRC: Amergen Energy Company, LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generatin
NUCLEAR SAFETY
22 US: Lahontan Valley News: Air samples show elevated tungsten, uraniu
23 Taipei Times: Uranium tests begin amid protests
24 Bellona: Sevmash shipyard tests hull of new Russian nuclear submarin
25 US: Times Argus: Officials to meet over failed nuclear evacuation te
26 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes: Meeting
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
27 US: Pasadena Star-News: City could be forced to close more wells
28 US: Lahontan Valley News: Good that EPA is taking charge of mine cle
29 US: Intelligencer: Officials to discuss cleanup of Revere site
30 Daily Yomiuri: Problems on road to N-dream
31 US: Auburn Journal: Court strikes county OK of Teichert mine
32 Daily Yomiuri: Push N-fuel cycle plan by building confidence
33 US: Las Vegas RJ: EPA to lead cleanupof abandoned mine
34 RGJJ: Judge wants Yucca Mountain silicosis lawsuit revised
35 NRC: NRC Extends Public Comment Period on Proposed Uranium Enrichmen
36 US: Salt Lake Tribune - Opinion: Huntsman should act
37 Pahrump Valley Times: Vote was for Bush, not for nuke project
38 US: OA Online News: Waste Control schedules meeting
39 US: Boston Globe: State tells military to clean up mess at Camp Edwa
40 asahi.com: Rokkasho plant begins crucial uranium test
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
41 UC loses nuclear weapons program (9/9)
42 chillicothe gazette: USEC: $18M payout wouldn't sink firm -
43 Washington Times: Secretary Abraham's tenure
44 Tri-City Herald: Fluor still reviewing K Basin dive plan
45 PISJ: Otter seeks an edge with announcement for governor's race
OTHER NUCLEAR
46 Energy crunch: Windmills just won't get it done
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Iran 'will defend nuclear sites'
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:32:57 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
sent by Bob Richards
BBC News - Dec 22, 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4118545.stm
Iran 'will defend nuclear sites'
Iran's military is on standby in case of an attack against its
nuclear facilities, the country's top army commander has said.
Gen Mohammad Salimi said training had been suspended to concentrate
on patrols close to potential targets.
Iran suspects that Israel may attack its nuclear sites because of
fears that Tehran is developing nuclear weapons.
Iran says it held at least 10 people for allegedly spying on atomic
sites for Israel and the US in the past year.
"The air force has been ordered to protect the nuclear sites, using
all its power," Gen Salimi told a government newspaper.
"All our forces including land forces, anti-aircraft [and] radar
tactics are protecting the nuclear sites and an attack on them will
not be simple," he added.
Gen Salimi's comments came amid claims that US military planners
have run simulations of a complex attack on Iran's nuclear sites.
The US magazine Atlantic Monthly reported that the Pentagon had
simulated a three-stage attack on Iran, beginning with operations
against suspected nuclear bases.
'Spies' held
At an Iranian cabinet meeting, Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi said
those arrested for spying had been working in Iran for the CIA and
Mossad.
An official said that three of those arrested had been working
within the state's nuclear programme itself.
In August, Tehran announced the arrest of a number of spies accused
of supplying information to other states.
"More than 10 nuclear spies were arrested during the current Iranian
year," Mr Yunesi is quoted as saying by the official Irna news agency.
He said the 10, whom he accused of working for the CIA and Mossad,
were arrested in Tehran and Hormuzgan in southern Iran.
The people were being held in the custody of the revolutionary
court, he said.
The US accuses Iran of seeking nuclear weapons.
Iran denies this, saying that its nuclear development programme is
purely for peaceful, energy-generating purposes.
*
Search the NYTr Archives at:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
2 BBC: Iran 'detained 10 atomic spies'
Last Updated: Wednesday, 22 December, 2004
[Worker at Iran's Isfahan nuclear facility]
Iran denies claims that it wants to build nuclear weapons
The authorities in Iran say more than 10 people have been
arrested in the past year accused of spying on its atomic
programme for Israel and the US.
An official said that three of those arrested had been working
within the state's nuclear programme itself.
Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi said those arrested had been
working in Iran for the CIA and Mossad.
In August, Tehran announced the arrest of a number of spies
accused of supplying information to other states.
"More than 10 nuclear spies were arrested during the current
Iranian year," Mr Yunesi is quoted as saying by the official Irna
news agency.
"They have been working for the CIA and Mossad and were arrested
in Tehran and Hormuzgan" in Southern Iran, he added.
The people are being held in the custody of the revolutionary
court, he said.
The US accuses Iran of seeking nuclear weapons.
Iran denies this, saying that its nuclear development programme
is purely for peaceful, energy-generating purposes.
*****************************************************************
3 GP: Nuclear Iran: Race Against Time
12/23/2004 By Ryan Mauro
“If one day, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons
currently in Israel’s possession—on that day this method of
global arrogance would come to an end. This is because the use of
a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground,
whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.” ---Former
Iranian President Rafsanjani on December 14, 2001.
During the Presidential campaign, Iran became one of the major
foreign policy crisis issues, with both candidates agreeing it's
the world's greatest threat today. While North Korea possesses
nuclear weapons, and the Administration has failed to find any
“actual” weapons in Iraq, Iran is fast at work on its own
nuclear arsenal. The world’s most active state sponsor of
terrorism will have it's own nuclear bomb in one or two years.
And worse, the actual creation of the fissile material needed
for the bomb is set to begin within months. From this point,
sanctions or bombing raids will be unable to adequately delay
the nuclear program.
Some even claim Iran already has nuclear weapons. The former
director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and
Unconventional Warfare, Yossef Bodansky, has claimed just that
in his book, "The High Cost of Peace". Before I quote from that
book, please take note that I lack the ability to confirm these
claims (although I have seen these same details in the overseas
press reports over the years). It is possible that Iran obtained
nuclear devices in the late 1980s or early 1990s, but that these
devices are unable to be used—the book does not say if the
status of the weapons is known. The book’s statements on Iran’s
nuclear program are as follows:
“Even before the final Soviet breakup, and while Tehran was
beginning its talks with Beijing, Iranian intelligence
operatives were scouring Soviet Central Asia for weapons,
technologies, and nuclear material, in search of a shortcut to
operational nuclear capabilities. In summer 1991, one of these
operatives was offered access to nuclear weapons in Kazakhstan.
Tehran dispatched a delegation of senior officials, including
US-educated physicists, who returned convinced that the offer
was genuine. In early September, the Iranian delegation returned
to Kazakhstan to renew negotiations. Their Kazakh interlocutor
told them he was speaking for a group of about twenty-five
security, scientific, and government officials who were willing
to obtain the ‘atomic bombs’ for Iran. The weapons would come in
separate pieces from different sites throughout Central Asia,
but the group would assemble these pieces into operational
weapons. At the same time, the Iranians and their allies
initiated a comprehensive effort to acquire delivery
capabilities—both ballistic missiles and strike aircraft.
These developments boosted Tehran’s confidence in its ability
to implement its grand strategic design. As Hashemi-Rafsanjani
would put it later in the year, it had fallen to Iran to acquire
nuclear weapons for the entire region, if only because the Arabs
had proved incapable of doing so. Such weapons would be the key
to a rejuvenated and vibrant Islamic unity. With them,
Hashemi-Rafsanjani concluded, it would be possible to eliminate
the Western presence in the Middle East and liberate
Jerusalem....
...In December, the Kazakh deal came to fruitition, and Iran
made its first purchase of nuclear weapons. The deal included
two 40-kiloton warheads for a SCUD-type surface-to-surface
ballistic missile; one aerial bomb of the type carried by a
MiG-27; and one 152-mm nuclear artillery shell. These weapons
reached initial operational status in late January 1992 and full
operational status a few months later.”[1]
“On October 10, Khameini made an inspection tour of the special
facilities of the Air Force’s Eighty Shahid Babai Base in
Isfahan, where Iran’s aerial nuclear bomb was stored. Iran
intended to use this bomb in a kamikaze-style attack against a
US Navy carrier in the Persian Gulf. Iran had several North
Korean-trained pilots willing to undertake the mission, all of
them with extensive operational experience, qualified on the
latest Soviet aircraft.
Iran’s two nuclear warheads were fitted to their ballistic
missiles at Isfahan, although the warheads themselves were
usually stored in Lavizan, in the Tehran area. Khameini also
visited these facilities and discussed the shift of emphasis
from indigenous development of missiles to massive purchases
abroad. He emphasized the long-range importance of developing
and producing strategic weapons in Iran; however, he explained,
under certain emergency conditions foreign weapons could be
acquired ‘with our pride intact’.
While all this was going on, Tehran was not neglecting its
nuclear arsenal. In the fall of 1992, Iran signed a new deal
with officials in Kazakhstan for the purchase of four 50-kiloton
nuclear warheads, upgraded and adapted to fit on the SSMs
purchased from North Korea...Rahmani confirmed that four
warheads had indeed been purchased but added that their delivery
was postponed due to ‘a technical problem’—ensuring clandestine
support. The warheads were eventually shipped to North Korea,
where they were optimized for the soon-to-be-delivered Nodong-1
SSMs.”[2]
In October 2002, Debkafile, which apparently has close ties to
Israeli intelligence, reported that they believed that Iran had
a “basic” nuclear bomb do to the assistance of scientists and
technicians from Pakistan, Russia, China and North Korea.[3] Of
course, I cannot confirm if this is true, and there has been
little corroboration to support the claim. However, there is
evidence that Iran is discussing the purchase of North Korean
nuclear weapons.
As a close ally of the Communist regime, and the regime’s top
customer, such negotiations can be assumed to be occurring. It
is understood by the experts that North Korea first seeks to
secure its future by creating a nuclear deterrent—but once that
deterrent is achieved, it is likely entire nuclear bombs or
critical components will be sold for large amounts of money. The
cash-strapped regime’s most likely customer for this is of
course, Iran. Should sanctions delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions,
or should an attack by Israel or America become imminent, it is
likely that Iran will opt to buy a nuclear weapon. It appears
that the Iranians feel that obtaining such a bomb before the
West can take action will secure the regime from such action.
Both Debkafile and terrorism expert, Michael Ledeen (author of
War Against the Terror Masters) have written articles confirming
that negotiations have been taking place since the first quarter
of 2003. Unfortunately, there is no reporting to confirm or deny
if a deal has been reached. The only thing that can be confirmed
is that at the very least, North Korea is helping Iran in its
quest for an Islamic bomb.
Over the summer, the government of South Korea confirmed that
teams of North Korean and Iranian nuclear scientists had several
meetings.[4] The meetings began producing results in August, if
the media reports are to be trusted. Negotiations for the
purchase of a Taepo-Dong-2 ballistic missile by Iran were
reported to be in their “advanced stages”, probably to be
finished in mid-October.[5] The missile gives Iran the ability
to strike mostly anywhere in Europe and Asia. This caused a
media frenzy, and soon reports began filtering out about the
cooperation between the two rogue states.
The mainstream press, particularly in Japan, began finding out
the details of the duo’s talks. Among the revelations were that:
Korean military scientists were recently spotted entering
suspected nuclear sites in Iran, possibly to test a nuclear
warhead; so many Koreans are in Iran that a special Caspian Sea
resort was made for them; negotiations for an agreement on the
joint development of nuclear warheads are set to be finished in
October; and Iranian nuclear experts had visited North Korea in
March, April and May, possibly to learn how to keep the program
alive despite inspections and internal pressure.[6]
The Bush Administration and Israel apparently believes Iran is
not yet a nuclear power, but will be around 2005. We cannot know
the status of their nuclear weapons capabilities. There are
several possibilities:
A: The reports are untrue, and Iran has no nuclear weapon. The
main concern truly is about Iran’s plans to produce a nuke on
its own.
B: The reports are true, and Iran has nuclear weapons bought
abroad.
C: The reports are true, and Iran has bought nukes abroad, but
they are inoperable.
It is anybody’s guess which of the possibilities is accurate.
Ever since members of the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, an Iranian
opposition group labeled as a terrorist organization (some
members are militant, most are now just attached to the
opposition’s efforts) disarmed in Iraq in late May, 2003 and
gave intelligence to the US, the pressure on Iran has built up.
The political branch of MEK reported on May 26th that Iran had
two uranium-enrichment facilities west of Tehran, which operate
as “satellite plants” to the larger facility centered at Natanz.
The Iranians reportedly had already installed several
centrifuges at one of the sites. The purpose of the sites,
besides to assist in the nuclear program, is to take over the
work of the Natanz site should it be bombed. The dissidents
explained that there were small, dispersed sites around Iran to
prepare for an Israeli or American air campaign, and they listed
8 businesses used as front companies to obtain components for
the program.[7] They confirmed that the goal set by Iran was to
become a nuclear power in 2005.[8]
It didn’t take long for the IAEA to report that Iran was
suspected of violating international treaty, by concealing the
import of nuclear materials and not reporting the construction
of sites to process uranium.[9] From the wealth of information
provided by the dissidents, the United States and Israel agreed
that they’re window of opportunity amounted to less than a year,
because at the earliest, Iran could begin producing nukes in the
end of the fall of 2004. By the summer of 2004, the uranium
enrichment program will be finished, and therefore, unstoppable
by anything short of regime change. At the end of 2007, the
infrastructure will be large enough and advanced enough to allow
for the production of up to 15 nuclear weapons a year.[10]
Eventually, no air raid would be able to destroy their plans.
The facilities were large in number, were disguised, and
dispersed. Some were even hardened to protect against
explosions.[11]
By the beginning of July, the pressure had an impact on the
IAEA to express concern about Iran.
Inspectors stated that they were “puzzled” by Iran’s uranium
program, and said they were receiving unsatisfactory answers to
their questions about the activity related to converting
imported uranium to enriched uranium metal. Nevertheless, the
IAEA refused to cite Iran as in direct violation of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty.[12] The IAEA revelations revealed
several things:
- In 1991, Iran imported 1.8 kilograms of uranium, and did not
declare it.
- Traces of UF6 were found in soil samples at Natanz, which
indicated the centrifuges may have already been used.
- Iran was developing sophisticated laser technology that can be
used to enrich uranium. Iran has already converted 400 kg of UF4
into uranium metal (done in 2000) at the Jabr Ibn Hayan
Multipurpose Labs at the Tehran Nuclear Research Center. UF4,
or, uranium tetraflouride, is a compound that comes from uranium
processing. UF6, or uranium hexafluoride, is another compound
that indicates the process of uranium enrichment. The fact that
UF6 was found, and that UF4 can be confirmed to be converted
into metal, is a clear sign of an ongoing nuclear program.[13]
- The report acknowledged that there were signs that Iran had
used UF6 gas bought from China (and not declared) and used it to
test four centrifuges, as part of the plan to make a centrifuge
production facility at Natanz. Inspectors noticed that 1.9
kilograms was missing from the containers, and may have been
used. Iran claims that over the many years they had the
containers, the sealing caps became loose and the gas
evaporated. Further inspection however showed that the caps
fitted perfectly, and there was no way for evaporation to
occur.[14]
The Los Angeles Times finished their three-month investigation
into the matter in the first week of August. They confirmed that
Iran was trying to obtain nuclear bombs, had a concealment
program to hide it, and was using the scientists and technology
of Russia, China, Pakistan and North Korea to pursue it. It
concluded that several research labs were hidden, and that one
plant was disguised as a watch-making factory in Tehran. It also
mentioned that in June, inspectors were denied access to two
large rooms and barred from testing soil samples at a factory
known as Kalaye Electric Company.[15] The New York Times was
also convinced, stating that Iran appeared to be planning to
mine uranium, convert it to a gas, and transform it into nuclear
fuel using centrifuges. The current array of 1,000 centrifuges
was enough to make one nuke a year. They also opined that the
reason Iran was focusing mainly on using uranium as a nuclear
fuel was because using plutonium requires reprocessing spent
nuclear fuel, which requires a reprocessing plant.[16] Such a
plant is believed to be in its infant stages of construction
today. By the end of the month, Iran was forced to admit that
they had foreign assistance in building a uranium enrichment
facility south of Tehran, which the UN evidence indicated was
Pakistan.[17]
This is certainly what Israeli intelligence indicated.
Debkafile reported that in the middle of May, President
Musharraf of Pakistan had dispatched a team of nuclear engineers
to Iran with blueprints for the construction of gas centrifuges,
and the team still is in Iran.[18]
On September 8th, the IAEA issued another warning about Iran.
Inspectors had visited an underground uranium enrichment
facility at Natanz that contained approximately 1,000 gas
centrifuges, accommodations for about 1,000 people, and
components for up to 50,000 centrifuges. This is the same
facility that traces of weapons-grade uranium was found, which
Iran only recently admitted to having once the dissidents
revealed it (the site was denied for the past five years).
Sophisticated equipment to enrich uranium to the level needed
for use in nuclear weapons was found. There were two large halls
inside the site that have the features of a facility used to
conduct uranium enrichment. The halls were 25 feet underground
with a concrete barrier that is eight feet thick, apparently to
protect the site from air assault.[19]
Despite denials, Iran was forced to admit they used nuclear
materials for research and have made uranium metal. There was
also concern about a heavy-water facility at Arak, also kept
secret and undeclared until exiles revealed it. If Iran was
simply going for an alternate fuel supply, there’d be no purpose
for a heavy-water facility! The Bushehr complex is to be run by
light-water reactor. But heavy water, with an extra hydrogen
atom, is needed to make plutonium for nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, Israeli intelligence was reporting that Russia had
secretly sold to Iran an advanced AVRII uranium enrichment
processor system installed at Natanz and the super-secret
Moallen Kalayeh site.[20] By the end of the month, Israel warned
that Iran would “reach the point of no return” on its nuclear
quest in 1 year. The head of the IAEA also said that Iran had
shopped on black market for components related to a nuclear
program.[21] It was leaked that the major suspected nuclear
sites are at Arak, Natanz, Esfahan, and Kashan. This does not
even include the sites this article has listed.
Due to the failure of Kay’s inspection team to find WMD in
Iraq, I have heard several people question the claim that Iran
does indeed have a nuclear program. However, in this case, the
program is much more obviously for weapons, than for an
alternative energy source, like Iran claims. Simple logic
disproves these claims, as an alternate energy source means that
the nuclear power industry lacks fuel. If the industry lacks
fuel, why is there a program for a “closed-loop nuclear fuel
cycle”? Another point: If Iran produced its own nuclear fuel, it
will cost two to four times as much as buying foreign nuclear
fuel.
The country also is rich in natural gas and oil. There is
enough to take care of its needs for centuries, which is another
reason that the claim that the program is for an alternative
fuel source is suspicious. Besides, it will cost several more
times to produce electricity from uranium than from
petroleum.[22]
Iran’s nuclear weapons program is huge and complex. The
Russian-built and Russian-managed nuclear reactor at Bushehr is
the center of the complex, and the most critical aspect of it.
The reactor will be activated in late 2004 or 2005, at which
time it will be able to provide the electrical power production
required to enrich the uranium fuel. In May 2003, Iran and
Russia finished plans for the delivery of the first 90 tons of
enriched uranium to Iran. Once the uranium is enriched
sufficiently, it can become the fuel used to cause a nuclear
explosion. Talks are already underway for Russia to help with
construction of a second reactor at Bushehr (and up to 6 more by
2018, but there is no telling what will happen before then).
There are uranium deposits in the Jazd province, which even if
they are quickly depleted for the weapons program (the deposits
only contain 50 grams of uranium per every 100 kilograms of
uranium), is enough to produce a few nuclear warheads over the
next couple of years. The complexes used to make the actual
weapons are also available, and soon will be activated.
In 2005, the uranium-separation facility at Erdekan will be
activated. The uranium-concentrate complex around Isfahan will
also be activated at that time, most likely in late 2003 or
early 2004. Iran also has plans to build a uranium-conversion
facility and a uranium-enrichment facility, approximately 150
kilometers from Isfahan, which is believed to be activated
within 1-3 years. Parts of the Isfahan complex are scientific
laboratories which will produce the fuel necessary for
water-cooled reactors, as well as sites to produce the
fuel-assembly cases.
The Iranian program is not limited, and is focused on the
creation of a “close-looped fuel cycle”. This means Iran will be
able to create its own fuel for its own nuclear bombs by 2006.
Perhaps the scariest thing about the program is that the United
Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is unable to
do much about it. It is obvious countries like France, Russia,
and China will oppose any meaningful action to stop the program,
and most likely will stop any meaningful sanctions (which could
only stall the ultimate result). Under the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran is allowed to produce
highly-enriched uranium and weapons-grade plutonium, as long as
they are stockpiled at separate facilities, and the UN can
inspect the sites.
At the same time, Iran is permitted to collect the materials and
resources needed to produce the weapons from the fissile
materials, which takes very little time. When ready, Iran can
violate the treaty and kick out inspectors and begin assembling
nukes right away (it is unlikely there will be a collective
decisive response to the action in time to stop Iran from having
nukes). Iran can also abide by the rules, and announce its
nuclear plans six months in advance, and count on the slim
chance that the world community will be able to do much about it
in that time.
The race against time has begun. Time is not on our side, and
neither is the international community. Sanctions can extend the
time we have to stop this from occurring, but it is unlikely
that Russia, France and China will allow such sanctions to be
put in place. Bombing raids could extend the time limit, but
they are unlikely to succeed in destroying the program. At best,
the results of the program can be delayed for months. The race
against time has begun. The clock is ticking.
SOURCES
[1] “The High Cost of Peace: How Washington’s Middle East Policy
Left America Vulnerable to Terrorism” by Yossef Bodansky. 2002.
Prima Publishing, Roseville, California. Pages 76-77.
[2] Ibid., pages 84—87.
[3] Debkafile, Sept. 25, 2003.
[4] Al-Zaman, June 12, 2003.
[5] Middle East Newsline, August 7, 2003.
[6] Washington Times, August 7, 2003.
[7] New York Times, May 26, 2003.
[8] New York Post, June 18, 2003.
[9] Middle East Newsline, June 8, 2003.
[10] Debkafile, June 26, 2003.
[11] Middle East Newsline, June 29, 2003.
[12] Middle East Newsline, July 1, 2003.
[13] Geostrategy-Direct.com, week of July 8, 2003.
[14] Debkafile, June 26, 2003.
[15] LA Times, August 5, 2003.
[16] New York Times, Aug 3, 2003.
[17] Washington Post, August 27, 2003.
[18] Debkafile, June 26, 2003.
[19] London Sunday Telegraph, September 8, 2003.
[20] Debkafile, August 28, 2003.
[21] Ha’aretz, August 30, 2003.
[22] New York Times, August 3, 2003.
Ryan Mauro has been a geopolitical analyst for Tactical Defense
Concepts (www.tdconcepts.com), a maritime-associated security
company, since 2002. In 2003, Mr. Mauro joined the Northeast
Intelligence Network (www.homelandsecurityus.com), which
specializes in tracking and assessing terrorist threats. He has
been published in WorldNetDaily.com, Newsmax.com,
StrategyPage.com, WorldTribune.com, HomelandSecurityUS.com,
JRNyquist.com and in the Turkistan Newsletter (Turkistan
Bulteni). He is a frequent writer for Milnet.com as well. He has
appeared on radio shows including The Al Rantel Show, WIBG
Radio, WorldNetDaily Radioactive with Joseph Farah, Jeff Nyquist
Program, Kevin McCullough Show, Laurie Roth Show, Tovia Singer
Show, Stan Major Show, and Preparedness Now. His book "Death to
America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq" is scheduled to be
published in the coming months.
*****************************************************************
4 MN: U.S. trying to produce fake nuclear documents implicating Iran
MehrNews.com -
Yunesi said here on Wednesday that Iran has arrested more than 10
nuclear spies who worked for the United States.
Some of the nuclear spies were members of the terrorist Mujahedin
Khalq Organization (MKO), but they were not able to transfer any
important information, he added.
The information that the MKO members transferred was already
common knowledge and by providing this information they claimed
that Iran was seeking to produce nuclear weapons, the
intelligence minister told reporters.
He said the U.S. intelligence service knew that the information
the MKO provided was false but wanted the group to repeat these
lies in order to prepare the ground for Washington to apply
official pressure on Tehran.
Despite receiving false information, U.S. officials wanted the
MKO to spy for them in order to divert attention from their main
spies, and they thought that if the MKO made such a claim Iran
would not notice the main spies.
“Neither the MKO nor the main spies succeeded in providing
valuable information to the U.S. because we didn’t have any
secret information and nothing was in violation of the NPT,”
the intelligence minister added.
On the main mission of the spies, he said, “The spies wanted to
disrupt nuclear activities and they wanted to prevent Iran from
gaining access to nuclear technology.
“Three years ago, one of the project managers, who had been
deceived by the CIA, informed the U.S. that Iran’s progress was
tangible and this was sad news for the U.S., and therefore he was
given the mission to disrupt the work and the (Iranian)
Intelligence Ministry arrested him.”
Yunesi noted that the spy was an employee of the Iranian Atomic
Energy Agency and was the manager of one of the nuclear projects.
The intelligence minister said that on another occasion the U.S.
intelligence agency attempted to produce fake documents
implicating Iran after Tehran agreed to suspend building
centrifuges under a deal. For example, he said, “Some come to
us and say that they can build equipment and we arrest them or
somebody comes and announces that he sells uranium or a (nuclear)
bomb like selling vegetables, and all these are guided by the
intelligence services in order to create documents implicating
Iran.”
Contaminating the environment of areas used for nuclear
activities in order to claim that nuclear contamination had been
found was another ploy used by spies, he added.
He said there was also industrial espionage activity meant to
glean information about Iran’s nuclear expertise, but these
efforts failed, too.
Yunesi went on to say that the United States has always been
sensitive about Iran developing nuclear technology and has used
all the means at its disposal to prevent Iran from gaining access
to nuclear technology.
First, the Bushehr nuclear power plant was launched with the
agreement of the United States before the Islamic Revolution and
in addition to the Bushehr plant there were also plans to build
some more nuclear power plants, he said.
However, after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, the
Americans seriously objected to the continuation of the Bushehr
project and barred some other countries like Germany, Japan, and
China from finishing the project, he noted.
Also, during the war the U.S. gave the toppled Iraqi dictator a
green light to bomb the Bushehr nuclear plant, he said.
Therefore, under U.S. pressure and sanctions, it was not possible
for Iran to transfer nuclear technology from abroad and it had no
alternative but to rely on its young scientists, Yunesi told
reporters.
The intelligence minister said the U.S. monitored Iran’s
nuclear activities comprehensively through its satellites and
with the help of its agents and knew that Iran’s nuclear
activities were not meant for military purposes.
For the past three years the U.S. has found out through its
intelligence sources that Iran was on the verge of gaining access
to nuclear technology, but it did not want to announce it, Yunesi
said.
The U.S. employed its nuclear spies from some southern Persian
Gulf Arab states, but they acted very unprofessionally, he added.
MS/HG End
MNA
© 2003 Mehr News Agency
*****************************************************************
5 EUbusiness: EU-US cooperation on Iranian nuclear question
'important': Tehran
http://www.eubusiness.com
Iran's chief nuclear negotiator said Tuesday it was important
for the United States to work with the European Union over the
Islamic republic's atomic activities.
Hossein Moussavian, quoted by the official IRNA news agency, did
not rule out future talks with Washington, despite non-existant
diplomatic relations since 1979.
"From our point of view, it is important that the Americans and
Europeans interact in this process," Moussavian was reported as
saying.
"The Europeans are making big efforts to bring the Americans
into nuclear discussions. We have no objection to the Americans
joining the Europeans in this process," he added.
But there was no need for direct US nuclear talks "at this
stage," he said.
Last month, Iran agreed to suspend uranium enrichment in
exchange for trade, technology and security rewards from
Britain, France and Germany -- preventing its nuclear activities
from being referred to the UN Security Council.
The deal was heavily criticised by the United States. It accuses
arch-foe Tehran of covertly trying to develop nuclear weapons, a
charge vehemently denied by Iran.
Text and Picture Copyright © 2004 AFP. All other copyright ©
2004 EUbusiness Ltd. All rights reserved. This material is
intended solely for personal use. Any other reproduction,
publication or redistribution of this material without the
written agreement of the copyright owner is strictly forbidden
and any breach of copyright will be considered actionable.
EUbusiness © Copyright EUbusiness Ltd 2004. Privacy Statement |
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Has Detained Over 10 on Spy Charges
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Wednesday December 22, 2004 10:01 AM
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran has arrested more than 10 people on
charges of revealing its nuclear secrets to Israeli and U.S.
intelligence agencies, Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi said.
Yunesi said the 10 were detained in Tehran and in the southern
Hormozgan province during the Iranian year that began March 21,
the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.
``These people were spying for Mossad and CIA,'' IRNA quoted
Yunesi as saying. He was referring to the Israel's external
secret service and the Central Intelligence Agency.
The United States accuses Iran of running a secret program to
build a nuclear bomb. Iran says its nuclear programs are purely
for energy.
The minister said the identity of those detained will not be
revealed before they stand trial but said three of them were
employees of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran and the rest
were not government employees.
They are now in the hands of the hard-line Revolutionary Court,
which deals with security crimes, Yunesi said.
Earlier this month, the Intelligence Ministry said it had
arrested a spy who had been pretending to work on nuclear
centrifuges in order to cast doubt on Tehran's recent agreements
to suspend such work.
Iran agreed last month to suspend uranium enrichment and all
related activities to try to ward off sanctions for which the
United States has pressed. Centrifuges can spin gas into
enriched uranium, which can then be used to produce energy or
bombs.
The International Atomic Energy Agency agreed to police
suspension of Iran's nuclear activities. Under the agreement
reached last month with France, Germany and Britain, Iran has
suspended its enrichment activities during negotiations with the
Europeans on economic, political and technological aid from the
25-nation European Union. Those talks started earlier this
month.
Tuesday in Vienna, where the IAEA is based, diplomats told The
Associated Press that Tehran is still turning tons of raw
uranium into uranium metal and has said it would continue to do
so until February, exploiting a loophole in its deal with the
Europeans. The metal is a precursor of uranium hexafluoride - a
substance that can then be used to produce weapons-grade
uranium.
Iran says it will judge within three months whether to either
continue suspension. Tehran has threatened to resume all nuclear
activities it has suspended if the talks fail to make progress.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
7 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Chung: North should abandon nuclear weapons
December 23, 2004 ¤Ń BEIJING -- Unification Minister Chung
Dong-young told students here that the North Korean nuclear
standoff should be solved peacefully and that the next year will
be critical.
Mr. Chung arrived here Tuesday to discuss with Chinese leaders
how to resume the stalled six-party talks and seek the Chinese
government's aid in urging North Korea to come back to the
negotiating table.
"We should not unilaterally force Pyeongyang to make a
decision," Mr. Chung said during a talk with students at the
University of Beijing. "The only thing that will never be
compromised in the process of resolving the nuclear issue is
that it should be solved peacefully.
"Some argue for military pressure or economic sanctions against
Pyeongyang, but we do not want any physical force," the minister
said.
Mr. Chung emphasized that progress should be made next year.
"Year 2005 is a meaningful year for the Korean Peninsula," Mr.
Chung said. "It is the 60th anniversary of Korea's liberation
from Japan and the 5th anniversary of the June 15 inter-Korean
summit in 2000.
"The nuclear issue will be at an important crossroads in 2005. I
expect Pyeongyang, Washington and other participants in the
six-party talks to make historic choices and decisions next
year," he said.
The two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the United States are
involved in the six-party talks.
When a student asked how the nuclear issue can be solved
peacefully, Mr. Chung said Pyeongyang should abide by the
Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, give up its nuclear weapons
program and accept International Atomic Energy Agency
inspections.
North Korea can then accept Washington's offers to guarantee
Pyeongyang's political system, lift economic sanctions and form
diplomatic ties between the two countries.
by Yoo Kwang-jong iamfine@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc.
*****************************************************************
8 YWS: Ban Expresses Regret at Lack of Progress on Nuclear Talks
YONHAPNEWS WORLD SERVICE::ENGLISH NEWS
2004/12/22 14:19 KST
SEOUL, Dec. 22 (Yonhap) -- Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said
Wednesday he cannot foresee when six-party talks on North
Korea's nuclear program can be reconvened, but stressed that
efforts to persuade the communist state to return to the
negotiating table will continue.
"Our government and myself as well think it is very regretful
that there isn't specific progress yet" in efforts to resume the
nuclear talks, Ban said during his weekly press briefing.
*****************************************************************
9 YWS: Seoul Urges U.S., N. Korea to Make Historic Decision on Nuke Row
YONHAPNEWS WORLD SERVICE::ENGLISH NEWS
2004/12/22 12:37 KST
BEIJING, Dec. 22 (Yonhap) -- A South Korean presidential envoy
called on North Korea and the United States Wednesday to
compromise to end the ongoing global standoff over the North's
nuclear weapons program.
The South Korean envoy, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young,
discussed the North's nuclear tension in a speech at Beijing
University. He said that 2005 will be a watershed year to resolve
the dispute.
*****************************************************************
10 ITAR-TASS: Russia, US note importance of Korean peninsula nuclear free status
22.12.2004, 09.05
MOSCOW, December 22 (Itar-Tass) - Russia and the United States
noted the importance of preventing the appearance of nuclear
weapons on the Korean peninsula, a Foreign Ministry official
told Itar-Tass after the talks on Tuesday between Russia's
Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alexeyev and US Ambassador to
Russia Alexander Vershbow.
The parties expressed the hope for the soonest resumption of
six-nation Korean nuclear talks involving the United States,
North Korea, China, Russia, South Korea and Japan.
"In the course of the talks, Alexeyev and Vershbow exchanged
their views of the situation around the nuclear problem on the
Korean peninsula, as well as other international problems of
mutual interest," according to the diplomat.
"Moscow underlined the necessity of a productive and flexible
approach to the talks by all the participants in the six-lateral
process," he added.
Russia "consistently calls for a political settlement of the
nuclear problem of the peninsula in the course of six-party
talks by providing safety guarantees to North Korea," Alexeyev
said.
Speaking at the meeting devoted to the 13th anniversay of the
nomination of Kim Jong Il the supreme commander-in-chief of the
Korean People's Army and the 87th anniversary of the birth of
revolutionary Kim Chen Suk, the diplomat called for the soonest
resumption of talks.
Alexeyev said the development of contacts and cooperation
between the two Korean states, the implementation of economic
projects with the participation of North Korea, South Korea and
Russia are a very important factor in normalizing the situation
on the peninsula.
For his part, North Korea's Ambassador to Moscow Pak Ui Chun
accused Washington of the scheming aimed at strangling North
Korea. This scheming has reached its limit recently. Washington
unilaterally rejects Pyongyang's line in the field of nuclear
deterrence and uses for pressure the law on human rights in
North Korea.
"If Washington continues to use a hostile policy for isolating
and strangling our country under the pretext of a nuclear
problem and the human rights issue, we'll be reacting to this by
further strengthening of our defensive power," Pak Ui Chun said.
© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy,
*****************************************************************
11 UN Nuclear Watchdog UN New Project For Peaceful Use Of Technology
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:00:45 -0500
X-Sender-Hostname: mx3.un.org
X-Temp-Whitephrase: YES NUCLEAR
UN NUCLEAR WATCHDOG LAUNCHES NEW PROJECT FOR PEACEFUL USE OF TECHNOLOGY
New York, Dec 22 2004 11:00AM
Furthering its mission to harness nuclear technology for peaceful
uses, the UN watchdog entrusted with preventing the spread of nuclear
weapons has launched a pilot project for collaboration with
distinguished institutions around the world for research on such
issues as plant breeding and genetics.
China's Institute of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences at Zhejiang University
became the first partner in November, and more institutions
worldwide are expected to be designated next year in the so-called
Collaborating Centre programme, the International Atomic Energy
Agency's (IAEA) announced in a <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2004/zhejiang_univ.html">news
release today.
<"http://www.iaea.org/index.html">IAEA Deputy Director General Werner
Burkart, head of the Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications,
called China's collaboration with the agency and its Joint
Division with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (<"http://www.fao.org/">FAO)
in the fields of food and agriculture "a significant
event in the new scheme."
The Collaboration Centre programme is beginning on a trial basis
on a three-year maximum work plan at no cost to the IAEA. It draws
on the experience of the UN World Health Organization (<"http://www.who.int/mediacentre/en/">WHO)
and FAO, which have established
global networks of cooperative centres. It is designed to publicly
recognize the work designated institutions are doing in support
of the IAEA's mission for research, development and training in
peaceful applications of nuclear science and technology.
2004-12-22 00:00:00.000
________________
For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml
*****************************************************************
12 The Hindu: Kalam justifies India's nuclear programme
Wednesday, December 22, 2004 : 1855 Hrs
Palampur, Dec. 22 (PTI): President A P J Abdul Kalam, today
justified India's nuclear programme, saying "only strength
respects strength." Interacting with 327 students hailing from
24 schools of Palampur and adjoining areas, the President said
India always stood for use of nuclear energy for peaceful
purposes and favoured nuclear disarmament.
"Only strength respects strength," he added. Describing India as
a young and powerful nation, Kalam said 540 million out of the
one billion population were young which was a great strength.
Observing that about 26 per cent of the people were living below
the poverty line, he told the children that we need to increase
the growth in GDP from six per cent to twelve per cent in the
next ten years to eradicate poverty. Kalam asked the children to
"have a dream and realise it" which was the only way to make
India strong and prosperous.
He said eminent scientists Subramaniam Aiyar and Vikram
Sarabhai, were his role model and asked the students not to get
disheartened by problems and face them boldly.
During the interaction, the President not only answered
questions already sent to him but also queries asked on the spot
besides asking the students to e-mail their questions which he
promised would be answered positively within 24 hours.
Though the time schedule for interaction with the children of
the Institute of Himalayan Bio-resource Technology was 40
minutes, the President spent more than an hour before leaving
for Shimla by helicopter.
Copyright © 2004, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of
*****************************************************************
13 BBC: Breaking the Khan network
Last Updated: Wednesday, 22 December, 2004
By Gordon Corera BBC security correspondent
A year ago, Libya shocked the world by announcing it was
abandoning a secret programme to build a nuclear bomb, a
programme few were even aware of.
[AQ Khan]
AQ Khan was the architect of Pakistan's nuclear deterrent
Libya's declaration may have taken much of the world by surprise,
but not the tiny circle of people in London and Washington who
were privy to some of their nation's most closely held secrets.
It is now clear that for more than a decade, British and American
intelligence had been picking up clues that one of their worst
nightmares could be true - someone was selling "off-the-shelf"
nuclear weapons technology.
The finger pointed to a clandestine network run by AQ Khan, the
father of the Pakistani nuclear programme and a man former CIA
director George Tenet has described as being at least as
dangerous as Osama Bin Laden.
Details are only now emerging about how the network was broken -
and what questions still remain unanswered.
In one of their most sensitive operations, Britain's Secret
Intelligence Service and America's CIA decided to infiltrate
Khan's circle in the late 1990s.
They used a number of operations, including placing one of their
own officers inside the network.
Along with other sources, including work by Britain's GCHQ, this
made it possible to piece together Khan's clients, front
companies, finances and manufacturing plants, long before the
Libyan deal.
Libyan opportunity
On Britain's Joint Intelligence Committee, alarm bells were
ringing by early 2000, as the intelligence made it clear that
Khan had built a global network supplying designs and
mass-producing components for nuclear weapons.
In Washington, some in the intelligence community wanted to
pursue covert operations to disrupt Khan, such as sabotaging his
production or transport.
It would be very surprisi if there weren't some criminals looking
to take advantage of this kind of trade again in the future David
Landsman UK Foreign Office The scientist who confessed Black
market bombs
But some diplomats feared the consequences of this and wanted to
make public the intelligence, in order to pressure foreign
governments to shut down the network immediately.
But others in the intelligence community feared this could
endanger intelligence sources.
The decision was taken to wait and collect more information.
Some experts are critical of that delay, concerned that it may
have allowed the spread of some nuclear technology which the
spies didn't know about.
But Libya's offer to disarm, which came initially in March 2003,
provided the opportunity to shift from a secret
intelligence-gathering operation to public action.
It offered a way in which sensitive information could be made
public and then passed on to international bodies like the
International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as governments in
whose jurisdiction the Khan network was operating
The intelligence from the spies also allowed officials to make
sure that Libya really was coming clean in every detail, although
the long negotiations also delayed action against Khan.
Iranian question
Since the Khan network was outed, there have been a wave of
arrests and seizures around the globe, from South Africa to
Malaysia to Turkey.
And officials say that while they have stopped the network
operating, there are a still a large number of active
investigations into those who supplied Khan - some of whom may
have known what they were doing, while others may not.
[Iran testing a Shahab-3 ballistic missile in October 2004]
Iran's latest ballistic missiles have a range of at least 2,000km
There are still some questions unanswered.
A recent CIA report stated that "Iran's nuclear programme
received significant assistance" from Khan.
Officials point to the close similarities between what Khan gave
to Libya and what he gave to Iran, and ask why the Iranian deal
would have been so different from the Libyan deal - in which
weapons plans were passed on.
If that was the case, it would be proof that Iran was seeking
nuclear weapons - and not just nuclear power, as it claims.
The exact nature of transactions with North Korea also remains
unclear.
Another problem is that while Khan himself has publicly confessed
and is under "house arrest", international investigators have not
been able to talk to him.
That is particularly worrying, because the order books don't add
up.
Tipping point?
Three countries - Iran, Libya and North Korea - are known to have
been customers.
But some believe there was also a fourth country.
There is also the fear that this could happen again. The rewards
for proliferators are potentially huge - at one point a Khan
middleman was handed a pair of briefcases stuffed with $3m.
[Supporters of Mr AQ Khan prior to his confession ] Khan is still
regarded as a hero by many in Pakistan
From time to time, intelligence agencies pick up indications of
people in the market looking for illicit equipment.
Criminal networks could exploit this dark underbelly of
globalisation, argues David Landsman, head of
counter-proliferation at the Foreign Office.
"There may never be another AQ Khan network quite like this one,
but equally it would be very surprising if there weren't some
criminals or potential criminals out there looking to take
advantage of this kind of trade again in the future."
It is questionable whether Khan himself - as well as some of his
key associates - have yet paid a heavy enough price for their
activities to deter others.
And for all its successes, the Khan story makes clear that it may
be easier than previously thought to acquire nuclear weapons.
As the expertise and technology involved becomes more and more
dispersed, the world may be moving closer to a tipping point in
which building a nuclear bomb is no long the closely-held secret
of the few.
*****************************************************************
14 Indian Express: India must have veto rights - PM
December 22, 2004
NEW DELHI, DEC 21: Asserting that there was no ambiguity on UN
reforms, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday made it clear
that India must have veto rights as a permanent member of the UN
security council.
He told Rajya sabha: “There is no ambiguity in our stand. There
is no confusion... We do not believe there should be any
discrimination in the security council (on veto rights).”
Observing that there was ‘no clarity’ on the shape the security
council reforms would take, he said it was ‘premature’ for the
government to ‘pre-judge’ the issue at this stage.
Responding to clarifications by former external affairs minister
and BJP leader Yashwant Sinha on his statement on foreign
policy-related issues in both Houses of Parliament, Mr Singh
brushed aside apprehensions over the country’s nuclear policy.
“There is no ambiguity about our nuclear policy. India is a
nuclear weapon state and we are a responsible nuclear power,” he
said adding the country was committed to promoting
non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament.
On Indo-PAK ties, he said confidence building measures could not
move forward if the flow of terrorists from across the border
went on ‘without any check and control’.
He said India would go by the ground situation and was committed
to what was agreed between Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf
and the then prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee on January 6
this year.
Pakistan should ‘remain committed to the commitment’ it made in
January, Mr Singh said adding the whole exercise would take off
if Pakistan remains committed to its assurance.
On the issue of the US arms supply to Pakistan, the Prime
Minister said though this did not figure during his talks with
Mr Musharraf, India’s concerns were conveyed to the US defence
secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who had visited India recently.
About supply of natural gas from Iran through pipeline via
Pakistan, he said the issue was being discussed and it was not
possible to say what shape the discussions would take.
Asked about doubts over supply of nuclear fuel to Tarapur
reactor by Russia, he said India had the assurance from Moscow
that it would honour all its contractual obligations. On the
question of additional supplies, the Prime Minister said he was
confident that a satisfactory conclusion would be arrived at.
Asked about assurances given by Myanamarese leader Than Shwe
during his recent visit that North-East insurgents would not be
allowed to use Myanamar soil for anti-India activities, he said
Yangon was honouring the commitment.
— PTI
© 2004: Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. All
*****************************************************************
15 DAWN: Terrorism, N-issue discussed with Russia -
December, 2004
By Our Staff Reporter
ISLAMABAD, Dec 21: The second session of the Pakistan-Russia
Consultative Group on Strategic Stability concluded its meeting
here on Tuesday after talks on various issues including
terrorism , nuclear non-proliferation and bilateral cooperation.
A press statement issued by the foreign ministry said the two
sides expressed satisfaction over the exchange of views and
closeness of positions on a number of issues.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Kislyak and additional
secretary of foreign office, Tariq Osman Haider, led their
respective sides during the talks held on Monday and Tuesday.
"They agreed to work towards expanding areas of commonality,"
said the foreign office. It was agreed during the talks to
increase interaction between the foreign ministers of the two
countries, said the Foreign Office.
The press statement said the two sides expressed satisfaction
over the positive development in their bilateral relations as a
result of the meeting between President Pervez Musharraf and
President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in February 2003.
The Foreign Office said the next session of the Pakistan-Russia
Consultative Group on Strategic Stability would be held in
Moscow in mid-2005, dates for which would be agreed to by the
two sides through diplomatic channels.
The visiting head of the Russian delegation also called on
Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri and Minister of State
Makhdoom Khusro Bakhtiar. During the meetings with Foreign
Minister Kasuri, the Russian delegation was briefed on the
ongoing dialogue with India.
© The DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2004
*****************************************************************
16 APP.COM: Utility execs say merger will improve nuclear plants
ASBURY PARK PRESS
Utility execs say merger will improve nuclear plants
Published in the Asbury Park Press
12/22/04 THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
PHILADELPHIA -- Executives from Exelon Corp. and Public Service
Enterprise Group Inc. said Tuesday that their creation of the
country's biggest utility will help three troubled nuclear power
plants in southern New Jersey run more smoothly. But critics of
the plants said they have no faith such a massive company would
spur any improvements.
A day earlier, Chicago-based Exelon announced it would acquire
Newark, N.J.-based PSEG in a $12 billion stock deal the companies
said will create cost savings and better service. They expect it
will take until early 2006 to complete the deal.
The new company would have 18 million customers in Illinois,
Pennsylvania and New Jersey, assets worth $79 billion, annual
revenues of $27 billion and yearly profits of $3.2 billion. The
current combined work force of 28,500 would be trimmed by about
1,400 jobs.
But the deal would not change plans for any of New Jersey's four
nuclear power plants, all of which would be owned and operated by
the new company. Of those facilities, the Oyster Creek plant in
Ocean County already is owned and operated by an Exelon
subsidiary. In Salem County, the Salem I and II plants are
co-owned by Exelon and PSEG and operated by PSEG; the Hope Creek
plant is owned and operated by PSEG.
Making the three plants on Salem County's Artificial Island more
efficient will be a boon for both stockholders and energy
customers, company officials said during a news conference.
"The biggest benefit is the effect good operations at Salem and
Hope Creek has on wholesale prices," said John W. Rowe, the
chairman and CEO of Exelon, who would have the same job in the
new company.
Electricity generated at the plants is sent to a regional energy
pool, rather than being transmitted straight to homes and
businesses.
The nuclear power business is a target of critics who say the
industry needs big subsidies to be profitable and holds a danger
of disaster if things go wrong. The companies' plans did little
to quell those worries.
Jeff Tittel, director of the Sierra Club's New Jersey office,
said having bigger companies with higher profit expectations
could make plants more dangerous.
"I just don't know what's going to happen when you create these
large, behemoth companies," Tittel said.
Activists have called for Exelon to shutter the relatively small
Oyster Creek plant when its license expires in 2009. Company
officials reaffirmed on Tuesday they do not plan on doing so.
That's not a good sign for Norm Cohen, the coordinator of Unplug
Salem, a group that wants the three Salem County reactors shut
down permanently. Cohen said continuing to operate that plant
shows Exelon cares more about profits than safety.
"While they supposedly have a better safety record than PSEG,
everybody can have a better safety record than PSEG," Cohen said.
Hope Creek, meanwhile, has been shut down since a steam pipe
there ruptured on Oct. 10.
Some anti-nuclear power activists have said the company should
make another significant repair there by replacing a
recirculation pump with a bent rod before the plant restarts.
PSEG officials have said they would wait until the next
regularly scheduled outage at Hope Creek in the summer of 2006 to
make the repair.
The merger does not change that, said E. James Ferland, the
president and CEO of PSEG who would become the chairman of the
board of the new Exelon Electric and Gas firm.
Ferland said Exelon has had a role at PSEG's three New Jersey
nuclear plants since they opened in the 1970s and 1980s and has
taken a more active role this year. The analysis that determined
Hope Creek would be safe to operate another 18 months with the
old recirculation pump is largely the work of Exelon, Ferland
said.
Ferland said Hope Creek should be ready to be restarted by the
end of the year. The company, though, has agreed to wait until
after meeting with the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission
before restarting the plant. That meeting has not been scheduled.
At the Hope Creek and Salem I and II plants, PSEG has been
trying to fix what it calls a "safety culture" problem brought to
light in part by whistle blowers who have complained that the
plants have not been as safe as they should be.
Recent changes to operations there include an expanded office
for dealing with employee safety concerns and a campaign that has
placed safety-related posters all over the facility.
Ferland said the Exelon acquisition will mean smoother
operations at the plants because Exelon already runs 17 nuclear
plants at 10 sites and has a strong standard operating procedure
for the plants.
"It's like a cookbook: This is how we run our plants," Ferland
said.
For the Sierra Club's Tittel, that's part of the problem.
"Exelon has already been a partner in the Salem nuclear plants
and there have been more problems since they became a partner,"
Tittel said.
Asbury Park Press
*****************************************************************
17 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the
FR Doc 04-27945
[Federal Register: December 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 245)]
[Notices] [Page 76794-76795] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22de04-95]
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice
of pending NRC action to submit an information collection request
to OMB and solicitation of public comment.
SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a submittal to OMB for review of
continued approval of information collections under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). Information pertaining to the requirement to be
submitted: 1. The Title of the Information Collection: 10 CFR
Part 72, Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of
Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste.
2. Current OMB Approval Number: 3150-0132. 3. How Often the
Collection is Required: Required reports are collected and
evaluated on a continuing basis as events occur; submittal of
reports varies from less than one per year under some rule
sections to up to an average of about 100 per year under other
rule sections. Applications for new licenses, certificates of
compliance (CoCs), and amendments may be submitted at anytime;
applications for renewal of licenses are required every 20 years
for an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) or
Certificate of Compliance (CoC) and every 40 years for a
Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) facility.
4. Who is Required or Asked to Report: Certificate holders of
casks for the storage of spent fuel, licensees and applicants for
a license to possess power reactor spent fuel and other
radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage in an
ISFSI, and the Department of Energy for licenses to receive,
transfer, package and possess power
[[Page 76795]] reactor spent fuel, high-level waste, and other
radioactive materials associated with spent fuel and high-level
waste storage in an MRS.
5. The Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 50. 6. The Number
of Hours Needed Annually to Complete the Requirement or Request:
25,551 (22,781 hours for reporting [71 hours per response plus
2,770 hours for recordkeeping 55 hours per recordkeeper]).
7. Abstract: 10 CFR part 72 establishes mandatory requirements,
procedures, and criteria for the issuance of licenses to receive,
transfer, and possess power reactor spent fuel and other
radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage in an
ISFSI, and requirements for the issuance of licenses to the
Department of Energy to receive, transfer, package, and possess
power reactor spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste, and
other associated radioactive materials, in an MRS. The
information in the applications, reports and records is used by
NRC to make licensing and other regulatory determinations.
Submit, by February 22, 2005, comments that address the following
questions: 1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary
for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the
information have practical utility? 2. Is the burden estimate
accurate? 3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected? 4. How can the burden
of the information collection be minimized, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology? A copy of the draft supporting statement may be
viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD
20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide
Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/ doc-comment/omb/
index.html. The document will be available on the NRC home page
site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions about the information collection
requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Brenda
Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, T-5 F52,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, by telephone at 301-415-7233, or by
Internet electronic mail to INFOCOLLECTS@NRC.GOV. Dated at
Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of December 2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-27945 Filed 12-21-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
18 Scotsman.com: Investors Back British Energy Shake-Up
Wed 22 Dec 2004
By Graeme Evans, PA City Editor
British Energy moved a step closer to a debt restructuring today
after shareholders and creditors supported the terms of the
overhaul.
The nuclear power group will now seek court approval as part of
the final stages of a complex process expected to be completed in
mid-January.
The shake-up, which was drawn up in October 2003 after low
wholesale prices sent the company deep into the red, involves
banks and bondholders agreeing to write off ÂŁ1.3 billion in debt
in return for control of the group.
Shareholders, who backed the proposals at a meeting in Edinburgh
today, will be left with 2.5% of a newly listed company, with the
opportunity to subscribe for warrants covering another 5%.
Without the restructuring, British Energy said it would face
insolvency proceedings and that there was unlikely to be any
return to shareholders.
The group’s sites are at Hartlepool, Heysham, Heysham; Hinkley
Point, Somerset; Hunterston, Ayrshire; Dungeness, Kent; Sizewell,
Suffolk and Torness, East Lothian.
*****************************************************************
19 Vermont Guardian: States nuclear response plan flawed
By Kathryn Casa | © Vermont Guardian
BRATTLEBORO Vermonts radiological emergency planning has for
years been in such disarray that state officials would be unable
to monitor radiation fallout resulting from an emergency at
Vermont Yankee. Nor could the decontamination center in Bellows
Falls adequately protect thousands of southern Vermont residents
evacuated there, according to internal state memos and copies of
e-mails obtained by the Vermont Guardian.
The 32-year-old reactor poses the single greatest event threat to
Vermont, according to a May 2004 e-mail from Larry Crist,
director of the Health Departments Health Protection Division, to
Albie Lewis, head of Vermont Emergency Management a threat that
is heightened by a proposed power increase at the plant, he
wrote.
To be inadequately prepared because we did not have sufficient
resources is going to be considered a crime should an event
actually occur, Crist wrote.
It is unclear why the state has annually signed off on the
emergency plan required by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency as a component of Vermont Yankees operating license. Calls
to the governors office about that issue were not returned at
press time.
Lewis said this week that he was not familiar with the documents,
which include a five-page memo from Crist citing critical
shortcomings in the states Radiological Emergency Response Plan,
and a warning from VEMs Lew Stowell that the state can expect to
fail a major FEMA drill next spring.
In Brattleboro Dec. 23 for a follow-up meeting on a failed Dec.
16 school evacuation drill, Lewis also refused to look at the
documents when presented with them in person.
Crist said a huge amount has transpired since last spring, when
he wrote the communiqués. At long last we have set the stage for
the creation of a professionally staffed and trained team, he
said in a Dec. 23 phone interview.
But one member of the states Ingestion Pathway team which would
collect samples of soil, water, and agriculture products after a
radiation release concluded in a damning post-training critique
obtained by the Vermont Guardian that the state is not ready for
a radiological emergency.
Team members were outfitted with brittle gloves, ill-fitting dust
masks, 1950s-era survey equipment prone to dead batteries, loose
wires and stuck gauges, and thin, cheap Grand Union kitchen trash
bags in which to collect irradiated samples, the state employee
wrote after participating in training Nov. 4-5.
Trainers talked about side-stepping safety requirements by
referring to team members as volunteers, he wrote.
The state has never had adequate personnel to carry out the
emergency response plan, Crist wrote in February, and for years
has played something of a shell game, juggling a bare minimum of
some 11 qualified personnel where at least 60 are necessary.
This was the same strategy employed for all other facets of the
plan and was successful because FEMA never tested all components
of the plan simultaneously, according to Crists memo. The flaw in
this approach was that had there been a real event, the state
would have been faced with the impossible task of assigning 11
trained health personnel to cover some 60 different roles
simultaneously.
Since the documents were written, 20-25 members of the state
hazardous materials team have been designated as the state plume
team, which is responsible for mapping the radiation plume
footprint immediately following a release, Crist said in the
interview.
However, with 25 people in place and 60 needed for both teams,
the state appears to remain short-staffed, and it would take
HAZMAT team members up to six hours to reach the hot zone.
Crist said Dec. 23 that three state departments, Health,
Agriculture, and the Agency of Natural Resources, will supply a
total of 14 employees for the Ingestion Pathway team. He said
that all employees have been designated, but not all have been
trained.
As recently as late October, internal e-mails between ANR
employees indicated that the state continues to seek volunteers
for the team, and is considering altering job descriptions to
require state employees to staff the teams critical to the plan.
The e-mails also indicated that the employees were considering
filing a grievance with their union over a possible change in
their job descriptions.
Although planning has moved forward since the series of
high-level memos and e-mails were exchanged last spring,
preparation appears to remain inadequate as Vermont Yankee owner
Entergy Corp. proceeds with a proposal to increase, or uprate,
power output by 20 percent.
In May, Crist wrote to Lewis: Given the recent events at Vermont
Yankee (stress cracks in piping, missing spent fuel rod pieces)
and the real possibility of similar events in the future ( the
uprate will stress the physical facility even more than it
currently is being stressed) its imperative that the
administration understand our potential vulnerability.
The e-mail continues: For over five years now we have attempted
to get both Vermont Yankee and the Legislature to recognize that
our level of preparedness, although steadily improving, has not
met the requirements contained in the [Radiological Emergency
Response Plan]. We are now at the point where we can no longer
gloss over our shortcomings in the hope that things will get
better next year.
Asked if he believed the plan was now sufficiently staffed and
funded to handle an emergency, Lewis said that the RERP is a
living document. We are constantly looking at ways to improve the
entire plan.
As better technology becomes available, the state seeks to employ
it, he said.
There is a certifiable plan in place, Crist insisted on Dec. 23.
The challenge is to make sure you have the resources, both
monetary and personnel, to meet the requirements in that plan.
Thats a very tough challenge.
Crists February memo also identified serous problems at the
reception center in Bellows Falls, to which residents of the
emergency planning zone, including preschoolers, schoolchildren,
and the elderly and infirm, would be evacuated.
The center failed a 2001 FEMA drill, but passed during a
follow-up retest of portions of the drill. Crist wrote that,
since the 2002 retest, In short, we have a reception center that
is not meeting basic readiness requirements and, more
importantly, is staffed by local officials who do not appear to
believe that they are accountable to either Health or VEM.
He recommended that responsibility for the center be shifted
either to Entergy or to the local communities.
Crist said on Dec. 23 that problems at the reception center stem
from the fact that it has never been completely clarified who
actually is responsible for the centers overall operation. He
noted that the center, which would be set up at Bellows Falls
high school, is designed to handle only 15 to 20 percent of the
population of the 10-mile emergency planning zone. The expected
number of cars alone would overwhelm parking capacity, he
acknowledged.
The state hopes to resolve the problems by establishing a second
reception center to the west, possibly in Bennington, Crist said.
One anti-nuclear activist called the planning problems a
dereliction of responsibility to the people of Vermont.
To permit the plant to continue running when these emergency
response measures are not in place is a huge hypocrisy, said Ray
Shadis, technical advisor to the New England Coalition, which
closely monitors Vermont Yankee. They treat it as if theyve got
all the time in the world to pony up some kind of
fill-in-the-blanks, demonstrable plan, but looking at the facts,
you cannot say theyre serious.
Posted December 22, 2004 Send us your news tips, a letter to the
editor or general comments.
* All fields required - This information is used for verification
purposes only - Thanks!
Name Zip Phone Email Subject Please Select News Tip Letter
to the Editor General Message I wish to remain Anonymous
Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004 Todays Headlines
| | Northern Vermont: PO Box 335, Winooski, VT 05404
Southern Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT
05301
Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 877.231.5382
(toll-free)
©2004 Vermont Guardian |
Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com
y
*****************************************************************
20 NRC: RIN 3150-AH58 Minor rule changes
FR Doc 04-27946
[Federal Register: December 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 245)]
[Rules and Regulations] [Page 76599-76601] From the Federal
Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22de04-2]
Minor Correction Amendments for FY2004 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations to correct several miscellaneous errors in the NRC
Rules and Regulations. This document is necessary to inform the
public of these corrective changes to NRC regulations.
DATES: Effective Date: December 22, 2004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alzonia Shepard, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6864.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission is amending the regulations in 10 CFR Parts 19, 34,
40, 55 and 60 to correct several miscellaneous errors in
regulatory text. These changes occurred in the process of
preparing and printing rulemaking documents.
Because these amendments constitute minor administrative
corrections to the regulations, the notice and comment provisions
of the Administrative Procedure Act do not apply pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The amendment are effective upon publication in
the Federal Register. Good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to
dispense with the usual 30-day delay in the effective date of the
final rule, because the amendments are of a minor and
administrative nature dealing with corrections to certain CFR
sections, which do not require action by any person or entity
regulated by the NRC. Nor does the final rule change the
substantive responsibilities of any person or entity regulated by
the NRC.
Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion The NRC has
determined that this final rule is the type of action described
in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22(c)(2). Therefore, neither
an environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment
has been prepared for this final rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This final rule does not
contain a new or amended information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the Office of
Management and Budget, approval numbers 3150-0053; 3150-0044;
3150-0010; 3150-0130; 3150-0020; and 3150-0011.
Public Protection Notification The NRC may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request
for information of an information collection requirement unless
the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
[[Page 76600]] List of Subjects 10 CFR Part 19 Criminal
penalties, Environmental protection, Nuclear materials, Nuclear
power plants and reactors, Occupational safety and health,
Radiation protection, Reporting and record-keeping requirements,
Sex discrimination.
10 CFR Part 34 Criminal penalties, Packaging and containers,
Radiation protection, Radiography, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Scientific equipment, Security measures.
10 CFR Part 40 Criminal penalties, Government contracts,
Hazardous materials transportation, Nuclear materials, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Source material, Uranium.
10 CFR Part 55 Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs,
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
10 CFR Part 60 Criminal penalties, High-level waste, Nuclear
materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.
0 For the reasons set forth in the preamble and under the
authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552
and 553, the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10 CFR
parts 19, 34, 40, 55, and 60.
PART 19--NOTICES, INSTRUCTIONS AND REPORTS TO WORKERS: INSPECTION
AND INVESTIGATIONS 0 1. The authority citation for Part 19
continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 53, 63, 81, 103,
104, 161, 186, 68 Stat. 930, 933, 935, 936, 937, 948, 955, as
amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 Stat.
2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2201,
2236, 2282, 2297f); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42
U.S.C. 5841); Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C.
5851); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
0 2. In Sec. 19.3, the definition of ``Licensee'' is added in
alphabetical order to read as follows: Sec. 19.3 Definitions. *
* * * * Licensee means the holder of such a license.
* * * * * PART 34--LICENSES FOR INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHY AND
RADIATION SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC
OPERATIONS 0 3. The authority citation for Part 34 is revised to
read as follows: Authority: Secs. 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat.
935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2201, 2232,
2233); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec.
1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note). Section 34.45 also
issued under sec. 206, 88 Stat. 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846). PART
40--DOMESTIC LICENSING OF SOURCE MATERIAL 0 4. The authority
citation for Part 40 continues to read as follows: Authority:
Secs. 62, 63, 64, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 Stat. 932, 933,
935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, Secs. 11e(2), 83, 84, Pub.
L. 95-604, 92 Stat. 3033, as amended, 3039, sec. 234, 83 Stat.
444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2014(e)(2), 2092, 2093, 2094, 2095,
2111, 2113, 2114, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); sec. 274, Pub.
L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688 (42 U.S.C. 2021); Secs. 201, as amended,
202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841,
5842, 5846); sec. 275, 92 Stat. 3021, as amended by Pub. L.
97-415, 96 Stat. 2067 (42 U.S.C. 2022); sec. 193, 104 Stat. 2835,
as amended by Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321-349 (42
U.S.C. 2243); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 40.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat.
2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 40.31(g) also issued under sec.
122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 40.46 also issued
under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234).
Section 40.71 also issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C.
2237). 0 5. In Sec. 40.66, paragraphs (b)(5) and (c) are revised
to read as follows: Sec. 40.66 Requirement for advance notice
of export shipment of natural uranium.
* * * * * (b) * * * (5) A certification that arrangements have
been made to notify the Division of Nuclear Safety, Office of
Nuclear Security and Incident Response when the shipment is
received at the receiving facility.
(c) A licensee who needs to amend a notification may do so by
telephoning the Division of Nuclear Safety, Office of Nuclear
Security and Incident Response at (301) 816-5100.
0 6. In Sec. 40.67, the first sentence in paragraph (a), and
paragraphs (c), and (d) are revised to read as follows: Sec.
40.67 Requirement for advance notice for importation of natural
uranium from countries that are not party to the Convention on
the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material.
(a) Each licensee authorized to import natural uranium, other
than in the form of ore or ore residue, in amounts exceeding 500
kilograms, from countries not party to the Convention on the
Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (see appendix F to Part
73 of this chapter) shall notify the Director, Division of
Nuclear Security, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident
Response, using an appropriate method listed in Sec. 40.5. * * *
* * * * * (c) The licensee shall notify the Division of Nuclear
Security by telephone at (301) 816-5100 when the shipment is
received in the receiving facility.
(d) A licensee who needs to amend a notification may do so by
telephoning the Division of Nuclear Security at (301) 816-5100.
PART 55--OPERATOR'S LICENSES 0 7. The authority citation for Part
55 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 107, 161, 182,
68 Stat. 939, 948, 953 , as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 2137, 2201, 2232, 2282); Secs. 201, as
amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841,
5842); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Sections 55.41, 55.43, 55.45, and 55.59 also issued under sec.
306, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2262 (42 U.S.C. 10226). Section
55.61 also issued under Sacs. 186, 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C.
2236, 2237).
Sec. 55.40 [Amended] 0 8. In Sec. 55.40(a), footnote 1, remove
``2120 L Street, NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC.'' and insert
``One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (0-1F23),
Rockville, MD.'' PART 60--DISPOSAL OF HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE
WASTES IN GEOLOGICREPOSITORIES 0 9. The authority citation for
Part 60 continues to read as follow: Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 62,
63, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 935, 948,
953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2092, 2093, 2095,
2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); Secs. 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1244, 1246 (42
U.S.C. 5842, 5846); Secs. 10 and 14, Pub. L. 95-601, 92 Stat.
2951 (42 U.S.C. 2021a and 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83
Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); Secs. 114, 121, Pub. L. 97- 425, 96
Stat. 2213g, 2228, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134, 10141), and Pub.
L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec.
1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
[[Page 76601]] 0 10. In Sec. 60.2, the term ``NRC Public
Document Room'' is revised to read as follows: Sec. 60.2
Definitions. * * * * * NRC Public Document Room means the
facility at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room
0-1F23, Rockville, Maryland, where certain public records of the
NRC that were made available for public inspection in paper or
microfiche prior to the implementation of the NRC Agency wide
Documents Access and Management System, commonly referred to as
ADAMS, will remain available for public inspection. It is also
the place where computer terminals are available to access the
Electronic Reading Room components of ADAMS on the NRC Website,
http://www.nrc.gov , where copies can be made or ordered as set
forth in Sec. 9.35 of this chapter. The facility is staffed with
reference librarians to assist the public in identifying and
locating documents and in using the NRC Web site and ADAMS. The
NRC Public Document Room is open from 7:30 am to 4:15 pm, Monday
through Friday, except on Federal holidays, Reference service and
access to documents may also be requested by telephone
(1-800-397-4209) between 8:30 am and 4:15 pm, or by e-mail
PDR@nrc.gov), fax (301-415-3548), or letter (NRC Public Document
Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room 0-1F23,
Rockville, Maryland 20852).
* * * * * Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 16th day of December,
2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael T. Lesar, Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration.
[FR Doc. 04-27946 Filed 12-21-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
21 NRC: Amergen Energy Company, LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
FR Doc 04-28066
[Federal Register: December 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 245)]
[Notices] [Page 76795-76796] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22de04-96]
Station Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Subsection
2.109(b), for Facility Operating License No. DPR-16, which
authorizes operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station (OCNGS), a boiling-water reactor facility, located in
Ocean County, New Jersey. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21,
the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of
no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action
Subsection 109(b) of 10 CFR part 2 states, ``If the licensee of a
nuclear power plant licensed under 10 CFR 50.21(b) or 50.22 files
a sufficient application for renewal of an operating license at
least 5 years prior to the expiration of the existing license,
the existing license will not be deemed to have expired until the
application has been finally determined.'' This requirement for
license renewal applications was established in December 1991 in
conjunction with the publication of the final license renewal
rule, 10 CFR part 54, ``Requirements for Renewal of Operating
Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants'' (56 FR 64943).
AmerGen's application requested an exemption from the timing
requirements of 10 CFR 2.109(b), for submittal of the OCNGS
license renewal application. The exemption would allow the
submittal of the renewal application with less than 5 years
remaining prior to expiration of the operating license while
maintaining the protection of the timely renewal provision in 10
CFR 2.109(b). The proposed action is in accordance with the
licensee's application for exemption dated August 10, 2004.
The Need for the Proposed Action AmerGen stated that the OCGNS
license renewal application would be submitted in July 2005 and
that application of the 5-year term in 10 CFR 2.109(b) for filing
a license renewal application is not necessary in this situation
to achieve the purpose of the regulation. The July 2005 filing
date, which is approximately 44 months before expiration of the
existing license in April 2009, according to AmerGen will provide
the NRC staff with ample time in which to perform a full and
adequate review.
The licensee proposed an exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 2.109(b), to allow submittal of the license renewal
application with less than 5 years remaining prior to expiration
of the operating license, while maintaining the protection of the
timely renewal provision in 10 CFR 2.109(b). Environmental
Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its
evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the pursuant
to 10 CFR 50.12(a), the proposed exemption is authorized by law,
will not endanger life or property or common defense and
security, and is, otherwise, in the public interest.
In addition, special circumstances exist to justify the proposed
exemption. The details of the staff's evaluation will be provided
in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the
licensee approving the exemption to the regulation.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the
probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being
made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite.
There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent
release offsite. There is no significant increase in occupational
or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites.
It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no
other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant
non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the
proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there are no
significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff
considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-
[[Page 76796]] 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 OCNGS, dated December 1974,
published by the Atomic Energy Commission.
Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its policy, on
December 16, 2004, the NRC staff consulted with the New Jersey
State official, Mr. Richard Pinney, of the New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Nuclear Engineering,
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. During
the consultation, the NRC staff acknowledged a September 23,
2004, letter from Mr. Bradley Campbell, Commissioner of the State
of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, which
opposed the exemption. The NRC staff responded by letter dated
November 2, 2004. No environmental concerns were raised by the
September 23, 2004 letter. During the consultation, the State
official had no additional comments regarding the environmental
aspects of the exemption.
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. However, a site specific supplement to the ``Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear
Plants (NUREG-1437)'' will be required for the license renewal
application submitted under this exemption.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated August 10, 2004. Documents may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document
Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 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 16th day of December 2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam, Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project
Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 04-28066 Filed 12-21-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
22 Lahontan Valley News: Air samples show elevated tungsten, uranium in Fallon
and Fallon Eagle Standard - News
December 22, 2004
Results from air samples taken earlier this year by University
of Arizona researchers show elevated levels of tungsten in
Fallon, up to 13 times the amount found in surrounding
communities.
Samples were taken in March and April in Fallon using five
high-volume dust samplers positioned randomly in and around the
city. The study was conducted in five four-day sessions, and also
included data from Fernley, Lovelock, Reno and Yerington as
control tests.
In simultaneous comparisons conducted with other neighboring
cities, Fallon had airborne tungsten levels of 38 parts per
million compared to 2.3 in Lovelock, 107 ppm compared to 2.4 in
Fernley, 5.8 ppm to 4 in Yerington and 101 ppm to 2.8 in Reno,
according to data published by researchers.
The study was conducted by Mark Witten, a cancer researcher at
the University of Arizona, Paul Sheppard, an assistant professor
at the University of Arizona, and Dr. Gary Ridenour, a Fallon
physician. It was presented at the American Geophysical Union
meeting in San Francisco on Dec. 13.
Witten said the results bolster his theory that exposure to
tungsten may accelerate the spread of leukemia. A study by
Witten, Ridenour, Sheppard and other researchers published in
November concluded that tungsten ore exposed to human leukemia
cells caused a 170 percent increase in cell growth compared to
control leukemia cells over a 72-hour period.
"We're closing in on the source, there's no question about that,"
Witten said. "We have seen blood profile changes in mice given
tungsten. My current theory is that it may take metal to activate
the process."
Since 1997, 17 children have been diagnosed with leukemia in the
Fallon area. The latest case, a 2-year-old boy, was added to the
cluster Monday after two years with no new cases. Three of the
cancer victims have died.
The wind was of particular interest to Witten once the results
came in. On days when the wind was strong from the west and
southwest, tungsten readings were near 100 ppm. A north wind
produced much lower levels, including a reading of 6 ppm during
one session.
Witten said the readings may eliminate the Kennametal plant 10
miles north of Fallon as a source of tungsten contamination.
Kennametal is a manufacturer of tungsten carbide used to harden
drill bits and airplane parts.
"I thought that it's pretty obvious that one of the culprits in
spreading tungsten was Kennametal, but I was shocked," he said.
"That's why we do the research."
Fallon's airborne, naturally-occurring uranium levels were also
high. In simultaneous comparisons to other neighboring cities,
Fallon had uranium levels of 4.1 ppm compared 2.8 in Lovelock,
3.6 ppm compared to 1.9 ppm in Fernley, 4.7 ppm to 4.1 ppm in
Yerington and 3.4 ppm to 1.6 ppm in Reno.
A theory offered by the researchers is that an unknown deposit of
tungsten or uranium exists somewhere west of Fallon. The Lahontan
Valley goes through 40-year cycles of drought and moisture,
Witten said. Fallon is in a drought cycle for the past few years,
which may have caused tungsten and uranium particulate to be
stirred up and blown westward, introducing metals that may be
responsible for the cancer cluster, he said.
"If it is unknown tungsten and uranium deposits, they can be
mined and removed," Witten said. "Then maybe people won't get
sick anymore."
Ridenour said the results far from pinpoint a source of tungsten
or uranium, much less the cause of the cluster. It's still
uncertain what type of tungsten is found in Fallon's air and
whether it is similar to the cancer-accelerating tungsten used in
lab tests, he said.
Still, the study confirms that tungsten is airborne in Fallon,
building on previous studies that showed high tungsten levels in
children's urine, tap water and within trees, he said.
"We had it in water. We had it in trees. The next question was,
was it airborne also?" Ridenour said.
An independent investigation is needed to corroborate the results
and continue research, he said.
Josh Johnson can be contacted at jjohnson@lahontanvalleynews.com
All contents © Copyright 2004 lahontanvalleynews.com
Lahontan Valley News and Fallon Eagle Standard - 562 North
Maine Street - Fallon, NV 89406
*****************************************************************
23 Taipei Times: Uranium tests begin amid protests
http://www.taipeitimes.com
Wed, Dec 22, 2004
AP , TOKYO
A nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in northern Japan started tests
with depleted uranium yesterday -- 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 580km 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) 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.
Dozens of activists gather outside a nuclear fuel reprocessing
plant in Rokkasho village, northern Japan, to protest uranium
tests yesterday. PHOTO: AP
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.
Yesterday, workers hauled into the plant about 53 tonnes 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.
Yesterday, 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." This story has
been viewed 215 times.
Copyright © 1999-2004 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
24 Bellona: Sevmash shipyard tests hull of new Russian nuclear submarine
The specialists of the Sevmash plant in Severodvinsk completed
the tests of the hull structure of the Yury Dolgoruky nuclear
submarine.
2004-12-22 12:49
Interfax agency reported on November 30 that the tests were
successful and soon the installation of the electromechanical
equipment will begin. The works are financed according to the
schedule and the representative of the Sevmash plant said they
were sure to complete the construction in the time frames
“settled by the program approved by the Russian President”,
Interfax reported. Yury Dolgoruky should be completed by 2006.
Construction the 995 class Yury Dolgoruky , which is an improved
model of the 677 class (comparable to NATO's Delta IV) was
started in 1996 at Sevmashpredpriyatie. The submarine has
displacement of 14,720/24,000 tons, and its maximum submersion
depth is 450 meters. The submarine is armed with D-9RMU
ballistic missiles, 533 calibre torpedoes, Waterfall torpedo
missiles and Igla-1 anti-aircraft missiles. The submarine can
operate for 100 days without docking. Its crew consists of 107
people including 55 officers. Missile launching can be done at a
depth of 55 meters in rough sea (a storm with a magnitude of
6-7) and at a speed of up to 6 knots. The submarine is equipped
with an escape chamber. The Yury Dolgoruky was developed at the
Rubin Design Bureau for Marine Engineering.
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
*****************************************************************
25 Times Argus: Officials to meet over failed nuclear evacuation test
December 22, 2004
Associated Press
BRATTLEBORO — Local and state officials involved in a test
evacuation of schools last week plan to meet privately to figure
out what went wrong, leaving nearly 1,000 students without bus
transportation.
A clear picture of the glitches that undercut the Dec. 16
evacuation — and what changes can be made to the area's
evacuation plan — will be the focus of Wednesday's meeting,
several emergency officials said.
The private meeting will include representatives from the local
school district, the town of Brattleboro, Vermont Emergency
Management and the Laidlaw bus company of New Hampshire.
"We need to make some changes so that we have a bus evacuation
plan that works," said Town Manager Jerry Remillard, who is also
Brattleboro's emergency management director. "But we may not
come out of the meeting with all the magic answers."
Several dozen buses from New Hampshire failed to show up during
the first test evacuation of Brattleboro-area schools in case of
a chemical or nuclear emergency, such as one that could occur at
the nearby Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.
Because the evacuation drill was running nearly an hour late,
the Laidlaw buses were told to turn around to attend to bus
routes in New Hampshire, according to emergency officials. That
order left several schools with no transportation out of the
disaster zone during the test drill.
But officials have not explained a 30-minute lapse between when
local officials asked Vermont Emergency Management in Waterbury
to order the buses and that state agency contacting emergency
officials in Concord, N.H., to send the buses.
Because data from the evacuation is still being studied, it is
not clear why it took emergency officials in Waterbury 30
minutes to relay the bus notice to their counterparts in
Concord, N.H., said Duncan Higgins, deputy director of Vermont
Emergency Management.
That delay will be among the topics "fleshed out" during
Wednesday's meeting, according to Marc Metayer, deputy
commissioner of the Vermont Department of Public Safety.was
talking at the same time about the same topics," Higgins said.
© 2004 Times Argus
*****************************************************************
26 NRC: Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes: Meeting
FR Doc 04-27947
[Federal Register: December 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 245)]
[Notices] [Page 76796] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22de04-97]
Notice AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice
of meeting.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will convene a
tele- conference meeting of the Advisory Committee on the Medical
Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI) on January 18, 2005. The topic of
discussion will be ``Update to Medical Event Criteria
Definition.'' During this discussion, an ACMUI subcommittee will
forward to the full ACMUI its recommendations regarding revision
of the medical event criteria definition in Pt. 35. NRC staff is
seeking the ACMUI's recommendations on this issue, as well as any
recommendations on communicating associated risks to the public.
DATES: The tele-conference meeting will be held on Tuesday,
January 18, 2005, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m Eastern Standard Time.
Public Participation: Any member of the public who wishes to
participate in the tele-conference discussion may contact Angela
R. McIntosh using the contact information below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela R. McIntosh, telephone
(301) 415-5030; e-mail arm@nrc.gov of the Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Conduct of the Meeting: Leon S. Malmud, M.D., will chair the
meeting. Dr. Malmud will conduct the meeting in a manner that
will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. The following
procedures apply to public participation in the meeting: 1.
Persons who wish to provide a written statement should submit a
reproducible copy to Angela McIntosh, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Two White Flint North, Mail Stop T8F5, Washington, DC
20555-0001. Hard copy submittals must be postmarked by January
12, 2005, and electronic submittals must be submitted by January
14, 2005. Any submittal must pertain to the topic on the agenda
for the meeting.
2. Questions from members of the public will be permitted during
the meeting, at the discretion of the Chairman.
3. The transcript and written comments will be available for
inspection on NRC's Web site (http://www.nrc.gov) and at the NRC
Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD
20852-2738, telephone (800) 397-4209, on or about March 18, 2005.
Minutes of the meeting will be available on or about February 1,
2005.
This meeting will be held in accordance with the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended (primarily Section 161a); the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App); and the Commission's
regulations in Title 10, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, part
7. Dated: December 16, 2004.
Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-27947 Filed 12-21-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
27 Pasadena Star-News: City could be forced to close more wells
Article Published: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 -
By Gary Scott , Staff Writer
PASADENA -- A perchlorate plume threatens to close more Pasadena
water wells, and frustrated city officials say they have no
choice but to treat the groundwater themselves and send the bill
to NASA.
Nine city-owned wells have been closed since 1997, when
perchlorate was first detected in the Raymond Basin aquifer. City
officials say NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory is the source for
the contamination.
A 10th well is beginning to show levels of the chemical
contaminant, according to Pasadena Water and Power officials, and
may eventually have to be shut down if the plume is not halted.
"We believe that at this point we need to do something now to
contain the perchlorate plume and then work out the
responsibility and any potential reimbursement,' said Phyllis
Currie, general manager of PWP.
NASA has agreed to clean the four wells closest to the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in La Canada Flintridge, but officials with
the federal agency say more testing needs to be done to determine
the source of the perchlorate found at the five other well sites.
"It is not an easy process to detect chemical flow and chemical
provenance, said Steve Slaten, remedial project manager for NASA.
"We are currently undertaking a state of the art study.'
If NASA is ultimately found to be responsible, Slaten added, "we
will work with the city to find the best way to meet their
needs.'
Currie predicted the testing, which involves drilling a series of
monitoring wells, will take "a couple of years' to complete. In
the meantime, she said the city is relying on ground water from
wells on the east side of the basin. She is afraid pumping too
much water from there will draw the plume further eastward.
Perchlorate is a chemical used mainly in rocket fuel and dynamite
production. It has been shown to inhibit the thyroid gland,
causing developmental problems in newborns and tumors in adults.
Some city officials expressed surprise that NASA would question
the source of the contamination. But Councilwoman Joyce Streator
asked for clarification since the Sunset Reservoir is near the
City Yards.
"We are sure that contamination is not from the yards?' she
asked.
"We did not manufacture dynamite at the yards,' answered Shan
Kwan, business director for PWP.
The City Council on Monday approved $800,000 to begin planning
the treatment plant. The cost to buy and install the plant will
be much more than that, she said.
Currie expects it will take the city a year to 18 months to get
the proper permits from the state to build the plant.
"This is just the beginning of a long project,' Currie said.
City officials are anxious to begin treating the groundwater as
soon as possible.
"The longer it goes the more it spreads,' said Councilman Paul
Little. "The more it spreads, the more it is going to cost to
cleanup the problem.'
The city also risks further closures if the plume spreads. That
would force PWP to import more expensive water from the state to
make up for the lost groundwater, a cost that will be passed on
to the customers.
"There is definitely a sense of urgency on the city's part to
cleanup the situation and make the wells usable again,' said
Mayor Bill Bogaard.
NASA is about a month away from opening a perchlorate treatment
plant on the JPL grounds that will use bacteria to eat away the
contaminant.
The plant will clean about 125 gallons of water per minute, not
enough to make a dent Pasadena's water supply but hopefully
enough to stop any further groundwater contamination.
Perchlorate has been leeching into the Raymond Basin aquifer for
decades. The U.S. Army used to test rockets at JPL and would dump
the chemical waste into pits on the property.
JPL was later turned over to NASA and the contaminated area was
declared a Superfund site.
As part of NASA's cleanup effort, a larger, 7,000-gallon-a-minute
treatment plant is planned to clean water at the four city- owned
wells in the Monk Hill basin. Slaten said it will take at least a
year to get the plant up and running.
"Right now, California has a public health goal of 6 parts per
billion' of perchlorate, Slaten said. "Our treatment plants will
achieve that level or better.'
Pasadena filed a claim against NASA and the U.S. Army earlier
this year for costs associated with the well closures.
"We don't intend to back down,' Currie said. Gary Scott can be
reached at (626) 578-6300, Ext. 4458, or by e-mail at
gary.scott@sgvn.com.
Copyright © 2004 Los Angeles Newspaper Group Feedback
*****************************************************************
28 Lahontan Valley News: Good that EPA is taking charge of mine clean up
and Fallon Eagle Standard - Opinion
December 22, 2004
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was right to take the
lead on cleaning up the abandoned Anaconda copper mine near
Yerington after years of trying to do the job by committee. A
clean up project of this magnitude requires direct oversight by
the federal government, which has the expertise in dealing with
similar contaminated sites around the country.
For years, the state of Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, which
owns half of the land, and the EPA sought to collaborate on the
clean up of the 6-square-mile mine. But that hasn't moved the
project far enough along.
Anaconda mined copper at the site for about 30 years until 1978.
The next owner, Arimetco, filed for bankruptcy and walked away
from the mine in 2000, leaving a previous owner, Atlantic
Richfield, with the liability.
The folks living around the mine are growing concerned about the
health implications of the open pit, which is not only an
eyesore along U.S. Highway 95A, it's also a potentially toxic
stew. The contaminated pit contains copper, lead, arsenic,
mercury and radioactive materials. Tests last year of soil
samples at the mine showed levels of radiation 30 times above
the EPA standard. What's even scarier for residents of the
community is groundwater testing around the mine has shown
uranium is present above EPA standards. A disaster is in the
making if any contaminants leach into the aquifer used by the
residents of Yerington.
We're realistic in acknowledging it will take many years and
millions of dollars to clean up the site. Nothing is going to
happen overnight and returning the area to a more natural state
is a mammoth undertaking. However, seeing some progress would go
a long way in assuaging local concerns that the clean up is at a
standstill. With the EPA in charge, that hopefully will change,
and even agency officials predict the work will move faster
under the new arrangement.
The EPA's first order of business ought to be a timeline so
residents of the Mason Valley can look forward to the day when
they don't have an open pit of contaminants as a neighbor.
All contents © Copyright 2004 lahontanvalleynews.com
Lahontan Valley News and Fallon Eagle Standard - 562 North
Maine Street - Fallon, NV 89406
*****************************************************************
29 Intelligencer: Officials to discuss cleanup of Revere site
(phillyBurbs.com)
By KELLY MADSEN The Intelligencer
Nockamixon's environmental advisory council will meet with
representatives of Cabot Corp. early in January to discuss the
cleanup of the metal processing site in Revere that once stored
radioactive byproducts, it was announced Tuesday night at a
township supervisors meeting.
Residents who live near the 102-acre property on Beaver Run Road
became concerned about potential environmental hazards on the
site after Stephen Donovan, a chemist and adviser to the
council, said at the November township meeting that he found
pieces of radioactive slag - a rock-like byproduct of metal
processing - in the portion of Rapp Creek that runs through
Cabot.
Donovan said he found the slag in the creek this summer and a
Geiger counter confirmed that it was radioactive.
"We want to know what the environmental impact could be," said
Donovan. "I want to know what level of radiation is too much for
public safety."
Cabot produced specialty metals at the Revere site from the late
1970s until 1992. Cabot is now demolishing the buildings and
removing the slag. Timothy Knapp, Cabot's environmental manager,
said all of the radioactive slag has already been taken away.
The radioactive elements uranium and thorium were a byproduct of
making the metals, he said.
"A small fraction of the slag on the site contained uranium and
thorium," Knapp said. "In the early 1990s, Cabot went through
the slag piles with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and
the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and
pulled out the radioactive slag."
The nuclear commission said the slag had acceptable levels of
radioactivity, about 100 times below safe levels, Knapp said.
There are still 8,500 tons of "uncontaminated slag and soil" on
the property that will be hauled away, said Bradley Okoniewski,
Cabot's safety, health and environmental manager.
"We don't believe there is anything there that will contaminate
the water. We want to meet with the environmental advisory
council to understand their concerns," he said.
They will meet at the site Jan. 5. Okoniewski said Cabot might
host an information session for neighbors following that
meeting.
In 2003, Nockamixon's supervisors asked Cabot about the
possibility of donating the cleared land to the township so it
can be used for athletic fields.
Okoniewski said there are no future plans yet for the property.
Kelly Madsen can be reached at (215) 538-6369 or
kmadsen@phillyBurbs.com. December 22, 2004 5:57
©2004 Copyright Calkins Media, Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
30 Daily Yomiuri: Problems on road to N-dream
Toshiaki Sato and Tatsuo Nakajima Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writers
The initial test operation that started Tuesday at Rokkashomura,
Aomori Prefecture, in preparation for recycling spent uranium
faces many hurdles that must be cleared before a nuclear fuel
cycle can be established in 2006 as planned.
The test run at the reprocessing plant being built in the
Pacific coast village is scheduled to last a year. During this
period, Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. will seek to eliminate any
problems and develop safety procedures involving an active test
that will be conducted using spent nuclear fuel.
The material being used in the first phase of the test is
depleted uranium, a low-radioactive by-product of the uranium
enrichment processes at a nuclear fuel processing plant in
Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture.
The reprocessing plant, scheduled to go online in July 2006,
will extract uranium and plutonium from spent nuclear fuel
generated at nuclear power plants across the county for reuse as
fuel.
Prior to the launch of full-scale reprocessing, a number of
preparatory steps must be taken, including the initial test run
that started Tuesday. In the first phase of the test run, JNFL
will examine the facility's equipment for any defects and
problems by conducting an experiment using a dummy fuel assembly
and pulverized depleted uranium from Tokaimura, company
officials said.
JNFL is jointly owned by the nation's 10 electric power
companies that operate nuclear plants and 87 other companies.
The initial test run is of essential importance in identifying
potential dangers in reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, which
contains high-level radioactive substances, including plutonium
and uranium.
The level of radioactivity of the pulverized spent uranium being
used for the initial test run is extremely low, about
one-millionth that of spent nuclear fuel, JNFL said.
The type of radioactivity emitted by spent uranium is relatively
easy to shield against in the event of leakage, meaning that any
repairs required during the test run could easily be made.
In advance of the test run, JNFL drew up a list of 190 possible
problems, including the leakage of small amounts of radioactive
substances from pipe joints and valves, which occurred during
similar tests conducted by Britain and France, noting that the
initial test is designed to identify possible causes of problems
to minimize risks when full-scale operations begin at the
Rokkashomura reprocessing plant.
The officials said JNFL had scrutinized about 1,200 accidents
and other operational troubles at reprocessing plants in Britain
and France.
Following the one-year initial test run, the operation will move
on to an active test. This will involve processing spent nuclear
fuel using large-scale equipment and devices in a room called a
cell, constructed with walls made of one-meter thick
ferroconcrete.
The operation of the nuclear fuel recycling plant is extremely
complex, with the process being undertaken in four major stages
starting with dissolving spent nuclear fuel, which has been cut
into tiny fragments after being cooled with water, in nitric
acid (as shown in the diagram).
===
Pluthermal plan at a standstill
Before Japan can achieve a nuclear fuel cycle, two major
problems must be addressed.
One is the cost of building and operating the Rokkashomura
reprocessing plant.
Construction on the plant began in 1993 with technological
assistance from France. Because of unforeseen expenditures,
mostly for increasing safety at the plant, building costs have
ballooned to 2.2 trillion yen, three times the initial estimate.
In addition, investigations by the Cabinet's Atomic Energy
Commission have revealed that the cost of recycling fuel at
Rokkashomura will cost more than simply burying it deep
underground .
The AEC, however, decided in November to maintain the
government's nuclear fuel cycle policy to make the most
effective use of resources.
A tougher problem is the current moratorium on pushing ahead
with the government-envisioned Pluthermal Project for burning
plutonium in lightwater reactors in the form of mixed oxides
(MOX) of uranium and plutonium. This plan has ground to a halt
because of a series of accidents and breakdowns of
pluthermal-related systems.
The halting of the project means there is no way to consume
reprocessed nuclear fuel produced by the Rokkashomura plant.
Another program for the use of recycled nuclear fuel, using MOX
for running a fast breeder reactor, has been on hold since
operations of the prototype reactor Monju were suspended in
December 1995 following leakage of the reactor's coolant,
although there were no casualties in the incident.
Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun
*****************************************************************
31 Auburn Journal: Court strikes county OK of Teichert mine
By: Gus Thomson, Journal Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 22, 2004 5:09 AM PST
A Placer County Superior Court judge has tossed out environmental
documentation approved by the Board of Supervisors on Teichert
Inc.'s plans to develop a 696-acre mine and aggregate processing
plant between Lincoln and Sheridan.
Describing the county Board of Supervisors' December 2002
decision to approve a state-mandated environmental impact report
"a prejudicial abuse of discretion," Judge James Luther ordered
the board to rescind it.
The court challenge to the county's environmental approvals came
from the grassroots Western Placer for an Agricultural &Rural
Environment (WPCARE) group. The ruling by Luther - a retired
Mendocino County judge assigned the case by the local court -
effectively halts a project that has been on hold since the
initial court challenge was filed in March 2003.
Therese Adams, a leader in WPCARE's bid to halt Teichert plans
and preserve more of Placer County's dwindling stock of
agricultural land, said volunteers spent hundreds of hours poring
over environmental reports and attending public hearings to point
out environmental effects of the mining proposal that were not
studied.
"Never underestimate the ability of a modern-day 'David' to
succeed over a corporate 'Goliath,'" Adams said. "With all its
wealth and influence, Teichert couldn't alter the environmentally
devastating facts of this project."
Teichert's intentions are to mine over a 40-year period on part
of a 3,455-acre parcel that has been described by project
opponents as the largest plot of prime farmland left in the
county. Over a period of a decade, the Sacramento road-building
and mining firm had downsized plans for the property, including
dropping the lifespan of the mine from 100 years to 40, with
restoration taking place in phases and two open pits becoming
public lakes at the end of the project.
WPCARE attorneys argued that environmental documentation was
both flawed and incomplete. During sometimes stormy public
hearings leading up to the county board's decision, Adams
presented a long list of perceived environmental issues her
group contended were not addressed adequately in the
$1-million-plus review. A main point - not addressed by the
judge - was that supervisors didn't abide by the Placer County
General Plan, which calls for preserving agricultural land.
WPCARE also expressed concerns about air pollution, traffic,
putting an industrial plant on a floodplain, and the possibility
that cancer-causing perchlorate could leach into Lincoln's water
supply because of mining activity.
Perhaps the most tempestuous issue revolved around perchlorate
contamination. County-hired experts said in hearings there was
no danger and Luther said the issue was adequately addressed.
In the end, Luther latched onto to areas in the environmental
review he considered lacking under California Environmental
Quality Act regulations.
Luther said that a change in phasing that was added to the
project after the environmental report was issued for public
comment needed to be included in the final report. The plan -
detailing the progression of step-by-step mining on the property
- would result in mining and reclamation taking place many years
ahead of what was reported in the official environmental
documentation, he said. Teichert attorneys argued during court
proceedings that the changes avoided changing the description of
the actual project and were legal under state guidelines.
In the judge's decision, the second fatal flaw in the report
revolved around whether enough work had been done to determine
if the project's water supply needs could be addressed over its
40-year lifespan.
The report had stated that issues surrounding water needs added
up to a "less than significant impact." Luther said that with
total water requirements reaching 2,437 acre-feet yearly and the
mining operation able to only work with year-by-year contracts
with the Nevada Irrigation District, the environmental report
didn't go far enough in addressing how water would be obtained
in drought years.
Teichert and county officials could not be reached for comment
Tuesday. When WPCARE launched court proceedings, representatives
for both expressed confidence in a review that was one of the
most extensive the county had ever embarked upon.
For WPCARE, the court victory was one that shows how dedicated
volunteers can challenge a strip mine project and win, Adams
said. A group of El Dorado County residents in the Cool area are
opposing Teichert's plans to increase activity at the Cool
quarry.
"This win by WPCARE should encourage others to stand up and
fight for their communities," she said.
Luther's ruling halts a project that now will have to be
reconsidered by supervisors only after a revised environmental
report is prepared.
"This huge mining project will now receive adequate
environmental review and a fresh look by the Board of
Supervisors," WPCARE attorney Susan Brandt-Hawley said.
The Teichert property is part of a 3,455-acre parcel 4 miles
from Lincoln. Plans call for Teichert to permanently deed 1,943
acres on the site for agriculture and open space.
The site has been actively ranched and farmed since the
mid-1850s WPCARE contends that a "viable alternative" exists
less than 30 miles north of the project, in the Marysville-Yuba
County gold fields.
The Journal's Gus Thomsoncan be reached at
gust@goldcountrymedia.com.
Contents of this site are all Copyright 2004 Gold Country
Media. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
32 Daily Yomiuri: Push N-fuel cycle plan by building confidence
Yomiuri Shimbun
The final-phase test run started Tuesday at a plant for
reprocessing spent nuclear fuel built by Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd.
in Rokkashomura, Aomori Prefecture.
Depleted uranium is being used as fuel for the test run. It has
similar chemical properties to the spent nuclear fuel that will
be used in the actual reprocessing. During the test run, which
will last about a year, the JNFL will examine the facility's
equipment for any defects.
If the experiment runs smoothly, an experiment using spent
nuclear fuel will begin late next year, with the aim of putting
the plant into full operation in July 2006.
The plant is the core facility for the nuclear fuel cycle, a
project being pursued under a national policy. Under the
project, 800 tons of spent nuclear fuel are to be reprocessed
each year to extract plutonium and uranium for reuse.
With the project, uranium can be effectively utilized, and
radioactive waste will be greatly reduced. The project will also
prove useful for ensuring a stable energy supply for this
country, which is poor in natural resources.
It is indeed an important experiment and must be carried out
with meticulous attention to detail. With the test, all possible
problems should be identified and corrected. Doing so will
secure the safety of the plant's operation and help restore
public confidence in the nation's nuclear program.
===
Transparency important
The Rokkashomura facility is a huge chemical plant, with 1,500
kilometers of piping. Subject to the latest test run is the
1,300-kilometer stretch of piping in which the main process in
the nuclear fuel cycle takes place--chopping up and dissolving
spent fuel and separating and recovering plutonium and uranium.
A variety of problems can be expected to occur, ranging from
pipe leakages, clogged pipes, inaccurate equipment readings,
defective control systems and fires.
Taking all these possible mishaps into account, the JNFL has
studied past problems that occurred at similar facilities at
home and abroad, and has come up with a total of 190 types of
glitch that can be expected to occur, which it has made public
via such means as its Web site.
The latest test is primarily aimed at preventing problems from
occurring when the plant eventually goes into full-scale
operation.
The radioactivity level of the depleted uranium used in the test
is extremely low, meaning that there is no danger of a
criticality accident occurring. So as not to prompt any needless
fears, the JNFL must disclose relevant information on the
experiment.
===
Put safety first
A nuclear reprocessing plant operated by the Japan Nuclear Cycle
Development Institute in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture and one
in France have been in operation for many years. Nuclear
reprocessing is not a particularly advanced technology.
In parallel with the reprocessing test-run, efforts for the
establishment of a nuclear fuel cycle should be accelerated.
What is needed first is the construction of a plant to process
extracted plutonium into fuel. There are plans to build such a
plant within the premises of the reprocessing plant, making it
vital to win the Aomori prefectural government's consent for the
construction.
It is also necessary to expedite efforts to realize the
government-envisaged Pluthermal Project for burning plutonium in
existing light-water reactors in the form of mixed oxides (MOX)
of uranium and plutonium.
Though the nation's power-generating industry plans to make use
of the MOX at 16 to 18 plants, power companies, except for
Shikoku Electric Power Co., have yet to win consent from local
governments to do so.
If ways are found to deal with problems that can be expected to
occur in the operation of the nuclear fuel cycle, public
understanding of the program will spread.
(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, Dec. 23)
Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun
*****************************************************************
33 Las Vegas RJ: EPA to lead cleanupof abandoned mine
Wednesday, December 22, 2004
By SCOTT SONNER THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
RENO -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency took the lead
role Monday in the cleanup of an abandoned, contaminated copper
mine in Northern Nevada.
The federal agency is taking the main cleanup role for the
former Anaconda copper mine under the Superfund law because of
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.
EPA, the Bureau of Land Management and the Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection were sharing responsibility for
cleaning up several metals -- copper, lead, arsenic and mercury
-- and radioactive materials, including uranium and thorium.
Tribal leaders, Yerington residents and an environmental group,
the Great Basin Mine Watch, have expressed concerns about the
potential dangers and complained that the cleanup was moving too
slowly.
Officials for Atlantic Richfield Co. said Monday they have more
than doubled the number of households, to 140, around the mine
they are providing with bottled water as a precaution.
Samples taken at the mine in the summer showed levels of
radiation in soil samples as high as 30 times above the EPA
standard.
Earlier this year, groundwater testing of drinking water wells
around the six-square-mile mine site showed uranium
concentrations four times greater than the EPA standard.
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 mainly responsible
for cleanup as the past owner.
Since then, the state, EPA and BLM, which owns half of 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.
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.
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
34 RGJJ: Judge wants Yucca Mountain silicosis lawsuit revised
ASSOCIATED PRESS
12/21/2004 09:18 am
A federal judge called for revisions to a lawsuit claiming Yucca
Mountain contractors exposed workers and visitors to toxic dust
during tunneling at the site of a planned national nuclear waste
dump in Nevada.
U.S. District Judge James Mahan ruled Monday in Las Vegas that
the lawsuit on behalf of Gene Griego, of North Las Vegas, and
seven others seeking class action status was overstated.
The Jan. 10 hearing will let Bechtel National, Bechtel SAIC and
other Yucca Mountain project contractors respond to the revised
complaint.
Bechtel SAIC spokeswoman Beatrice Reilly said the company was
“gratified that the court decided to strike the improper
complaint.”
Griego noted the judge didn’t throw out the case.
Griego, a retired Los Alamos, N.M. employee, worked as a tunnel
supervisor when a five-mile exploratory tunnel was bored into
the mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
He blames chronic lung ailments on inhaling dust containing
silica, the fibrous mineral erionite and a sister mineral,
mordenite.
Joe Egan, Griego’s McLean, Va.-based lawyer, claimed tunnel
contractors deliberately deceived workers and visitors “by
hiding, doctoring or failing to accumulate key data on actual
workplace conditions.”
© Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Newspaper. Use of this
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: NRC Extends Public Comment Period on Proposed Uranium Enrichment Plant in New Mexico until Jan. 7
News Release - 2004-16 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office
of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC
20555-0001 E-mail: No. 04-165 December 22, 2004
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has extended until Jan. 7 the
public comment period for the draft environmental impact
statement for a proposed uranium enrichment plant to be built in
Lea County, N.M.
Public access to documents concerning the license application of
Louisiana Energy Services for the proposed plant was limited
after the NRC shut down its online documents library for a
security review.
The agency is placing on its Web site redacted versions of the
draft environmental impact statement, the environmental report
submitted by LES as part of its application, and LESs responses
to NRC staff requests for additional information related to the
environmental report. These documents will be available no later
than Dec. 23 through this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/materials/fuel-cycle-fac/lesfacility.html.
The redactions withhold potentially sensitive information
relating to the security of the proposed facility.
Other publicly available documents may be available by request
to the NRCs Public Document Room by calling (800) 397-4209 or
(301) 415-4737, or through e-mail at . Requested documents will
be screened by the agency for sensitive information before they
are released.
Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement should be
postmarked by Jan. 7 and sent to Chief, Rules Review and
Directives Branch, Mail Stop T6-D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. Comments may also be
submitted by e-mail to or by facsimile to (301) 415-5397,
attention: Anna Bradford. Please note Docket Number 70-3103 on
all submissions.
Last revised Wednesday, December 22, 2004
*****************************************************************
36 Salt Lake Tribune - Opinion: Huntsman should act
Article Last Updated: 12/21/2004 11:38:57 PM
The toxic game of storing higher levels of nuclear waste in
Utah has just been anted up by the sale of Envirocare to new
investors, (Tribune, Dec. 16). Like a circle of tigers chasing
their tails, the nuclear waste storage crowd has just expanded
and will continue to run amok. Utahns should stay alert to the
fact that higher levels of radioactive waste continue to
threaten Utah's desert landscape.
The Utah Department of Environmental Quality has already
issued a regulatory permit to Envirocare allowing for higher
levels of nuclear waste storage. The Utah Legislature is
filled with folks who support and promote the storage of
radioactive waste in Utah. Either Utah's Legislature or its
governor can take action to block the storage.
Gov.-elect Jon Huntsman Jr. ran for office stating his
“adamant opposition” to the storage of nuclear waste in Utah. I
hope Huntsman will take the tiger by the tail and, once and for
all, put an end to this long-standing sordid tale. The current
and past history of deception and corruption in the process of
bringing toxic jobs and polluting businesses to Utah should be
put to rest with a timely executive order from Huntsman.
Rosemary A. Holt
Salt Lake City
© Copyright 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
37 Pahrump Valley Times: Vote was for Bush, not for nuke project
December 22, 2004
GOP POLL FINDS NEVADANS OPPOSE WASTE REPOSITORY
Poll: Democrats erred in keying on Yucca issue
By STEVE TETREAULT
PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - The presidential election still is being fought in
Nevada, at least when it comes to Yucca Mountain.
Both sides in the dispute over the proposed nuclear waste
repository continue to debate President Bush's victory on Nov.
2, and what it means in terms of public opinion and for upcoming
fights in Congress.
A new poll commissioned by Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John
Ensign, R-Nev., indicates most Nevadans remain opposed to Yucca
Mountain and a majority wants the state to continue fighting the
nuclear waste project even though voters chose to re-elect Bush.
The senators said the poll reported the true feelings of
Nevadans as they cast their votes in November. Others maintained
the senators were trying to control Election Day damage on the
Yucca issue.
Of Nevadans who voted for Bush in November, 85 percent polled
said their choice was based on the war, the economy - issues
other than Nye County's Yucca Mountain, which the president
designated for a nuclear spent fuel repository in 2002,
according to the survey.
Seven out of 10 respondents said they opposed the repository,
consistent with an earlier state poll, while 57 percent said
Nevada's elected officials "need to continue fighting against
Yucca Mountain," the poll showed.
"The voters of Nevada, just because they voted for Bush, it
does not mean it was an endorsement of Yucca Mountain by any
stretch," Ensign said. "Nobody should misread this election."
The survey, taken of 600 registered voters Nov. 30 through Dec.
2 by the Republican polling firm Public Opinion Strategies,
carried an error margin of plus or minus four percentage points.
Ensign said he and Reid commissioned the poll for ammunition in
Congress and to fight a perception growing out of the election
that Nevadans have become more accepting of the repository that
the Energy Department proposes to build 50 miles from Pahrump
and 20 miles east and north of Beatty and Amargosa Valley,
respectively.
Senate aides said the poll cost about $20,000. They said it was
paid out of unspent funds from the state's 2002 fight against
legislation that designated Yucca Mountain for nuclear waste
disposal.
Reid and Ensign ordered the poll a few weeks after Bush defeated
John Kerry by 50.5-48 percent in Nevada. The president's victory
followed a campaign where Democrats played up Yucca Mountain and
Kerry's promise to kill the project if elected.
Stumping for Kerry in Henderson on Oct. 30, President Clinton
said if Bush wins Nevada, "the inescapable conclusion will be
the majority of the people of Nevada have voted to put (nuclear
waste) here."
Consequently, Bush's victory in the state was touted by
supporters of the Yucca Mountain Project. They predicted the
Nevada election results would become part of an aggressive
effort in Congress next year to pass bills that would help the
Energy Department move the repository program forward.
But even though Democrats built up the Yucca issue during the
campaign, Reid said the new poll indicates it was not at the
front of voters' minds.
"In spite of the election where Yucca Mountain could have been
terminated by voting for Kerry, the people of Nevada still don't
like it, and that feeling is very, very strong," Reid said.
"Personally, I'm tired of hearing that the people of Nevada
changed their mind."
Political science professor Eric Herzik said that, in taking the
poll, the senators are attempting to reclaim control of Yucca
Mountain as a political issue.
"It's somewhat damage control in that the way the election
results have been spun is that this was a referendum on Yucca
Mountain and now the Democrats are back-pedaling," said Herzik,
who teaches at the University of Nevada, Reno.
Democrats "tried to use it as an issue and it blew up on them,"
Herzik said.
Herzik said the senators' involvement also signals Nevada
legislators and other elected officials they are not to break
ranks against Yucca based on the election.
"This is Reid and Ensign saying, 'Don't go there,'" Herzik said.
David Damore, a professor at UNLV, said the results send a
message to the White House and to Energy Secretary-designee
Samuel Bodman that state leaders do not intend to back down on
Yucca Mountain.
Robert List, a former Nevada governor who is a consultant to
the Nuclear Energy Institute, said the poll may re-energize
environmental activists who were discouraged by the election
results.
Other than that, List said the survey is unlikely to be
persuasive.
On key questions, List said it confirmed what polls were showing
before Election Day - that Yucca Mountain was not foremost in
the minds of voters and Democrats were making a mistake in
amplifying the issue.
Reid and Ensign "will try to sharpen the arrows in their quiver
any way they can but I don't think that's going to have any
resonance on (Capitol) Hill," List said.
Peggy Maze Johnson, an anti-nuclear activist and executive
director of Citizen Alert in Nevada, said the poll reflected the
views of voters who were weighing Iraq, the economy, and
homeland security as they cast their ballots.
"When you talk to people, you can see (the election) was not at
all how some people are trying to portray this (as pro-Yucca),"
Johnson said. "I believe the people here want us to continue to
fight."
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2004
*****************************************************************
38 OA Online News: Waste Control schedules meeting
Wednesday, 22 December 2004
AMERICAN ONLINE
c /o Odessa American 222 E. 4th Street P.O. Box 2952 Odessa, TX
79760
Company wants to build hazardous waste storage units in Andrews
County
Odessa American
ANDREWS Waste Control Specialists, which stores low-level
radioactive waste in Andrews County, has scheduled a public
meeting on a request to change its hazardous waste permit.
The meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. Jan. 11 at the Andrews
Chamber of Commerce boardroom, 700 W. Broadway, Andrews.
Waste Control General Manager Tom Jones III said two storage
areas are allowed in the company’s existing permit with the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality. Those storage facilities
have never been built.
He said they would be 160 feet wide by 400 feet long. The
material stored would not be liquid, so they can be built out of
asphalt instead of concrete.
Jones said items that could be stored in the storage areas
include soil, concrete and personal protective equipment. Waste
Control gets a lot of its waste from national laboratories.
He said space has “gotten real tight” and customers are starting
to ship Waste Control more material by rail so it’s getting
greater quantity.
Although the storage units are permitted, Jones said the company
must be available for the public meeting.
Waste Control has submitted a license application which is now
undergoing review to the Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality. Waste Control filed its 4,000-page license application
with a fee of $500,000 in August.
If Waste Control’s application is approved, it would be able to
start taking waste in 2008. The way the disposal site legislation
is written, it would include one facility for the interstate
Waste Compact, including Texas and Vermont. There would be a
second facility for government waste, including contaminated
soil.
Both sites would get demolition debris, lab coats, respirators,
coveralls and gloves. Waste Control plans to dig an initial
concrete-lined hole that is 1,500 feet square and 75 feet deep.
Right below the surface is 800 feet of clay.
There are also monitor wells around the site and sump pumps
that pump the water into a holding well when it rains.
Nebraska has submitted a proposal to Texas to take its nuclear
waste, which would help Nebraska get out from under a $150
million judgment. Nebraska was to host a nuclear waste site for
members of its compact, which also includes Kansas, Arkansas,
Oklahoma and Louisiana.
Waste Control Specialists has also applied to the Department of
State Health Services to amend its license so it can store
uranium tailings from a former U.S. Department of Energy uranium
processing plant in Fernald, Ohio.
The Department of Energy wants to move the waste by the end of
2006, Gary Stegner, public affairs officer for the Department of
Energy, has said.
Jeff Wagner, public affairs officer for Fluor Fernald, the
company charged with cleaning up the Fernald site, said a
request for proposals will be mailed out the first part of
November and a contract should be awarded by Jan. 20, 2005.
Shipping would start sometime in early 2005 — around February or
March, Wagner said.
*****************************************************************
39 Boston Globe: State tells military to clean up mess at Camp Edwards
By Associated Press, 12/22/2004 07:54
CAMP EDWARDS, Mass. (AP) State environmental officials have
asked the military to pick up trash and dilapidated equipment
left behind from decades of military training at Camp Edwards on
Cape Cod.
The junk, including items such as a decaying airplane fuselage
and engine parts, isn't a threat to the Cape's groundwater or
the environment, state Environmental Officer Mark Begley said.
But he said the debris' continued presence conflicts with the
spirit of state law governing military activity and
environmental stewardship.
''Better management of the debris out there is a way to reduce
impact to the habitats,'' Begley told the Cape Cod Times for a
story Wednesday.
Lt. Col. David Cunha, commander of the Environmental and
Readiness Center on the base, agreed that the junk should be
removed.
''If we're not going to use it, we should get rid of it,'' he
said.
The military has already begun cleaning and refurbishing
long-neglected areas of the base by hauling away old bunkers and
removing other metal debris left over from a training drill on
responding to a nuclear, biological or chemical attack.
Camp Edwards, the northern portion of the 22,000-acre
Massachusetts Military Reservation, was used from 1911 until
1997 for target practice, and by defense contractors testing and
disposing of munitions.
One of the base's large firing ranges is home to a dilapidated
trailer and three boats. Elsewhere, an airplane fuselage lies in
a field, tagged with graffiti from military units and full of
bullet holes, possibly from hunters.
Military officials earlier this year requested funding from the
National Guard Bureau to put together a plan to get rid of the
debris.
The northern 15,000 acres of the base is governed by a strict
set of environmental performance standards intended to guarantee
that military activity doesn't harm endangered species or an
aquifer that is the source of most of Cape Cod's drinking water.
Begley, three citizen committees and the Massachusetts National
Guard's Environmental and Readiness Center monitor compliance
with the standards.
The National Guard oversees several ongoing programs that have
restored hundreds of acres of endangered habitat.
| | | | © 2004 The New York Times Company
*****************************************************************
40 asahi.com: Rokkasho plant begins crucial uranium test
The Asahi Shimbun
At stake is the future of Japan's plan to recycle nuclear fuel.
ROKKASHO, Aomori Prefecture-An ambitious national plan to
reprocess spent nuclear fuel and bolster the nation's energy
security entered a new phase Tuesday morning when tests started
at a plant here using depleted uranium.
If successful, the yearlong uranium test at the plant, operated
by Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd., opens the door to full operation of
the nation's first commercial nuclear fuel reprocessing
facility.
The plant is at the center of the government's program to
reprocess the hundreds of tons of spent fuel produced annually
by nuclear power plants throughout the country.
Using depleted uranium as a stand-in for spent fuel, the test is
aimed at determining what problems could arise with the plant's
facilities and equipment.
An ``active test'' using actual spent nuclear fuel is slated to
follow next year, and, if that goes well, the company expects to
start full operations in 2006, company officials said.
Until now, only water, air and nitric acid have been used in
tests at the reprocessing plant. Tuesday marks the first time
radioactive substances were used.
The 31 tons of depleted uranium for the test were transported by
sea the day before from Mitsubishi Nuclear Fuel Ltd., a
manufacturer of nuclear fuel for reactors in Tokaimura, Ibaraki
Prefecture.
Initial plans called for the plant was to be in operation by
December 1997. But a series of serious accidents and cover-ups
of faults at other nuclear facilities in the country pushed back
the test run at the Rokkasho reprocessing plant.
In 1995, there was a sodium leak at the prototype fast-breeder
reactor, called Monju, in Fukui Prefecture. This was followed in
1999 by an accident at JCO Co.'s uranium-processing plant in
Tokaimura that resulted in a nuclear fission chain reaction.
The Japan Atomic Energy Commission decided in November to
proceed with the government's nuclear fuel cycle policy, which
was under review following the series of accidents. After that,
the Aomori prefectural government and the JNFL signed an
agreement on the test run and on ways to ensure the safety of
residents and protect the environment.
Meeting reporters Tuesday at the JNFL head office in Rokkasho
after the test had started, JNFL President Isami Kojima said:
``The path leading up to this stage has not been an easy one, so
it is a very emotional occasion for us to be able to start the
test.
``I strongly believe a system of producing energy domestically
can be established with the reprocessing plant going into
operation.''(IHT/Asahi: December 22,2004)
[Copyright Asahi Shimbun. All rights reserved. No reproduction
*****************************************************************
41 UC loses nuclear weapons program (9/9)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:00:13 -0600 (CST)
http://www.sfbayview.com/120804/nuclearweapons120804.shtml
Who should control the US nuclear weapons program?
UC Regents lose nuclear weapons program, Part 9
by Leuren Moret
In November of 1991, Richard Berta, the Western Regional inspector
for the Department of Energy at the nuclear weapons labs and the
Nevada Test Site, told me: The nuclear weapons labs exist for the
Pentagon and the Pentagon exists for the oil companies.
This statement reveals the hidden purpose for transferring the
nuclear weapons lab management contract to Texas, where the University
of Texas-Texas A&M partnership will formally hold the contract. And
it is that contract that enables the Bush-Carlyle Group-oil companies
cabal to take control.
It is not the mission of any university to develop Weapons of Mass
Destruction, nor to control nuclear weapons research and management.
Many members of the University of California faculty have long
opposed UC management of the labs, and they are supported by a
majority of the students and many citizens. Many Texans also oppose
transfer of the nuclear weapons program to the University of Texas
and Texas A&M.
WMD at the University of California?
The weapons industry is highly profitable. UC is now in the position
of managing, developing, producing, promoting, proliferating,
investing in and profiting from Weapons of Mass Destruction -
thermonuclear weapons and depleted uranium weaponry. In fact, it
is a major academic participant and benefactor of research funds
from the military (see Fiat Pax for military funding at U.S.
universities).
The institutional dedication and focus of UC to projects of mass
and indiscriminate destruction - which may lead to extinction of
the human species - rather than to education and new energy sources
is hardly exemplary. But their profits and funds are not derived
from military research grants alone.
In 1999, UC ranked first in the nation, raking in $61 million from
academic patent royalties. In 2001, it received $1.8 billion in
gifts, the largest single donation of nearly $200 million coming
from the estate of UC alumnus Larry Hillblom, founder of DHL Corp.,
who died in 1995 in a plane crash.
But that wasnt enough. Recently UCLA was caught in a scandal, selling
body parts from 800 bodies that had been donated for scientific
research. The buyers had also sold cadavers to the U.S. Army which
were blown up in land-mine experiments (see The UCLA Body Parts
Scandal and Donated Bodies Blown Up by Army).
The U.S. Army paid $10,000 for each body to be used for land-mine
research, which may have included the ADAM depleted uranium landmine.
The official Army response was that they were just testing boots.
The fact that UC is developing, investing in and profiting from
depleted uranium (DU) weaponry, which meets the definition of Weapons
of Mass Destruction under U.S. federal law, makes UC complicit in
war crimes. (For a graphic look at war crimes in Afghanistan, see
AC-130 Spectre Gunship video, a leaked U.S. military combat mission
in Afghanistan.)
UC has invested $33,046,370 in Lockheed Martin Marietta, one of the
largest military industrial corporations, and $21,471,120 in General
Dynamics, one of the two biggest U.S. manufacturers of DU weaponry.
Students and faculty should be informed of this.
The University of California investment in war profiteering is small
compared to CalPERS, the State of California employee pension fund
now worth $177.8 billion (see CalPERS Pension Fund President Ousted).
CalPERS owns 5.5 percent of the Carlyle Group, with a return on
investment of 20-30 percent per year and an option to buy an
additional 5 percent within a few years.
As a land grant university, the University of California has a
mandate and mission to educate the citizens of California, and it
should have special consideration for people of color and people
with disabilities. As the state with probably the greatest diversity
in the nation, California universities had the chance to provide a
vital and creative model for the nation.
Instead, administrators have pigged out feeding at the public trough,
giving themselves 25 percent raises while throwing breadcrumbs to
the staff a paltry 2 percent for the workers. This was the pattern
I observed at the Livermore nuclear weapons lab, where a secret
document revealed that the five top administrators in the Geosciences
Department, where I worked, gave themselves 25 percent raises on
their $120,000+ salaries.
We were given bad annual job evaluations each year to justify the
paltry 1.5 percent raises we received annually. Instead of a model
for the nation, the University of California is one of the most
corrupt institutions I have ever encountered. As a lawyer representing
some of the 500 women who filed lawsuits against UC told me UC is
rotten and corrupt from the bottom to the top and back to the bottom
and I later found out so was she.
The Carlyle Group - shadow government?
Former Manhattan Project scientist and retired Livermore Lab nuclear
physical chemist Marion Fulk warns, The military should NEVER be
in control of the nuclear weapons program; it should be in civilian
hands.
The Carlyle Group, worth about $14 billion in 2001, with vested
interests and ties to the Bush crime family and oil companies,
cannot be investigated or subjected to any oversight whatsoever
because it is a private corporation. For that reason, it should not
have any control or influence over U.S. nuclear weapons policy and
development.
Admiral Bobby Ray Inman and his associates in the intelligence
business have demonstrated their systematic and treasonous abuse
of the internet, voting machines and American civil liberties.
Should we give them the trigger, the nukes, the budget they want,
and the cover of secrecy?
Eliminating resistance to change?
The old guard at the nuclear weapons labs is being systematically
targeted, scapegoated and run out of the labs to clear out the old
and bring in the new by those UC admirals and Homeland Security
folks. Recently, the lab badge of a retired Livermore scientist
Marion Fulk was cancelled by Homeland Security without explanation.
Fulk remarked, This is ridiculous. Hell, I have higher security
than anyone in Homeland Security. What does Tom Ridge know about
nuclear weapons?
You can bet Fulk will get his badge back when they call him to one
of those problem meetings. At the last problem meeting, he discovered
that the plutonium canisters in the high security vault at Livermore
were puffing up like muffins in a hot oven, which could have led
to a major criticality disaster wiping out the Western United States
and beyond.
Younger scientists had arbitrarily changed the canister design,
which allowed moisture to enter the canisters, dangerously generating
hydrogen gas. Eliminating the older and more knowledgeable nuclear
weapons experts from the labs is a dangerous practice. It is time
to demand some answers from the UC admirals in charge now about
their motives behind such changes.
National Science Foundation?
Management and oversight of the nuclear weapons labs belongs at a
place like the National Science Foundation, a U.S. government agency
with the resources to make rational decisions and reign in the
planned unlimited proliferation of nuclear weapons on earth and in
space.
Nuclear weapons are now obsolete. If the money spent on the nuclear
weapons program had been spent on alternative energy development,
the U.S. would now be a healthy and wealthy country. Instead, the
U.S. economy is bankrupt, with an unhealthy population suffering
from the long-term effects of nuclear weapons testing, a radiation
contaminated environment and little choice left but to steal oil
resources from other countries.
A young student at a San Francisco antiwar demonstration two years
ago held up a sign, Nuke their ass and take their gas. That sums
up the present U.S. foreign policy.
Professor Butler Shaffer of Southwestern University School of Law
put it this way: There is a toxic quality to war that affects the
inner life of individuals and, as a collective consequence, the
society itself. In the degradation and dehumanization of the
individual lies the destruction of all mankind.
References
Fiat Pax (Let there be peace): A Resource on Science, Technology,
Militarism, and Universities, http://www.fiatpax.net.
How Research Turns Into Royalties, Stanford University Alumni
Magazine, March-April 1999.
Gifts to UC Total $1.8 Billion Last Year, by Helen Hwang, Daily
Cal, Feb. 7, 2002, http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=7600.
Asian Children Finally Get Part of $550-Million Estate, by Mary
Curtius, Los Angeles Times, May 20, 1999,
http://www.wright.edu/~tran.dung/vn_boy.htm.
The UCLA Body Parts Scandal, by C. Ornstein and A. Zorembo, March
10, 2004, Los Angeles Times,
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bodies10mar10,1,6780091.story?coll=la-headlines-california.
Donated bodies blown up by Army by Stewart Yerton, The Times Picayune,
March 10, 2004, http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a856.htm.
CalPERS Pension Fund President Ousted, by Ben White, The Washington
Post, Dec. 1, 2004,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25537-2004Dec1.html.
To read Parts 1 through 8 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,
http://www.sfbayview.com/112404/ucregents112404.shtml and
http://www.sfbayview.com/120104/nuclearcorridor120104.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
*****************************************************************
42 chillicothe gazette: USEC: $18M payout wouldn't sink firm -
http://www.chillicothegazette.com
Wednesday, December 22, 2004
Settlement may be paid to ex-leader
By GREG WRIGHT Gazette Washington Bureau
On the Net
+ United States Enrichment Corp. Inc.: www.usec.com
WASHINGTON -- United States Enrichment Corp. Inc. will survive
financially even if the nuclear fuel company has to pay its
former president up to $18 million in compensation, a company
spokesman said Tuesday.
But giving former USEC President William Timbers so much cash
would take a big bite out of USEC's income if it had to be paid
all at once, said Philip Potter, a lawyer who represents union
workers at USEC uranium-refining plants near Piketon; Paducah,
Ky.; and Oak Ridge, Tenn.
The company expects to earn $18 million to $20 million this
year, according to a financial statement released in November.
But it reported a net loss of $2.9 million during the first nine
months of the year.
USEC announced Timbers was leaving the company Dec. 14, but the
reason for his departure was not disclosed. USEC officials and
Timbers will go before an independent arbitration panel to
determine whether he was terminated for no reason, according to
a statement USEC Chief Financial Officer Ellen Wolf filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission this month. If Timbers
was let go without cause, the company must pay him up to $18
million in compensation, according to an employment agreement,
Wolf said in the statement.
Such a payment could slash USEC's net income by up to $8
million, Wolf said in the statement.
However, the pay-out would not be disastrous for USEC, which is
expected to generate more than $1 billion dollars in revenue
this year, USEC spokesman Charles Yulish said. "The point is the
company is getting on with its business," Yulish said.
James Mellor, chairman of USEC, is serving as interim president,
Yulish said.
Yulish said he did not know when the arbitration panel would
make a decision. However, "it's not going to go on for ages," he
said.
Timber's departure also will not affect USEC's long-term plan to
build a new, $1.5-billion uranium-refining plant in Piketon
Potter said. The American Centrifuge will refine uranium using a
more energy-efficient process.
Originally published Wednesday, December 22, 2004
Copyright ©2004 Chillicothe Gazette. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
43 Washington Times: Secretary Abraham's tenure
Editorials/OP-ED - December 22, 2004
nearing the end of a successful term promoting the nation's
energy and nuclear security.
In a period of unusual economic and political turbulence
triggered by the September 11 terrorist attacks and volatile
energy markets, Mr. Abraham assumed the considerable burden of
pushing change in a large, unwieldy and scandal-plagued
bureaucracy amid terrorist threats, rising oil prices and a
holdover culture of security laxity that had engulfed the
department in the 1990s.
That's not even mentioning
the California energy crisis of 2001 or last year's Northeast
region blackouts.
We'd like to point out how large are the shoes Mr. Abraham is
leaving for his successor by way of his greater achievements the
last four years.
*****************************************************************
44 Tri-City Herald: Fluor still reviewing K Basin dive plan
This story was published Wednesday, December 22nd, 2004
By Annette Cary Herald staff writer
Fluor Hanford plans to continue studying whether divers may
safely be sent into Hanford's K Basins to speed cleanup there.
Fluor had hoped to make a decision this week whether to drop the
plan as unfeasible or move forward toward a possible dive as
early as January.
More testing is needed, Fluor spokesman Geoff Tyree said
Tuesday. That will include lowering a mannequin in a dive suit
into the basins to see how it picks up contamination and
practice washing the radioactive particles off the suit.
If Fluor decides to go ahead and hire divers, it may not happen
as soon as January, Tyree said. The testing will determine the
schedule, he said.
Fluor is looking at ways to speed up the removal of radioactive
sludge left in the huge indoor pools of water from irradiated
nuclear fuel. The leak-prone basins are 400 yards from the
Columbia River.
Fluor is expected to miss a Dec. 31 commitment to DOE to have
the sludge in the most contaminated basin, K East, corralled in
underwater containers.
Divers could do the difficult cleanup work quicker than workers
who are maneuvering long-handled tools to the bottom of the
murky pools about 20 feet below the steel grating that covers
them.
Divers who specialize in radioactive environments now perform
underwater jobs at commercial nuclear reactors. They've also
been used to clean four spent nuclear fuel storage basins at the
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory.
The K Basins is a more difficult dive, however, because the
water is so heavily contaminated that radioactive particles
would cling to the divers' suits when they come out of the
water. Keeping the divers and the workers who help them out of
the contaminated suits safe could be difficult.
© 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
45 PISJ: Otter seeks an edge with announcement for governor's race
Pocatello Idaho State Journal:
Political strategists may admire the adroitness of First District
Congressman C.L. "Butch" Otter in announcing he will run for
governor in 2006, which is not as distant as it may seem. In
making his announcement, Otter appears to be making a pre-emptive
strike at potential opponents, most likely Idaho Lieutenant Gov.
Jim Risch.
In addition to the early timing, Otter has lined up a couple of
heavyweight supporters in former Governor Phil Batt and Second
District Congressman Mike Simpson, who might have been
considering his own run for the governor's office at some time.
Both have given enthusiastic endorsements to Otter, who says he
made his early move in order to permit him to start accepting
campaign contributions.
For his part, Risch has so far limited his comment to surprise
that Otter has started a new political campaign even before he is
sworn in for a third term as congressman. Risch's own
announcement of candidacy likely will come this spring, barring
an unexpected change of heart.
Otter also may have anticipated that Risch might ascend to the
governor's chair in 2005, should Gov. Dirk Kempthorne be tabbed
for a federal job by President George W. Bush. As an incumbent,
Risch could then stake an early claim to the job. At this point,
eastern Idahoans are hardly familiar with either man. Risch
campaigned statewide in 2002 for his present office, surviving a
heated primary race, but he is best known as a former legislative
leader in Boise. Otter likewise is a stranger, though he is known
as an outspoken critic of the Patriot Act. That legislation ran
against the grain of Otter's libertarian instincts with its
provisions for "sneak and peek" searches and access to library
records in the cause of combating terror. He succeeded in getting
the House in 2003 to approve a prohibition on the use of federal
funds for such searches, which are executed without the property
owner's or resident's knowledge, and with warrants delivered
afterward. But Senate and House leaders succeeded in later
killing that measure, following hard lobbying by the Justice
Department.
Otter, who affects a cowboy persona, spent almost 30 years with
the J.R. Simplot Co. He has managed to put a DUI conviction in
1993 behind him. Should he be elected governor, Otter is hardly
likely to be a fan of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
which in 1999 billed him $80,000 for willfully excavating and
filling in 2.7 acres of wetlands on his property without
authorization. It should be noted Otter is well able to afford
that amount.
At this juncture, it appears Democrats will have difficulty
finding a formidable candidate for governor, which means an
Otter-Risch matchup in the May primary election of 2006 could be
the political show of the year. Or of next year, too.
In addition to the early timing, Otter has lined up a couple of
heavyweight supporters in former Governor Phil Batt and Second
District Congressman Mike Simpson, who might have been
considering his own run for the governor's office at some time.
Both have given enthusiastic endorsements to Otter, who says he
made his early move in order to permit him to start accepting
campaign contributions.">
December 22, 2004
Copyright © 2004 Pocatello Idaho State Journal
P O Box 431 Pocatello, ID 83204-0431
*****************************************************************
46 Energy crunch: Windmills just won't get it done
International Herald Tribune
Thursday, December 23, 2004
Western governments are proving astonishingly slow to face up to
the four-pronged energy crisis that lies ahead and which could in
due course engulf them: . World consumption of fossil fuels is
soaring when it should be falling. .
Dependence on supplies from politically unreliable and unstable
regions is increasing when it was meant to be diminishing..
Carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels are expanding
worldwide when they should be shrinking..
Investment in alternative energy sources is at best marginal,
with the one really major source of clean energy, nuclear power,
being held back in most countries by political pressures.. All
these trends are heading the wrong way, and their effects may
unfold on different (and maybe quite unexpected) time scales.
World oil consumption is officially 80 million barrels a day,
compared with 60 million in 1980. But the real figure could well
be higher, some say as much as 84 million barrels a day. Without
radical policy changes, world consumption will be 122 million
barrels a day within two decades, the International Energy Agency
says..
The second crisis springs from the first. By 2030, the energy
agency estimates, more than half the world's supplies will
originate from shaky and troubled regions. But events will not
wait until then. . Two decades ago Margaret Thatcher was dismayed
to learn that 14 percent of Western Europe's gas imports were
from the Soviet Union. Today, 40 percent comes from those
regions, and the upheavals in Ukraine, which is crossed by
pipelines carrying much of this huge volume, give a whiff of what
is to come..
As for oil, consider the sources of what are supposed to be huge
future supplies. Iraq sees its pipelines blown up almost every
day. Iran may yet be the scene of another war. Saudi Arabia is
under attack and wobbly, and unease runs through most of the
other Gulf states. The Russian oil industry is in turmoil, and in
other Central Asian producers and the various pipeline transit
states like Georgia and Ukraine, the political landscape is
generally volcanic. .
Nigeria has strikes and sabotage, Sudan is at war, Venezuela is
politically unsettled and Algeria still has a bad dose of Islamic
fanaticism. Libya may be on the path of virtue, but it is too
early to be confident. The golden age of North Sea oil and gas is
drawing to an end, and Britain will shortly become a net importer
once again.. .
The prospect might be manageable if governments were all set
firmly on the path to a cleaner and greener energy future. .
Europe has tried, with high taxes and the new system of carbon
emissions "trading" - though even in Britain, carbon emissions
rose last year, when they should have been falling, and the
government now reluctantly concedes that its goals for emissions
reductions are being missed..
But these noble efforts are dwarfed by opposite pressures
elsewhere. China is building 60 new coal-fired stations a year.
America is still relying on coal for over half its electric power
while drinking more oil than ever, helped by gas-guzzling SUV's.
Energy issues received hardly a mention in the recent elections..
Acres of giant wind pylons, the current Great Green Hope, cannot
conceivably fill the gap. The one obvious alternative, nuclear
power, remains largely stymied by politics. China may have bold
longer-term plans for new plants. But elsewhere, nuclear programs
have been in limbo for years. In Britain, a pioneer in civil
nuclear power, the policy is to phase out nuclear capacity
altogether, though the nuclear option is still claimed to be
"open." .
Yet the plain truth about the world's energy future is that the
massive electric power that industry and 21st-century life need
will have to come increasingly from nuclear energy if it is not
to come from coal, oil and gas. The experts know this, as do the
technicians.
But do the politicians dare to break the news to a still nervous
public, or will they wait until the lights go out, industry
seizes up and governments are bundled from office by angry and
frightened voters? . Advisers to President George W. Bush are
said to be warning him that America needs a radically new energy
policy. They are right. So do we all.. (Lord Howell, a former
British energy secretary and president of the British Institute
of Energy Economists, is Conservative spokesman on foreign
affairs in the House of Lords.) .
International Herald Tribune All Rights Reserved
[IHT]
| Terms of Use | Contributor Policy
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************