*****************************************************************
11/02/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.262
*****************************************************************
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 US: [NukeNet] First High School to Use Nuclear Power Curriculum
2 IPS-English IRAN: For a nuclear-free Middle East, but with no
3 EUbusiness: EU powers hopeful on Iran nuclear front
4 Korea Herald: Russia seeks renewed 6-party talks
5 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: UN nuclear chief says North needs monitors
6 [NYTr] US Quietly Weaponizing Space
7 SF Chronicle: White House takes aim at U.N.'s nuclear chief
8 US: The Nation: The UN Deserves an Apology
9 Las Vegas SUN: Summary: N. Korea, Iran Respond to IAEA
10 Mos News: Russian Hands Over Weapons-Grade Plutonium to Police
NUCLEAR REACTORS
11 [NukeNet] Earthquakes and Nuclear Safety in Japan
12 [NukeNet] Reprocessing gets the nod
13 US: Global Warming or Nuclear Power --
14 US: NRC: FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1; Not
15 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
16 Slovensko.com: Austria wants Bohunice nuclear plant decommissioned -
17 US: New York Times: Power Increase Is Approved for Indian Pt.
18 US: TheDay.com: N-plant Foes Want Relicensing Halted
19 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Joint Meeting of t
20 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Meeting of the AC
21 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Meeting of the AC
22 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste, Meeting on Planning an
23 US: NRC: AmerGen Energy Company, LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generatin
NUCLEAR SAFETY
24 US: November Surprise Piketon, Ohio
25 [du-list] media report: "armour salvaged from old iraqi tanks"
26 [du-list] weapons dust worries iraqies - provisional
27 US: Rocky Mountain News: Reform may aid ill nuke workers
28 Interfax: 8 containers of plutonium given to police in Siberia
29 BBC: Russian kept plutonium in garage
30 US: Hawk Eye: Bush signs workers claims bill
31 Scotsman: Nuclear fears grow as Russian scientist hands over plutoni
32 Mos News: Russian Nuclear Sub Successfully Launches ICBM -
33 IDS: Uranium pollution in Iraq damaging
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
34 Las Vegas SUN: Candidates hoping Nevada helps tip the presidential e
35 Inyo Register: Yucca Mtn. issues mounting for Inyo
36 Las Vegas RJ: JOHN L. SMITH: Today's the day when opinion polls get
37 US: ABQjournal: More WIPP Waste Breaks Rules
38 Elko Daily Free Press: which papers in NV supported whom
39 US: AU ABC: Ranger mine operators to face licence charges
40 US: AU ABC: Ranger contamination case adjourned.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
41 Idaho Statesman: INEEL case hurts the bottom line at Lockheed Martin
42 lamonitor.com: DOE sanctions prescribed burns
OTHER NUCLEAR
43 [du-list] DU in the news - 3rd Nov 04
44 UK The Times: Nuclear commander shot dead
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NukeNet] First High School to Use Nuclear Power Curriculum
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:46:15 -0800
Langley to be the first school to use nuclear power curriculum
Friday, October 29, 2004
By Amy McConnell Schaarsmith, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
As part of the Bush administration's effort to boost the nuclear power
industry, physics students at Langley High School will become the first in
the country to use a new curriculum from the U.S. Department of Energy that
promotes nuclear energy.
With memories of the 1979 near-disaster at Three Mile Island fading, federal
energy officials said last week they hope the new curriculum will encourage
more students to pursue careers in nuclear engineering -- a field energy
officials expect to grow.
"No new nuclear power plants have been built for many years, but now because
of increasing oil and natural gas prices, utilities are looking to build
some new plants in the next few years," said William Magwood IV, a graduate
of Carnegie Mellon University and director of the U.S. Energy Department's
Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology. "They're looking for
people to work in those plants and design those plants, and there you are."
Among those attending Magwood's presentation at Langley last week were 13
physics students. Several of the students plan to study medicine, become
teachers, practice psychiatry or go into a math-related field. But a few
interested in scientific careers said the two-week pilot program might
persuade them to consider nuclear engineering.
"I was interested in aviation, but this really showed me how much broader it
could be, that there could be better fields to go into," said Jon Mack, a
junior from Crafton Heights, after Magwood's presentation.
The program, which is called "The Harnessed Atom: a new curriculum in
nuclear science and technology," is not officially part of the Pittsburgh
Public Schools physics curriculum that was designed by the district. Physics
teacher Ed Henke, however, said he has committed to teaching the program by
volunteering to participate.
It is designed to teach the students about energy physics, atomic structure,
power plant design and operation, safety and environmental protection,
according to federal officials.
The program -- part of a push by the Bush administration to develop
additional nuclear power as an alternative to foreign oil -- could be
expanded to other high schools throughout the country if it succeeds at
Langley, Magwood said.
No new reactors have been built in the United States since a partial
meltdown at Three Mile Island 25 years ago released a small amount of
radioactive water into the Susquehanna River, tainting the industry's public
image for decades.
Now, however, federal energy officials are touting nuclear energy as "green"
power and the nation's largest source of pollution-free electricity. Unlike
fossil fuels such as oil and coal, nuclear energy does not emit sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxide or carbon dioxide; sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide
create acid rain, while carbon dioxide contributes to global warming.
Critics, however, point out that nuclear power is not truly "clean" because
the production process creates radioactive waste that remains potentially
dangerous for thousands of years. Currently, a backlog of about 80,000 tons
of high-level radioactive waste is being stored at nuclear reactor sites
throughout the country.
Despite such concerns, the general public's worries about nuclear energy
have begun to lift, Magwood said.
"I think people recognize that since [Three Mile Island], a lot of changes
have been made, and we haven't had any significant problems with nuclear
power," he said. "We know how to operate plants safely."
(Amy McConnell Schaarsmith can be reached at aschaarsmith@post-gazette.com
or 412-263-1548.)
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04303/403478.stm
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
2 IPS-English IRAN: For a nuclear-free Middle East, but with no
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:40:57 -0800
AP HD IP
IRAN: For a nuclear-free Middle East, but with no exceptions, says UAE paper
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)
ABU DHABI, Nov. 2 (WAM) - A United Arab Emirates (UAE) paper today commented
on the current dialogue between Iran and the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA). It said, however, that if Iran is required to give up its
nuclear ambitions, Israel should do so.
Commenting editorially on the issue, the Dubai-based 'Gulf News' said:
"Let us get matters straight -- a Middle East region that is free of nuclear
weapons is without question a desirable goal.
"But if Iran is required to refrain from pursuing any nuclear programme,
then the same should apply to Israel. It is no secret that, in the region,
Israel holds the reins of the arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.
"For some time now, handling Iran's nuclear programme has been a
dilemma -- and perhaps a debacle for some. The country is no stranger to
various accusations. Threatening fingers have long been pointed at Iran.
"It is not the place here to attack or stand by any party. But whatever
role the world community seeks for Iran, alienation and threats are
certainly not the best way to make progress.
"Coercion could lead to a surprisingly sudden reaction. But let us not
fall into the trap of confusing issues here. The debate is not about Iran's
right to pursuit its nuclear ambitions, nor is it about establishing a
nuclear-free zone in the region.
"The approach of the European Union (EU) and that of the International
Atomic Energy Agency in dealing with Iran is, for the time-being, the most
appropriate.
"It is by maintaining an open communication channel which has led Hossein
Mousavian, Iran's top nuclear negotiator with the EU, to state that talks
were 'in progress', hinting that compromise on Iran's side was possible.
"'We have rejected two possibilities: cessation and unlimited suspension.
We told the Europeans if your target is cessation, it would be impossible.
But we are flexible if [the EU] is balanced,' he said.
"The best medicine for defiance in international relations is not
necessarily the stick-without-the-carrot policy," the paper concluded. (WAM)
*****************************************************************
3 EUbusiness: EU powers hopeful on Iran nuclear front
[http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/]
The European Union's major powers expressed guarded optimism
Tuesday for a breakthrough with Iran on the Islamic republic's
nuclear ambitions as signs emerged of a compromise deal taking
shape.
Asked whether the EU could accept an Iranian offer to suspend
uranium enrichment only for up to six months, French Foreign
Minister Michel Barnier said the bloc wanted a "lasting"
suspension, without specifying for how long.
"We are in an extremely intensive phase of discussions with the
Tehran government and we are entering into this final phase of
discussions with a certain optimism," Barnier told reporters at
an EU meeting here.
Officials from EU heavyweights Britain, France and Germany are
preparing for a new round of talks with Iran in Paris on Friday.
The EU has been pressing Tehran to renounce entirely uranium
enrichment, which can be used to make nuclear weapons, in return
for an assistance package for peaceful atomic energy.
But diplomats at the UN's nuclear watchdog in Vienna said the EU
was no longer explicitly calling for an indefinite suspension to
the uranium programme, in a possible compromise ahead of Friday's
talks.
Iran is prepared to call a halt to its uranium enrichment
activities for "up to at most six months, not more", Tehran's top
nuclear negotiator Hossein Mousavian told AFP Tuesday.
Asked what Barnier meant by a "lasting" suspension, a senior
French source said he meant "for as long as possible".
Speaking before Mousavian's comments, German Foreign Minister
Joschka Fischer said the international community should accept
Iran's "legitimate right to use nuclear power for peaceful
purposes".
But on the other hand, Iran must "stop the (uranium) fuel cycle",
Fischer told reporters in Brussels.
"The negotiations continue and we hope that at the end there will
be a successful outcome," he said. "If we find a way I would be
very happy. If not, we are moving forward in a very serious
situation."
The UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has given Iran
a deadline of November 25 to allay concerns about its nuclear
activities.
At this week's Paris talks, representatives from the EU trio will
try to persuade Iranian officials to renounce uranium enrichment
and stave off the threat of being summoned before the UN Security
Council.
"I don't think it's an issue coming to a head," British Europe
Minister Denis MacShane said.
"We're working very closely... with the United States, and we're
working through the IAEA in Vienna to get a solution that I think
the entire international community, from Moscow to Washington, is
agreed on," he said.
Dutch Foreign Minister Bernard Bot, whose country holds the EU's
rotating presidency, took note of recent hardline statements by
Iran's parliament but said: "We hope the Iranian government will
give different signals."
A final decision on whether to refer Iran to the UN Security
Council will be up to the IAEA, Bot said, "but we fully endorse
the efforts made by the IAEA, which involves full suspension of
all enrichment activities".
However, diplomats at IAEA headquarters in Vienna said the EU had
now adopted a softer line that stops short of demanding full and
permanent suspension of the activities.
EU foreign affairs chief Javier Solana said contacts with Iran
had been "progressively more constructive as time goes on", and
did not rule out top-level talks between the EU and Tehran after
Friday's meeting of aides.
"Having a meeting at a higher level will be necessary to have a
real breakthrough," he said. General Affairs and External
Relations Council
Text and Picture Copyright © 2004 AFP. All other copyright © 2004
EUbusiness Ltd. All rights reserved. This material is intended
*****************************************************************
4 Korea Herald: Russia seeks renewed 6-party talks
2004.11.03
By Shin Hae-in
[http://www.voiceware.co.kr]
Russia will push for the resumption of the
six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program before
the end of this year, a Russian parliamentary leader said here
yesterday.
"Russia's primary interest is to have a nuclear-free Korean
Peninsula," Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the State Duma
International Committee, said in an interview with The Korea
Herald.
Leading a parliamentary delegation, Kosachev arrived in Seoul on
Monday to discuss parliamentary exchanges and other issues of
mutual concern with the South Korean National Assembly.
Assembly officials said Kosachev and three other representatives
of the Russian parliament met South Korean lawmakers, including
Assembly Speaker Kim Won-ki, and discussed ways of the reopening
the six-party nuclear talks as soon as possible.
The talks involve the two Koreas, Russia, the United States,
China, and Japan. They were held three times in Beijing, but
failed to achieve any major diplomatic breakthrough because of
differences between North Korea and the United States.
The talks have been suspended since September when North Korea
refused to attend a fourth meeting, citing Washington's
"hostile" policy toward it and South Korea's past nuclear
activities.
"My personal point of view is that the multilateral approach may
not be very useful," said Kosachev. "I prefer to use the
bilateral ways of consultation between the nations and have
direct contacts with the North Korea also."
Kosachev added that the U.S. hard-line policy toward the North
had not helped dissolve the tension on the Korean Peninsula.
"One of the reasons of North Korea behaving the way they did was
due to the rather inflexible approach of the United States," he
said. "It led to a response not good for anyone, including the
United States, and now we are in the situation where nobody
knows a way out."
"The existing mechanism of the six-party consultation has been
good enough, and I think some progress had been reached there.
But time is important. Since the reason they could not meet each
other for several months is partly due to the U.S. presidential
election, I am glad that it is almost over," Kosachev said.
He added, however, that he does not expect much change after the
election.
"I do not believe that the approaches of the current president
and the candidate differ very much," he said. "Both of them are
interested in the problem in the North Korea because the North
is considered as a direct threat to the U.S. security. Ways of
handling this threat would not differ much."
Kosachev said that he hoped for North Korea to become a
"democratic, transparent and predictable" nation, which Russia
can maintain intimate cooperation with.
"Our first task is to be as active as possible in this six-party
consultation process, and the next task is to persuade North
Korea that they can win on having good economic and political
cooperation with Russia as well as with South Korea," he said.
Kosachev was a key aide to former Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny
Primakov, an international negotiator who served under former
Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.
The Russian parliamentarian, who came here at the invitation of
Rep. Lim Chae-jung, head of the parliamentary unification,
foreign affairs and trade committee, will stay in Korea until
Friday.
(hayney@heraldm.com)
By Shin Hae-in
2004.11.03
*****************************************************************
5 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: UN nuclear chief says North needs monitors
November 3, 2004 KST 12:34 (GMT+9)
November 03, 2004 ¤Ñ In an annual report to the UN General
Assembly, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency has
urged North Korea to allow inspectors to monitor its nuclear
activities.
At the UN briefing on Monday, Mohamed ElBaradei, the
international nuclear watchdog's secretary-general, called on
North Korea to dismantle its nuclear program in a verifiable
manner, or at least allow his agency to resume monitoring to
ensure that the country's nuclear activities were what he called
"exclusively peaceful."
North Korea reacted angrily to the call, repeating its long-held
position that it will only give up nuclear arms development when
the United States ends its hostile policies.
Shortly after it was revealed that North Korea was engaged in a
clandestine program to enrich uranium, Pyeongyang expelled UN
inspectors in December 2002. The next month it pulled out of the
Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty for the second time.
"The agency has not performed any verification activities in
[North Korea], and cannot therefore provide any level of
assurance about the non-diversion of nuclear material," Mr.
ElBaradei said.
"I'm telling the North Koreans again that the international
community is ready to look into your security concerns, ready to
look into your economic and humanitarian needs," the Associated
Press quoted Mr. ElBaradei as saying. "But a prerequisite is for
them to commit themselves to full, verifiable, dismantlement of
their weapons program ¡ª as they say they have a weapons
program."
North Korean diplomats in New York sternly rejected Mr.
ElBaradei's entreaties. Kim Chang-guk, North Korea's deputy UN
ambassador, called the International Atomic Energy Agency "a
political tool of the superpower," and said his country's
nuclear program is a political-military question to be settled
between Washington and Pyeongyang.
Meanwhile, a five-member team from the UN agency arrived in
Seoul yesterday to continue an evaluation of South Korea's past
nuclear activities. The team will stay until Sunday to look into
two cases of South Korean nuclear testing, one in 1982 and the
other in 2000.
The nuclear agency is to conclude its report before Nov. 25,
when its board meeting takes place in Austria. After the report
is reviewed at the board meeting, the International Atomic
Energy Agency will decide whether to bring the issue to the UN
Security Council or not.
by Ser Myoja myoja@joongang.co.kr>
[http://joongangdaily.joins.com/faq.html]
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
6 [NYTr] US Quietly Weaponizing Space
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 16:17:31 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Reuters - Oct 29, 2004
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6665322&pageNumber=0
U.S. Deploys Satellite Jamming System
By Jim Wolf
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force quietly has put into service a
new weapon designed to jam enemy satellite communications, a significant
step toward U.S. control of space.
The so-called Counter Communications System was declared operational
late last month at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, the Air
Force Space Command said on Friday in e-mailed replies to questions from
Reuters.
The ground-based jammer uses electromagnetic radio frequency energy to
knock out transmissions on a temporary and reversible basis, without
frying components, the command said.
"A reversible effect ensures that during the time of need, the
adversary's space-based capability to threaten our forces is
diminished," said Capt. Angie Blair, a spokeswoman. "Following the time
of need, the space-based capabilities used by the adversary can return
to its original state."
The device appears to have been put into service considerably earlier
than had been projected by the Air Force as recently as February.
At that time, a long-range planning document, dubbed the Transformation
Flight Plan, said such a system would let the United States by 2010
"deny and disrupt an adversary's space-based communications and early
warning" of attack.
U.S. military control of space is one of four missions spelled out under
a national space policy adopted by former president Bill Clinton in
1996. The goal is to make sure U.S. forces have unhindered access to
space and space-based services and to deny an enemy any similar benefits.
The U.S. military has experimented with a range of "antisatellite"
(ASAT) weapons, including lasers, to knock out enemy craft by destroying
them or damaging their sensors.
Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the private Center for Defense
Information in Washington, welcomed the new system on the ground it
would not create debris that could threaten global use of space and
would not destroy satellites, only jam them temporarily.
"Unfortunately, it seems we are not going to limit our quest for 'space
control' to benign systems," she said, citing the danger of a space arms
race.
The deployment was disclosed without fanfare late last month at a
technical conference of the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics in San Diego, California.
The system is operated by the 76th Space Control Squadron, a unit
created in 2001 to explore technologies for controlling space, Brig.
Gen. Larry James, vice commander of the Space and Missile Systems
Command told the conference.
The Air Force Space Command, in its e-mailed replies, said the system
was built from off-the-shelf commercial equipment, and made up an
antenna, transmitters and receivers that can be loaded into a trailer
and moved from place to place.
Three such systems had been delivered since late last year, the command
said. The program's budget for fiscal 2005 totaled $6.2 million,
according to the Congressional Research Service.
The primary integrator was Northrop Grumman Corp.'s . Mission Systems
business unit in Redondo Beach, California, said Joe Davidson, a Space
and Missile Center spokesman.
Citing "operational security" concerns, military officials declined to
discuss how the jammer worked but equated it with traditional Air Force
electronic warfare weapons that have been used since World War 2 to
deceive, disrupt, deny, degrade or destroy targets.
(c) Copyright Reuters 2004. All rights reserved.
*
Search the NYTr Archives at:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
7 SF Chronicle: White House takes aim at U.N.'s nuclear chief
/ Some in Bush camp say ElBaradei trying to help elect Kerry
[http://www.sfgate.com/index/] ]
Robert Collier, Chronicle Staff Writer [rcollier@sfchronicle.com]
Tuesday, November 2, 2004
While President Bush and Sen. John Kerry were arguing last week
over the looting of high explosives in Iraq, a parallel fight was
being waged in the shadows, one that could bedevil U.S. foreign
policy long after today's election.
The White House was locked in combat with an old adversary --
Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the International Atomic Energy
Agency -- whose cooperation the United States needs to prevent
nations such as Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear
weapons.
Some administration supporters accuse ElBaradei of orchestrating
the scandal over 377 tons of missing explosives at the Al Qaqaa
military base to help Kerry defeat Bush, and they suggest the
case will deepen distrust between Washington and the United
Nations.
"ElBaradei would like nothing better than to see President Bush
lose ..., " said Clifford May, president of the Foundation for
the Defense of Democracy, a conservative-leaning Washington think
tank.
After the explosives story broke last week, Bush administration
officials said they would oppose ElBaradei's bid for a third term
as head of the agency when it comes up for renewal next year.
Although the United States does not have veto power on the IAEA's
35-member board, opposition from Washington would carry
considerable weight, and some analysts say the administration is
determined to oust him.
"The people I've talked to in the administration are absolutely
convinced that ElBaradei is trying to defeat Bush, and what
happened (last) week means they will do anything it takes to make
sure that he doesn't get another term," said David Albright,
president of the Institute for Science and International Security
in Washington.
ElBaradei, in an Oct. 1 letter to the U.N. Security Council, said
that widespread looting of weapons in Iraq had occurred.
Responding to ElBaradei's request for more information on the
subject, Mohammed Abbas, an official of the Iraqi Ministry of
Science and Technology, reported that explosives at Al Qaqaa were
lost after the U.S. takeover because of "theft and looting of the
governmental installations due to lack of security."
The issue caught fire on the campaign trail after the letter was
leaked to the New York Times. Kerry accused Bush of
"incompetence" for not keeping the caches of explosives under
control, and administration defenders suggested that ElBaradei
might have coaxed Abbas to complain to the IAEA.
"Did ElBaradei in some way persuade the Iraqi official that this
letter was needed at this time because of the election?" asked
May. "This fuels the suspicion that ElBaradei is attempting to
manipulate an American election by spreading false information."
ElBaradei called the accusations "total junk."
"The timing probably is unfortunate, but there is a world out
there other than the American election," he said Friday.
"It's unfortunate that it's taking a political spin," he said in
a separate interview. "That's not ours."
The Bush administration's differences with ElBaradei began before
the Iraq war, when U.N. arms inspectors led by Hans Blix fanned
out across Iraq searching for weapons of mass destruction. The
administration constantly criticized their efforts as being too
weak. Relations became further strained when ElBaradei reported
to the Security Council that contrary to U.S. assertions, Iraq
did not appear to have an active nuclear weapons program.
At the time, Vice President Dick Cheney called ElBaradei "wrong"
and said he "consistently underestimated or missed what it was
Saddam Hussein was doing. "
After the war, U.S. weapons inspection groups in Iraq determined
that ElBaradei's findings had been correct.
The Egyptian soon took the offensive on other sensitive issues,
criticizing the Bush administration's plans to develop so-called
bunker-buster nuclear weapons.
"The U.S. government demands that other nations not possess
nuclear weapons," ElBaradei said in August 2003. "Meanwhile, it
is arming itself. If we do not stop applying double standards, we
will end up with more nuclear weapons."
The Bush administration, meanwhile, refused to allow U.N.
inspectors to return to postwar Iraq to complete their weapons
searches, despite pleas from both ElBaradei and Blix. Some
analysts see the administration's animus toward ElBaradei as part
of a broader distrust of the United Nations.
"There are personal issues with ElBaradei, but it also is more
fundamental, with the Bush administration opposed to any
fundamental role for the United Nations," said Lee Feinstein, a
senior fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations who was an
official in the Pentagon and State departments under the Clinton
administration.
One former Pentagon official in the Bush administration said the
distrust extended to much of the information that came from U.N.
arms inspectors when formulating strategy before and during the
war.
U.N. intelligence "was generally not used," said Marc Garlasco, a
former Defense Intelligence Agency official who headed the Joint
Chiefs of Staff's team directing high-value missile targeting.
Instead, he said in an interview, U.S. war planners were focused
on killing Saddam Hussein and his top aides. "Arms stashes were
just not a priority," he said. "But when you're talking about
potential WMD, it boggles the mind why Al Qaqaa wasn't higher on
the list," he said.
Administration officials, looking to curtail the influence of the
IAEA, note that the agency's 1957 charter tasks it primarily with
promoting the nuclear energy industry and ensuring that uranium
and plutonium are not taken out of nuclear power plants. The
charter does not specifically authorize the IAEA's current role
of investigating and enforcing nuclear nonproliferation accords,
they say, and the IAEA should defer all weapons-related
controversies to the U.N. Security Council.
"This goes to a fairly fundamental question here: whether the
IAEA's board recognizes that it is not the responsible agency for
the conduct of the affairs involving international peace and
security, but that the Security Council is, " said John Bolton,
the State Department's chief arms-control official, in a speech
in September. The administration has been ratcheting up pressure
on Iran over its alleged nuclear weapons program, and it is
expected to make a big push later this month urging the IAEA to
pass the issue to the Security Council for possible sanctions
against Tehran's Islamic government.
"That's what we think, and that's why we've been pressing for
it," Bolton said. "That's why we're going to continue to press
for it in November."
E-mail Robert Collier at rcollier@sfchronicle.com
[rcollier@sfchronicle.com] . Page A - 6
[http://www.sfgate.com/staff/]
*****************************************************************
8 The Nation: The UN Deserves an Apology
Issues November 15, 2004 (web)
[http://www.thenation.com/
Posted November 2, 2004
by Robert Scheer
[I] want to cast my vote in favor of the United Nations.
Some Americans like to talk as if the UN exists merely for the
convenience of the Third World, forgetting that it was the United
States that fought to create an inclusive international forum to
help restrain mankind's new ability to destroy itself.
[http://www.thenation.com/sam/public/click.mhtml/411/0] With the
radioactive dust of Hiroshima and Nagasaki still in the air, it
was shock over our own human barbarism that led this country to
push aggressively for a world organization that would allow
negotiation to take precedence over brute force, communication
over willful misunderstanding.
In the decades since, the UN has undertaken hundreds of largely
thankless humanitarian, arms control, nation-building and
peacekeeping missions. If these actions have not cured man's
rapaciousness and cruelty, they have certainly helped save
countless lives and arguably prevented a third world war.
Yet, even as we once again call on the organization to help
broker peace and elections in Afghanistan and Iraq, American
politicians find the UN an irresistible piñata, ripe for
demagogic bashing. When the president honored United Nations Day
last week in a routine annual resolution and then asked state
governors to follow suit, for example, opportunist Texas Gov.
Rick Perry refused to sign the symbolic proclamation. It's not
surprising, because the Texas Republican Party believes that the
United States should leave the UN altogether.
Of course, such posturing does a disservice to the many UN "blue
helmets" who have died in the cause of peace over the last five
decades. Even more important than their bravery, however, has
been the UN's work in helping to restrain the proliferation of
nuclear weapons. For more than a decade, to cite one example, the
UN ably supervised the elimination of Saddam Hussein's weapons of
mass destruction despite Hussein's trickery and resistance, as
well as the CIA's stupid infiltration of the inspection teams.
The CIA action gave Iraq's dictatorship an excuse to kick the
inspectors out of the country at one point.
Yet in this year's presidential campaign, both sides consistently
managed to deny the obvious: In Iraq, the UN inspectors got it
all right, while the top American military, political and
intelligence leaders got it all wrong.
As American inspectors finally admitted this past month, there
simply were no weapons of mass destruction left in Iraq, and no
serious effort was being made by Hussein's government to
manufacture them, no matter what George W. Bush or John F. Kerry
wrongly believed before the invasion.
Yet nobody in either party who supported the war has the
integrity to apologize to the United Nations and its inspectors,
who were chased out of the country before a war campaign that
Johns Hopkins University researchers estimate has killed 100,000
Iraqis to date.
Proof of the stolid effectiveness of the UN came again last week
when it was revealed that a cache of 377 tons of powerful
explosives located and sealed by the UN's nuclear watchdog
agency--the International Atomic Energy Agency--before the war
had gone missing after the American invasion of Iraq. American
military commanders in the field were not informed of the
location of high-intensity explosives sites or of the
significance of the United Nations' seals.
The United States prevented the UN inspectors from returning to
the country, while experts believe the special
explosives--powerful enough to blow up skyscrapers or trigger
nuclear warheads--may have been used by insurgents in bombings
that have killed hundreds of American troops and thousands of
Iraqis.
Yet, in a classic case of blaming the messenger, some in the
media have accused the UN of interfering in US electoral politics
by calling attention to the missing explosives. "The U.N....used
377 tons of high-grade Iraqi explosives to announce its
opposition to reelecting George W. Bush," wailed a Wall Street
Journal editorial.
In response to the sniping of UN-bashers, Mohamed ElBaradei, head
of the IAEA, was forced to point out the obvious: "There is a
world out there other than the American election."
Yes, and it is a world that clearly needs a strong United
Nations, now more than ever. Get The Nation at home (and online!)
for 75 cents a week! [http://www.thenation.com/associates/]
about Robert ScheerContributing Editor Robert Scheer, a Nation
contributing editor, is also a contributing editor and columnist
for the Los Angeles Times and the author, with Christopher Scheer
and Lakshmi Chaudhry, of The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About
Iraq, published by Akashic Books and Seven Stories Press.more...
Privacy Policy Copyright © 2004 The Nation
*****************************************************************
9 Las Vegas SUN: Summary: N. Korea, Iran Respond to IAEA
By The Associated Press ASSOCIATED PRESS
THE DEMAND: U.N. nuclear agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, in his
annual report to the General Assembly, calls on Iran and North
Korea to prove that their nuclear programs are peaceful.
IRAN RESPONDS: Deputy U.N. ambassador Mehdi Danesh-Yazdi says
nuclear talks with three European countries may yield results
but insists that Iran "is determined to pursue its inalienable
rights to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes."
NORTH KOREA RESPONDS: North Korea's deputy U.N. ambassador
rejects ElBaradei's call, saying it would only abandon its
"nuclear deterrence" if Washington ends its hostile policy
toward the communist nation.
--
*****************************************************************
10 Mos News: Russian Hands Over Weapons-Grade Plutonium to Police
MOSNEWS.COM
Created: 02.11.2004 13:45 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 13:45 MSK
MosNews
A resident of the town of Zmeinogorsk in Altai has handed eight
containers of weapons-grade plutonium-238 to the police.
Each of the containers handed in by Leonid Grigorov held 50 grams
of plutonium. Grigorov planned to receive $8.25 per milligram
after reading about rewards for surrendering radioactive material
in the local media. However, criminal proceedings were instigated
against him for “illegal storage of radioactive substances,”
ITAR-TASS news agency reported Tuesday.
Many years ago Grigorov worked as a nuclear engineer at the
laboratory of the local mining and enrichment plant. The
enterprise was closed in 1992. The installation, whose “heart”
was plutonium, was broken up and thrown on the scarp heap. The
radioactive metal should have been handed over to a special
plant, but this did not happen, the agency reported.
Grigorov was quoted by the agency as saying that seven or eight
years ago he had found cylinders of radioactive metal and written
a few letters about this. However, nobody answered him. Then he
placed the cylinders in a lead container and hid the plutonium in
his garage. “As an expert, I was simply obliged to do this to
prevent anything bad from happening,” Grigorov said.
“Having hidden the hazardous find, Grigorov acted as any person
should have acted from the moral point of view. But we are
considering the situation from the legal aspect. Grigorov’s
actions are categorized according to the Criminal Code,” the
local police department was quoted by the agency as saying.
Write us: info@mosnews.com [info@mosnews.com]
Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM
*****************************************************************
11 [NukeNet] Earthquakes and Nuclear Safety in Japan
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:45:39 -0800
Earthquake Zone
It might seem obvious to the average man or woman in the street, or the
average child in the playground for that matter, that you don't build
nuclear reactors in an earthquake zone. But the average man or woman in the
street, not to speak of the average child in the playground, would be na_ve
to make such an assumption. Here in shaky Japan we've got 52 of them (soon
to be 53) and not a single one has come crashing down - not yet at least.
Just take the recent spate of tremblers in Niigata Prefecture. Buildings
came down and the lights went out in Kashiwazaki City, but the nuclear
power plant (NPP) stood out like a lighthouse in a sea of darkness, a
beacon of hope proving that man is master of the elements, technology
conquering nature once again. If, for a moment, the inhabitants of
Kashiwazaki felt that nature had got the better of them, all they had to do
was glance over at that island of light. Not that any of that light shone
in Kashiwazaki itself. That precious commodity was all sent off to the
capital(1), but still, they could enjoy it vicariously. I suppose we should
acknowledge the reports that a few hundred liters of coolant overflowed
from spent fuel storage pools, but we can be sure that not a drop would
have been released into the environment.
Nevertheless, it must have been difficult in the early days to convince a
skeptical public. No matter how good your propaganda department is, the
public isn't totally stupid. To deal with this problem, the visionaries in
the government and in industry thought up a very clever scheme to help
people understand that the nuclear reactors they proposed to build would
not fall over. This scheme had three basic aspects. The first was to claim
that scientists knew where earthquakes would and would not occur. The
second was to claim that these same scientists could predict how powerful
the strongest earthquake would be in a given place. The third aspect of
this scheme was to play on people's belief (common at the time, though few
subscribe to it these days) in technology. Ever since Homo sapiens strode
out of Africa about 150,000 years ago, with just a club and a few stone
tools in his hands, it's been all progress. Our manifest destiny was to
conquer nature and technology was the means by which we would fulfill that
destiny. Such was the popular belief at the time, so when these visionaries
told people that the nuclear power plants that they were going to build
could withstand the most powerful earthquake possible, people swallowed it.
But apart from the shining example in Niigata the other day, how has the
record been? Well, it has to be admitted that the scientists got it wrong
pretty often, but heck, they were trying to sell a great idea. You can't
blame them for a bit of exaggeration. Anyway, let me give you a few details.
When designing earthquake-resistant features for nuclear power plants,
buildings and equipment are categorized in four levels of importance, on
the basis of the potential damage from a release of radiation into the
environment. Until July 1981 there were only three classes: Class 'A' being
the most important; Class 'B' being for buildings and equipment with less
safety significance than Class 'A'; and Class 'C' being for buildings and
equipment which have the same safety significance as general industrial
facilities. Class 'A' buildings and equipment must be able to withstand the
strongest predicted earthquake, known as the 'design-basis strongest
earthquake'. The magnitude of this earthquake is assessed on the basis of
past earthquakes and the likely effect of active faults. A higher
classification, Class 'As', was introduced in July 1981. This includes
buildings and equipment in Class 'A' which are deemed to be especially
important. These buildings and equipment must be able to withstand what is
called the 'design-basis upper limit earthquake'. People could be forgiven
for wondering what the difference is between the 'strongest earthquake' and
the 'upper limit earthquake'. It's probably easiest to put aside your
linguistic intuitions and just believe me that the 'upper limit earthquake'
is envisaged as being even bigger than the 'strongest earthquake'. That
would have to make it a real whopper one might think, but not necessarily.
In cases where no active fault has been discovered in the vicinity, it is
considered to be a magnitude 6.5 earthquake directly beneath the NPP active
fault.
Astute readers might have noticed that reactors built before July 1981
weren't designed to cope with the 'upper limit earthquake'. Fortunately,
the new rules specifically state that they don't have to go back and
redesign the old reactors. Actually, in several cases the original
calculations for both 'strongest earthquake' and 'upper limit earthquake'
were found to be too low and subsequent reactors were built to more
stringent design standards. But none of them is designed to withstand an
earthquake of the scale of the one which hit Kobe in 1995. The most severe
earthquake considered is for Hamaoka-3,4&5, built right on top of a major
plate boundary(2). These are designed to withstand an earthquake of 600
gals(3) at bedrock level. The Kobe earthquake was 833 gals.
Just for the record, the measuring device on the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa-5
reactor recorded 54 gals at bedrock. Measurements were recorded in the
order of 1,700 gals on the surface near the epicenter, but the
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa NPP is about 30 kilometers away from there. Also the
shaking is generally less at bedrock level. Power companies make much of
this, pointing out that the foundations of their power plants rest on the
bedrock.
Almost all of Japan's NPPs are in, or very close to areas which are
officially designated as requiring specific monitoring for earthquakes (a
high chance of an earthquake of magnitude 7 or greater.). Also one
shouldn't forget nuclear facilities other than NPPs: for example, the
complex at Rokkasho, including, or soon to include uranium enrichment,
spent fuel storage, reprocessing, MOX fuel fabrication and maybe even the
ITER nuclear fusion facility. But Rokkasho was very conveniently left off
the list of areas requiring special earthquake monitoring. It was on the
original draft list, but at the time it was thought to be too remote and
irrelevant, even though the risk of an earthquake was no less than other
areas. Well it has become more relevant since they fingered it to become
the center of the nuclear fuel cycle.
I have mentioned the four classes of building and equipment. Some people
might be interested to know what types of things are actually included in
these classes. As one would expect, the reactor containment vessel and the
spent fuel pit are in Class 'As'. But there are some surprises too. For
example, the turbine and the turbine building of Pressurized Water
Reactors, made famous in the recent Mihama-3 accident, are in Class 'C'.
The Nuclear Safety and Industrial Agency has admitted that the secondary
system (i.e. the turbine side) really should be taken seriously in future,
so it will be interesting to see whether the impending revision of the
current earthquake guidelines reflects this new awareness. I've heard
nothing to suggest that it will though. Actually, I suspect they would very
much like to keep Mihama-3 strictly separate from the issue of earthquakes.
If they drag that in they might be forced to address the problem of aging
reactors. In as much as Japan's reactors were designed to be resistant to
earthquakes (dubious enough in itself), those designs only applied to new
reactors. They provide very little insight into the ability of old, poorly
maintained reactors, with pipes below the regulation thickness, to
withstand an earthquake.
So returning to the question of how's the record, the visionaries might
have understated the magnitude of the design basis earthquakes, they might
have been a bit wayward in their classifications, they might have been a
bit too optimistic about the durability of the reactors and they might even
have missed a few active faults and earthquake zones here and there, but
lets face it, no reactors have fallen over, no radiation has been released
into the environment as a result of an earthquake, so what's all the fuss
about? And in their defense, I return to my earlier point, namely that they
were just trying to sell a great idea. No salesman is going to tell you
that he's selling you a dud and no visionary technologist is going to tell
you that we would have been better off without the industrial revolution.
Give the guys a break. Break their bloody necks, I say.
So finally, what of the people in Kashiwazaki City and Kariwa Village? They
have been through a terrible ordeal, albeit less terrible than for people
in towns nearer to the epicenter. If the epicenter had been right under the
NPP, there might well have been a nuclear catastrophe. In that case, the
emergency systems would have failed totally. People were sleeping out of
doors, in their cars, in tents and so on to get away from collapsed and
collapsing buildings. The last thing they needed was to be forced indoors
to escape a release of radiation. The train services and the roads were in
chaos. How would they have escaped if a major evacuation from the area had
been necessary? There are emergency procedures in place in regions which
host nuclear facilities, inadequate though they may be, but the logic of a
nuclear evacuation stands in total contradiction with the logic of an
earthquake evacuation. Realizing this, some people appealed to Tokyo
Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to shut down the reactors until things
returned to normal. But TEPCO management, due to its unshakeable belief in
its own technology, or else through sheer bloody-mindedness, kept them
going. However, of this, not a peep from the media, so I doubt if many
people in Tokyo were even aware that the power that supplied their TV sets,
came from the region where the disaster was unfolding before their very eyes.
1. The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant belongs to Tokyo Electric
Power Company, even though Niigata Prefecture is supplied by Tohoku
Electric Power Company.
2. The Hamaoka NPP is right over the boundary of the Philippine and North
American Plates. In fact, it is sandwiched between four plates - the two
just mentioned, plus the Pacific and Eurasian Plates. Hamaoka-5 is due to
commence commercial operations in January 2005.
3. Gal is a measure of acceleration. 1 gal = 0.01 m/s2.
Citizens' Nuclear Information Center
3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003
Phone: 81-3-5330-9520
Fax: 81-3-5330-9530
http://cnic.jp/english/
cnic@nifty.com
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
12 [NukeNet] Reprocessing gets the nod
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:45:37 -0800
This time it is true. More or less true, anyway.
The Japan Atomic Energy Commission's (AEC) Long Term Nuclear Program at its
Monday, November 1st meeting 'agreed' to go with the reprocessing option
for spent fuel produced by Japan's nuclear power plants. Essentially, all
it means is that they will proceed with the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant,
built at a cost of more than 2-trillion yen (U.S.$20-billion).
The so-called 'agreement' remains very vague, both in content and process.
The process essentially amounted to going around the table and hearing
everyone's opinion, then the chairperson announcing that the future
direction had been set. There is nothing so clear as a vote. This might be
hard to believe for European and North American people, but perhaps our
Asian friends will not be so surprised.
In regard to content, all they have really decided is to go ahead and
commence operations at the Rokkasho Plant. As for how long they will
continue, that is left vague. For example, the question of whether they
will build a second plant to cope with the full amount of spent fuel is not
addressed.
Unfortunately, the only clear voice of opposition was CNIC's own Hideyuki
Ban. There were others who didn't clearly endorse this option, but the
overwhelming majority of the hand-picked pro-nuclear members of the
committee did as expected and went for the government's existing policy.
It is now likely that Aomori Prefecture will sign a so-called "safety
agreement" for the Rokkasho plant, allowing Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited to
proceed with trials using depleted uranium. Once that happens the plant
will be contaminated with radiation. As far as we know, the Aomori Governor
has made no announcement about the matter and a demonstration against the
plant will be held in Aomori this Saturday. If, however, approval is given,
it is expected that these uranium trials will begin in late November or in
December. The plant is scheduled to commence commercial operations in 2006.
Philip White
International Liaison Officer
Citizens' Nuclear Information Center
3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003
Phone: 81-3-5330-9520
Fax: 81-3-5330-9530
http://cnic.jp/english/
cnic@nifty.com
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
13 Global Warming or Nuclear Power --
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:50:05 -0800
November 1st, 2004
More on the advancement of Nuclear power as the solution to Global Warming
At 05:24 PM 10/25/2004 -0500, "Doucette, Arthur"
wrote:
>Note, these articles all came out within days of each other. Search through
>the news just a while back and there is the odd piece here and there but
>nothing like this proliferation of articles, all friendly to NPPs that are
>being published in papers all over the globe. The responses from the local
>Environmental groups, caught seemingly unprepared for this logical
>conclusion to the avalanche of "CO2 is the world's greatest problem"
>stories that have been circulating, have been weak. Their responses seem
>quickly put together, particularly compared to the well-crafted articles
>written in support of NPPs. Their statements are little more than: "We don't
>need more NPPs, we need more Wind, Solar, Hydro and conservation" and are
>hardly convincing since even the mildly aware know that none of these are
>staged for the kind of ramp up needed to replace the existing NPPs, let
>alone the cuts that Kyoto demands. Further, the most promising alternative,
>Wind power, seems to generate a significant amount of opposition from
>members of the same groups that traditionally oppose NPPs. (See
>http://www.sundayherald.com/45570 ) which I'm sure is causing bickering
>within the ranks and thus difficulty in generating a coherent strategy.
>
>Articles on nuclear power as solution to global warming:
>
>http://www.fepc.or.jp/english/powerline/13/
>
>http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?tid=10625&ttype=6
>
>http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2004/10/24/diversified_energy_options_should_include_nuclear_power/
>
>http://www.lexpress.mu/display_news_dimanche.php?news_id=28731
>
>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-1324967,00.html
>
>http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2004/s1222552.htm
>
>http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/news04/101204_news_book.shtml
>
>http://allafrica.com/stories/200410200072.html
>
>http://www.progress.org/2004/fold373.htm
>
>http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2004/10/03/new21.html
>
>http://www.theunionleader.com/business_showa.html?article=45386
>
>
>As to the US, most people I talk to think Bush supports NPPs and that Kerry
>is opposed to NPPs, mainly because when Kerry talks about energy
>independence he never mentions NPPs and he has been vocal in his opposition
>to Yucca Mt., but if you dig on Kerry's Web site, because its not mentioned
>in any of the plans he proposes for "energy independence", you will find
>this buried in an article on Yucca Mtn: "Kerry and Edwards believe nuclear
>power can play an essential role in providing affordable energy while
>reducing the risk of climate change;"
>Its clear that both candidates support Nuclear power, just that Bush is a
>bit more open about it.
>
>As to Kyoto, while it is clear that Bush is against it, the Kerry doctrine
>is handled as deftly as a magician's slight of hand.
> >From the Kerry Web Site there are all of these statements which either say
>or imply that Kerry backs the Kyoto protocol:
>
>Interview with Chris Heinz: "He is not the type to run away from Kyoto"
>Interview with Theresa Heinz: "She is equally dismayed at Bush's public
>statements, from his pronouncement that the Kyoto Protocol on global warming
>was "dead on arrival" to his skepticism of scientific evidence on global
>warming. "As president, you have to have some sophistication in speech, if
>not in policy," she said. "But to say the science is still out is absurd,"
>she added. "People who don't know science like to doubt and vilify
>scientists."
> >From the position papers: He strongly advocated for U.S. participation in
>the Kyoto accords and other international environmental initiatives, and
>personally participated in many major world environmental summits, including
>conferences at Rio de Janiero, Kyoto and the Hague.
> >From "What Leading Voices have to say about John Kerry": by Environmental
>Director/Mass. " Kerry's been a consistent environmentalist. He strongly
>opposed Bush's efforts to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil
>drilling and backed the Kyoto Protocols"
> >From a statement by the League of Conservation Voters: "From getting America
>back into the game in the fight against global warming to..."
>Unattributed quote from Time mag; "Whether it be for his home state -
>cleaning up Boston Harbor, protecting the drinking water of Cape Cod, taking
>on corporate polluters - or the nation - ANWR, Kyoto, CAFE standards and
>much more - John has stepped forward to lead."
>Statement by John P. DeVillars, Mass Secretary of the Environment: "When
>Bill Clinton needed support on tough and politically difficult issues like
>climate change, the one person we could always count on was John Kerry. He
>came to every round of negotiations over the Kyoto Protocol all around the
>world and was a strong voice for action. He was always out-numbered by
>corporate lobbyists and opponents of environmental progress, but he never
>backed down. He not only has vision, he has guts."
> >From an article from The Press Democrat (Sept 18, 04) included in the Kerry
>site: "Kerry promises to respond to the threat of global warming - endorsing
>the Kyoto Protocol,"
>But in the only statement that I could find on the entire Web site by
>Kerry/Edwards on their Kyoto position was from the article that explains
>their plan for "Clean Coal":
>John Kerry and John Edwards believe that the Kyoto Protocol is not the
>answer. The near-term
>emission reductions it would require of the United States are infeasible,
>while the long-term
>obligations imposed on all nations are too little to solve the problem.
>Unlike the current
>Administration, John Kerry and John Edwards will offer an alternative to the
>Kyoto process that
>leads the world toward a more equitable and effective answer, while
>preserving coal miners' jobs.
>
>What is laughable is no other common form of energy used today creates more
>CO2 per unit of energy produced than coal. Equally dismaying is to have
>statements all over the Web site that imply that Kerry is for Kyoto but then
>have the only statement that says clearly he does not support Kyoto in a
>single narrow focus article that panders to the coal producing states is
>just dishonest. This level of deception does not happen accidentally.
>
>In any case, it does seem to me like there has been a coordinated effort to
>suddenly make the viability of NPPs as a solution to Global Warming a world
>wide media event.
>
>You can see the strategy taking shape:
>
>With Russia changing its mind, Kyoto is about to pass, and when it does it
>becomes the basis for international law.
>
>The US, regardless of Bush/Kerry, is not likely to ratify Kyoto, but with
>106+ other countries signing up plans will move forward to meet its targets
>and there will be strong pressure on the US to further reduce CO2 emissions.
>The only basic method that has been put forward for governments to prod
>their populace/industry to meet the reduced CO2 Kyoto targets has been
>through a "CO2 Tax". Since international trade is well regulated watch for
>some sort of "Kyoto duty" to be applied to goods from countries that are not
>complying with their Kyoto targets. This would be a way for the
>international community to impose a CO2 tax on the US if the US won't do it
>on its own.
>
>If you project this forward you will quickly see that a CO2 tax sufficient
>to cause fundamental changes in energy use/production will strongly favor
>the construction of new NPPs, since essentially they would not be hit with
>this tax.
>
>The fact is, while public opposition has slowed the building of NPPs, public
>opposition was not enough to stop NPPs. The real reason (particularly in the
>US) has been the economics of NPPs proved to be negative. Given a sufficient
>CO2 tax the economics behind NPPs would reverse. So while one can see the
>Power industry switching back to supporting NPPs the question becomes how
>negative is the public opposition? Witness the articles in support of
>nuclear power. The contest for the minds of the populace has begun.
>
>Its been a long time since TMI. The complexities of radiation are such that
>it will be difficult to educate a population with MTV length attention spans
>that NPPs have been/can be harmful. Listen to Dr. Caldicott speak in a
>severely time limited talk show "debate" format and you'll get my point. The
>issues she brings up can't be explained in the 90 second spot they give her
>while the "fact" that no citizens have been killed by a NPP in a "film at
>11" type of event is a simple point to make. The network appears "fair and
>balanced" since they presented spokespersons for both sides, but the
>reality is
>only the pro-NPP position lends itself to "sound bites".
>
>Further, if you look at both candidates' proposals for an alternative mobile
>fuel source they both support Hydrogen. But Hydrogen as a fuel is simply a
>method of storing energy. Natural forms of Hydrogen though are not a primary
>energy source. To create hydrogen for use as a fuel a significant amount of
>energy must be used to break natural forms down to its elemental state.
>Unlike oil and gas it will take significantly more energy to create, store
>and transport Hydrogen fuel than it will deliver. In a recent comprehensive
>study a "Well-to-Tank" analysis concluded that for the same amount of energy
>delivered to the tank for each fuel pathway, petroleum-based fuels and CNG
>have the lowest energy losses. Methanol, Fischer Tropsch liquids, compressed
>hydrogen from natural gas and corn-based ethanol have moderate energy
>losses. Liquid hydrogen from natural gas, electrolysis hydrogen, and
>cellulosic ethanol are subject to the largest Well-to-Tank energy losses.
>Greenhouse gas emissions were highest for production of hydrogen via
>electrolysis (using the U.S. electricity mix) second highest was production
>of liquid hydrogen from natural gas. Thus a movement to Hydrogen is a
>movement to one of the most inefficient fuels available and further if the
>electricity is produced in the same manner as it is today (approx 20%
>nuclear) in the US, the movement to Hydrogen would INCREASE CO2 emissions.
>Thus the only viable energy source that can be used for creating vast
>quantities of Hydrogen will be electricity and NPPs are the only non-CO2
>producing electrical generation method that could meet this massive increase
>in demand. While the Bush platform acknowledges this with Kerry you have to
>read between the lines, but the reality is both KNOW this.
>
>So ultimately, whoever wins the coming election, the public is ultimately
>going to be given the choice:
>
>Officials: You can keep your cars but only if they use Hydrogen as a fuel.
>Public: We'll take hydrogen cars then.
>
>A bit later as the first hydrogen cars are produced
>
>Officials: The only way to produce Hydrogen in the quantities necessary is
>to build more NPPs.
>Public: What's taking so long to get those NPPs built?
>
>And all because the public bought the idea of human induced Global Warming
>and the dangers that come with it (the Global Warming boys have been MUCH
>more successful in selling unseen dangers then the anti-nuke crowd ever
>was.)
>
>I repeat the statements I made several years ago:
>
>There is no clear and convincing evidence that the world is experiencing an
>un-natural period of global warming.
>==> The world has been warming for the last 20,000 years and it was warmer
>in the Medieval Warm Period, when much of Greenland was actually green, than
>it is now.
>
>If you believe the tenuous evidence that the world is experiencing global
>warming there is no clear and convincing evidence that it is human induced.
>==> Global circulation models do not explain the cooling of Antarctica, the
>global surface temperature discrepancy with satellite measurements, the long
>cooling trend from the late 40s to the mid 70s etc etc.
>
>If you believe the very tenuous evidence that the world is experiencing
>human induced global warming there is no clear and convincing evidence that
>the amount of warming rationally projected over the next century would be an
>overall bad thing for the planet as a whole.
>==> While negative stories get big press, history shows that civilization
>flourished during the MPP. Why are we convinced warmer is worse when we know
>that things like longer growing seasons are clearly positive?
>
>If you believe the extremely weak arguments that human induced global
>warming would be negative there is no clear and convincing evidence that
>even a strictly enforced Kyoto protocol would have any measurable effect on
>reducing the amount of warming.
>==> This is admitted by the IPCC itself.
>
>Further there are plenty of arguments to be made that Kyoto would be not only
>useless but harmful to both the developing and the developed nations' ability
>to adapt to any climate changes that might occur, human induced or
>otherwise.
>==> This has been shown by multiple different economic studies, the huge
>economic drag of a CO2 tax will stunt the abilities of nations to cope with
>change of any type. There are numerous "no regrets" policies which should be
>implemented first. There are other gases, primarily Methane and Nitrous
>Oxides which are potent GHGs but have no upside (like CO2 has) that should
>be addressed before CO2 is considered.
>
>Regards
>Arthur
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Doucette, Arthur
>Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 2:28 AM
>To: 'Russell D. Hoffman'
>Subject: Global Warming or Nuclear Power
>
>
>Hi Russell,
>As I predicted years ago the eventual proposed solution to Global Warming
>will be more NPPs
>
>Sigh.
>
>This will put the Green groups in a tough spot.
>
>They've bought the Global Warming hype hook, line and sinker, in fact made
>it a key part of their platforms. Now they are about to see it used against
>them.
>
>http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=574850
>
>Regards
>Arthur
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Russell D. Hoffman [mailto:rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:22 PM
>To: Doucette, Arthur
>Subject: RE: Global Warming or Nuclear Power -- The Secret Push is On!
>
>
>October 27th, 2004
>
>Hi Arthur,
>
>Your report (shown below, with minor typo corrections) is chilling.
>
>However, I CAN name one or two things that are "wrong" with the idea that
>global warming, if it is happening, might be nearly a non-event:
>
>1) Land loss by ice melting leading to ocean depth increases globally --
>say, two to three feet, which leads directly to:
>
>2) Larger storms, all other things being equal, which they wouldn't be,
>because all that extra energy (the warmth in Global Warming) will be
>dissipated somehow.
>
>Loss of land will result in tens of millions of displaced poverty-stricken
>world citizens, which would be a global catastrophe. Counterbalanced by
>increased production from newer fertile areas? Possibly, in some cosmic
>accounting system, I suppose, but then, we also might have to take into
>account increased health costs from a depleted ozone layer or something
>else that lets more deadly radiation in.
>
>But none of this could possibly warrant a nuclear power solution -- on that
>we both agree. You have researched the subtle but urgent topic
>beautifully, and I have corrected only a few minor typos for publication as
>is (mostly "then" where you mean "than", as you so often do).
>
>If you want to send this to The Nation or something before I publish it,
>feel free, but I'm ready if it's alright with you. I just attended the
>Project Censored 25 Most Censored news stories. This report should be a
>winner next year, IMHO.
>
>Yours,
>
>Russell Hoffman
At 05:42 AM 11/1/2004 -0600, "Doucette, Arthur"
wrote:
>Hi Russell,
>Thanks for your comments.
>I was hopeful that you would distribute it. I'm fairly good at research but
>I don't have the contacts/distribution network like you do.
>
>As to the points you raised.
>
>The rising water/displacement issue is not of the magnitude you assume. The
>rate of the rise in the oceans is not accelerating and even at twice times
>the current rate it is still slow enough for almost all governments & their
>citizens to deal with. Compared to the economic impact of the CO2 tax the
>cost of implementing rather modest control measures is a FAR cheaper
>alternative.
>Remember, any costal community ALREADY has to deal with the fairly frequent
>occasions when the sea level is many meters above normal. Providing an
>additional 6 inches of protection per decade to low lying communities will
>basically prevent any massive population displacements.
>
>Depletion of the Ozone layer is only marginally associated with Global
>Warming. There is some thought that it might be a bit player in warming of
>the polar regions, but so far this is only speculation.
>What is more disturbing is that we are co-signers of the Montreal Protocol.
>It calls for banning the use of CFCs since that is root cause of the
>thinning O3 layer. We have adhered pretty well in eliminating CFCs in almost
>all activities EXCEPT the enrichment of nuclear fuel.
>
>There is no evidence (even the IPCC doesn't claim it) that hurricanes are
>increasing in magnitude or frequency. The fact is if the Global Circulation
>Models that are used as the basis of IPCC's claims about the existence of
>anthropogenic Global Warming, then most of the predicted warming will occur
>in the higher latitudes, at night and during the Winter. While this year we
>saw more then the normal number of hurricanes hitting the US, the reality is
>that the number and intensity of hurricanes has been on a downward trend for
>many decades.
>
>I'll expand on these issues shortly.
>
>Regards
>Arthur
============================================================
============================================================
*************************************************
** THE ANIMATED SOFTWARE COMPANY
** Russell D. Hoffman, Owner and Chief Programmer
** P.O. Box 1936, Carlsbad CA 92018-1936
** (800) 551-2726
** (760) 720-7261
** Fax: (760) 720-7394
** Visit the world's most eclectic web site:
** http://www.animatedsoftware.com
*************************************************
IF YOU RECEIVED THIS EMAIL IN ERROR AND/OR DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE ANY MORE
EMAILS FROM US FOR ANY REASON, PLEASE CONTACT RUSSELL HOFFMAN AT:
rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com
MailTo:rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com?Subject=Unsubscribe-me-please .
Please be sure that "Unsubscribe-me-please" appears in the subject line.
*****************************************************************
14 NRC: FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC, Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1; Notice
FR Doc 04-24388
[Federal Register: November 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 211)]
[Notices] [Page 63560-63562] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02no04-89]
of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating
License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of
an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 issued to
FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (the licensee), for operation of the
Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1, located in Rockingham County, New
Hampshire.
The proposed amendment would revise the allowed outage times of
Technical Specification 3.3.3.6, ``Accident Monitoring
Instrumentation,'' to be consistent with the completion times in
the related specification in NUREG-1431, Revision 3, ``Standard
Technical Specifications Westinghouse Plants.'' Before issuance
of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made
findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that
operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed
amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated;
or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10
CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue
of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented
below: 1. The proposed changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
The proposed changes revise the actions and allowed outage times
(AOT) for inoperable post-accident monitoring (PAM)
instrumentation. The PAM instrumentation is not an initiator of
any previously evaluated accident. Furthermore, the PAM
instruments are passive devices; the instruments do not actuate
or control any plant systems or components. As a result, the
probability of any accident previously evaluated is not increased
by these proposed changes. While this change extends the AOT for
inoperable instruments, the Technical Specifications will
continue to require the availability of operable PAM
instrumentation for monitoring and assessing specific plant
parameters during and following an accident. The PAM instruments
have no impact on the ability of systems to perform the safety
functions of shutting down the reactor, removing decay heat,
controlling radioactive releases, or mitigating accident
consequences. The length of time that a PAM instrument has been
inoperable has no effect on the consequences of an accident
should an accident occur. As a result, extending the AOT for
these instruments will not significantly increase the
consequences of accidents previously evaluated.
2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any [accident] previously
evaluated.
The proposed changes neither install or remove any plant
equipment, nor alter the design, physical configuration, or mode
of operation of any plant structure, system, or component. The
accident monitoring instrumentation consists of passive devices
and is not an initiator of any accident. No physical changes are
being made to the plant, so no new accident causal mechanisms are
being introduced. Therefore, operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed amendments will not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
previously evaluated.
3. The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety.
The proposed changes do not alter the design, configuration,
operation, or function of any plant system, structure, or
component. The ability of any operable structure, system, or
component to perform its designated safety function is unaffected
by this change. These proposed changes allow an appropriate time
to restore inoperable PAM instruments to operable status when one
or more channels of a required instrument function become
inoperable.
The additional time to restore an inoperable channel to operable
status is appropriate based on the low probability of an event
requiring the accident monitoring instrumentation during the
interval, providing a reasonable time for repair of the
instrumentation, and alternate means of obtaining the required
information. Moreover, with the exception of the containment
post-LOCA [loss-of-coolant accident] high range area monitor (as
currently licensed) this change retains the requirement to shut
down the plant if less than a minimum number of instrument
channels of the required parameters are operable. Therefore,
operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed
amendment will not involve a significant reduction in the margin
of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR
50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to
determine that the amendment request involves no significant
hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the
date of publication of this notice will be considered in making
any final determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this
notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before
expiration of the 60- day period provided that its final
determination is that the amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the
amendment prior to the expiration of the 30- day comment period
should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such
that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in
derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take
action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or
the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will
take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need
to take this action will occur very infrequently.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page
number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also
be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal
workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at
the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the
licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to
issuance of the amendment to
[[Page 63561]] the subject facility operating license and any
person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who
wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a
written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to
intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to
intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's
``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10
CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of
10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located
at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/]
reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. (Note: Public access to ADAMS
has been temporarily suspended so that security reviews of
publicly available documents may be performed and potentially
sensitive information removed. Please check the NRC Web site for
updates on the resumption of ADAMS access.) If a request for a
hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above
date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the
Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or
petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a
hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner
in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically
explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with
particular reference to the following general requirements: (1)
The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or
petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right
under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the
nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property,
financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in
the proceeding on the requestors/petitioner's interest. The
petition must also identify the specific contentions which the
petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the
basis for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged
facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which
the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to
those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is
aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish
those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include
sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with
the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions
shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment
under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven,
would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least
one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the
conduct of the hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards
consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when
the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration,
the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately
effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the
final determination is that the amendment request involves a
significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take
place before the issuance of any amendment.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the
presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that
the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted
based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR
2.309(a)(1)(i)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for
leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,
Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier,
express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the
Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
and Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of
the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV [HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV] ; or (4) facsimile
transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101,
verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for
hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent
to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that
copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission
to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to
OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov [ OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov] . A copy of the
request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should
also be sent to M. S. Ross, Florida Power & Light Company, P.O.
Box 14000, Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated October 22, 2004, which is
available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located
at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html]
. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov
[pdr@nrc.gov] . (Note: Public access to ADAMS has been
temporarily suspended so that security reviews of publicly
available documents may be performed and potentially sensitive
information removed. Please check the NRC Web site for updates on
the resumption of ADAMS access.) Dated in Rockville, Maryland,
this 27th day of October 2004.
[[Page 63562]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Scott P. Wall, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate I,
Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 04-24388 Filed 11-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
15 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
FR Doc 04-24492
[Federal Register: November 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 211)]
[Notices] [Page 63564] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02no04-95]
Date: Weeks of November 1, 8, 15, 22,29, December 6, 2004.
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
Status: Public and closed.
Matters To Be Considered: Week of November 1, 2004 There are no
meetings scheduled for the week of November 1, 2004.
Week of November 8, 2004--Tentative Monday, November 8, 2004 9
a.m. Briefing on Plant Aging and Material Degradation
Issues--Part One (Public Meeting) (Contact: Steve Koenick,
301-415-1239) 1:30 p.m. Briefing on Plant Aging and Material
Degradation Issues--Part Two (Public Meeting) (Contact: Steve
Koenick, 301-415-1239) This meeting (both parts) will be webcast
live at the Web address-- http://www.nrc.gov
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] . Wednesday, November
10, 2004 2:30 p.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting)
(Tentative) a. U.S. Department of Energy (High Level Waste
Repository: Pre- Application Matters); DOE's appeal of LBP-04-20
(Tentative) b. Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Clinton ESP Site),
LBP-04-17 (August 6, 2004) (Tentative) Week of November 15,
2004--Tentative Tuesday, November 16, 2004 1:30 p.m. Briefing on
Threat Environment Assessment (Closed--Ex. 1) Thursday, November
18, 2004 1:30 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1)
Week of November 22, 2004--Tentative There are no meetings
scheduled for the week of November 22, 2004.
Week of November 29, 2004--Tentative There are no meetings
scheduled for the week of November 22, 2004.
Week of December 6, 2004--Tentative Tuesday, December 7, 2004
9:30 a.m. Briefing on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Program
(Public Meeting) (Contact: Corenthis Kelley, 301-415-7380) 1 p.m.
Discussion of Nuclear Fuel Performance (Public Meeting) (Contact:
Frank Akstulewicz, 301-415-1136) This meeting will be webcast
live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] .
Wednesday, December 8, 2004 1 p.m. Briefing on Status of Davis
Besse Lessons Learned Task Force Recommendations (Public Meeting)
(Contact: John Jolicoeur, 301-415- 1724) This meeting will be
webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] .
Thursday, December 9, 2004 1 p.m. Briefing on Reactor Safety and
Licensing Activities (Public Meeting) (Contact: Steve Koenick,
301-415-1239) This meeting will be webcast live at the Web
adderss--http://www.nrc.gov
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov] .
*The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on
short notice. To verify the status of meetings call
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more
information: Dave Gamberoni, (301) 415- 1651.
* * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the
Internet at:
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.htm
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-makin
g/schedule.htm] . * * * * * The NRC provides reasonable
accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate.
If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these
public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or
other information from the public meetings in another format
(e.g., braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability
Program Coordinator, August Spector, at 301-415-7080, TDD:
301-415- 2100, or by e-mail at aks@nrc.gov [aks@nrc.gov] .
Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be
made on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like
to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition,
distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic
message to dkw@nrc.gov [dkw@nrc.gov] . Dated: October 28, 2004.
Dave Gamberoni, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-24492 Filed 10-29-04; 9:23 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
*****************************************************************
16 Slovensko.com: Austria wants Bohunice nuclear plant decommissioned -
[Slovakia] Wednesday, 03 November 2004 04:42 in Bratislava
Tue 02 Nov 04, 15:25 RSI [http://www.rsi.sk/]
Austria will oppose any attempt by Slovakia to negotiate with the
European Union a postponement of the partial decommissioning of
its Bohunice nuclear power plant.
"The dates for shutting down Bohunice's V1 plant are fixed and
may not be changed," a spokesperson for Austrian embassy in
Bratislava told SME daily.
Slovakia agreed under the EU accession treaty to decommission the
V1 plant's two reactors in 2006 and 2008. However, Economy
Minister Pavol Rusko would like both reactors to be shut down in
2008 on grounds of safety. So far, his proposal has not been
discussed by the governing coalition or cabinet.
Copyright © 1998-2004 Slovensko.com
*****************************************************************
17 New York Times: Power Increase Is Approved for Indian Pt.
NYTimes.com [http://www.nytimes.com] > New York Region
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
[http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=org&v1=NUCLEAR+REGULA
TORY+COMMISSION&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=NUCLEAR+RE
GULATORY+COMMISSION&rt=1%2Cdes%2Corg%2Cper%2Cgeo]
Atomic Energy
[http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=des&v1=ATOMIC+ENERGY&
fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=ATOMIC+ENERGY&rt=1%2Cdes%2
Corg%2Cper%2Cgeo]
Electric Light and Power
[http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=des&v1=ELECTRIC+LIGHT
+AND+POWER&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=ELECTRIC+LIGHT+
AND+POWER&rt=1%2Cdes%2Corg%2Cper%2Cgeo]
Environment
[http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=des&v1=ENVIRONMENT&fd
q=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=ENVIRONMENT&rt=1%2Cdes%2Corg
%2Cper%2Cgeo]
By KIRK SEMPLE
Published: November 2, 2004
[W] HITE PLAINS, Oct. 29 - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has
granted permission to the owners of the Indian Point nuclear
power complex to increase output at one of its reactors by 3.3
percent.
The agency, which approved the increase in capacity, or "uprate,"
on Thursday, based its decision on a determination that the plant
could safely increase output primarily by upgrading minor
components, a commission spokesman said on Friday.
The agency had published a notice about the uprate application in
the Federal Register, inviting opponents of the plant to request
a hearing or file a comment challenging an increase, but no one
intervened, said the spokesman, Neil Sheehan.
Alex Matthiessen, the executive director of Riverkeeper, an
environmental group that has sought to shut down Indian Point's
two operational reactors, said he chose not to protest the
application. "We didn't have the staff time to devote to it," he
said Friday. "You have to pick your battles."
Safety experts have questioned the nuclear industry's use of
uprates to increase capacity at existing plants. In the past two
decades, total output nationally has been increased by the
equivalent of three large reactors without building any new
plants.
Mr. Sheehan said that since 1977, the commission had approved 101
power upgrades of between 1 and 20 percent at nuclear power
plants in the United States.
They have been granted with almost no opposition, though critics
contend that the uprates, on top of extensions of operating
licenses, could imperil safety.
The Indian Point 2 reactor, the one that received uprate approval
last week, had three unplanned shutdowns in September because of
equipment malfunctions, said a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear
Northeast, the plant's owner.
"When you increase capacity to these plants, you are no doubt
adding pressure on the existing facility," Mr. Matthiessen said.
But plant owners and regulators contend that they are modernizing
in a way that improves safety.
Entergy plans to put the increase into effect after the plant's
fall refueling operation, which is currently under way, Mr.
Sheehan said.
The last uprate at Indian Point 2, of 1.4 percent, was in 2003;
its sister reactor, Indian Point 3, received an uprate of 1.4
percent in 2002. An application to increase the capacity of
Indian Point 3 by 4.85 percent is being reviewed. Indian Point 1
closed in the 1970's.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
[http://www.nytco.com/] | Home [http://www.nytimes.com/] |
*****************************************************************
18 TheDay.com: N-plant Foes Want Relicensing Halted
Tuesday, Nov 2, 2004
Watchdogs Cut Off From Data Temporarily Because Of Concerns Over
Security
By PATRICIA DADDONA Day Staff Writer, Waterford Published on
11/2/2004
A Massachusetts lawmaker and a watchdog of the nuclear industry
have asked the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend
some re-licensing proceedings while the agency's online document
library is temporarily shut down.
Last week, the NRC blacked out use of its Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System (ADAMS) after newspapers and NBC
Nightly News pointed out that the database contained potentially
sensitive information about the location and amount of
weapons-grade nuclear materials.
Millstone Power Station in Waterford, owned by Dominion Nuclear
Connecticut, is one of 10 sites in the country where license
extensions are being considered for approval. Dominion applied in
January for the relicensing of two reactors and, as things stand
now, could get a decision as early as July 2006.
ADAMS, which was closed down and then reopened after Sept. 11,
2001, is again shut down, this time for several weeks, said Diane
Screnci, a public affairs officer for the NRC.
Concerns raised by the media focused on such matters as floor
plans at facilities that house nuclear materials, such as
hospitals and industrial facilities, Screnci said. Documents
pertaining to nuclear reactors or weapons facilities do not
contain such information. No classified documents are on ADAMS,
she added.
We had to shut down all of it because there were questions about
maintaining the integrity of the database if just parts of it
were taken down, Screnci said. We're adjusting screening
guidelines based on ever-changing threats.
Since the step was taken, U.S. Rep. Edward J. Markey, a
Massachusetts Democrat, and David Lochbaum of the Union of
Concerned Scientists have asked the federal agency to suspend
nonessential relicensing proceedings while ADAMS remains
unavailable.
In many cases since Sept. 11, the commission has failed to
strike a balance consistent with its responsibilities to the
public, said Markey in a letter sent Friday to the NRC. I am
concerned that the commission may now be using security as an
excuse to further erode the public's right to information.
Markey wants to know whether the commission has permitted
industry stakeholders to use ADAMS while others are denied
access; whether all commissioners participated in the decision;
and why sensitive information removed after Sept. 11 has not been
provided to him as requested.
The online database holds hundreds of thousands of documents
relating to regulation of the nuclear industry, including
information about companies' applications to extend licenses for
their power plants.
Screnci said the NRC hasn't yet answered Markey's or Lochbaum's
questions. She could not say whether the agency has removed any
sensitive information so far, but said that the highest priority
is to restore information in ADAMS related to ongoing litigation
and reactors.
Dominion spokesman Pete Hyde had no comment on the matter.
Lochbaum said he doubts the NRC would suspend re-licensing
because that could disrupt its monthly reports on the process to
Congress. Still, a suspension could motivate agency officials to
finish the ADAMS review faster since it's not just the public,
it's the industry that's bearing the brunt of not having access,
he said.
If the information they will be scrubbing out is so dangerous,
why did it take more than three years after Sept. 11 to do it?
asked Lochbaum. It had nothing to do with national security. The
NRC was embarrassed by NBC Nightly News.
1998-2004 The Day Publishing Co.
*****************************************************************
19 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Joint Meeting of the
FR Doc 04-24380
[Federal Register: November 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 211)]
[Notices] [Page 63563] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02no04-92]
ACRS Subcommittees on Materials and Metallurgy and on
Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena and on Reliability and Probabilistic
Risk Assessment; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittees on
Materials and Metallurgy and on Thermal- Hydraulic Phenomena and
on Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment will hold a
joint meeting on November 30 and December 1, 2004, Room T-2B3,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda
for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, November
30, 2004-8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m. Wednesday, December 1, 2004-8:30
a.m. until 12 Noon. The purpose of this joint Subcommittee
meeting is to discuss the PTS technical basis re-evaluation. The
revised technical basis document and peer review comments will be
discussed during this meeting.
Subject to the satisfactory review by the Subcommittees, this
matter will be referred to the full Committee for review during
the December 2004 ACRS meeting. The purpose of this meeting is to
gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and
formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for
deliberation by the full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official,
Dr. Hossein Nourbakhsh (Telephone: 301-415-5622) five days prior
to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can
be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted during the
meeting.
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by
contacting the Designated Federal Officials between 7:30 a.m. and
5 p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged
to contact the above named individual at least two working days
prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to
the agenda.
Dated: October 26, 2004.
John H. Flack, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 04-24380 Filed 11-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
20 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Meeting of the ACRS
FR Doc 04-24381
[Federal Register: November 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 211)]
[Notices] [Page 63563-63564] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02no04-93]
Subcommittee on Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment;
Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Reliability and
Probabilistic Risk Assessment will hold a meeting on November 16,
2004, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance.
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday,
November 16, 2004--12 p.m. until 3 p.m. The purpose of this
meeting is to discuss the development of guidance on the
treatment of uncertainties. The Subcommittee will hear
presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the
NRC staff and other interested persons regarding this matter.
TheSubcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues
and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as
appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official,
Mr. Michael R. Snodderly (telephone: 301-415-6927) five days
prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate
arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted
during the meeting.
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by
contacting the Designated Federal Officials between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are
urged to contact the above named individual at least two working
days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes
to the agenda.
[[Page 63564]] Dated: October 27, 2004.
John H. Flack, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 04-24381 Filed 11-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
21 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, Meeting of the ACRS
FR Doc 04-24382
[Federal Register: November 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 211)]
[Notices] [Page 63564] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02no04-94]
Subcommittee on Regulatory Policies and Practices; Notice of
Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Regulatory Policies and
Practices will hold a meeting on November 16, 2004, Room T-2B1,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance.
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday,
November 16, 2004--8 a.m. until 11 a.m. The purpose of this
meeting is to review the draft proposed NUREG documenting the
expert elicitation on large break loss-of-coolant accident
frequencies. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold
discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and other
interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will
gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and
formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for
deliberation by the full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official,
Mr. Michael R. Snodderly (Telephone: 301-415-6927) five days
prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate
arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted
during the meeting.
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by
contacting the Designated Federal Officials between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are
urged to contact the above named individual at least two working
days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes
to the agenda.
Dated: October 27, 2004.
John H. Flack, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 04-24382 Filed 11-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
22 NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste, Meeting on Planning and
FR Doc 04-24383
[Federal Register: November 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 211)]
[Notices] [Page 63563] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02no04-91]
Procedures; Notice of Meeting The ACNW will hold a Planning and
Procedures meeting on November 16, 2004, Room T-2B3, 11545
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the
exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552b(c) (2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel
matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and
practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday,
November 16, 2004--8:30 a.m.-10 a.m. The Committee will discuss
proposed ACNW activities and related matters. The purpose of this
meeting is to gather information, analyze relevant issues and
facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as
appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official,
Mr. Howard J. Larson (telephone: 301/415-6805) between 7:30 a.m.
and 4:15 p.m. (e.t.) five days prior to the meeting, if possible,
so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic
recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the
meeting that are open to the public.
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are
urged to contact the above named individual at least two working
days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes
in the agenda.
Dated: October 27, 2004.
John H. Flack, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 04-24383 Filed 11-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
23 NRC: AmerGen Energy Company, LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
FR Doc 04-24387
[Federal Register: November 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 211)]
[Notices] [Page 63562-63563] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02no04-90]
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) part 50,
appendix J, 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
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50,
appendix J, Option B, section III.B., ``Type B and C Tests,''
states, in part, that containment leakage tests must demonstrate
that the sum of the leakage rates at accident pressure of Type B
tests, and pathway leakage rates from Type C tests, is less than
the performance criterion (La) with margin as specified in the
Technical Specifications (TSs). In this context, ``accident
pressure,'' Pa, was previously analyzed to be 35 psig at OCNGS.
Accordingly, for main steam isolation valves (MSIVs), leakage
rate testing is to be done at the peak containment calculated
pressure related to the design-basis accident.
The licensee requested a permanent exemption from the
requirements of the subject provision of appendix J, such that
the MSIVs may be tested at lower pressures but not lower than 20
psig. By separate application also dated December 23, 2003, the
licensee proposed to revise the OCNGS TSs, section 4.5.D, to
specify the lower test pressure and associated leakage test rate;
the NRC staff will address the proposed amendment by separate
correspondence.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for exemption dated December 23, 2003.
The Need for the Proposed Action The licensee stated that, as a
result of the design of the inboard and outboard MSIVs on each
steam line, the preferred method of Type C testing is through the
use of a between-the-valves test tap.
Periodic Type C testing verifies that the leakage assumed in the
radiological analysis is not exceeded. The licensee is requesting
this exemption in order to reduce the probability of lifting the
inboard MSIVs during testing. Testing of the two valves
simultaneously at Pa, by pressurizing between the valves tends to
lift the disc of the inboard valve. This results in test results
which may not accurately reflect the isolation capabilities of
the MSIVs.
The licensee proposed an exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR part 50, appendix J, Option B, section III.B, by specifying
testing at a minimum of 20 psig, instead of Pa, between the
inboard and outboard MSIVs. This pressure would avoid lifting the
disc of the inboard MSIV. The measured leakage rate for any one
main steam line through the isolation valves will be limited to a
proposed pathway leakage value of 11.9 standard cubic feet per
hour (this proposed value will be evaluated in the safety
evaluation of the associated amendment). All the changes
addressed by the requested exemption (and associated amendment)
are concerned with MSIV testing only, and do not affect MSIV
design functions.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has
completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that the alternative measures proposed by the licensee
and discussed above will provide assurance that the primary
reactor containment is an essentially leak tight barrier against
uncontrolled release of radioactivity to the environment. The
performance of the containment, including the MSIVs, will not be
negatively affected by the proposed exemption. The details of the
NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption.
The proposed exemption will not significantly increase the
probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being
made in the types or quantities of radiological effluents that
may be released. 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-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 stated
policy, on October 13, 2004, the NRC staff consulted with the New
Jersey State official, Mr. Rich Pinney of the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Nuclear
Engineering, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed
action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No
Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment,
the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated December 23, 2003. 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
[[Page 63563]] http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html]
. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-
800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov
[pdr@nrc.gov] . (Note: Public access to ADAMS has been
temporarily suspended so that security reviews of publicly
available documents may be performed and potentially sensitive
information removed. Please check the NRC Web site for updates on
the resumption of ADAMS access.) Dated at Rockville, Maryland,
this 27th day of October 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. 04-24387 Filed 11-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
24 November Surprise Piketon, Ohio
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:45:32 -0800
There is a secret floating around the corridors, cubicles and
chemical pits in Ohio, Kentucky, and Washington DC. Its not a real secret
in the sense of national security or anything like that. Its more of a
national insecurity secret, pertaining to jobs, the deficit, the
environmental health mess left at federal nuclear sites, and Bush-Cheney
campaign strategy.
The big hush-hush is this: Embargoed until after the election, the
Bush Department of Energy will award the new contracts for cleanup and
management of the closed and closing uranium enrichment sites in Piketon,
Ohio, and Paducah, Kentucky.
This has been in the works for quite some time. Nearly two years ago,
the administration informed Bechtel-Jacobs Corporation, the current
contractor at both sites, that the contracts would be restructured and that
BJC would no longer qualify to bid owing to its size. The objective is to
downsize and to reorient prime contracts to "small businesses,"
theoretically saving money by eliminating protections for former employees
with grandfathered benefits. Of course another point is to hide the fact
that overall funding and the jobs that go with it are being slashed. Such
contracts do not take two years to award, and all bids have been in since
last March. But somebody somewhere in the political apparatus of the
Bush-Cheney campaign realized that this would be a disaster if made public
before the election.
Of course it already is a disaster, because underground toxic and
radioactive plumes are threatening to migrate offsite (if they havent
already done so) in one of the most scenic and historic locales in Ohio,
and likewise in Kentucky. The Department of Energy will not even release
projections of total cleanup costs at Piketon, because they probably exceed
the quarter billion dollars that it will take to remediate each of the
other, less-problematic enrichment sites.
But thats not the kind of disaster that the Bush administration
worries about. What they worry about is the political disaster of an
announced environmental and job rollback on such strategic electoral
terrain. No one can know the precise numbers until after the awards are
made, but the rumored projection is that about one third of the
approximately 500 onsite jobs at Piketon will have to go immediately, with
another fifty percent reduction to follow later. That will mean an even
bigger cut in actual performance because up to six separate companies will
replace BJC, necessitating wasteful duplication in overhead costs and
administration. In other words, more money may wind up being spent to
employ far fewer people and accomplish less cleanup.
The contracting process was extended three times inexplicably (wink,
wink), as operatives realized that even to announce the awards would let
the cat out of the bag. So Bechtel-Jacobs has been ordered to stay on until
April, even though they now want out. One woman at DOE who reluctantly
agreed to talk to me, said the scheduled award date was "sometime," nervous
about revealing even this much. When I asked a DOE public affairs
spokeswoman if the timing could be election-related, she giggled and said,
"I cant imagine." I asked the same question to a BJC representative and he
just belly-laughed for a very long time. One anonymous source at BJC called
me to say that employees are keeping to the cynical code of silence because
each one is fearful for his job.
Some would say that theres no secret at all, because all you have to
do is read through hundreds of pages of old and new contract
specifications, published in the Federal Register and available online.
Then, if you read between the deleted lines of projected funding and
staffing levels"redacted" to "protect national security"youll know the
naked truth.
John Kerry came to Wakefield, Ohio, just a mile or so down-creek from
Piketons migrating plumes, on October 16. He called for increased funding
for "cleanup of soil, groundwater and hazardous waste from legacy
operations." He seemed unaware, though, that the funding levels are already
being slashed. I guess hes been slacking off on reading and divining
secrets from the Federal Register. And I guess that no one clued him in,
because John Kerry doesnt have a "need to know." Yet.
*Geoffrey Sea is a writer, historian and health physicist now writing a
book about Piketon for Viking/Penguin, due out in 2005.
*****************************************************************
25 [du-list] media report: "armour salvaged from old iraqi tanks"
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:45:51 -0800
media report: "armour salvaged from old iraqi tanks"
This is not the first time I've seen this mentioned, and I wonder if anyone
has looked into the numbers of times this happens- is it ten humvees
carrying scraps of radioactive and toxic debris with them, or a hundred? I
would assume they use undamaged plates to protect their vehicles, so no DU
impact entry point levels of radiation, but perhaps a light coating of
dust. Its possible that the levels of DU would be so low as to be
insignificant...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/31/60minutes/main652491.shtml
Staff Sgt. Sean Davis from the Oregon National Guard was critically wounded
last June when his unarmored Humvee hit an IED outside of Baghdad. He
suffered shrapnel wounds, burns, and was unable to walk for six weeks.
Davis said his Humvee was armored with plywood, sandbags, and armor
salvaged from old Iraqi tanks.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
26 [du-list] weapons dust worries iraqies - provisional
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:45:40 -0800
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1101-01.htm
Published on Monday, November 1, 2004 by the Hartford Courant
Weapons Dust Worries Iraqis
Provisional Government Seeks Cleanup; U.S. Downplays Risks
by Thomas D. Williams
Despite assurances from the U.S. military that depleted uranium from
exploded munitions does not pose a significant health threat, Iraq's
provisional government is asking the United Nations for help cleaning
up the low-level radioactive, metal dust spread across local
battlefields by U.S. and British forces during the Persian Gulf wars.
The request comes as the United States continues to defend depleted
uranium weaponry - prized for its tank-piercing and bunker- or
cave-smashing ability - against strong opposition by other countries,
scientists and veterans organizations.
Great Britain, a major partner in the coalition now fighting in Iraq,
has provided the U.N. with the coordinates where its forces used
depleted uranium, also known as DU, in southern Iraq, but the United
States has not. Britain and Germany are supplying money to train Iraqis
in environmental science. The United Nations plans to survey for DU hot
spots from both wars in Iraq and says it needs the coordinates for an
effective survey.
Neither British nor U.S. authorities have offered to augment the $4.7
million donated mainly by Japan to the United Nations to evaluate sites
of wartime contamination that health experts say threaten the
well-being of Iraqi civilians.
In late October, Army Lt. Col. Mark Melanson said a five-year, $6
million Defense Department study of a simulated DU tank explosion shows
"the chemical risks of breathing in uranium dust are so low that it
won't cause any long-term health risks," even for the tank crew.
Health Concerns Remain
Concern about the health effects of depleted uranium is not limited
to
overseas countries. The Defense Department's contention that depleted
uranium has not been shown to affect health adversely and therefore
doesn't need to be cleaned up is contrary to its own rules for handling
it. Those rules mirror the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's and
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's treatment of depleted uranium as
an environmental hazard and danger to public health. Federal regulators
have shut down some U.S. nuclear weapons and uranium processing and
munitions plants, found to be contaminated by depleted uranium.
Billions of dollars are being spent on its cleanup in the United
States.
Depleted uranium, or U-238, is a toxic, heavy metal byproduct of
uranium enrichment that gives the world uranium suitable for use in
nuclear weapons and reactor fuel. It is also used in munitions, ballast
for airplanes, tank armor and other products. It has a half-life of 4.5
billion years.
In 2002 at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in
Bethesda, Md., researchers found that even though the alpha radiation
from depleted uranium is relatively low, internalized DU as a metal can
induce DNA damage and carcinogenic lesions in the cells that make up
bones in the human body.
Depleted uranium was first used widely in combat in the 1991 Persian
Gulf War. The material in armor-piercing munitions ignites and burns on
impact at temperatures of several thousand degrees Celsius. While
burning, tiny particles, or dust, of uranium oxide aerosol are created.
Wind can carry these considerable distances.
Since 1991, the cancer rates in Iraq have risen sharply in areas
where
depleted uranium was used, according to Iraqi medical studies reviewed
by scientists from other countries. In addition, more than 230,000 of
the 697,000 U.S. soldiers who served in that war have filed disability
claims for various maladies, the majority of which fall under the broad
category of gulf war syndrome.
With many of the causes of these illnesses still eluding researchers,
several lawmakers, at the urging of veterans groups, pushed for
legislation to study depleted uranium further, to see if there is a
connection with gulf war and other wartime illnesses. It called also
for cleaning up depleted uranium munitions firings.
In the Republican-controlled Congress, the measures quietly died this
fall inside the House Health Subcommittee. Congress and three
presidential administrations have either remained silent on the dispute
or have dismissed the environmental and health concerns raised.
Council Urges Ban
U.N.-related organizations, citing studies showing more cancers and
birth defects among civilians and soldiers in countries where depleted
uranium munitions have been used, have pressed for more studies and a
ban on their use until the effects are better understood. The Council
of Europe, Europe's oldest inter-governmental organization of 46
nations, has called for a ban on the production, use, testing and sale
of munitions containing depleted uranium or plutonium.
But U.S. political leaders in Congress and at the White House have
refused to acknowledge that depleted uranium might seriously harm
soldiers and civilians.
At home, the United States has spent billions of dollars cleaning up
depleted uranium - at former munitions factories, military firing
ranges and nuclear fuel production sites. A General Accounting Office
report in 2000 put the cost of cleanup at the uranium enrichment plant
in Paducah, Ky., where DU is processed for use in weapons and nuclear
reactors, at $1.3 billion. By December 2003, the cost of cleaning up
and closing the plant, estimated to take until 2070, was up to $13
billion
Cleaning up DU contamination in Iraq, experts say, would come with a
multibillion-dollar price tag.
Any money spent on cleaning up depleted uranium in Iraq would be in
addition to the estimated $225 billion that the United States will be
spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan if Congress approves the
Bush administration's estimated $70 billion in emergency funding
request early next year.
Frederick Jones, a spokesman for the National Security Agency, said
the United Nations has not asked the Department of Defense or State
Department for assistance in cleaning up depleted uranium in Iraq.
The U.N. Environmental Programme's chairman, Pekka Haavisto, however,
said his organization has kept the State Department informed of those
needs.
Since 1991, the United States and Britain have fired hundreds of tons
of DU munitions during four wars - in the Balkans, Afghanistan and
twice in Iraq.
U.N. environmental spokesman Michael Williams said the United States
has not supplied coordinates on the sites where DU munitions were fired
in Iraq or offered to clean it up. Haavisto added: "U.S. government has
the information that if field assessments will be done, exact DU
coordinates are needed."
Bill Dies Quietly
Last year, Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, a U.S. Navy psychiatrist
during the Vietnam War, sponsored a bill to pay for a definitive study
of the health effect of DU munitions and to clean up dust and fragments
after their use. The bill was referred to the House Armed Services and
Energy and Commerce committees and then to the committee's Health
Subcommittee, where it died.
McDermott's spokesman, Mike DeCesare, said the Republican leadership
blocked the bill's passage. But a spokesman for the Health Subcommittee
said the committee counsel could find no "aggressive action" by
McDermott to get a hearing for it. DeCesare insisted, however, that if
McDermott is re-elected, he intends to reintroduce the bill, which was
supported by Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays, R-4th District.
"Depleted uranium is a potential health hazard for the Iraqi people
and we need to do all we can to make sure that as Iraq is rebuilt, we
help the new Iraqi government mitigate any public health threats,"
Shays said.
The debate over DU has not made much of an impact on the presidential
race. President Bush sides with the Pentagon. The Democratic nominee,
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts does not have a position on the use of
depleted uranium munitions, his communications director, Andy Davis,
said recently.
Independent candidate Ralph Nader, a Connecticut native, said DU
munitions are environmentally dangerous and should never have been used
in the first place.
"The denial and cruel coverup has gone on too long," Nader said.
"These soldiers and civilians who suffered [adverse health from
exposure to DU] deserve the truth and respectful assistance. The first
step is to admit the problem. The second step is to measure the size of
the problem and then clean up the environmental toxins. The next step
is to stop using depleted uranium munitions."
But the Bush administration, which insists DU poses little
environmental risk so cleanup is not needed, takes the Pentagon's
advice on such matters.
"If the [Defense Department] indicated to us that the DU rounds or
explosions were a cause of concern, and they have not done so, a study
or inquiry of their use would be warranted," said Bush's National
Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones. "Then we would be faced
with that decision. The [Defense Department] has not contacted us, nor
to the best of my knowledge has any international body contacted us."
Jones said.
Kuwait Cleanup
There have been many instances when the military directed depleted
uranium cleanups overseas.
For example, a private contractor working for the Department of
Defense was paid $3.5 million to cleanup DU-contaminated military
equipment and a practice firing range in Kuwait. MKM Engineers Inc.
based in Stafford, Texas, performed a limited cleanup in Kuwait from
February 2003 to June 2004. The company recovered 22 tons of DU
fragments and 75 pieces of non-DU ordnance scrap. The unexploded DU
ordnance was destroyed with Kuwaiti assistance. MKM also cleaned
military hardware, including tanks, and wrapped them to contain surface
contamination before sending them back to the United States.
The U.S. Army Material Command, responsible for the Kuwaiti project,
described the work as retrieval of equipment and munitions, not a clean
up.
The Department of Defense "does not clean up DU once it leaves a U.S.
weapons system such as a Bradley Fighting Vehicle and hits an enemy
building, or vehicle," said Melissa Bohan, an Army public affairs
official. Army regulations require the clean-up and proper handling of
U.S. equipment hit by depleted uranium munitions.
MKM referred to some of its work in Kuwait as a cleanup. And, the
Defense Department has a low-level radioactive waste cleanup program,
whose goal is "the safe and compliant disposal of low-level radioactive
waste," including depleted uranium. It includes the Army Contaminated
Equipment Retrograde Team, which supervises cleanup of low-level
radioactive contamination of Army equipment worldwide.
Military regulations require immediate medical tests and treatment
for
any soldiers exposed to dust and fragments from depleted uranium shell
explosions. Some nuclear scientists studying the health effects of
those inhaling DU believe even a speck of the dust in the lungs or
bloodstream can eventually cause cancer or kidney disease in adults or
cancers or deformities in babies if even one parent has been exposed.
Marion Fulk, 83, a former nuclear chemical physicist at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory who was involved with the Manhattan
Project's development of the atomic bomb, said that even nano-size
particles of DU in the blood and lungs are a serious destructive force.
Others who support the Defense Department position say only
inhalation
of large quantities creates serious health problems.
---------------------------------
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
27 Rocky Mountain News: Reform may aid ill nuke workers
By Rocky Mountain News
November 2, 2004
WASHINGTON - The Department of Labor on Monday took over a
much-criticized program to aid sick nuclear weapons workers,
after President Bush signed the military spending bill that
includes a wide-ranging reform of the program.
Workers sickened by exposure to radiation or toxic chemicals on
the job who applied to the Department of Energy program will
receive letters explaining the transfer to the Labor Department.
Town hall meetings are also being planned, though dates have not
been set.
The Department of Energy spent $95 million on paperwork in four
years but ended up with payments to only 31 workers. About 1,700
former Rocky Flats workers are awaiting action.
ARCHIVES FAQ SUBSCRIBE TIP LINE
SITE MAP PHOTO REPRINTS CORRECTIONS 2004 © The E.W. Scripps
Co.
*****************************************************************
28 Interfax: 8 containers of plutonium given to police in Siberia
Interfax.com [http://www.interfax.com] Text version
Nov 2 2004 10:22AM
BARNAUL. Nov 2 (Interfax-Siberia) - A resident of Zmeinogorsk in
Altai territory, Siberia has surrendered eight containers of
plutonium 238 to the police, city police headquarters told
Interfax.
The man, a geophysicist by training, had worked at the
Zmeinogorsk mine and kept the containers in his garage for six
or seven years.
A criminal case on the illegal storage of radioactive materials
has been opened.
The man told the police that the facility for which he had
worked was closed and deserted in the early 1990s. The
laboratory was looted, but the plutonium was left at the x-ray
installation in which it was used. In 1997 or 1998 - he could
remember exactly when - he found the containers on the grounds
of his former workplace lying in a heap of litter.
He tried to trace his former superiors and wrote several letters
to various institutions about the plutonium, but received no
reply. Then he took the plutonium and placed it in a box in his
garage, believing that as an expert, he had no right to leave
the plutonium in a public place.
The man said he decided to hand the plutonium in after reading a
police announcement in the local paper encouraging people to
surrender weapons for a reward. [RU EUROPE ASIA EEU EMRG] ml tl
© 1991-2004 Interfax
All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
29 BBC: Russian kept plutonium in garage
Last Updated: Tuesday, 2 November, 2004
[Russian plutonium] Experts fear Soviet-era
plutonium could be acquired by militants
A former Russian nuclear scientist has handed over to
police eight containers of plutonium-238 he had stored at home
for eight years.
The 400g (14oz) of plutonium-238 - a highly radioactive compound
- came from a disused laboratory in Siberia.
Former employee Leonid Grigorov said he removed the containers
for safekeeping after the lab was looted and stored them in a
lead case, Russian media say.
He may face criminal proceedings, Russia's Itar-Tass news agency
says.
A spokesman for Russia's Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom), Nikolay
Shingaryov, insisted that "this is not weapons-grade plutonium,
but an isotope widely used in various instruments".
Counter-terrorism experts have repeatedly warned that
radioactive material from decrepit Soviet-era installations
could fall into the hands of militants.
'Morally right'
Mr Grigorov is quoted as saying he had written letters to his
former bosses warning of the risk posed by radioactive material
left in the laboratory in Zmeinogorsk, which was abandoned and
looted after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.
When his letters failed to elicit a response, Mr Grigorov says
he was obliged to remove the material himself "to prevent
anything bad from happening".
He says he took the plutonium from his garage to the local
police, in response to a newspaper advertisement announcing a
cash reward for surrendering weapons.
Zmeinogorsk police are quoted as saying Mr Grigorov was morally
right to have hidden the hazardous material but he may
nonetheless face criminal charges.
Itar-Tass said a legal case had been brought against the
physicist for "illegal storage of radioactive substances".
Plutonium-238 can be used with ordinary explosives to make a
"dirty bomb", potentially contaminating a large area with
radiation.
*****************************************************************
30 Hawk Eye: Bush signs workers claims bill
[http://archive.thehawkeye.com]
Monday, November 1, 2004 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST
Action gives Labor Dept. responsibility for compensation checks.
By MATTHEW LeBLANC
mleblanc@thehawkeye.com
President Bush signed a bill last week that's expected to help
secure workers' compensation payments for thousands of former
nuclear weapons workers sickened by their work at plants
including the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant in Middletown.
Included in a $445.6 billion defense authorization bill, the
measure involves sweeping changes to a program created in 2000 to
pay workers with cancer and other illnesses related to their
work. For the first time, the Energy Department — which formerly
ran a part of the program — will no longer have a hand in the
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program.
The new program allows only the Department of Labor to oversee
and make decisions on claims filed under the program.
Workers at IAAP built, test–fired and disassembled components of
nuclear weapons from the 1940s to the mid–1970s. The work has
been linked to illnesses in more than 1,500 former workers,
though doctors estimate up to 4,000 could have been exposed to
dangerous levels of radiation and chemicals while working at the
plant.
Only about 40 of the nearly 1,200 who have applied for
compensation from IAAP have received payments. Nationally, only a
tiny portion of the more than 23,000 that have applied for
benefits have been paid.
"Since the law was enacted in October 2003, (the Energy
Department) has expended $95 million on administrative costs, but
has rendered determinations by physicians' panels on fewer than 8
percent of its claims by October 2004 and has only secured
payments for a mere 31 workers as of August 2004," said a press
release issued by watchdog group Government Accountability
Project in October.
The president signed the bill last week, despite his
administration's stated opposition to the change in the
compensation program. The bill also includes $40 million to
develop real–time satellite communications for U.S. troops and
$11.2 billion for the Defense Department's science and technology
program.
A retooled compensation program includes provisions on the amount
of compensation for which each worker is entitled, using a
complicated formula that effectively "prices" an illness or an
injury. For example, more aggressive forms of illnesses are worth
more than non–aggressive illnesses.
The program also includes a government–appointed ombudsman
charged with providing information about the program to
claimants. Many who have filed claims under the program have
complained the process is long and confusing.
A joint panel of House and Senate leaders agreed earlier this
month to leave the measure in the bill.
It's unclear how long the transition will take. Thousands of
records and other information has to be transferred to Labor
officials, who have said they have just begun examining what
steps have to be taken.
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461
· 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com
[webmaster@thehawkeye.com]
*****************************************************************
31 Scotsman: Nuclear fears grow as Russian scientist hands over plutonium
[http://search.scotsman.com/] |
Wed 3 Nov 2004
CHRIS STEPHEN IN MOSCOW
A RUSSIAN scientist who kept 14 ounces of arms-grade plutonium in
his garage for eight years handed it over to police yesterday.
The discovery further highlights concerns that the country is
awash with nuclear material that could be seized by terrorists.
Leonid Grigorov found eight plutonium containers in a heap of
rubbish at his laboratory near Russia’s border with Kazakhstan,
the Itar-Tass news agency said. Mr Grigorov said he had picked up
the vessels, which according to some reports contained uranium
rather than plutonium, when the nuclear plant where he worked
closed in 1991.
He read an advertisement in a local paper offering government
cash for anyone handing in weapons and took the containers in a
cardboard box to the local police station to claim his reward.
"As an expert, I knew that I had to hide it to avoid tragic
consequences," Mr Grigorov was quoted as telling the Russian
media.
The report triggered astonishment and alarm among the world’s
nuclear watchdogs.
"This is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to accounting for
nuclear materials," said Nils Bohmer, a nuclear physicist with
the Norwegian monitoring agency Bellona. "It shows there are
people who have the possibility to take this material away."
Unhappily for the government, the incident comes just one day
after Vladimir Putin, the president, promised Russia was taking
tough action to prevent nuclear material falling into the hands
of terrorists.
On Monday he called for a United Nations convention on combating
nuclear terrorism.
*****************************************************************
32 Mos News: Russian Nuclear Sub Successfully Launches ICBM -
MOSNEWS.COM
Missile silos of a Russian submarine, photo from submarine.id.ru
Created: 02.11.2004 14:27 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 14:27 MSK
MosNews
A nuclear-powered submarine of Russia’s Pacific Fleet carried out
a test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile from the
waters of the Sea of Okhotsk on Tuesday, the Itar-Tass news
agency reports.
The Svyatoi Georgiy Pobedonosets (St. George the Victor)
submarine launched the missile from underwater in the direction
of the Chizha testing area in Novaya Zemlya, a source in the
Russian Defense Ministry has told the agency. The missile’s
warhead successfully reached the target at the scheduled time,
the source said.
Tuesday’s ballistic missile launch was the first in the Pacific
Fleet this year. So far only missile-armed submarines of the
Northern Fleet have been involved in mock-combat launches. They
have carried out five successful tests of sea-launched
intercontinental ballistic missiles. SEE ALSO
Write us: info@mosnews.com [info@mosnews.com]
Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM
*****************************************************************
33 IDS: Uranium pollution in Iraq damaging
(World, 11/02/2004)
[idsnews.com:world]
Depleted uranium in Iraqi soil, air may cause health issues
By Hina Alam
If you thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, then
consider this: the ongoing conflict in Iraq will leave behind a
legacy of depleted uranium, which will affect not just the U.S.
troops, but also the Iraqi people, maybe over generations, said
Diane Henshel, associate professor of public and environmental
affairs.
"Isn't that paradoxical? We went there to 'free' those people
and we ended up imprisoning them in a lifetime of ill health. And
for generations to come," said sophomore Lauren Lindsay, as she
examined the evidence of pollution that Henshel put together.
Iraq's pollution levels are beginning to be examined, and
Henshel, who studies environmental pollutants, added her
expertise to the study in an article published in September's
issue of Nature. Examining the overall pollution damage will be
the first step on a long road to cleaning up the contaminated
country, the article said.
The damage to the environment, and therefore human beings, began
in the 1970s, according to the article. This was when the country
underwent rapid industrialization with little attention paid to
toxic wastes and fumes.
The conflict in Iraq has only compounded the problem and one of
the most pressing issues is that of depleted uranium. It is a
dense material used to blow holes in heavily armored vehicles.
And depleted uranium was used in Iraq most extensively by the
United States.
"If you go on the Internet and look at depleted uranium and who
generates it, we are by far the largest generators of depleted
uranium in the world," Henshel said. "Nobody is even close to us.
We are close to 90 percent of the depleted uranium that's
generated in the world ... United States activity or U.S.
companies, I guess. Maybe it is not 90 percent, but we are at,
like, 800 tons and the next country down is below a 100. We are
ten-fold of the next country down."
Depleted uranium is mainly in two places, she said.
"There are some Abrams tanks which use depleted uranium, and
depleted uranium is in the penetrators (the warheads of
missiles), which are some of the weapons used out there -- a
number of them actually," Henshel explained.
As penetrators, depleted uranium is the lead point. The whole
purpose of these weapons, she said, was to be harder and denser
than other metals so they penetrate through other metals.
"As they penetrate through the other metals, the description is
that they get sharpened," she said.
Think of what happens when sharpening a pencil," she said. "You
lose all the fragments that are being pulled away to sharpen it.
It's not just that it is being pushed into a sharper point."
The pencil-like shape of the penetrator causes the depleted
uranium to scatter, Henshel said.
"When penetrator hits the hard top, a hard surface especially
like another metal ... you get some fragmentation and some
disintegration at the tip of the penetrator and again some
release of depleted uranium into fragments that then essentially
becomes the dust in the air," she said.
Heavy metals in general have the potential to interact with and
disrupt calcium processes, and calcium helps control signaling in
the brain and signaling between the cells and release of hormones
and nerve transmitters, she said.
"If you disrupt calcium control signaling, which can happen in a
high dose or even moderate dose situations ... tests have shown
changes in learning, changes in the ability to remember and
changes in reflexes, so there are a host of different things that
can happen," Henshel said.
A small cohort from Desert Storm have depleted uranium shrapnel
in their bodies, and they've been tracked over time with
publications coming out about them every two years or so. The
amount of uranium in their bodies has made a difference.
"Behavior in terms of response, based on computer tests, was the
first thing to show up," she said.
Within a number of years the amount of depleted uranium was
leaking out from shrapnel in their bodies and moving around in
their systems. There is depleted uranium showing up, for example,
in their urine, Henshel said.
Henshel said she believes that over time, people in Iraq are
going to be exposed to increasing concentration in their bodies.
"They will have increased problems with changes in behavior,
(and) increasing problems with their kidneys. And at high enough
levels you will start to see effects on their sperm count," she
said.
Another problem is women who are pregnant or are going to be
pregnant in a situation where they are exposed to depleted
uranium in the dust on a daily basis. Daily exposure to depleted
uranium in the dust means that what is circulating in their blood
streams at any given time includes some radioactive uranium, she
said, and uranium is a heavy metal that can affect a fetus.
"There are studies that indicate that birth defects are
increasing in the areas of high depleted uranium concentration of
the Gulf War," Henshel said.
Uranium is part of the environment, but what happens with
depleted uranium is that it is being used in such high intensity
in one area that there is an increased concentration.
"And that gives rise to a situation where it ends up in dust and
can get into people through air and water," she said.
The real concern is that depleted uranium is not intensely
radioactive as uranium is used in reactors, Henshel said.
"There is an assumption that A: there is no radioactivity going
on which is not true, and B: there is an assumption that this is
not the only concern."
The other problem, she said, is that it is not going to be just
uranium that is a problem in the war torn area, because it is not
just uranium that disintegrates.
"There are other heavy metals that disintegrate -- some of the
other heavy metals we have very little toxic information about,"
she explained.
While a lot is known about titanium and cadmium, there is whole
host of heavy metals that are used in weapons in small
concentrations, of which not much is know, but they are going to
end up in the soil, in the air, in water of the people in any war
torn area in Iraq, Henshel said.
As far as the troops are concerned, some of them might have
depleted uranium showing up in their bodies -- some show less and
some show more. If some of them have high intakes of milk or
other sources of calcium, they will be able to eliminate it
quickly from their bodies. High calcium levels limit how much
uranium replaces calcium in certain parts of the bodies. Other
people that, for whatever reasons -- economic or otherwise -- do
not consume enough calcium or milk may harbor depleted uranium.
As the knowledge of depleted uranium and its effects on Iraqi
people gets out in the world, Lindsay said, it could make the
United States look worse.
Political science Professor Michael McGinnis said, "it looks bad
in terms of environmental effects, but again, this is nothing
new."
World opinion of the U.S. is already at an all-time low, said
Dina Spechler, associate professor of political science.
"In the end, people who live in Iraq will manifest the greatest
problems. The chemicals accumulate and they stay in people's
bodies all the time and increase in concentration over time- and
we don't know what we are dealing with," Henshel said.
-- Contact staff writer Hina Alam at [halam@indiana.edu] .
[feedback@idsnews.com] to the IDS New Media staff
2004 Indiana Daily Student
*****************************************************************
34 Las Vegas SUN: Candidates hoping Nevada helps tip the presidential election
Today: November 02, 2004 at 12:08:50 PST
By ADAM GOLDMAN ASSOCIATED PRESS
LAS VEGAS (AP) - An expectation of a close race Tuesday after
the narrow outcome of 2000 has led to predictions that voters in
battleground Nevada could play a key role in whether George W.
Bush is re-elected or John Kerry becomes the 44th president of
the United States.
With voter turnout at a record pace, the tightly contested race
for Nevada and its crucial five electoral votes - one more than
2000 since redistricting - could be decided by the slimmest of
margins after an intense campaign.
Like the rest of the country, Nevada was closely divided between
the Democratic senator from Massachusetts and President Bush, a
Texas Republican.
---
The political landscape changed dramatically in the four years
since Nevada was a faint blip on campaign radar and presidential
candidates spent little time targeting the state's electoral
votes.
Bush defeated Democrat Al Gore by a mere five electoral votes,
illustrating the importance of even small swing states like
Nevada.
Bush won the state in 2000 by 3.5 percentage points, grabbing
49.5 percent of the vote to Gore's 46 percent after Clinton had
won Nevada in 1992 and 1996.
Both candidates campaigned an unprecedented number of times in
Nevada, with Kerry visiting seven times and Bush four. Most of
those trips were to Las Vegas, where the majority of the state's
fast-growing population lives.
Vice presidential candidates, family members and other political
supporters, including former President Bill Clinton, have
blanketed the state in recent months, hoping to sway voters in
what was a tight race for most of the campaign. Bush and Kerry
were separated by only a few percentage points, according to
statewide polls.
Voter registration reached a record high 1.1 million and was
virtually even between Democrats and Republicans after efforts
by more than 100 partisan and nonpartisan groups.
During the campaign, Bush and Kerry seized on issues important
to the state's voters.
Kerry repeatedly pledged to block the federal proposal to build
Yucca Mountain, a nuclear waste dump 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas.
Bush and Congress approved the site in 2002, angering Nevadans
who said the president broke a previous promise to use "sound
science" to make the decision.
Kerry hasn't let Nevadan voters forgot about the president's
"broken promises" and an anti-Yucca plank was part of the
national party's platform.
Bush touted his credentials as commander in chief during wartime
and the state's robust economy that has rebounded since the
Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
In the 10 states where polls showed close races, Nevada was the
only one in which the unemployment rate had fallen. Nevada's
rate dropped from an already low 4 percent in August to 3.9
percent in September - its lowest rate since mid-2000.
--
*****************************************************************
35 Inyo Register: Yucca Mtn. issues mounting for Inyo
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
County concern over transportation, bad science grows as DOE
presses for permit to store nuclear waste
By Jon Klusmire
The Inyo Register Staff Tuesday, November 2, 2004 12:15 PM
For a man talking about how to safely store the most dangerous,
radioactive material on Earth, Dr. Russ Dyer was rather glib when
he presented a quick overview of the progress being made on the
Yucca Mountain Project.
While Dyer was outlining what appeared to be smooth sailing ahead
for the high-level nuclear waste repository, Inyo County staff
members and supervisors started looking a little seasick when it
came to parts of the Yucca Mountain project that would directly
affect Inyo County. Yucca Mountain is located on the Nevada Test
Site, about 15 miles east from Death Valley and Inyo County,
which makes the county California's only 'Affected Unit of
Government' eligible for federal funds to study and monitor the
Yucca Mountain effort.
Dyer, a spokesman for the Department of Energy, which is in
charge of building the Yucca Mountain project, presented the rosy
scenario for the project, while Inyo County officials are taking
a tad darker view of the project's progress and brought to light
several issues for which there don't seem to be ready answers.
Skimming over the first 20 years of controversy and court action
concerning Yucca Mountain, Dyer said the DOE was still confident
it could open the 'state-of-the-art' nuclear repository by 2010.
That assumption was based on getting a license for the facility
from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and DOE is pressing ahead
with submitting the license application by the end of 2004, Dyer
said. That application 'only starts the process,' he noted, and
it could be 2007 before final regulatory approval is achieved, if
all goes well on the 'aggressive schedule' proposed by DOE.
Meanwhile, at the site, work is continuing. Dyer said seven miles
of underground tunnels have been completed. Eventually, about
70,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel rods from the nation's
nuclear power plants and military reactors will be stored in the
tunnel system at Yucca Mountain, he said.
As for the long-term monitoring program for the nuclear waste,
those decisions will be 'made by future generations' in the next
100 years or so, Dyer said.
'Transportation concerns me a bit,' noted Fourth District
Supervisor Butch Hambleton, 'because it seems separate from the
project.'
That is actually true, said Dyer, since, 'until you have a
destination, there is no transportation project.' However, in
anticipation of DOE being granted a license to store waste at
Yucca Mountain, the agency has decided that about 95 percent of
the nuclear waste slated for the site, which will come from
nuclear power plants and facilities from across the nation, will
be carried by rail. The Caliente Rail Corridor will be a new rail
line running from Caliente, Nev., west and north around the Test
Site, then cutting south to reach Yucca Mountain, Dyer pointed
out.
That rail line doesn't appear to address Inyo County' s concerns
that nuclear waste from California reactors and other states in
the Southwest will have to be trucked to Yucca Mountain through
Inyo County on State Route 127. 'That concerns me a lot,' said
Hambleton. 'Who's going to build that road the state or DOE?'
he asked.
Dyer said that decision is something Inyo County and the State of
California will have to grapple with, since DOE will give
transportation funding to the state, not individual counties.
'That sounds pretty bureaucratic,' commented Fifth District
Supervisor Michael Dorame, adding, 'Inyo County will have to cut
through the state bureaucracy to get any money' for either road
improvements or training and equipment for first responders
such as fire departments and the sheriff's department who
patrol that stretch of the county.
While he remained silent during Dyer's presentation to the
supervisors, Inyo County Yucca Mountain Project Assessment
Coordinator Andrew Remus said afterward that, like most comments
coming from the DOE on Yucca Mountain, Dyer's presentation was 'a
generalized and happy affair' that left out the 'hard issues'
faced by the Energy Department concerning the project.
Starting at the beginning, Remus said a recent court ruling
tossed out DOE's design standards that were geared to creating a
repository that was safe for 10,000 years. Thus, with those
guidelines in question and possibly not usable, 'DOE has no
standard to design around.' While that might be disconcerting to
other agencies involved, DOE considers the court ruling 'not a
big deal,' Remus noted.
But the NRC might think it's a big deal when that agency starts
reviewing the Yucca Mountain license application. The NRC, at the
least, will be in 'an awkward position' since it will be hard to
judge the application against accepted design guidelines, said
Remus.
The NRC is already concerned about the pending application,
having found initial submittals are 'not up to snuff,' and has
sent scientific reports and data back to DOE for additional
clarification, he added. 'I'm not sure it's possible' to get that
new information compiled and re-submitted by the Dec. 4 deadline,
Remus said, since it represents years of study and scientific
analysis.
There are also several 'big issues for Inyo County' that Dyer
didn't get around to mentioning.
On the technical side, there are no guidelines in place regarding
the possible corrosion standards for the nuclear storage
canisters, said Remus. If water corrosion takes place, it could
impact aquifers that reach into Death Valley. That the DOE is
being allowed to go ahead with the license application without
that critical component fully studied and documented, 'is a
little disturbing,' he noted.
Another critical issue is how the county can spend its Yucca
Mountain federal 'oversight funds.' It appears the DOE 'is not
exactly sure what their recently issued guidelines actually
mean,' wrote Remus and Planning Director Leslie Klusmire in a
memo to the county Board of Supervisors concerning Yucca
Mountain. It appears the county cannot use the federal funds to
make comments or objections during the licensing process, the
memo notes.
Of more concern is the DOE's claim that the oversight funds might
not be able to be used for 'transportation-related activities.'
That decision neglects how transportation studies and mitigation
measures are 'intrinsic to the oversight function and supported
by case law,' the memo notes.
Back on the ground, Remus pointed out there won't be a rail
option working until 2015, but if Yucca Mountain opens as
scheduled in 2010, there could be at least five years of truck
shipments of nuclear waste though Inyo County, and possibly 10,
if not longer, he said.
Plus, the state, not DOE, has to designate the highways and roads
that will be used for waste shipments, something the state has
yet to do, Remus said. Shifting the truck transportation issue to
the state, 'lets DOE off the hook' concerning all the issues Inyo
County could face if S.R. 127 is eventually designated as an
alternate truck route to Yucca Mountain, he added.
Grants from DOE currently cover all of the county's current Yucca
Mountain work, including Remus' salary and expenses and costs to
other departments working on Yucca Mountain issues.
©2004 The Inyo Register [pub@inyoregister.com]
*****************************************************************
36 Las Vegas RJ: JOHN L. SMITH: Today's the day when opinion polls get put to the
reality test
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Call it the last debate of the campaign.
It takes place not in a convention hall, but around the company
coffee pot or water cooler.
Without filibuster or fanfare, let the debate begin with two
intriguing survey results.
There's good news in Clark County for U.S. Sen. John Kerry,
according to the latest Magellan Research presidential poll.
The bad news is, Nevada doesn't end at the Clark County line.
Kerry has vowed to stop the Yucca Mountain project, but he might
be better off if he persuaded a few northern counties from
voting. Kerry leads President Bush 49.5 percent to 45.8 percent
in Clark County, according to Magellan polling guru Marvin
Longabaugh. The advantage was anticipated given the county's
traditional Democratic voter registration edge, but is a smaller
percentage than Al Gore led Bush by in 2000, when he lost the
state by less than 4 percent.
Will Kerry's advantage in Southern Nevada be enough to offset a
rough road through the rurals?
Barring major computer glitches, we'll probably find out late
tonight. With early voting gaining in popularity, voter
registration at an all-time high, and a record turnout expected,
the horse-race element of the campaign is more entertaining than
ever before. Polls and pollsters occasionally butt heads and
produce conflicting numbers sure to leave at least one expert
red-faced come morning.
Magellan on Friday and Saturday sampled 600 regular Clark County
voters in a two-question survey balanced by gender and political
affiliation with consideration given to first-timers.
The first question: "If the General Election were held today,
who would be most likely to receive your vote for President?"
Although Kerry carved a 3.7 percent advantage over Bush overall,
Bush won the likely voters in the 45-to-54 age group by an
impressive 51.5 percent to 43.6 percent. Of course, Kerry's
supporters will probably say members of that age group voted for
Bush because they were too old for the draft.
Women favor Kerry, 52.8 to 43.1 percent, according to the poll,
and men favor Bush 48.9 to 45.8 percent. The over-65 crowd likes
Kerry best, 51.4 percent to 44 percent, perhaps because he has
more gray hair. And 18-to-24 voters in Clark County are wild
about the Massachusetts Democrat, favoring him 59.1 percent to
31.8 percent. The difference between the two groups is, the
former traditionally votes far more reliably than the latter.
That's where voter turnout will be the big story of Campaign
2004. In a day, we'll all know just how effective the millions
spent on voter registration really was.
Longabaugh says Kerry's relatively low advantage, "I think,
probably bodes well for the president statewide." But he hedges
his bet with two wild cards: the hard-to-track young and Hispanic
voters. If they turn out in big numbers, Kerry could pull off an
upset.
Not many years ago, the Magellan poll's second question would
have been a no-brainer:
"Question 9 on the ballot asks that voters approve a small
increase in sales taxes to provide 2,500 more police officers
throughout Clark County. How do you plan to vote on this
proposal?"
The increase is a quarter cent in 2005 with another quarter-cent
kicker in 2009. Public safety is worth an extra half cent, right?
More recently, however, an under-organized police drive was
defeated in Henderson. Adding intrigue this campaign season are
conflicting Review-Journal surveys by Mason-Dixon Polling
&Research of Washington, D.C., which have appeared to show
support for the police issue tumbling fast. In September,
Mason-Dixon gave the police question a comfortable 54-40
advantage, but last week the same experts showed support had
slipped to 49-48.
Not so, according to Magellan.
Longabaugh's outfit shows the police measure winning in a
blowout, 56.7 percent to 36.8 percent. And, remember, Magellan
took a larger polling sample that Mason-Dixon, 600 to 385.
Magellan was retained by Kent Oram, head of the well-funded More
Cops group.
"It seems solid to me," Longabaugh says, but he adds that a
"general fear of taxation" could make it close.
He's an expert, but at the water cooler on Election Day, so is
everyone else.
John L. Smith's column appears Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and
Sunday. E-mail him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call 383-0295.
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
37 ABQjournal: More WIPP Waste Breaks Rules
ABQjournal.com
Tuesday, November 2, 2004
Albuquerque Journal--> John Fleck--> By John Fleck
[jfleck@abqJournal.com]
Journal Staff Writer
The Department of Energy shipped at least 602 drums of
plutonium waste to New Mexico in violation of Environmental
Protection Agency rules, according to documents obtained by the
Journal.
As a result, federal regulators are considering a shutdown
of radioactive waste shipments from Washington state to New
Mexico.
The shipments, from the DOE's Hanford nuclear reservation
to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, violated an
EPA directive issued in August 2003. The directive said the
waste should not be shipped because of questions about whether
it had been properly tested.
Officials with the EPA, which has legal responsibility for
environmental safety at WIPP, refused Monday to answer
questions. EPA spokesman Dave Ryan issued a statement saying the
agency is conducting "a full technical review" of the waste in
question and gathering information to see what further action
may be required.
DOE officials also refused to talk about the issue.
An internal EPA document obtained by the Journal says one
option under consideration is a complete shutdown of all
shipments from Hanford to WIPP.
It is the second such incident this year and the fourth
since WIPP opened in 1999, a string of failures that threatens
public confidence in WIPP, according to the document, an
internal EPA review.
"EPA and DOE need to demonstrate that the violation is
being taken seriously, and that changes will be made to ensure
that it does not happen again," the EPA review concluded.
New Mexico Environment Secretary Ron Curry called the
problem "mismanagement at the highest level."
Curry's department is in negotiations with DOE over a fine
that could be as high as $2.4 million as a result of the most
recent similar incident at WIPP.
In that incident, more than 100 drums of
plutonium-contaminated waste were shipped from the Idaho
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory to WIPP
earlier this year without proper testing.
The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is a mine dug 2,150 feet
beneath the southeast New Mexico desert for the disposal of
plutonium-contaminated nuclear weapons waste.
As the first facility of its kind, WIPP operates under
rules intended to ensure that some dangerous materials— such as
waste that contains explosives or is more radioactive than WIPP
was designed to hold— are not inadvertently buried.
In each of the four cases, the DOE and EPA made an
after-the-fact determination that no prohibited waste ended up
underground, according to the EPA review.
"Although we do not believe this waste (already placed
underground) will adversely affect WIPP's performance or affect
protection of public health and the environment, a serious and
thorough response to these problems is necessary to maintain
public confidence in the WIPP's performance and EPA's oversight
process," the EPA internal review concluded.
In the most recent case, Hanford had set up a testing
program for the waste, but the EPA had not yet approved it as
sufficient, WIPP manager Paul Detwiler wrote in an Oct. 18
letter to the EPA.
While that EPA review was under way, the environmental
agency had explicitly directed DOE not to ship any of the
questionable waste, according to Detwiler's letter. Detwiler
admitted the mistake and promised a number of actions to try to
ensure it does not happen again.
[Get Copyright Clearance] Copyright 2004 Albuquerque
Journal
*****************************************************************
38 Elko Daily Free Press: which papers in NV supported whom
Free Press, Review-Journal supporting President Bush
LAS VEGAS (AP) - Like the nation, Nevada newspapers are closely
divided when it comes to choosing either George W. Bush or
Democratic challenger John Kerry for president.
Two newspapers, the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Elko Daily
Free Press, endorsed President Bush for a second term. Three
others - the Reno Gazette-Journal, the Las Vegas Sun and the
Nevada Appeal of Carson City - endorsed Kerry. Editorial writers
at the Reno and Carson City newspapers said the decision to pick
Kerry over Bush wasn't easy.
"It was really a close call," said Steve Falcone, opinion editor
for the Gazette-Journal. "To a large extent, it was the need for
change, the thought that Kerry better reflects the country's
values."
Barry Smith, editor of the Nevada Appeal, said the vote for Kerry
rested with Yucca Mountain, the site of a proposed nuclear waste
dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
"I think the bottom line for us was Yucca Mountain," Smith said.
"There were strong opinions on both sides on the major issues of
the war in Iraq and domestic policy. But we were unanimous that
we agreed with Kerry's stance on Yucca Mountain."
Rhonda Zuraff, publisher of the Elko Daily Free Press, said the
decision to go with Bush was not difficult.
"We have a real strong sense of the strength of his leadership,
his consistent message and his common sense approach to managing
natural resources," she said.
John Kerr, editorial page editor for the Review-Journal, also
said the decision to support Bush's re-election was not close.
"We have generally favored the Republican-oriented market
economic policy for more than a decade here," he said. "We felt
he was a more resolute commander in chief on the war on terror."
*****************************************************************
39 AU ABC: Ranger mine operators to face licence charges
[http://abc.net.au/]
Wednesday, 3 November 2004
[http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200408/r28458_70960.jpg]
Audit due: The first of two inspections of safety and maintenance
begins today.ABC TV
The operators of the Northern Territory's Ranger uranium mine are
expected to appear briefly in a Northern Territory court today
over allegations it breached its operating licence.
The Territory Government is prosecuting Energy Resources of
Australia (ERA) over an incident in March, in which workers fell
ill after drinking water contaminated with uranium.
Operations were suspended for several days in September after the
Federal Government expressed concerns about the incident.
Independent auditors are expected to arrive at the Ranger uranium
mine today to assess progress on safety and maintenance work.
A second audit will also be undertaken.
Last Updated: 5:58:00 AM (ACST)
[http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm]
*****************************************************************
40 AU ABC: Ranger contamination case adjourned.
03/11/2004. ABC News Online
[http://www.abc.net.au/]
The operator of the Ranger uranium mine has appeared briefly in
the Darwin Magistrates Court charged with breaches of the Mining
Management Act.
The charges against Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) relate
to a March incident where workers fell ill after drinking or
showering in water contaminated with uranium.
The charges have been laid against the company by the Northern
Territory's Department of Business, Industry and Resource
Development.
The matter has been adjourned until November 24.
[http://www.abc.net.au]
© 2004 Australian Broadcasting Corporation
This service may include material from Agence France-Presse
(AFP), AAP(International), APTN, Reuters, CNN and
*****************************************************************
41 Idaho Statesman: INEEL case hurts the bottom line at Lockheed Martin
11-02-2004
Bob Fick The Associated Press
The nation's largest defense contractor will take a $110 million
fourth quarter charge against earnings after losing its bid to
salvage at least some of the money it pumped into a failed
nuclear waste cleanup project in eastern Idaho.
Lockheed Martin Corp. said on Monday that it had not determined
whether it would appeal last Friday's ruling by U.S. District
Judge B. Lynn Winmill in Boise.
The Maryland-based company, which had the contract to run the
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory from 1994
through September 1999, said the charge would translate into 25
cents per share of common stock. It will also write off costs it
had assumed were recoverable.
In his 97-page decision, Winmill found that a now-defunct
Lockheed subsidiary had failed not only to make progress toward
cleaning up Pit 9 at INEEL but also to provide any assurance that
progress would ever be made. He said that justified termination
of the cleanup contract in 1998.
The ruling came just three days after Lockheed Martin reported a
41 percent increase in third-quarter earnings a profit of $307
million, or 69 cents per share, for the July-September period.
Wall Street analyst had expected only 65 cents per share,
according to Thomson First Call.
Lockheed stock gained 70 cents a share to $55.97 in trading
Monday on the New York Stock Exchange.
Winmill ordered the company to repay the $54.4 million the
subsidiary received on the $179 million contract it failed to
carry out plus 12 percent interest for the past six years. He
also ordered Lockheed to cover the $11.7 million cost of
decontaminating facilities at the site.
*****************************************************************
42 lamonitor.com: DOE sanctions prescribed burns
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
[http://www.lac-nm.us]
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com [roger@lamonitor.com] ,
Monitor Assistant Editor
The Department of Energy has put fire back into the toolbox of
forest management at Los Alamos National Laboratory, giving a
green light to future prescribed burns on lab property. A DOE
official said the laboratory would not be starting any
intentional burns in the near term, but the measure would enable
work to be conducted by the forest service or park service
managers on contiguous property.
"The only fires allowed would be to facilitate our neighbors'
efforts," said Elizabeth Withers, the environmental compliance
officer at the Los Alamos Site Office.
No prescribed burns have been allowed at LANL since the Cerro
Grande Fire in 2000.
Withers said the immediate issue has to do with the fact that
roadways often do not accurately demarcate property boundaries.
Narrow strips of land on the side of the road belong to LANL.
DOE's permission (and therefore the environmental assessment) is
needed for the forest service to burn from their side up to the
natural firebreak of the road itself.
Despite the finding, Los Alamos will not be starting prescribed
burns on DOE property until another document has been completed,
Withers said. That document, LANL's Wildland Fire Management Plan
was mandated by Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham as a
precautionary safety measure and is anticipated next spring. Even
then, Winters said, it is more likely the National Forest Service
and the National Park Service would be relied upon for any fire
activities.
"They have staff that routinely deal with fires, and we would
have to bring in expert staff, so we would probably be asking our
neighbors to assist us," Winters said. "Why reinvent the wheel?"
The Environmental Assessment for Alternative Wildlife Hazard
Reduction and Forest Improvement Programs at LANL, which was
finalized a few months after the Cerro Grande Fire concluded that
there would be no significant impact under the preferred
alternative, which was at that time the "no burn" alternative.
In May 2001, a limited burn alternative described in the
assessment was also found to be without significant impact and
enabled the use of "air curtain destructors" for eliminating
forest waste from the fire and from additional forest thinning
activities.
The current Finding of No Significant Impact now brings into play
a third alternative covered by the original assessment, the burn
alternative, for both waste and treatment.
This includes prescribed burns planned by the forest service in
places west of the LANL boundary along NM 501 and piles of waste
limbs and brush along NM 4 by the park service.
The prescribed burn might occur in late fall or early winter,
depending on moisture conditions.
The final assessment weighed the various alternatives against a
number of potential environmental factors, including biological,
cultural and visual resources, air and water quality and human
health and socioeconomic considerations.
A runaway prescribed burn at neighboring Bandelier National
Monument in May 2000 resulted in the evacuation of more than
20,000 people and the wrenching destruction of over 230 private
residences in Los Alamos. As the assessment noted, the Cerro
Grande Fire blackened 43,000 acres, including some 7,500 acres of
lab land.
Along with four other major wildfires in the last 50 years, the
Cerro Grande Fire brought home a warning that an even greater
catastrophe had been averted.
and inspired a host of coordinated efforts to combat future
wildfires.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
43 [du-list] DU in the news - 3rd Nov 04
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:54:22 -0800
Independent Media TV, Tue, 02 Nov 2004 2:57 AM PST
Depleted Uranium Dust Worries Iraqis - Independent Media TV
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=9677&fcategory_desc=Under
Despite assurances from the U.S. military that depleted uranium from
exploded munitions does not pose a significant health threat, Iraq's
provisional government is asking the United Nations for help cleaning up
the low-level radioactive, metal dust spread across local battlefields by
U.S. and British forces during the Persian Gulf wars.
PeaceLink, Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:18 AM PST
Depleted uranium is slaughtering the people of Afghanistan
http://italy.peacelink.org/disarmo/articles/art_7842.html
All the western media are celebrating the victory of Hamid Karzai (55.3% of
the vote) as "the first democratically elect president in the history of
Afghanistan".
St. Petersburg Times, Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:16 AM PST
Russia's Youzhny Wins St. Petersburg Open
http://www.sptimes.ru/archive/times/1017/rest/r_14060.htm
ST. PETERSBURG - Home favorite Mikhail Youzhny trounced Slovakia's Karol
Beck 6-2 6-2 in the St Petersburg Open final on Sunday to claim his first
title of the year. ....
Greeley Tribune Online, Tue, 02 Nov 2004 0:16 AM PST
Running to help
http://www.greeleytrib.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041102/SPORTS/111020058
For most of his life, Greeley's Geoff Muntz has been running to help others
in their time of need.
Anniston Star, Tue, 02 Nov 2004 1:17 AM PST
Red State | Blue State: Voices from each side of the political divide
http://www.annistonstar.com/opinion/2004/as-insight-1102-0-4k01r3612.htm
The Red State/Blue State dialogue continues today with the twelfth
installment. The Anniston Star and Philadelphia Inquirer are hosting this
election year forum in hopes of fostering a discussion between political
cultures. Below are excerpts from our contributorsâ?T thoughts.
South End, Mon, 01 Nov 2004 9:19 PM PST
The South End Newspaper
http://www.southend.wayne.edu/modules/news/article.php?storyid=496
Imagine there was no Electoral College and Al Gore became president after
winning the popular vote in 2000. Now, imagine President Gore running for
re-election with George W. Bush s record.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
44 UK The Times: Nuclear commander shot dead
November 02, 2004
From Kevin O’Flynn in Moscow
THE deputy head of Russia’s long-range nuclear bomber fleet has
been shot dead in a contract killing, apparently in mistake for
his travelling companion, whose son was once accused of mafia
activity in Smolensk.
Major-General Konstantin Dementiev, 47, died on Sunday evening
when the car in which he was travelling was raked with bullets.
Prosecutors said that he was killed instantly just outside
Smolensk, when gunmen in a Mercedes opened fire as they overtook
his car.
The driver of the car was also killed and its owner, Viktor
Konorov, whose son Alexei had faced mafia charges that were not
proven, seriously injured. Investigators do not believe the
murder was an attempt on the life of the air force officer. “The
version that they wanted to kill him is not the main one,” a
source in the prosecutor’s office said. Investigators have not
ruled out a link with General Dementiev’s air force post,
although colleagues said he was not involved in any financial or
property issues that could have caused conflicts.
Mikhail Oparin, the former commander of the strategic long-range
nuclear division said: “He had one of the brightest futures. He
was a very proper person.”
Alexei Markov, the deputy prosecutor of the Smolensk region, said
that one suspect had been arrested.
Copyright The Times - timesonline.co.uk
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************