***************************************************************** 10/05/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.238 ***************************************************************** 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 BBC: Iraq inspectors prepare to report 2 UK Independent: Iraq Survey Group to concede defeat in search for WM 3 Korea Herald: Third IAEA inspection team to arrive soon 4 BBC: N Korea angry at US rights bill 5 Xinhuanet: ElBaradei thanks S.Korea for cooperation on inspection 6 Xinhuanet: S. Korea hopes IAEA to address nuclear material experimen 7 Korea Times: [Another Korea] (93) The Cost of Suspicious Minds 8 Korea Times: Inter-Korean Summit Talks 9 SKorea demands end to controversy over its nuclear tests 10 US: PRAVDA.Ru: A new spin in the US soap opera - 11 US: Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Bush no friend of the environment 12 US: Roanoke Times: A hitchhiker's guide to the Bush universe 13 BBC: US 'sure' of Brazil nuclear plans NUCLEAR REACTORS 14 US: Response To NPP, IP No Fly Zones & What Can & Can't Be Done 15 US: APP.COM: In-depth study of Lacey nuclear power plant called a mu 16 US: NRC: NRC Chairman Discusses Nuclear Plant Security at Americas N 17 US: St. Petersburg Times: Opinion: NRC remains fully in charge 18 US: TheDay.com: Dominion Asks For Dismissal Of Storage Permit Appeal 19 US: TheDay.com: Waterford Wins Round In Millstone Tax Appeal Trial S 20 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Procedures for Me 21 US: NRC: Sunshine Federal Register Notice 22 Rediff: Nuclear power generation to get big push NUCLEAR SAFETY 23 [DU-WATCH] MOD spoofing vets with creatinine studies .... 24 US: Hurricane Valley Journal: Radioactive Fallout Myths, Fears and D 25 US: Hawk Eye: IAAP worker comp bill debate set NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 26 Las Vegas SUN: Kerry would use budget, Cabinet influence to kill Yuc 27 Las Vegas SUN: Audit: Government lost $458,000 giving away Yucca Mou 28 Las Vegas RJ: Agency lost money on equipment, audit says 29 BBC: Protests target nuclear shipment 30 NRC: Public Meeting Oct. 14 in Eunice, N.M., to Discuss Draft Enviro 31 Island Packet Online: Yucca Mountain not 'best thing' 32 Las Vegas SUN: Report: Energy Department mismanaged Yucca property 33 RGJ: Yucca agency wasted money, watchdog report concludes 34 US: Taunton Gazette: Cleanup slated for toxic site 35 US: NRC: General Electric Company, Morris Operation; Notice of Docke NUCLEAR WEAPONS US DEPT. OF ENERGY 36 T: Auditors find some Oak Ridge workers reimbursed for unaccredited 37 lamonitor.com: Fired lab employee files suit 38 AFPS: Interagency team checking for H-Bomb lost in 1958 39 Daily Texan: University's Los Alamos bid on track - 40 DOE: Computer Software Available for License 41 DOE: Computer Software Available for License OTHER NUCLEAR ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 BBC: Iraq inspectors prepare to report Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 October, 2004 [Charles Duelfer] Charles Duelfer has led the Iraq Survey Group since January The group hunting for banned weapons inside post-war Iraq is preparing to report that it has found no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. But the Iraq Survey Group will assert that Saddam Hussein had plans to start producing weapons in defiance of UN sanctions, US officials say. Chief weapons inspector Charles Duelfer will reveal the findings on Wednesday. Much of the content of the report has been anticipated since a draft of the report was leaked last month. Mr Duelfer is due to appear before the Senate Armed Services Committee, where he is expected to confirm that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction when the US-led invasion began in March 2003. That verdict has been widely anticipated since the former head of the Iraq Survey Group, David Kay, resigned from his position in January. 'Clandestine schemes' US government officials told the New York Times that the report would include new evidence that Saddam Hussein had plans to break UN-imposed sanctions and renew the production of banned weapons. The officials, speaking anonymously, said the report would detail efforts by Iraq to bypass sanctions while they were still in place, and to undermine international support for them. Those efforts were reported to include the use of clandestine laboratories to manufacture small quantities of chemical and biological weapons for use in assassinations. The document will stop short of offering a final judgement about the situation before the war. Instead the Iraq Survey Group is expected to continue translating and evaluating an estimated 10,000 boxes of documents seized in Iraq. ***************************************************************** 2 UK Independent: Iraq Survey Group to concede defeat in search for WMD By Rupert Cornwell in Washington 06 October 2004 The Iraq Survey Group is expected to report today that it has found no evidence of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in post-war Iraq. Charles Duelfer, the chief UN arms inspector in Iraq, is due to present the findings in a 1,500-page report to Congress. He is expected to conclude that Iraq had neither weapons of mass destruction, nor significant WMD production programmes at the time of the invasion. However, he will assert that Saddam Hussein had plans to produce weapons once UN sanctions were lifted, according to US officials. The verdict of Mr Duelfer, who will present the findings to the Senate Armed Services Committee, has been widely anticipated since the resignation of David Kay, the former head of the Iraq Survey Group, in January. When he stepped down, Mr Kay voiced serious concerns about allegations of weapons stockpiles. "We were probably all wrong about whether Iraq had stockpiles of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons," he said. There were claims last night that the report would reveal new evidence that Saddam had planned to break UN-imposed sanctions and renew the production of banned weapons. Anonymous US officials told The New York Times that the report would detail efforts by Iraq to sidestep the sanctions while undermining international support for them. This was reportedly manifested in the use of clandestine laboratories to manufacture small amounts of chemical and biological weapons for use in assassinations, according to the officials. Today's document will stop short of offering a final judgement about the situation before the war. The Iraq Survey Group is expected to continue translating and evaluating an estimated 10,000 boxes of documents seized in Iraq. UK Independent Ltd. ***************************************************************** 3 Korea Herald: Third IAEA inspection team to arrive soon 2004.10.06 By Choi Soung-ah A team of inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency is set to arrive here on the third week of this month for another round of investigations into South Korea's past experiments with nuclear substances, the head of the IAEA said yesterday. The third batch of inspectors, different from those in prior rounds of the probe, will further scrutinize the two experiment cases, IAEADirector General Mohamed ElBaradei, told The Korea Herald. When asked about the progress to date, he said "so far, everything is going well and the process of the inspections (is) very smooth." The U.N. nuclear watchdog chief declined to answer exactly what the new team's mission is, but added that its work would be nothing out of the ordinary. ElBaradei also said he hoped for all the inspections to be completed and final results made before the end of November. Two IAEA teams visited South Korea for inspections last month following South Korea's revelation to the agency that its scientists experimented with nuclear particles without reporting it to the nuclear agency. The two experiments, one in 1982 and the other in 2000, led to the production of small amounts of plutonium and enriched uranium, the two main types of fissile material used in nuclear weapons. ElBaradei arrived here Sunday on a four-day visit primarily to attend the 54th Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs, scheduled for Oct. 5-8. The nuclear chief is set to deliver a speech at the conference today. His trip comes as Seoul awaits a verdict from the IAEA on whether the case of the controversial experiments will be referred to the U.N. Security Council. (bluelle@heraldm.com) ***************************************************************** 4 BBC: N Korea angry at US rights bill Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 October, 2004 By Charles Scanlon BBC, Seoul North Korea has responded angrily to a new human rights bill approved by the US House of Representatives. The bill, already passed by the Senate, is designed to help North Koreans fleeing hunger and persecution. It provides $24m a year in humanitarian assistance and also aims to make it easier for North Korean refugees to gain asylum in the US. North Korea has said it is part of a plan to topple the communist government. A foreign ministry spokesman in Pyongyang said the move made further negotiations with the US meaningless. North Korea was already refusing further talks with its neighbours and the US on its development of nuclear weapons. It has again threatened to step up development of what it calls a deterrent force, a term used to describe its nuclear weapons programme. As many as 200,000 North Korean refugees are thought to have crossed the border into China. The North worries that Washington is trying to encourage migration on an even larger scale to destabilise the government. Both China and South Korea are alarmed at the prospect of a mass exodus. The Chinese authorities currently arrest and return refugees. South Korea reluctantly accepts those who manage to escape from China. ***************************************************************** 5 Xinhuanet: ElBaradei thanks S.Korea for cooperation on inspection www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-10-05 22:40:19 SEOUL, Oct. 5 (Xinhuanet) -- Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), thanked South Korean government for its voluntary report of nuclear material experiments and cooperation with IAEA's inspection teams on Tuesday, reported South Korean Yonhap News Agency. Yonhap quoted officials at the South Korean Ministry of Science and Technology as reporting that ElBaradei expressed the above standing to Science and Technology Minister Oh Myung when the two held meeting on Tuesday. In responses, Oh reiterated that South Korean government thoroughly holds nuclear transparent principal and will truly fulfill the international Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty. Oh also said South Korea will set up an independent institution to supervise and manage nuclear activities in future. Oh hoped the investigation results of the IAEA inspection over the South Korea's old nuclear experiments can be reported to the board of governor meeting in this November without any prejudice. The two also made agreement to strengthen cooperation over security of nuclear energy, Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Programs (INPRO) and radiation iatrology. Moreover, in a reception of Egyptian Embassy to South Korea, ElBaradei also confirmed that the IAEA will send a third inspection team to South Korea late this month for additional investigations into the country's past nuclear material experiments, Yonhap said. The United Nations nuclear watchdog sent two groups of inspectors in late August and late September to probe the (South) Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute's nuclear facilities. South Korean government admitted last month that two groups of scientists of the nuclear research center conducted two experiments, one in 1982 and the other in 2000, on producing small amounts of plutonium and enriched uranium, the two main types of fissile material used in nuclear weapons. ElBaradei's South Korea trip came as Seoul was awaiting a verdict from the IAEA on its controversial experiments involving nuclear materials. The acknowledgment touched off suspicions over the country's nuclear ambitions despite Seoul's repeated assertion that the laboratory experiments had nothing to do with nuclear weapons. ElBaradei arrived here on Sunday to attend an international non-governmental disarmament seminar, known as the Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs which kicked off its sessions earlier Tuesday. The chief of the UN nuclear watchdog has met South Korean PrimeMinister Lee Hae-chan, Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young and Oh Myung. ElBaradei will conclude his four-day trip to Seoul and leave here on Wednesday. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Xinhuanet: S. Korea hopes IAEA to address nuclear material experiments www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-10-05 22:54:38 SEOUL, Oct. 5 (Xinhuanet) -- South Korea on Tuesday called on Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the UN nuclear watchdog, to address the controversy over Seoul's past nuclear experiments by next month so that the six-party talks aimed at resolving the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula will not be disrupted. South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young stated the government position to ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), earlier Tuesday when the two held a meeting, according to the South Korean news agency Yonhap. Chung also voiced the hope that the IAEA will dispel suspicions of undeclared experiments by that time and not refer the issue to the UN Security Council. ElBaradei's South Korea trip came as Seoul was awaiting a verdict from the IAEA on its controversial experiments involving nuclear materials. The two one-off experiments, one in 1982 and the other in 2000,led to the production of small amounts of plutonium and enriched uranium, the two main types of fissile material used in nuclear weapons. "The six-way talks will inevitably be affected if the resolution of Seoul's nuclear row is delayed," as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea mentioned Seoul's nuclear issue as a precondition to the talks, Chung said to ElBaradei. ElBaradei said it is up to the board of governors to decide whether to refer the issue to the Security Council. The Vienna-based UN nuclear watchdog is scheduled to make a final decision on South Korea's nuclear experiments next month when its 35-nation board of governors convenes. The South Korean government has explained that it does not have any nuclear weapons program and the two one-off experiments were academic ones. ElBaradei arrived in Seoul on Sunday for the annual meeting of the Pugwash Conference, an international body for consultation on nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament, which kicked off its four-day session on Tuesday. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 Korea Times: [Another Korea] (93) The Cost of Suspicious Minds Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Special By Andrei Lankov What is the greatest secret the North Korean government wants to hide from its own people? Is it a nuclear program? Or is it the brutality of the prison camps? Unlikely. After all, I am not sure whether the common North Koreans are unhappy about their country¡¯s nuclear program (remember those outbursts of bomb-inspired public enthusiasm in New Delhi and Islamabad few years ago?). And the truth about prison camps is likely to make the listeners even more docile and obedient. Perhaps the greatest worry of the regime is that its populace will learn the truth about living standards of other countries, above all _ that of South Korea. In North Korean media the South has always been presented as a nightmarish place where people live in unimaginable poverty and never cease to dream about the happy life they would, of course, enjoy under the wise leadership of the Kims¡¯ dynasty. Life in other countries was also depicted as grim and impoverished. There is only one way to make sure that this propaganda would be effective: to keep the entire country sealed from the outside world. And indeed, the North Korean authorities have spent a fortune on keeping their borders information-proof. As readers of this column probably remember, for decades North Koreans were not allowed radio sets with free tuning. All radios in the country, including those bought by the privileged few in the currency shops, had to stay permanently tuned to the official Pyongyang broadcast. Foreign publications were sent to special departments in the libraries. These departments were opened only to those who had clearance from the security police. From the 1960s no foreign publications, however innocent or apolitical, were available for sale in the country. Needless to say, no access to the Internet is allowed. Perhaps North Korea remains unique in being the world¡¯s only country that has no Net users. Actually, Kim Jong-il himself is said to be an enthusiastic surfer, but outside the elite¡¯s top crust (perhaps, a few dozen families) access to the Net is unheard of. The scholarly institutions have their own digital network that operates within the North, but it has only limited connections with the Web. However, this network can be accessed only from one¡¯s workplace. Private foreign travel has been not been allowed for a majority of the population. With the exception of some special cases (the timber workers in Siberia being the most notable), all Koreans who have ever been overseas came from the highly privileged strata. In most cases they worked in the country¡¯s overseas institutions _ embassies, advisers¡¯ groups, shipping agencies and the like. Once again, their loyalty to the regime and unwillingness to talk too much about overseas life is ensured by the constant supervision of the security police and mutual surveillance. Foreign tourists who arrive in Pyongyang are isolated from the locals and kept under constant supervision. To play it safe, a tourist group or even an individual tourist is accompanied by two tour guides. The guides are supposed to control not only tourists, but also one another. Such tight supervision is supposed to be paid for by the tourists themselves, thus the North Korean operators charge exorbitant fees from their foreign partners. Few people agree to pay some $1,300 for a week in Pyongyang, of course. However, the shortage of tourists does not seem to worry Pyongyang too much. In spite of all the talk about the development of international tourism, North Korean leaders obviously believe that hard currency brought in by the tourists will not compensate for the political risks incurred by letting these dangerous foreigners in. Most of these policies were common in Communist countries, but few if any of them went to such extremes. However, the events of the recent decade provide us with a good lesson. Repression and control costs money and can be supported only by an economy. The hordes of supervisors and policemen devour resources, but do not produce anything (apart from political stability, of course) in return. Since the early 1990s when the North Korean economy nose-dived, the above-mentioned measures have been somewhat relaxed. It seems that this relaxation was not a result of some policy, but simply reflected the government¡¯s inability to find money to pay for these programs. Of course, this means that unwanted information is flowing in, and the common people are beginning to doubt some official statements. But that is another story¡¦ 10-05-2004 18:56 ***************************************************************** 8 Korea Times: Inter-Korean Summit Talks Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion Inter-Korean Summit Talks Pacify Mounting Tension on Peninsula It is not an exaggeration to say that the nation is deeply concerned with a crisis that foreign media predicted would engulf the Korean peninsula this month because of Pyongyang¡¯s defiance of Washington¡¯s demand for the complete dismantlement of its nuclear facilities. The six-party dialogue aimed at finding a peaceful resolution to the nuclear standoff between North Korea and the United States has been suspended since its third round held in Beijing in June due to the North¡¯s boycott. The North, which initially refused to take part in the multi-lateral negotiations under U.S. pressure, is now using the South¡¯s nuclear experiment involving uranium and plutonium as an excuse to reject dialogue. On the other hand, inter-Korean exchanges have virtually ceased since July due to Pyongyang taking offence to the failure of a Southern delegation¡¯s visit to the North on the 10th anniversary of Kim Il-sung¡¯s death and the arrival of over 400 Northern refugees into the South from Vietnam. Amid rising tension on the peninsula, the government is resolved to push ahead with holding the second inter-Korean summit talks in order to restore the suspended exchanges with the North and persuade it to come to the negotiating table for settlement of its second nuclear confrontation with Washington. Minister of Unification Chung Dong-young revealed the government¡¯s resolve on Monday, the first day of the National Assembly¡¯s 20-day investigation of state affairs. Regardless of how the Northern regime reacts to the proposal, it is generally considered a timely offer to head off any untoward speculation by foreign media. It is sincerely hoped that North Korean leader Kim Jong-il will accept the proposal and visit the South to hold talks with President Roh Moo-hyun before the U.S. presidential election next month. The summit is likely to contribute to helping the North return to the six-level talks. The South¡¯s nuclear experiments cannot be used as an excuse for the North to stay away from the six-level negotiations as Seoul voluntarily revealed them to the world and underwent two investigations conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency. There is little point in the North returning to the negotiating table after the U.S. elections as whoever wins, U.S. policy toward North Korea¡¯s nuclear activities is not likely to change. The sooner the summit talks take place, the better are the chances for resumption of inter-Korean exchanges and the six-party negotiations, thus averting a crisis breaking out on the peninsula. 10-05-2004 18:52 ***************************************************************** 9 SKorea demands end to controversy over its nuclear tests Tuesday October 5, 06:40 PM SEOUL, (AFP) - South Korea has called for an early end to controversy over its secret nuclear experiments, saying this is hindering efforts to stop North Korea's nuclear weapons drive. Unification Minister Chung Dong-Young expressed the wish in a meeting with Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Chung's office said. ElBaradei is in Seoul to attend an anti-nuclear weapons forum while his inspectors are investigating Seoul's unauthorized experiments to produce plutonium and enriched uranium -- essential ingredients for atomic bombs. South Korea insists the lab experiments were purely for scientific purposes, not linked to nuclear weapons programs, but IAEA inspectors last month visited the country twice and are expected to visit again soon. ElBaradei has expressed "serious concern" about South Korea's nuclear activities. The Vienna-based UN watchdog will hold a meeting of its board of directors in November to determine whether the matter ought to be referred to the UN Security Council. "We hope the case will be closed at the IAEA meeting of directors in November and will not be referred to the UN Security Council," Chung told the IAEA chief, his office said. Chung warned that a further delay in resolving the case would affect talks to end the two-year impasse over North Korea's nuclear ambitions. "It's up to the meeting but we will do our utmost to avoid (having the case being referred to the UN)," ElBaradei was quoted as saying. The UN watchdog wants South Korea to come clean about its past unauthorized nuclear experiments and not to repeat its mistake. The case has embarrassed the United States and South Korea when they are trying, through six-party talks, to pressure Stalinist North Korea to end its nuclear weapons drive. North Korea refused to take part in a fourth round of the multilateral talks, scheduled for last month, blaming what it called hostile US policy and the secret nuclear experiments. The North's attitude prompted South Korea to make a fresh pledge that it would not develop or possess nuclear weapons and would pursue research transparently. South Korea said its scientists produced 150 kilograms (330 pounds) of uranium metal in 1982 in undeclared activities and a small amount of that was used in 2000 to produce a microscopic amount of enriched uranium. The scientists also admitted to having extracted a miniscule amount of plutonium from 2.5 kilograms of fuel rods in secret research in 1982. South Korea has the world's sixth-largest civilian nuclear industry, operating 19 power plants that produce 40 percent of the country's energy needs. Copyright © 2004 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Copyright © 2004 AFP. All rights reserved. All information ***************************************************************** 10 PRAVDA.Ru: A new spin in the US soap opera - Terrorists let a big part of hostages go 10/05/2004 18:42 Donald Rumsfeld, apparently might be having pangs of embarrassment over previous other spin doctored 'facts'. Just like Robert McNamara who did a major 'mea culpa' over the Viet Nam war, Rumsfeld is coming clean about Iraq. He now states with equal zeal that he has found no direct link to Iraq's phantom WDMs and the 'Intel' he provided to the world. He also stated that he saw no direct link between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, which is in direct contradiction to his earlier 'absolute' statements that claimed there was a provable hand-in-hand link between the two. Rumsfeld is in sharp contrast with his boss, Bush. Bush absolutely maintains there is a bullet proof connection claiming that Iraq was in league with al Qaeda under Saddam Hussein's rule, and that fugitive Islamic militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had a hand-in-hand relationship with Saddam and the terrorist network. However, Rumsfeld is still very wishy-washy over the alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction (WDMs) that were supposed to have been in the hands of Iraq - weapons that have never been found. If readers will remember, Iraq evicted the UN Inspectors after former president Clinton said that US spy agents had penetrated the UN inspection team, working with the inspection teams, and were reporting back. Perhaps the WDMs were bogus intel - or worse completely spin doctored. Iraq scientists have said the WDM program had been abandoned years before because Saddam Hussein feared reprisal. Bush used Iraq's steadfast refusal to allow the inspection teams back in as one of the justifications for the case presented to the UN for direct US military intervention in Iraq. Military action that the UN denied and the US decided on a "go it alone' unilateral military attack on Iraq. The US expels suspected spies but demands the right to having overt US spies operate within the borders of other nations. The US executed Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, using the electric chair, based only upon a suspicion that they might be spies. KGB records stated that the Rosenbergs were a pair of nothings and nobodys. Rumsfeld continues to state without reservation that the world is better off with Saddam Hussein out of the picture, but he cannot provide clear and concise details and facts to support his statement. The mounting civilian death toll as a result of the US war in Iraq, the poisoning of the water and land from depleted uranium, the abuse of Iraq citizens and POWs, should make one question Rumsfeld's logic. There are a growing percentage of Iraq citizens who are now stating they are worse off under the US military government than they were under the Ba"ath party. With the Iraq elections maybe in sight, the Iraq people can be assured that who ever they vote for, their government will be a US puppet government. It should be noted that Iraq has not violated the sovereignty of any nation in the last eleven years. No country has approached the UN citing fear of Iraq and asking for protection. Iraq"s HARP gun was dismantled, and their scud missiles were never properly re-engineered to increase the range from the mandated 120 mile restriction. Saddam Hussein was nothing more than a big mouthed, impotent threat, braggart, playing huff & puff GI Joe. Iraq was crucial to US interests in the containment of Iran - which we wanted as an enemy on a leash. Iraq would probably been a designated staging area if the US had chosen to go to war with Iran at the time. Tensions between the US and Iran have been mounting for years and it is just a matter of time before the US will engage military actions against Iran. Iran has a functioning nuclear reactor and the US has committed itself to taking out the reactor. The US administration believes it is in their best interests to remain in Iraq for an indefinite period of time and do a military build up there. There are conflicting reports to the length of the US presence in Iraq, but the common denominator is a 10 year occupation. The US still uses nuclear reactors to generate electricity and material for the atomic weapons still being produced by the US. It is true that Hussein used torture on his own people - but what is happening to the Iraq civilian now? Same thing. It is true he did execute a number of people - but what were the reasons? Impoverished people tend to commit crimes as the US knows so well within it's own shores, and Texas is the execution capital of the world where executing criminals is as American as apple pie. It is true he used lethal gas against Iran and the Kurds - but who did he get the silent go ahead from? Rumsfeld was the US person who had direct dealings with Saddam Hussein at the time. Hussein is reported to have told Rumsfeld he was going to use gas and Rumsfeld was supposed to have smiled and nodded yes. Rumsfeld has been under severe scrutiny because of the Iraq POW abuse. Unofficial sources commented months ago that Bush was furious with Rumsfeld over the stories that were hitting the press. The context of Bush's anger has never been discussed, but one can surmise by Bush"s own words and actions that his rage was over the leaking of the stories to the press and the publications of the stories, rather than outrage over the actual abuse. The Iraq POWs were classified as illegal combatants in the US rules of engagement contrary to the Geneva Convention"s classification of POW. Rumsfeld"s new found truths are just another example of a desperately in need of justifications US administration and an administration that has no cohesive internal communications or direction or adult leadership. There are rumors of deep seated splits within the administration. As for Rumsfeld, why do I get this sinking feeling that this is just chapter two of the continuing US Soap Opera: Iraq, being sponsored by the flim-flam group up on the hill and viewed by billions? During the Viet Nam conflict, there was a song and one of its lyrics was: "Be the first person on your block to have your kid come home in a box". Maybe America should find a copy of that song and play it with increasing regularity over the next four years. Michael Berglin L1999-2002 "PRAVDA.Ru". When reproducing our materials in ***************************************************************** 11 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Bush no friend of the environment [seattlepi.com] [OPINION] Tuesday, October 5, 2004 JAY INSLEE CONGRESSMAN Until recently, the environment has always been a bipartisan issue here. Many Washington Republicans such as Dan Evans and Ralph Munro are known as great environmentalists. Unfortunately, GOP President Theodore Roosevelt must be spinning in his grave due to the Bush administration's assault on Washington state's environment. Since taking office President Bush has conducted a shock and awe campaign on the Pacific Northwest environment. His administration has destroyed environmental protections that enjoy great public support and crushed carefully laid plans to preserve our natural surroundings. In light of the Bush-Cheney campaign's anointment of Bush as a "champion of the environment" ("Bush Respects and Preserves Park Land," Sept. 28), it is fitting we consider this brief reminder of the environmental attacks: Forgetting our national parks. Quite contrary to the laughable claims made by Marc Racicot, chairman of the Bush-Cheney campaign, the administration is not taking care of our national parks. Our National Park Service has a $600 million operating deficit and a growing maintenance backlog of up to $6 billion. This funding lack has caused a loss in needed park employees; Olympic National Park is down to one permanent park ranger for the entire park. Chopping down pristine national forests. Racicot called Bush "a protector of national forests" in the column but this title could never pass the straight-face test if said out loud. Despite election year promises, Bush supports eliminating the popular Roadless Rule, which protects nearly 60 million acres of pristine national forest lands from logging, mining and drilling while keeping them open for fire suppression and recreational use. Bush supports logging and road building, and even more outrageously, his administration is making taxpayers subsidize private logging companies by paying for new roads through our forests. Bush has also weakened the Northwest Forest Plan. His administration dropped a rule that had required forest managers to look for rare plants and animals before approving timber sales for logging and loosened the limitation on the amount of runoff that logging operations are allowed to put into salmon-bearing streams. These changes pander to special interests at the expense of protecting our local areas. Threatening wild salmon. Bush's proposed salmon hatchery policy would include hatchery-raised salmon in wild salmon counts, thus giving an inaccurate estimate of the health of our wild salmon stocks and reducing the salmon's eligibility for protection under the Endangered Species Act. Wild salmon are biologically different from hatchery fish. If we are to preserve wild salmon stocks, it is important to use sound science, not artificial numbers. Refusing to clean up Hanford nuclear waste. The administration has attempted to foist more high-level nuclear waste onto our state and to avoid its cleanup responsibilities for the waste it already put here. The administration tried to change the name of the nuclear waste to escape the law that requires the waste to be treated properly. Unfortunately, calling the waste by any other name does not change the fact that leaking nuclear waste has serious consequences such as contaminating the Columbia River and undermining Washington's right to protect public health. There is no greater contrast between the aspirants to the White House this year than there is on the environment. John Kerry is resolute and straightforward on the environment, and has sincerely worked to protect it throughout his entire career. He has one of the highest, if not the highest, career voting records on the environment in the Senate. We could not do better for our local environment. Many people hope Bush will have an epiphany and change his ways but his record on the environment is the worst of any president in American history, and we cannot take that terrible gamble. Democrat Jay Inslee represents the First Congressional District and serves on the Committee on Resources. He is the ranking member of the subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health. Back to [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com [newmedia@seattlepi.com] ***************************************************************** 12 Roanoke Times: A hitchhiker's guide to the Bush universe [http://www.roanoke.com] Tuesday, October 05, 2004 The latest assertions about Iraq's intentions typify this administration's unnerving consistency. The Bush administration built its case for invading Iraq on aluminum tubes that buckled under the weight of reality. But the administration exists in an alternate reality. In its universe, it never has made a mistake. Its blunders are working out beautifully. And its decision to launch a pre-emptive attack against Iraq was completely justified - because Iraq was developing nuclear weapons and might hand one off to al-Qaida to use against the United States. The "irrefutable evidence," in the words of Vice President Dick Cheney, lay in Iraq's efforts to get tens of thousands of aluminum tubes. These, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice warned, were "only really suited for nuclear weapons programs." That was 2002. The administration scared the bejabbers out of most Americans, invaded Iraq, toppled Saddam Hussein and found ... um, no evidence that Iraq was rebuilding its nuclear weapons program; no unconventional weapons of any kind that could be construed as an imminent threat against the United States. This is 2004. In the real world, the overwhelming number of intelligence experts now agree with what Department of Energy experts in uranium enrichment - the government's foremost nuclear experts - were saying, behind the scenes, back in 2002: The aluminum tubes were the wrong size and quality to be used in a nuclear program. They probably were intended for small artillery rockets. After a year-long inquiry, the Senate intelligence committee in July concluded unanimously that the Energy Department had been right. The Bush White House had rejected the most plausible explanation for the aluminum tubes. And, in beating the drum for war, it never told the public that the only physical evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program was fiercely disputed by the government's most senior scientists. Rice, still operating in the alternate reality of the Bush White House, maintained Sunday that the issue was still open to debate. Repeat the big lie often, and it starts to ring true. ***************************************************************** 13 BBC: US 'sure' of Brazil nuclear plans Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 October, 2004 [US Secretary of State Colin Powell speaking in Sao Paulo] US-Brazilian ties have improved dramatically in recent years US Secretary of State Colin Powell has said he is confident Brazil has no plans to develop nuclear weapons. But Mr Powell, who is on a two-day visit, urged Brazil to allow the UN's nuclear watchdog greater access to inspect its nuclear technology. Brazil wants to limit entry to a new uranium enrichment plant, saying it must protect its nuclear technology. Despite nuclear concerns, Mr Powell's visit is firmly fixed on strengthening co-operation between the US and Brazil. Global role Speaking to business leaders in Sao Paulo, Mr Powell said Brazil was an "important candidate" for a permanent seat on an expanded UN Security Council, although he stopped short of directly backing the country's long-held desire for the position. He praised the growing global role of Brazil, the biggest country in Latin America. "Brazil is a nation the US values as a close partner in advancing prosperity, democracy, and security, not only in the hemisphere but around the globe," Mr Powell said. [The Resende nuclear plant in Brazil which will be inspected by UN officials in October] Brazil says it fears industrial espionage at its nuclear plant Mr Powell also said the US was firmly committed to seeing a pan-American free trade deal, known as the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), take effect early next year. Brazil has voiced mixed feelings over the free trade moves, as well as complaining about US agricultural subsidies. Mr Powell accepted that negotiations had been difficult but he expected progress. "We hope that we will be able to complete the FTAA in the early part of 2005. That looks more difficult now, but in no way could we move the commitment [President Bush] has," Mr Powell said. Wrong message Mr Powell travelled on from Sao Paulo to Brasilia for talks with President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Foreign Minister Celso Amorim. The secretary of state's visit comes less than two weeks before a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) arrives. The IAEA wants unimpeded access to the Resende plant in Rio state but Brazil argues visual inspection will result in the disclosure of its technological secrets. US diplomats have warned that such a stance by Brazil will send the wrong message, at a time when there is concern about the nuclear programmes of Iran and North Korea. However, Mr Powell has said he expects Brazil and the IAEA will resolve their difference. ***************************************************************** 14 Response To NPP, IP No Fly Zones & What Can & Can't Be Done Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:31:43 -0400 http://www.google.com From: "Scott D. Portzline" To: "Bill Smirnow" Cc: ; Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 10:32 AM Subject: Re: A No-Flight Zone for Indian Point & ReactorsThroughout US Some time ago I made the below database using Google's calculator abilities. I performed these calculations to demonstate how little time there is for aggressive defensive measures. I believe the Phalanx weapon system is the only active system which can handle this problem. It has great capability of determining the flight vector of an aircraft and if its termination point is at a nuclear plant or if the aircraft is merely passing nearby or off course. Tests of the system have show the exacting capabilty of these determinations by flying jets nearby actual buildings without the system firing. (BTW - the modern version of the Phalanx uses tungsten steel bullets instead of DU rounds used in the original version.) The military would have to operate these systems at the plants. Ideally, 4 Phalanx systems would be deployed at each plant. The annual operating cost is about $1 million per system if my memory is correct. Friendly fire incidents due to human error have occurred. I have talked with commercial pilots and military pilots, and with pilots with both commercial and military experience and they all have confidence in the system. Still others would be fearful of an accidental shootdown but I have not spoken with any who are. The data shows various speeds (in 50 mph increments) and how much distance an aircraft can travel for various times at those speeds (in 5 second intervals). To get greater distances, simply multiply the miles side of the equation by say 1 or 2 or 5 etc. and then multiply the seconds by the same factor. Second method: Use Google in this manner type or enter "(30 sec) * 150 mph in -- the star is the multiplication symbol and press enter this will utilize the Google calculator by instructing it to calculate the time and speed and present the answer in miles traveled in that time you can use various times and speeds A nice feature of Google is that you can type "150 mph in feet per second" and get the answer instantly. Or convert 150 mph to yards per hour by typing "150 mph in yards per hour" or "150 mph in yards per second" if you like The government's calculations put the speed of the first plane at 494 mph (WTC), and the second at 586 mph. The MIT analysis determined the first plane was traveling 429 mph, and the second 537 mph, The Times said. 500mph cruise speed To find how long it takes the second jet to travel ten miles use Google in this manner. enter 10 miles / 586 mph answer 61.43 seconds 30 miles as the opinion piece writers discusses would be about 3 minutes and 5 seconds missiles are not the answers - they stray off course too easily seeking innocent aircraft! Aircraft are limited to about 200 knots (google 200 knots in mph -- answer 200 knots = 230.15589 mph) below a certain altitude (I forget right now what it is) see http://www.freeessays.cc/db/8/asp8.shtml. Therefore, an aircraft jet exceeding this speed at low altitudes becomes suspicious automatically. I'm assuming terrorists would use high speeds to attack a nuclear plant. Waiting until the last minute to dive from a higher altitude would be very difficult because controlling the aircraft becomes problematic. However, a small plane loaded with explosives would give no indication that it is about to crash into a nuclear plant. I have recommended the Phalanx In Close Weapons System be used at nuclear plants until they are phased out. http://www.tmia.com/security/airplane.html#phal Ted Postal and Dan Hirsch have independently recommended similar passive defensive structures be built around plants to shield and deflect aircraft attacks. Scott Portzline Impact Times from Various Aircraft Speeds and Distances 150 mph = 220 feet per second (30 sec) * 150 mph = 1.25 miles (25 sec) * 150 mph = 1.04166667 miles (20 sec) * 150 mph = 0.833333333 miles (15 sec) * 150 mph = 0.625 miles (10 sec) * 150 mph = 0.416666667 miles (5 sec) * 150 mph = 0.208333333 miles 200 mph = 293.333333 feet per second (30 sec) * 200 mph = 1.66666667 miles (25 sec) * 200 mph = 1.38888889 miles (20 sec) 5 866.66 feet = 1.11110985 miles (15 sec) * 200 mph = 0.833333333 miles (10 sec) * 200 mph = 0.555555556 miles (5 sec) * 200 mph = 0.277777778 miles 250 mph = 366.666667 feet per second (30 sec) * 250 mph = 2.08333333 miles (25 sec) * 250 mph = 1.73611111 miles (20 sec) * 250 mph = 1.38888889 miles (15 sec) * 250 mph = 1.04166667 miles (10 sec) * 250 mph = 0.694444444 miles (5 sec) * 250 mph = 0.347222222 miles 300 mph = 440 feet per second (30 sec) * 300 mph = 2.5 miles (25 sec) * 300 mph = 2.08333333 miles (20 sec) * 300 mph = 1.66666667 miles (15 sec) * 300 mph = 1.25 miles (10 sec) * 300 mph = 0.833333333 miles (5 sec) * 300 mph = 0.416666667 miles 350 mph = 513.333333 feet per second (30 sec) * 350 mph = 2.91666667 miles (25 sec) * 350 mph = 2.43055556 miles (20 sec) * 350 mph = 1.94444444 miles (15 sec) * 350 mph = 1.45833333 miles (10 sec) * 350 mph = 0.972222222 miles (5 sec) * 350 mph = 0.486111111 miles 400 mph = 586.666667 feet per second (30 sec) * 400 mph = 3.33333333 miles (25 sec) * 400 mph = 2.77777778 miles (20 sec) * 400 mph = 2.22222222 miles (15 sec) * 400 mph = 1.66666667 miles (10 sec) * 400 mph = 1.11111111 miles (5 sec) * 400 mph = 0.555555556 miles 450 mph = 660 feet per second (30 sec) * 450 mph = 3.75 miles (25 sec) * 450 mph = 3.12500 miles 15 sec) * 450 mph = 1.87500 miles (20 sec) * 450 mph = 2.5 miles (10 sec) * 450 mph = 1.25 miles (5 sec) * 450 mph = 0.625 miles 500 mph = 733.333333 feet per second (30 sec) * 500 mph = 4.16666667 miles (25 sec) * 500 mph = 3.47222222 miles (20 sec) * 500 mph = 2.77777778 miles (15 sec) * 500 mph = 2.08333333 miles (10 sec) * 500 mph = 1.38888889 miles (5 sec) * 500 mph = 0.694444444 miles 550 mph = 806.666667 feet per second (30 sec) * 550 mph = 4.58333333 miles (25 sec) * 550 mph = 3.81944444 miles (20 sec) * 550 mph = 3.05555556 miles (15 sec) * 550 mph = 2.29166667 miles (10 sec) * 550 mph = 1.52777778 miles (5 sec) * 550 mph = 0.763888889 miles 600 mph = 880 feet per second (30 sec) * 600 mph = 5 miles (25 sec) * 600 mph = 4.16666667 miles (20 sec) * 600 mph = 3.33333333 miles (15 sec) * 600 mph = 2.5 miles (10 sec) * 600 mph = 1.66666667 miles (5 sec) * 600 mph = 0.833333333 miles 200 knots = 230.15589 mph Speed Limit at low altitude http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/03/opinion/opinionspecial/l03indian.html A No-Flight Zone for Indian Point? Published: October 3, 2004 To the Editor: While the issues of the Indian Point nuclear power plant raised by Rory Kennedy ("A Target on the Hudson," Op-Ed, Sept. 5) certainly warrant close review, and the impact on our region of virtually any mishap there would be one of great harm, the first suggestion she makes - a no-flight zone - is a red herring. Prohibited airspace at Indian Point, say a five-mile ring, would do only two things. First, it would, to a degree, disable flight patterns in the region, particularly to Westchester County Airport (and conceivably make flight patterns more concentrated to the south and east of the airport), not to mention create consequential delays in peak periods and bad weather. In part, this is because a key bad-weather arrival route, its path dictated by the alignment of the primary runway, crosses the region east of (but not over) Indian Point. Second, if prohibited airspace went in only at Indian Point, it would raise the question of why such zones are not installed at the 103 other plants around the nation. Doing so would create a patchwork of aerial roadblocks that could inhibit air transportation and close airports nationally. Of most consequence, however, is that such a prohibited area would be useless, because a jet entering such airspace with the intent of an attack would be, in relatively few seconds, upon its target. If somebody in government wants to establish, say, a 30-mile zone that closes several airports, has missiles ready 24 hours a day, and where any airplane or airliner entering that zone is immediately shot out of the sky, including airplanes that end up there inadvertently through navigation error or equipment malfunction, then let him or her propose such a Draconian solution. Berl Brechner Croton-on-Hudson The writer is a director of the Westchester Aviation Association. ***************************************************************** 15 APP.COM: In-depth study of Lacey nuclear power plant called a must ASBURY PARK PRESS Published in the Asbury Park Press 10/05/04 By KIRK MOORE STAFF WRITER Federal officials should not relicense the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station until the Nuclear Regulatory Commission changes its process for reviewing such operating permits, Rep. H. James Saxton, R-N.J., said yesterday at a meeting with other 3rd Congressional District candidates and the Asbury Park Press editorial board. "I'm not going to get on board with relicensing until we have another look," Saxton said, in his strongest statement yet on the future of the plant. Saxton, who is seeking an 11th two-year term in Congress, said he has introduced a bill to order up a study of the power plant from the National Academy of Sciences, but is still trying to get congressional support for such a directive. Plant operators AmerGen Energy plan to submit an application to the NRC to extend Oyster Creek's operating life beyond the current 2009 expiration date. Already the nation's oldest operating commercial nuclear power station, the Lacey facility has been operating since 1969. Saxton's Democratic challenger, Assemblyman Herbert C. Conaway Jr., said he favors a national energy policy that moves away from nuclear fission power. But it may be too soon to forgo power from Oyster Creek, he said. "If we were to lose Oyster Creek," said Conaway, 42, "we're going to have to make up that energy somewhere else." But Saxton, Conaway and Libertarian candidate Frank Orland all agreed they cannot support offshore wind generation turbines as an alternative energy source. A New York company's proposal to build up to 98 windmills off the Monmouth County coast -- some within 3.5 miles of the beach -- raise the same kind of visual impact problems as offshore oil and natural gas rigs, Conaway said. "To me, losing that seascape would be a real tragedy," he said. Orland, 83, said he's not convinced that earlier wind projects in North America have demonstrated the economic viability of offshore turbines. Saxton, 61, said he can't support offshore wind generation in light of other ocean conservation efforts he's backed over the years. An economic engine The issue of relicensing Oyster Creek could be a tricky one for 3rd District candidates, who are vying for an area covering towns in Ocean, Burlington and Camden counties. The power plant is one of the largest industrial employers in the eastern half of the congressional district, with 450 workers. Revenue from the plant contributes $11.5 million toward host community Lacey's annual budget, helping hold down voters' property taxes there. But the aging plant and its stored, spent nuclear fuel rods make some neighbors edgy, and anti-nuclear campaigners have found receptive audiences in other Ocean County municipal governments. Some of those local officials have taken to criticizing the idea of a license extension beyond 2009. In August, Saxton said he would side with those calling for the plant to close unless an independent study shows Oyster Creek can continue to operate safely under a renewed license. When asked by editors yesterday if they favor relicensing the plant, Saxton and Conaway differed, although they both alluded to the problem faced by the nuclear industry and federal government in obtaining long-term storage for nuclear waste. "I have to say yes (to relicensing) because we don't have a means yet to replace that energy," Conaway said. But U.S. energy policy should be moving away from nuclear to alternative sources and cleaner technology to exploit coal, he said. Staffing a concern "I have called for a relook at relicensing," Saxton said. The Government Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, has described the NRC's relicensing procedures as a "paper review" that does not account for changing circumstances around a power plant, such as the population growth and spent fuel rod issues associated with Oyster Creek, he said. Saxton said he's concerned with staffing at the power station. During a May 2003 strike by plant workers, labor leaders "made the point that the plant used to have 900 workers and now they have 450, and this strike was about reducing it further," Saxton recalled. "That gives me a lot of heartburn." "Right now we're being held hostage to fossil fuels," Orland said. He agreed with Saxton's call for a review of NRC procedure, but said AmerGen's relicensing application should proceed "while we ensure there is an adequate work force at Oyster Creek." the Asbury Park Press ***************************************************************** 16 NRC: NRC Chairman Discusses Nuclear Plant Security at Americas Nuclear Energy Society Symposium News Release - 2004-12 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: [opa@nrc.gov] No. 04-125 October 05, 2004 MIAMI - Security at U.S. nuclear power plants has been substantially upgraded since Sept. 11, 2001, with higher federal requirements placed on utilities that operate nuclear facilities, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Nils J. Diaz said Tuesday. "Nuclear power plants have been and are even more so now among the most well-protected elements of our national civilian infrastructure," Diaz said in remarks prepared for delivery at the Americas Nuclear Energy Symposium jointly sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and the American Nuclear Society. "The NRC has further strengthened security requirements at nuclear power plants and enhanced our coordination with federal, state and local organizations since Sept. 11," Diaz said. "In addition, the NRC has conducted research-based studies which concluded that a significant radiological release affecting public health and safety is unlikely from a terrorist attack, including a large commercial aircraft. And time is available to protect the public in the unlikely event of a radiation release." Diaz also said the NRC is: - improving nuclear plant operating safety in the United States through the use of a new Reactor Oversight Program that provides a better inspection regime for plants. He said the NRC objective is to provide the tools for inspecting and assessing licensee performance in a manner that was more risk-informed, objective, predictable and understandable than the previous oversight processes, and that ensures the agencys performance goals are being met. - providing oversight in a way that corresponds to the actual, real world risk presented, rather than a theoretical worst-case scenario. He added, Simply put, technical and regulatory decisions are informed by the real world  utilizing advancing scientific knowledge, improving technological capabilities and the lessons that have been learned through decades of operating experience. Outlining security advances, Diaz said that the steps taken by the NRC include: ordering plants to take into account a more challenging adversarial threat; tighter access controls and vehicle checks at greater stand-off distances; significantly improved force-on-force exercises to test the capabilities of plant defenders; better readiness by plant security forces; and enhanced liaison with the intelligence community, and federal, state and local authorities responsible for protecting the national critical infrastructure through integrated response training. The symposium brought together members of the government, industry, and academic communities for presentations and discussions on issues related to the future of nuclear energy in the Americas. Last revised Tuesday, October 05, 2004 ***************************************************************** 17 St. Petersburg Times: Opinion: NRC remains fully in charge [http://www.sptimes.com/] Letters to the Editor Published October 5, 2004 Contrary to your Sept. 28 editorial, Nuclear security, Wackenhut style, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has ceded nothing in its oversight responsibilities at the nation's nuclear power plants. The NRC fully controls the force-on-force exercises that evaluate nuclear plant security measures, which have been enhanced from already high levels given the realities of the post-9/11 world. The NRC sets the scenarios involved, including the use of military-grade, laser-based weapons simulations for realism. Most important, NRC staff members grade the exercises. The Nuclear Energy Institute's contract with Wackenhut provides only a group of professionals, trained full-time in terrorist tactics, to standardize the exercises' attacking forces. This represents a significant improvement over previous exercises, which utilized a plant's off-duty guards and other "part-time" attackers. Any cheating by either attackers or defenders will not be tolerated, and the NRC is ready to order changes in the attacking force, if necessary. The NRC continues to work with Congress to ensure the agency has the resources necessary to carry out its mission of protecting the public health and safety. -- Eliot Brenner, director, Office of Public Affairs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Rockville, Md. School Board needs to grow up © 2004 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times 490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 ***************************************************************** 18 TheDay.com: Dominion Asks For Dismissal Of Storage Permit Appeal Waterford By PATRICIA DADDONA Day Staff Writer, Waterford Published on 10/5/2004 The owner of Millstone Power Station has asked New Britain Superior Court to dismiss an appeal of a Connecticut Siting Council permit that allows additional storage of radioactive waste at the nuclear complex. In May, the siting council approved a permit that allows the company to build a dry storage facility for up to 49 concrete bunkers and metal casks designed to hold spent fuel. Last month, the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone and three individuals called for a halt to the building of spent-fuel storage at Millstone, citing the realistic potential for terrorist attacks. On Monday, Dominion Nuclear Connecticut sought to dismiss the plaintiffs' allegations that the siting council erred in granting a permit. Dominion argues that the coalition has not proven itself aggrieved under the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act. Claims by the coalition and Geralyn Cote Winslow, William H. Honan and Clarence O. Reynolds also fall outside the scope of CEPA or are pre-empted by federal law, Dominion's motion says. The company maintains that any claims associated with radiological emissions fall directly and exclusively within the jurisdiction of the federal government. 1998-2004 The Day Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 19 TheDay.com: Waterford Wins Round In Millstone Tax Appeal Trial Starts Nov. 17 By PATRICIA DADDONA Day Staff Writer, Waterford Published on 10/5/2004 New Britain  The judge presiding over Dominion Nuclear Connecticut's tax appeal against the town of Waterford has refused to dismiss defenses the town wants to use to support its handling of air pollution equipment tax credits at Millstone Power Station. Last year, the town rejected Dominion's appraisal of $854 million for three power plants and related property, and independently appraised the power station at $1.2 billion. Dominion sued the town in Superior Court in New Britain. At stake for the company is higher taxes; for the town, about $3 million less a year in tax revenue. Part of Dominion's claim of overly high appraisal is the argument that the town has incorrectly refused to honor air pollution equipment certificates that would have, if found valid by the town's assessor, exempted the company from paying some of its taxes. The state Department of Environmental Protection issued the certificates 10 years ago when Northeast Utilities still owned Millstone. To defend its position in court, the town has filed four special defenses by which its attorneys plan to establish that Dominion knowingly relinquished its exemptions when the firm failed to account for alterations to the equipment. On Sept. 23, Judge Arnold W. Aronson refused to dismiss the town's special defenses, saying the issue is a matter of law for the courts to decide. He rejected Dominion's arguments that the court lacked jurisdiction; that the town had not exhausted administrative remedies through the DEP; and that the assessor had no authority to question the validity of the certificates. Waterford First Selectman Paul B. Eccard said he was pleased with the judge's decision. Dominion Spokesman Pete Hyde declined to comment. The case is expected to go to trial Nov. 17. 1998-2004 The Day Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 20 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Procedures for Meetings FR Doc 04-22314 [Federal Register: October 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 192)] [Notices] [Page 59620-59621] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05oc04-93] Background This notice describes procedures to be followed with respect to meetings conducted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). These procedures are set forth so that they may be incorporated by reference in future notices for individual meetings. The ACRS is a statutory group established by Congress to review and report on nuclear safety matters and applications for the licensing of nuclear facilities. The Committee's reports become a part of the public record. The ACRS meetings are conducted in accordance with FACA; they are normally open to the public and provide opportunities for oral or written statements from members of the public to be considered as part of the Committee's information gathering process. ACRS reviews do not normally encompass matters pertaining to environmental impacts other than those related to radiological safety. The ACRS meetings are not adjudicatory hearings such as those conducted by the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel as part of the Commission's licensing process. General Rules Regarding ACRS Full Committee Meetings An agenda will be published in the Federal Register for each full Committee meeting. There may be a need to make changes to the agenda to facilitate the conduct of the meeting. The Chairman of the Committee is empowered to conduct the meeting in a manner that, in his/her judgment, will facilitate the orderly conduct of business, including making provisions to continue the discussion of matters not completed on the scheduled day on another meeting day. Persons planning to attend the meeting may contact the Designated Federal Official (DFO) specified in the Federal Register Notice prior to the meeting to be advised of any changes to the agenda that may have occurred. The following requirements shall apply to public participation in ACRS full Committee meetings: (a) Persons who plan to make oral statements and/or submit written comments at the meeting should provide 35 copies to the DFO at the beginning of the meeting. Persons who cannot attend the meeting but wishing to submit written comments regarding the agenda items may do so by sending a readily reproducible copy addressed to the DFO specified in the Federal Register Notice, care of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments should be limited to items being considered by the Committee. Comments should be in the possession of the DFO five days prior to the meeting to allow time for reproduction and distribution. (b) Persons desiring to make oral statements at the meeting should make a request to do so to the DFO. If possible, the request should be made five days before the meeting, identifying the topic(s) to be discussed and the amount of time needed for presentation so that orderly arrangements can be made. The Committee will hear oral statements on topics being reviewed at [[Page 59621]] an appropriate time during the meeting as scheduled by the Chairman. (c) Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained by contacting the DFO. (d) The use of still, motion picture, and television cameras will be permitted at the discretion of the Chairman and subject to the condition that the use of such equipment will not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. The DFO will have to be notified prior to the meeting and will authorize the use of such equipment after consultation with the Chairman. The use of such equipment will be restricted as is necessary to protect proprietary or privileged information that may be in documents, folders, etc., in the meeting room. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. (e) A transcript will be kept for certain open portions of the meeting and will be available in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), One White Flint North, Room O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738. A copy of the certified minutes of the meeting will be available at the same location three months following the meeting. Copies may be obtained upon payment of appropriate reproduction charges. ACRS meeting agenda, transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room at pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] , by calling the PDR at 1-800-394-4209, or from the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] or http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collecti ons/] (ACRS & ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas). (f) Video teleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use this service for observing ACRS meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician, (301-415-8066) between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The availability of video teleconferencing services is not guaranteed. ACRS Subcommittee Meetings In accordance with the revised FACA, the agency is no longer required to apply the FACA requirements to meetings conducted by the Subcommittees of the NRC Advisory Committees, if the Subcommittee's recommendations would be independently reviewed by its parent Committee. The ACRS, however, chose to conduct its Subcommittee meetings in accordance with the procedures noted above for ACRS full Committee meetings, as appropriate, to facilitate public participation, and to provide a forum for stakeholders to express their views on regulatory matters being considered by the ACRS. When Subcommittee meetings are held at locations other than at NRC facilities, reproduction facilities may not be available at a reasonable cost. Accordingly, 25 additional copies (total of 50 copies) of the materials to be used during the meeting should be provided for distribution at such meetings. Special Provisions When Proprietary Sessions Are To Be Held If it is necessary to hold closed sessions for the purpose of discussing matters involving proprietary information, persons with agreements permitting access to such information may attend those portions of the ACRS meetings where this material is being discussed upon confirmation that such agreements are effective and related to the material being discussed. The DFO should be informed of such an agreement at least five working days prior to the meeting so that it can be confirmed, and a determination can be made regarding the applicability of the agreement to the material that will be discussed during the meeting. The minimum information provided should include information regarding the date of the agreement, the scope of material included in the agreement, the project or projects involved, and the names and titles of the persons signing the agreement. Additional information may be requested to identify the specific agreement involved. A copy of the executed agreement should be provided to the DFO prior to the beginning of the meeting for admittance to the closed session. Dated: September 29, 2004. Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 04-22314 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 21 NRC: Sunshine Federal Register Notice FR Doc 04-22398 [Federal Register: October 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 192)] [Notices] [Page 59621-59622] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05oc04-94] Agency Holding the Meeting: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Date: Weeks of October 4, 11, 18, 25, November 1, 8, 2004. Place: Commissioner's Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Status: Public and closed. Matters to be Considered: Week of October 4, 2004 Thursday, October 7, 2004 9.25 a.m. Affirmation Session (public meeting) (tentative). a. State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (Confirmatory Order Modifying License); appeals of LBP-04-16 by NRC staff and license (tentative). b. Private Fuel Storage (Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation) Docket No. 72-22-ISFSI (tentative). c. USEC, Inc. (tentative). d. Citizen's Awareness Network's (CAN) motion to dismiss the Yankee Rowe license termination proceeding or to re-notice it (tentative). e. Duke Energy Corp. (Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2); Licensing Board's certification of its ruling on ``need to know'' during discovery (tentative). f. Final rulemaking to add new Section 10 CFR 50.69. ``Risk- Informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures, Systems, and Components for Nuclear Power Reactors'' (tentative). 10:30 a.m. Discussion of security issues (Closed--Ex.1). 1 p.m. Discussion of security issues (Closed--Ex. 1). 2:30 p.m. Discussion of security issues (Closed--Ex. 1) Week of October 11, 2004--Tentative Wednesday, October 13, 2004. 9:30 a.m. Briefing on decommissioning activities and status (public meeting) (contact: Claudia Craig, 301-415-7276). 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] . 1:30 p.m. Discussion of intragovernmental issues (Closed--Ex. 1& 9). Week of October 18, 2004--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of October 18, 2004. Week of October 25, 2004--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of October 25, 2005. [[Page 59622]] Week of November 1, 2004--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of November 1, 2004. Week of November 8, 2004--Tentative Monday, November 8, 2004. 2 p.m. Briefing on plant aging and material degradation issues (public meeting) (Contact: Steve Koenick, 301-415-1239). The 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] . Tuesday, November 9, 2004. 9:30 a.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 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] . 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.html [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.html] . * * * * * 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 2055 (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: September 30, 2004. Dave Gamberoni, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 04-22398 Filed 10-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M ***************************************************************** 22 Rediff: Nuclear power generation to get big push [http://www.rediff.com/] BS Economy Bureau in New Delhi | October 05, 2004 12:28 IST Nuclear power generation in the country is going to get a big push with the government planning to raise the target for 2020 at 20,000 MW. For this, it is looking at using recycled fuel and involving the private sector. The installed capacity for nuclear power is 2,720 MW at present, and is expected to increase to 6,780 MW by 2008. The government has a target of enhancing capacity to 10,000 MW by 2012 and 20,000 MW by 2020. The maximum potential generation at the first-stage nuclear plant with pressurised heavy water reactors using natural uranium is 10,000 MW.  The first-stage programme, currently in progress at Kalpakkam, has reached maturity. The Kalpakkam fast breeder reactor, which is expected to come up in another four years, will be a second-stage reactor, with a potential power generation capacity of 350,000 MW. The second-stage programme will use recycled fuel from the first stage, along with breeding in the fast breeder reactor cycle. The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd is looking at replicating the Kalpakkam model. In the third stage, the corporation plans to use thorium, which is available in abundant quantities in the country. The draft National Electricity Policy is expected to moot private sector participation to raise nuclear power capacity. Though the NEP would not lay out an investment route for the private sector, it could suggest joint ventures with NPCIL or setting up of privately-owned companies on the lines of independent power producers, sources said. The share of nuclear electricity in the overall power generation capacity needed to be raised significantly in order to plug the power demand-supply gap in the country, said experts. However, there is a need to evolve an economically efficient and acceptable cost-tariff structure for nuclear power, they added. Copyright © 2004 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 [DU-WATCH] MOD spoofing vets with creatinine studies .... Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 09:55:46 -0500 (CDT) What do ya' bet ... not one will have elevated U and so they will not invoke phase two and three of protocol: total uranium followed by isotope fraction counting. The selected facilities don't have mass spec equipment capable of detecting DU. They either go to Randy Parish of they perish. How will he account for the 236U in the urines. By not measuring its presence of course. The DUOB is overseeing this. How come they are not speaking out? http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004- 09/27/content_378096.htm http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1311683,00.html Black Hanger, CO ...anyone know about this place. I used to live in Coal Creek Canyon but never heard of "Black Hanger" http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_32 12280,00.html ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/Sj.0lB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 24 Hurricane Valley Journal: Radioactive Fallout Myths, Fears and Disinformation Blown Away: Tuesday, October 5th, 2004 Vol. 8 , No. 9 , October 06, 2004 Bruce W. Church and Dr. Antone L. Brooks educate the public about the effects of radioactive fallout in southern Utah By: Newell Frandsen “Two local boys,” as they describe themselves, recently gave a public information seminar at Dixie State College. Dr. Antone L. “Tony” Brooks (the biology guy), and Bruce W. Church (the physics guy), presented fascinating power-point lectures on radioactive fallout that occurred in southern Utah and the effects of exposure to ionizing radiation.     Both Church and Brooks have strings of degrees and credentials that follow their names like a long freight train. They have been consultants both at home and abroad and enjoy international acclaim as scientists.     Both grew up and went to school in the Dixie area and are good friends who have worked on research projects together.     Dr. Tony Brooks’ area of expertise is in induced cancer with chromosome changes and health effects of internally deposited radioactive materials and radiation. Bruce Church’s specialty has been in the measuring and distribution of radioactivity in the environment and radiological remedial actions.     Brooks and Church gave their lectures on their own initiative and were not sponsored by anyone. The purpose of the lectures was to dispel fears, to contest myths and to correct misinformation. Many residents have had concerns about the lingering effects of contamination due to the atomic bomb tests that were conducted in the Nevada desert from 1951 through 1958. Nearly 1,000 tests were conducted: 900 were underground detonation, and 100 were above ground.     After the testing was discontinued (moratorium), Church and Brooks traveled the state of Utah collecting samples of soil, water, vegetation and food products to determine the levels of radiation in them. The two scientists also got in some huntin’ and fishin’ while in the Uintas, smiled Church. Mountains of charts, tables and graphs were compiled as a result of their careful and extensive research. All the data collected is available for anyone to see and has not been hidden, as some think, by the federal government.     “It is important to understand that radiation is both energy and particulate matter,” said Church. “I’m an old dairyman. When you go out to the corral and you can smell it—that’s the radiation. When you get inside the corral and you step in it—that’s contamination.”     Many interesting facts and concepts emerged from the data that was accumulated.     Studies done by the United Nations in Iran, Brazil, India and China, where large populations live right on top of naturally occurring monazite sands (highly radioactive and far above the levels of every other place in the world), show that there is some chromosome breakage, but with no statistically significant cancer effects on the population. The levels of radiation proved to be significantly higher than were measured in southern Utah.     Everyone in the world has been and is being exposed to radiation in one form or another. Background radiation is present everywhere, i.e. solar, microwave, TV, medical treatment, cell phones, etc.     Radiation is a poor mutagen (cell mutations are rare) and a very poor carcinogen (radiation is not good at causing cancer). However, intense radiation kills cancer cells (it’s good for medical treatment). Brooks emphasized these concepts several times.     According to Brooks and Church, detonations in the Nevada desert were low yield. Of the 225 various fissionable products or fragments, most had degraded and become inert due to the short half-lives of the radioactive materials involved. Transit times, i.e. the amount of time required from detonation until the wind carried radioactive material to Washington County, were on the order of four hours. After four hours, most of the material had degraded.     Getting cancer depends a great deal on age and whether a person is individually susceptible. If a person lives to be 100, the odds are 90-100% that the person will have cancer. He may not die of cancer, but it will be present in the body. Each individual is variable in the diseases to which he or she is susceptible.     Lifestyle is an extremely important determinant whether one gets cancer or not. Clean living, nutritious food with antioxidants, and exercise and low stress will greatly reduce the risk of getting cancer. The uranium miner who smokes and drinks will almost certainly die of cancer.     Humans are marvelously adaptable at the cellular level. If a cell dies due to radiation exposure, surrounding cells (Bystander Effect) will pick up the slack, rearrange, carry out the damaged cells and repair tissue.     Radioactive poisoning, or any other kind of poisoning, is in the size of the dose. Taking one aspirin per day will probably not hurt most people. Taking a whole bottle of aspirin at one time will poison you; likewise, with radioactive poisoning. Small amounts of radiation over a period of time are usually harmless. Intense instant doses can kill. Think Chernobyl or Hiroshima.     Yes, there were moderate to low levels of radiation in the samples taken from the various areas in Utah. In spite of the number of exposures to people here, the death rate due to cancer in the state of Utah is one of the lowest in the nation. That includes Washington County. After years of research and analyzing a lot of data, the big questions were: Was the radiation doing anything? Was there an epidemic of cancer-related diseases due to atomic testing? The answers were no. Do we need to be concerned? The answer still is no. Still don’t believe it? All the data collected from a lifetime of study by two straight shooters, with the help of the government, is archived at 755 East Flamingo Blvd. in Las Vegas. A great deal of information can also be obtained from Internet Websites. The presentation was laced with humor and anecdotes, but they told it like it was, and is. Videos of the presentation are available from Dixie State College. © Copyright 2004, [http://www.hvjournal.com] and ***************************************************************** 25 Hawk Eye: IAAP worker comp bill debate set Monday, October 4, 2004 House conferees to debate moving program from Energy to Labor department; no Iowa members on panel. By MATTHEW LeBLANC mleblanc@thehawkeye.com U.S. House Armed Services Committee members will begin debating next month whether to leave in the 2005 defense authorization bill an amendment aimed at overhauling a complicated workers' compensation program for ailing nuclear weapons workers. The amendment, sponsored by Kentucky Sen. Jim Bunning, would move control of claims filed under the program from the Department of Energy to the Labor Department, where proponents say the claims process would speed up and help ensure timely payments to thousands of former ordnance workers nationwide. A Senate committee agreed in June to leave the amendment in its version of the $417.5 billion bill. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R–Ill., named 30 conferees — 17 Republicans and 13 Democrats — to a committee last week that will debate in November whether to leave the measure in the bill. The committee will take up the issue after Congress recesses Friday for the Nov. 2 election. "We'll keep working," said Beth Pellett–Levine, a spokeswoman for Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, who has led a charge by several senators to overhaul the compensation program. Critics of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program contend that an arduous and expensive claims process can be alleviated by wresting control from DOE officials. Bunning, R–Ky., said last month that Energy has processed only two of more than 24,000 claims filed under the program, despite funding exceeding $95 million. The Bush administration announced opposition to any change in the program in a statement issued earlier this year, though a bipartisan group of senators agreed to the change in June, drawing cheers from Grassley, a Republican and Iowa Democrat Sen. Tom Harkin. The White House has declined comment on the issue, though the statement said changes would result in the program becoming "unworkable." News reports since the decision have indicated that Republicans assigned to the House committee seem likely to eschew politics and pass the bill with the Bunning amendment intact. Rep. Heather Wilson, R–N.M., told Congressional Quarterly in September that she felt the committee would agree to the change. "There's been some back and forth going on," Pellett–Levine said last week, referring to negotiations, but added: "It doesn't seem like there will be any problems with (moving claims to the Labor Department)." A move to the labor department would affect more than 1,000 former Iowa Army Ammunition Plant workers who have filed claims under the compensation program, which is jointly run by Labor and Energy officials. Workers at the Middletown plant assembled, test–fired and disassembled components of nuclear weapons during the Cold War, leading to cancers and lung diseases in many of the workers. Congress passed EEOICP in 2000, though few workers in Iowa have been paid under the program. Energy officials have largely been to blame for a lack of accountability in processing claims, according to Grassley and Harkin, who have called the program "broken" in speeches to the Senate. While a move to the Labor Department does not ensure payment to the former weapons workers, it does represent a significant step toward payment, supporters say. Among the 30 representatives chosen for the committee that will debate the change, there are none from Iowa and only five from states that will be directly affected by a move to the Labor Department. A majority of the workers affected by the change live in so–called battleground states sought by President Bush and Democrat John Kerry in the upcoming presidential election — Iowa, New Mexico, Ohio, Missouri and Washington. An effort also is under way to secure IAAP workers in a "special exposure cohort" that would virtually ensure payment to any ammunition plant worker able to prove they worked in a hazardous area of the plant during the Cold War. That effort, supported by Harkin, has yet to receive approval from Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. For a list of the House conferees, go to www.house.gov/hasc–/pressreleases/2004/28Sept–Conferees.htm The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · [webmaster@thehawkeye.com] ***************************************************************** 26 Las Vegas SUN: Kerry would use budget, Cabinet influence to kill Yucca Mountain Today: October 05, 2004 at 15:58:39 PDT ASSOCIATED PRESS RENO, Nev. (AP) - Democrat John Kerry said if he is elected president he will refuse to fund efforts crucial to the construction of Yucca Mountain to keep the nation's nuclear waste dump from being built in Nevada. "I'll guarantee you, if I'm president, Yucca Mountain is not going to happen," Kerry said Tuesday. "Nevada can take that to the bank," he told KRNV-TV in Reno on Tuesday in a satellite hookup from Tipton, Iowa. "I don't think it is safe." Kerry repeatedly has pledged to kill the high-level radioactive waste repository planned 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, but Republicans argue he's powerless to do anything about it and that the federal courts ultimately will decide the fate of the project. "I have any number of ways to keep it from happening," Kerry insisted Tuesday from Iowa where he was campaigning. "First of all, in my budget, by not funding the things necessary to make it happen, that is a good place to start," he said. In addition, the Department of Transportation, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Agency have to approve various health and safety standards for the dump to be built, he said. "Since I will make those appointments and I will be the president, I have the ability to guarantee those signoffs don't occur," he said. Kerry, who repeated his pledge to visit Reno before Election Day, said scientific studies have raised serious concerns about the safety of Yucca Mountain. "It is too bad they have been raised late. I know money has been spent. But that doesn't mean you go do something that doesn't make sense. I don't think Nevada should be made the scapegoat dumping ground and I don't intend to do it," he said. President Bush has defended his decision to go forward with the nuclear waste dump despite it being unpopular in the swing state he won four years ago. "I said I would make a decision based upon science, not politics," Bush told a Las Vegas crowd in August. "I said I would listen to the scientists, those involved with determining whether or not this project could move forward in a safe manner and that's exactly what I did," he said. Bush said he was pleased to "allow this process to be appealed to the courts and to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission." "I will stand by the decision of the courts and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission," the president said. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., is among those who think the federal courts will determine if Yucca Mountain will be built "regardless of who is the president," Ensign's spokesman Jack Finn said recently. "John Kerry says `If I'm president, there will be no repository.' He can't make that statement. Nevadans should not believe him," Finn said. -- ***************************************************************** 27 Las Vegas SUN: Audit: Government lost $458,000 giving away Yucca Mountain items Today: October 05, 2004 at 8:38:30 PDT ASSOCIATED PRESS Audit: Government lost $458,000 giving away Yucca Mountain items LAS VEGAS (AP) - The federal Energy Department lost $458,000 in 2003 giving away equipment it deemed no longer needed for a financially strapped national nuclear waste dump in Nevada, auditors said. A never-used conveyer belt feeder and a generator listed as new were among 1,300 items with a potential value of $1.75 million turned over to a contractor for disposal, according to a report made public Monday by the Energy Department inspector general in Washington, D.C. The Sept. 27 report blamed the Energy Department for "poor property management practices" when it rid itself of excess inventory after completing site studies for the proposed Yucca Mountain national nuclear waste repository, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. It said the material could have been auctioned or offered to other federal agencies. Items included a refurbished $792,000 rock-boring machine called a roadheader that the contractor advertised for sale as being "in very good condition with only 165 hours of use." A department spokesman identified the contractor as Toxco Inc., a metals recycling company in Oak Ridge, Tenn. John Arthur, Yucca Mountain project deputy director, defended the giveaway as the most cost-effective way to get rid of the material. He said some items had been shipped to Nevada when the Energy Department abandoned repository studies in Texas and Washington state in 1987. The equipment had little value after "years of nonuse and harsh exposure to the desert environment," Arthur said. Auditors said the Energy Department paid $73,000 to dispose of the material and "lost the potential to recover funds that could have been used to satisfy pressing mission needs." They said two diagnostics trailers that belonged to the National Nuclear Security Administration for use at the Nevada Test Site were turned over mistakenly for disposal. A drilling rig was sold after test site manager Bechtel Nevada requested it for transfer. The report comes with the Energy Department scrambling for funds to keep plans on track to open the repository in 2010. The plan is to entomb 77,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste now stored at reactors in 39 states. Critics said the report highlighted Yucca Mountain management problems. "You've heard the phrase 'waste, fraud and abuse.' Now you can add mismanagement to that," said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. "We're not talking about chump change; this is a half-million dollars." Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., was researching ways for Congress to force the Energy Department to repay $458,000 to taxpayers, spokeswoman Amy Spanbauer said. Arthur said the material that had value was limited because of its age, remote location and lack of maintenance records. He said disposal rules would have required radiological contamination surveys at more than $250 per metric ton. "Since there was 9,000 metric tons of property, these radiological release surveys would have cost the program over a million dollars, which exceeded any estimated value of the property," he said. Auditors said the disposal contractor identified five contaminated items out of 1,300 turned over for disposal. Inspectors said 70 percent of the equipment was less than 10 years old and still had value. They called the department's financial estimates unreliable because of failure to inventory the age and condition of the equipment. "The financial advantage of disposing of excess property was shifted, essentially in its entirety, from the government to the disposal contractor," auditors said. --- Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com [http://www.lvrj.com] -- ***************************************************************** 28 Las Vegas RJ: Agency lost money on equipment, audit says Tuesday, October 05, 2004 By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Department of Energy in 2003 gave away 1,300 pieces of equipment no longer needed at Yucca Mountain, including a refurbished rock-boring machine and thousands of tons of iron and steel that could have raised more than $450,000 for the financially strapped nuclear waste project, federal auditors said. A conveyer belt feeder that was never used and a generator listed as new were among the items turned over to a disposal contractor rather than sold at auction or offered to other federal agencies through normal procedures. A refurbished rock-boring machine called a roadheader valued at $792,000 was put up for sale on the Internet by the contractor, who advertised it as being "in very good condition with only 165 hours of use." Disposal of property estimated to carry a potential value of $1.75 million was detailed in a Sept. 27 report by the Energy Department inspector general that was made public Monday. Auditors estimated the department lost $458,000 from "poor property management practices" when it rid itself of excess inventory after completing site studies for the proposed nuclear waste repository. The department gave the contractor about 9,000 metric tons of property, "and the government received no monetary benefit from the sale of potentially reusable property," auditors said. "With the uneconomic disposal of Yucca Mountain property, the department lost the potential to recover funds that could have been used to satisfy pressing mission needs," they said. Auditors said two diagnostics trailers that belonged to the National Nuclear Security Administration for use at the Nevada Test Site were turned over mistakenly for disposal. And a drilling rig was sold after test site manager Bechtel Nevada requested it for transfer. The report comes as the Energy Department is scrambling to avoid financial shortfalls that could cripple the Yucca Mountain Project. Responding to the audit, DOE officials said they were revising their property management. But they defended their actions as the most cost-effective way to dispose of material they said had little value. The property included 4,580 tons of scrap metal, plus fencing, piping, drill rigs and other heavy equipment, mining tools, water tanks and other industrial material that was stored in equipment yards and remote locations on the Yucca site, a DOE official said. Critics said the report highlighted management problems in the Yucca Mountain Project. "You've heard the phrase 'waste, fraud and abuse.' Now you can add mismanagement to that," said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. "We're not talking about chump change; this is a half-million dollars." Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., is researching ways that Congress could force DOE to repay $458,000 to taxpayers, spokeswoman Amy Spanbauer said. "Such disregard for the American taxpayer is simply unacceptable and indefensible," Gibbons said in a statement. Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said the department "has wasted U.S. tax dollars." Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said the report "highlights the ongoing mismanagement of the Yucca Mountain Project and is further evidence the project is misguided and unmanageable." Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said, "I can assure you that the half-million (dollars) is just the tip of the iceberg. The more auditors probe they will find millions and millions in waste." Government rules require offering excess equipment to other federal agencies or selling it at auction. But auditors said DOE paid $73,000 to a contractor to dispose of the material. A DOE spokesman identified the contractor as Toxco Inc., a metals recycling company in Oak Ridge, Tenn. Responding to the audit, John Arthur, the Yucca project's deputy director, said the department chose the most cost-effective method to get rid of the material. He said some of it had been sitting around after being shipped to Nevada when DOE abandoned repository studies in Texas and Washington state in 1987. The equipment had little value after "years of nonuse and harsh exposure to the desert environment," Arthur said. The material that did have value was limited because of its age, remote location and lack of maintenance records, he said. But inspectors said they found that 70 percent of the equipment was less than 10 years old and still had value. The department's financial estimates were unreliable because of failure to inventory the age and condition of the equipment, they said. "The financial advantage of disposing of excess property was shifted, essentially in its entirety, from the government to the disposal contractor," auditors said. Arthur said disposal rules would have required the equipment to have been surveyed for possible radiological contamination at a cost of more than $250 per metric ton. "Since there was 9,000 metric tons of property, these radiological release surveys would have cost the program over a million dollars, which exceeded any estimated value of the property," he said. Auditors said the disposal contractor identified five items that were contaminated out of 1,300 turned over for disposal. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 29 BBC: Protests target nuclear shipment Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 October, 2004 [French police drag away Greenpeace protesters as they try to block a road to a nuclear reprocessing plant] It took police two hours to remove the protesters Demonstrators have been staging further protests in France ahead of the expected arrival of a shipment of weapons-grade plutonium from the US. Several Greenpeace members chained themselves to a truck to block the road out of the port of Cherbourg before police moved in to drag them away. Activists say the transport of such material is vulnerable to attack. The companies involved reject this and say the protesters' actions are just "media-seeking gestures." Risks disputed Two heavily-armed British-registered vessels left the US last month carrying 140kg of plutonium to France, where it is to be converted into nuclear fuel rods. The ships are expected to arrive in Cherbourg on Tuesday night but the authorities have kept the docking date and time a secret, citing security reasons. We don't understand how organisation that has always been against nuclear weapons proliferation could wage a protest against an operation aimed at curtailing that same proliferation Cogema spokeswoman The plutonium is to be taken to a reprocessing plant at La Hague 18km (12 miles) from Cherbourg before being driven nearly 1,000km (660 miles) to south-east France for recycling at two facilities run by the Areva-Cogema company. In the latest protest, Greenpeace members chained themselves to a truck to try to block the road from the port to La Hague. Police and firefighters took two hours to cut loose about a dozen protesters who were attached under and inside the vehicle. Greenpeace says four of its activists were detained. The environmental organisation argues that the long distances of road transport pose a big risk. "A rocket-propelled grenade could go through those trucks so easily and expose plutonium around this area," Greenpeace activist Thomas Breuer said. But Cogema spokeswoman Laurence Pernot said the aim was to make the plutonium safe. "We don't understand how an organisation that has always been against nuclear weapons proliferation could wage a protest against an operation aimed at curtailing that same proliferation," she said. Civilian use The plutonium shipment is part of an agreement between the US and Russia to destroy plutonium from excess nuclear warheads. Cogema will process the material and convert it into mixed oxide nuclear fuel (MOX), which will then be shipped back to the US for civilian use. The US Department of Energy says the plutonium has to be shipped overseas because there is not a plant capable of the conversion process in the US. In a separate incident, a truck carrying 4.5 tonnes of enriched uranium was hit from behind by another truck near the French city of Orleans, AFP news agency reported. "The load of radioactive material was not damaged," the regional authorities said. ***************************************************************** 30 NRC: Public Meeting Oct. 14 in Eunice, N.M., to Discuss Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Uranium Plant News Release - 2004-12 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-124 October 4, 2004 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public meeting Oct. 14 in Eunice, N.M., to discuss the draft findings of an environmental impact statement for a proposed uranium enrichment plant that may be built in Lea County. The meeting will be held from 7 - 10 p.m. at the Eunice Community Center, 1115 Avenue I. Beginning at 6 p.m., members of the NRC staff will be available to discuss the proposed project and the environmental impact statement in an informal open house format. During the formal meeting, members of the public will be invited to make comments on the draft impact statement, and their comments will be considered by the NRC staff in preparing its final report. Louisiana Energy Services (LES), a consortium of international and U.S. energy companies, submitted a license application Dec. 12, 2003, for a gas centrifuge uranium enrichment plant, to be called the National Enrichment Facility. The NRCs license review process includes two parallel studies: a safety evaluation to determine whether the proposed plant can be operated safely, and an analysis of the environmental impacts of the proposed project. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is available on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1790 /. The DEIS presents and compares potential environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project and its alternatives, and identifies mitigation measures that could eliminate or lessen these impacts. Comments on the DEIS will be accepted through Nov. 6, and should be submitted to Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Mail Stop T6-D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001. Comments may also be submitted by e-mail to nrcrep@nrc.gov [nrcrep@nrc.gov] , or by facsimile to (301) 415-5397, Attention: Anna Bradford. Please note Docket No. 70-3103" on the comments. Last revised Tuesday, October 05, 2004 ***************************************************************** 31 Island Packet Online: Yucca Mountain not 'best thing' [http://www.islandpacket.com/] HILTON HEAD ISLAND - BLUFFTON S.C. Sun, October 3, 2004 To The Packet: Your Sept. 24 editorial, "America needs cohesive plan for nuclear disposal: Communities around the nation need Yucca Mountain," correctly pointed out that the nation sorely needs a cohesive plan for disposing of nuclear waste. But you are way off the mark in asserting that "the best thing America has going is the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste disposal site in Nevada." Yucca Mountain is an unsafe and dangerous choice for a repository that must protect people and the environment for thousands of years. The site was selected solely for political reasons in spite of its obvious flaws. Moving deadly nuclear waste from existing storage locations to a site that is incapable of isolating it for the time required is just compounding the problem, passing an environmental time bomb on to future generations. The federal government has known for years that Yucca Mountain is not a suitable nuclear waste disposal site. Yet the Energy Department stubbornly has refused to face facts and admit it made a mistake. Instead of advocating for a Yucca Mountain program that's going nowhere, South Carolina and other states with nuclear waste that needs disposing should be joining Nevada in pressuring the feds to stop throwing good money and resources after bad and get on with the task of finding an acceptable and safe solution to the problem. Now that the federal courts have weighed in on the side of Nevada, the time may be ripe for such action. Joseph C. Strolin, administrator Planning Division Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects Office of the Governor Carson City, Nevada © 2004 The Island Packet | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 32 Las Vegas SUN: Report: Energy Department mismanaged Yucca property Today: October 05, 2004 at 11:15:14 PDT By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department gave away more than 1,300 pieces of property last year at Yucca Mountain that it could have sold for an estimated $458,000, a department inspector general's report said. The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management gave an unnamed disposal contractor 9,000 metric tons of excess federal property and paid the company $73,000 to get rid of it, the report said. The office has not seen any money in return, according to the report. Property included mining equipment, power generators and a drill that could have been used on site. The inspector general's office found the deal "did not maximize the recovery of the government's investment" because the government did not receive any money from the sale of reusable property. It attributed the problems to weaknesses in property management. Nevada's congressional delegation, which is against the proposed nuclear waste repository 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, blasted the Energy Department over the report. In a letter sent to key members of committees that oversee Yucca Mountain funding, Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said Congress should not allocate money for the project based on the report's discovery of poor property management. "Congress cannot allow the (office's) flagrant disregard for agency rules go unchecked," Gibbons wrote in a letter sent Monday to Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, who heads the same subcommittee in the House. He asked the lawmakers to cut funding for the office for fiscal year 2005. "It is my hope that this level of funding for the (office) will send a strong message to the Department of Energy that Congress does not take the priority of fiscal restraint and accountability lightly." The House approved $131 million for the nuclear waste storage project at Yucca, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, earlier this year. The Senate has not approved its budget and will not until after the November election. The department asked for $880 million. The department's mismanaged property included: ••• A "roadheader," which is a piece of mining equipment used for drilling tunnels, valued at $792,000 that could have brought in up to $523,000 if resold. ••• Two power centers that cost $68,000 and appreciated to $82,000 in value and and a conveyor belt feeder worth $35,000, none of which had ever been used. ••• About 4,580 tons of iron and steel, some of which was never used, valued at $737,000. The inspector general's office estimated the department could have made $29,000 selling the materials on its own. "This is just an example of the waste, fraud and mismanagement the DOE (Energy Department) has showed in working with the Yucca Mountain project," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said "The DOE is wasting money. They are either completely incompetent or so driven by arbitrary deadlines that they're doing shoddy work." Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said the report highlighted "the ongoing mismanagement of the Yucca Mountain project by the Department of Energy and is further evidence that the project is misguided and unmanageable." "Every step in the process to target Nevada as the nation's nuclear waste dumping ground has been marked by incompetence and inconsistency," Ensign said. Nevada's congressional delegation was not surprised by the report. "Once again, this is just another example of the DOE's (Energy Department's) failure to follow the rules and continued efforts to waste more money on a ill-thought scheme to bury nuclear waste in Nevada," Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said. David Cherry, spokesman to Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she will review the report "with a special eye toward the decision by Yucca Mountain officials to ignore standing policy." The report also discovered the department sold a drill it declared excessive even though site contractor Bechtel Nevada told Yucca Mountain officials it needed the drill. The department sold the drill for $67,000. Bechtel estimated a new one would cost $200,000, and it did not have enough money budgeted to buy one. The inspector general's report, dated Sept. 27, also found the department gave two diagnostic trailers that belonged to the National Nuclear Security Administration over to the contractor that were not supposed to be sold. The department used the trailers for recording weapons test data, which has nothing to do with storing nuclear waste at Yucca. "The NNSA determined that the trailers were missing when it conducted its physical inventory seven months after the disposal," the report said. The report said that normally the department would see if excess property could be used in another program or in another government agency and, if not, then auction the property to the highest bidder. "The uneconomic disposal of Yucca Mountain property occurred because normal disposition procedures -- including offering available property to other department sites -- were not followed," according to the report. "The department lost the potential to recover funds that could have been used to satisfy pressing mission needs." The inspector general's office found similar problems with property at the Nevada Test Site in March 2003 and other department sites in previous reports. ***************************************************************** 33 RGJ: Yucca agency wasted money, watchdog report concludes http://www.rgj.com/] Doug Abrahms [online@rgj.com] RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 10/5/2004 WASHINGTON — The agency overseeing the construction of a nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain gave away mining equipment and other gear that could have been sold, saving taxpayers money, according to an inspector general’s report released Monday. The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management paid a contractor $73,000 to take title to mammoth drills, generators and other equipment worth at least $385,000, the report said. According to the inspector general, the agency received no money for: * A little-used piece of equipment to drill tunnels that cost nearly $800,000. The inspector general found similar used equipment listed for sale on the Internet at up to $563,000. * Two power generators that cost $68,000 and actually increased in value. * Thousands of tons of iron and steel that could have been sold for scrap. “What a waste of money,” said U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. “Half a million dollars in most people’s lives is a lot of money.” The agency is pushing to license and build a deep tunnel to store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The project’s estimated price tag is $53 billion. Government officials hope to start accepting waste at Yucca Mountain from nuclear power plants by 2010, although many experts expect the project will be delayed several years. The agency said that most of the material it gave away was old fencing, pipes and other junk equipment that lacked value. To sell the equipment, the government would have required a radiation test because it was housed near the Nevada Test Site, where nuclear bombs were detonated in the past. Those assessments would have cost more than the value of the equipment, the agency said. Allen Benson, a spokesman for the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, said Monday the office would have no comment beyond what was included in the report. The inspector general’s office, which monitors and audits the agency and points out problems, said the agency didn’t know the quantity or value of its inventory. Besides the loss of taxpayer money from giving away the equipment, the agency might need those items again and have to buy new ones, including a drill rig, the inspector general said. “This report highlights the ongoing mismanagement of the Yucca Mountain project by the Department of Energy and is further evidence that the project is misguided and unmanageable,” said U.S. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. “Every step in the process to target Nevada as the nation’s nuclear waste dumping ground has been marked by incompetence and inconsistency.” Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 34 Taunton Gazette: Cleanup slated for toxic site Tuesday 5 October, 2004 MIKE STUCKA Gazette Staff Writer NORTON -- A strong public backlash is helping lead to a more thorough cleanup of a Norton Superfund toxic waste dump, a result summarized in a single word by one official: "Hooray." The comment by U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., came yesterday, minutes after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced its decision to adopt the SC-3B plan supported by the town of Norton, state and national legislators and neighbors of the Shpack dump. The 9-acre dump on the Norton-Attleboro line includes everything from U.S. Navy nuclear reactor uranium to the chemicals used to make plastic piping. Originally, the U.S. EPA and the state’s Department of Environmental Protection favored a lesser plan, called SC-2B, that would have bulldozed and capped concentrations of heavy metals, volatile organic compounds and some other pollutants. Under the decision announced yesterday, those materials will be removed with the site’s radioactive debris, PCBs and dioxin. Heather Graf, who coordinated the Citizens Advisory Shpack Team, said the EPA had done the right thing. "I’m satisfied. We felt that the SC-3B alternative was a fair compromise for an acceptable cleanup at a reasonable cost," Graf said. "It was the only acceptable alternative for the town, for the area. I have to get in there that the credit goes to our congressman, Barney Frank, and also his aide, Garth Patterson in the Taunton office, who were in the trenches with us." Frank said he had not been optimistic about the outcome but now sees the decision as a textbook way of handling those kinds of cases. He said he had called EPA administrators to offer his thanks. Frank said he actively got involved about 10 years ago in the case, and had amended federal legislation that put the U.S. Corps of Engineers in charge of cleaning up the radioactive debris. Federal involvement goes back more than two decades. One study from 1981 joins several shelves of other Shpack material at the Norton Public Library. Dave Lederer, the remedial project manager for the EPA, said several factors were involved in the agency’s support for SC-3B instead of SC-2B. "Obviously the community’s input was pretty important," Lederer said. "We were able also to work with our consultant to identify an alternate disposal facility for significantly less money than our original cost estimate." The revised estimate puts the cost at $43 million instead of $55.6 million. The lesser plan was estimated at about $28.1 million. Lederer said the proposal pointed out that the improved cleanup had more permanence. Bob Kimball, chairman of Norton’s Board of Selectmen, said the decision will benefit the region. "We’re thrilled that the EPA and the Corps of Engineers will work with us to get the cleanup to a stage we’ll all be comfortable with," Kimball said. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said in a statement that work could begin soon. "We anticipate starting work on the radiological portion of the cleanup by spring 2005 and completing it by summer 2006," Corps New England District Engineer Col. Thomas Koning said. The cost of the Corps’ work on radioactive debris was not estimated in the statement. The work of cleaning up the chemically polluted materials would be born by a group of companies known as Potentially Responsible Parties that may have contributed to the pollution. The EPA will now try to get a consent order from the PRPs. Lederer said he hoped and expected the cost of the EPA’s cleanup would be born by the PRPs, which have the "wherewithal" to fund the effort. Monday’s "record of decision" also clears the way for the Corps to begin its share of the cleanup. The record of decision -- some 140 pages, plus additional comments -- will likely be online in a matter of days at tinyurl.com/45alo or www.epa.gov/ne/superfund/sites/shpack. The Shpack site on Union Road includes wetlands and is close to Chartley Pond. Yesterday’s decision calls for about 35,000 cubic yards of material to be removed. ©The Taunton Gazette 2004 ***************************************************************** 35 NRC: General Electric Company, Morris Operation; Notice of Docketing FR Doc 04-22313 [Federal Register: October 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 192)] [Notices] [Page 59619-59620] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05oc04-92] of the Materials License SNM-2500 Amendment Application for the Morris Operation Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. [[Page 59620]] ACTION: License amendment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-1179; fax number: (301) 415-1179; e-mail: cmr1@nrc.gov [cmr1@nrc.gov] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter dated July 30, 2004, as supplemented August 13, 2004, General Electric Company submitted an application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission), in accordance with 10 CFR part 72, requesting the amendment of the General Electric--Morris Operation (GEMO) independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) Materials License SNM-2500 and the associated Technical Specifications (TS) for the GEMO ISFSI located in Grundy County, Illinois. The amendment application requests changes to the GEMO Consolidated Safety Analysis Report to reflect the current condition of the fuel stored and only that equipment necessary for its safe storage. The major changes proposed include revisions to information regarding the spent fuel inventory, deletion of the requirement for ventilation exhaust vacuum, deletion of the requirement to have certain instrumentation operative for equipment that is no longer in service, a change in the methods to verify pool water quality, revision to the description of the company organization, and removal of ``receipt'' from the license which effectively will not permit the GEMO facility to accept shipment of any additional spent fuel. Commensurate changes to the Technical Specifications to reflect these revisions are also proposed. This application supersedes in its entirety, General Electric's amendment 10 application dated April 30, 1998, and amendment 11 application dated August 13, 2001. Amendment requests 10 and 11 were withdrawn by GEMO by letter dated March 1, 2004. This application was docketed under 10 CFR part 72; the GEMO ISFSI Docket No. 72-1. The amendment of an ISFSI license is subject to the Commission's approval. The Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, or his designee, will determine if the amendment presents a genuine issue as to whether public health and safety will be significantly affected and may issue either a notice of a hearing or a notice of proposed action and opportunity for a hearing in accordance with 10 CFR 72.46(b)(1) or take immediate action on the amendment in accordance with 10 CFR 72.46(b)(2). In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of NRC's ``Rules of Practice,'' final NRC records and documents regarding this proposed action, including the application for license amendment dated July 30, 2004, as supplemented August 13, 2004, and supporting documentation, are publically available in the records component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). These documents may be inspected at NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] under Accession Nos. ML042180412 and ML042250233. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28 day of September 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 04-22313 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 36 T: Auditors find some Oak Ridge workers reimbursed for unaccredited coursework - Tuesday, 10/05/04 [http://tennessean.com By DUNCAN MANSFIELD Associated Press OAK RIDGE — Federal auditors have found that 10 contractor employees at the government's Oak Ridge weapons and research complex and Hanford nuclear reservation were reimbursed for tuition for coursework at unaccredited schools. At least some of the courses were at the doctoral level and keyed to engineering safety and homeland security, according to a report from the Department of Energy's inspector general. The review followed the Government Accountability Office's report to Congress in May that at least 28 high-level federal employees had degrees from bogus colleges. DOE's inspector general found that five employees at Oak Ridge and five at DOE's Hanford reservation in Richland, Wash., were reimbursed $34,000 for coursework at unaccredited schools. The auditors sampled 221 employees at Oak Ridge and 318 employees at Hanford who received tuition reimbursements between 2001 and 2003. ''By not ensuring that tuition reimbursements were made for course work at institutions that provide meaningful training, the department expended funds that may not have provided any benefit to its mission,'' the inspector general wrote. ''And it risked placing and compensating individuals in potentially sensitive positions for which they were not qualified.'' One Oak Ridge worker received $4,600 for course work toward a doctorate in safety engineering. Another collected $4,400 for classes toward an engineering doctorate focused on homeland security technologies. The classes were offered by Kennedy-Western University, which denies it is a diploma mill. The Wyoming university reportedly has an array of online degrees and nearly 9,000 students, but lacks accreditation from the Distance Education and Learning Program. The inspector general said the school uses an unconventional approach that ''promotes the award of academic credentials based on life experience and does not require any classroom instruction.'' The Oak Ridge National Laboratory has now removed Kennedy-Western from its list of approved schools for educational assistance. BWXT, DOE's managing contractor for the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge, said it had previously reviewed and approved the Kennedy-Western coursework and curriculum. ''We do not believe that Kennedy-Western is a diploma mill school,'' wrote Michael Kane, associate administrator at DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees Y-12. ''However, until such time as Kennedy-Western receives accreditation, ... BWXT will permit no new students to enter the program.'' Oak Ridge lab officials noted that ''completion of educational courses or degrees would not lead directly to salary increases or promotions,'' and would be one of many factors in those decisions. TOP | HOME [http://www.tennessean.com/] | LOCAL NEWS ***************************************************************** 37 lamonitor.com: Fired lab employee files suit The Online News Source for Los Alamos [http://www.lac-nm.us] ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com [roger@lamonitor.com] , Monitor Assistant Editor A former employee of Los Alamos National Laboratory has filed a civil suit against the University of California and several laboratory officials. David Lee of Los Alamos is the plaintiff in a complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Albuquerque that contends the laboratory improperly fired him in November 2002 and that officials of the laboratory continued to harm his reputation since then. A spokesman for the laboratory acknowledged that a copy of copy of the filing had been received last week.. "By now the lawsuit has been assigned to an in-house legal counsel," said Kevin Roark of the Public Affairs Office on Thursday. "It's a long-standing policy that the laboratory does not comment specifically on pending litigation." The case seeks compensation, including back pay and damages, as well as a public hearing to clear Lee's name. Speaking by telephone in Albuquerque, Lee's lawyer, Herbert Silverberg said, "David Lee is a highly respected professional at Los Alamos. There are numerous witnesses that are convinced that this termination is inappropriate and we expect to demonstrate this as the proceedings unfold." Rehired by the Department of Energy's Los Alamos Site Office in July 2004, Lee's complaint alleged that that mistreatment leveled against him as a lab employee has continued, and that some of those responsible for his dismissal have expressed concerns to LANL managers that "he would use his DOE-derived powers to exercise unfairly demanding oversight of his former colleagues." Top laboratory officials, the suit alleges, conspired to damage his reputation further by sending a highly derogatory memorandum to DOE. "Under these circumstances," the document states, "Plaintiff is subjected to day-in-day-out stigmatization and emotional distress ...due to job insecurity in the face of Defendants' effort to have DOE remove him." Defendants, who are sued in both their individuals and official capacities, include the lab's director, acting deputy director, and Health, Safety, and Radiation Protection Division leader, plus the group leader of the Radiation Protection Service group, and three other laboratory employees. If he is successful, the laboratory would have to provide a facility and allow laboratory employees time to go hear Lee receive a public apology, or whatever remedy the court provides. The outline of the case, as summarized in the initial complaint suggests an aggravated case of office politics, involving jealousies, grudges and reprisals. Lee began working at the laboratory in 1993 as a technical staff member and the document attests that his official evaluations were consistently above average. On May 20, 2002, after a series of events having to do with Lee's supervision of an employee, Lee was placed on investigative leave. Then in August, he was suspended for three weeks, demoted and formally reprimanded for actions that his complaint denies. After the suspension expired, he remained on investigative leave until he was terminated in November. Lee has requested a trial by jury. A trial date, barring a settlement of the complaint, would normally be set in 6-9 months. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 38 AFPS: Interagency team checking for H-Bomb lost in 1958 Air Force officials said there has never been a danger of a nuclear explosion from the weapon because the bomb has no arming capsul"> + by Jim Garamone American Forces Press Service 10/5/2004 - WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- A team of experts is looking into whether a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel may have located a hydrogen bomb missing off the coast of Georgia since 1958. Air Force officials said there has never been a danger of a nuclear explosion from the weapon because the bomb has no arming capsule. The 20-person team came from the Air Force, Navy, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, national laboratories and Department of Energy. The team took water and soil samples at the site where retired Lt. Col. Derek Duke believes the bomb may have landed. The Air Force lost the bomb following a midair collision between a B-47 Stratojet and an F-86 Sabre. The bomber was severely damaged, and the pilot was worried that if he tried to land with the bomb aboard, the 400 pounds of conventional explosives aboard might detonate. He requested permission to jettison the bomb. Controllers gave the pilot permission, and he dropped the weapon in Wassaw Sound near Tybee Island. The sound is shallow, and the 7,500-pound weapon may have burrowed as much as 15 feet into the mud. After 10 weeks of searching, Air Force officials listed the bomb as "irretrievable." For the last five years, Colonel Duke has been searching the sound for the weapon. He detected unusual radiation readings in an area and notified authorities. On Sept. 29, the interagency team went to Savannah, Ga., and met with Colonel Duke and his team. Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Frank Smolinsky said the talks were constructive and that Colonel Duke’s team shared all the information -- and the way it had gathered the information -- with the interagency team. On Sept. 30, the team took four boats out to the area where Colonel Duke believes the weapon may lie and took water and soil samples. The samples will go to national laboratories for testing. Colonel Smolinsky said he could not say when testing will end, "but it will be several weeks at a minimum." If tests determine the bomb may be in the area, then Air Force officials, in consultation with local, state and federal officials, will decide what to do next. There is no danger of a nuclear detonation, but the conventional explosives that are a part of the bomb may be unstable, officials said. ***************************************************************** 39 Daily Texan: University's Los Alamos bid on track - [http://www.dailytexanonline.com] Top Stories | 10/5/2004 New laboratory guidelines won't hinder UT's plans By David Kassabian A guide released last week specifying what must be included in any potential bid to manage Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory will not play a significant part in The University of Texas System's decision to manage the weapons lab, said Randa Safady, vice chancellor of external relations for the UT System. The National Nuclear Security Administration Formal Acquisition Plan requires the new lab manager to re-hire all existing employees with the exception of senior management, sets the initial contract length at five years and sets the estimated budget at $2.1 billion per year, which is $100 million less than the current lab budget. Statements of the plan's objectives for Los Alamos, a timetable for final bidding on the lab and a clause giving the Secretary of Energy the authority to remove any contractor personnel breaking clauses in the contract are also included. "The plan really hasn't been reviewed yet," Safady said. "It doesn't have a tremendous amount of impact on us." All of the details found in last week's report will be considered, Safady said, but the document hasn't made the System any more or less likely to bid on running the lab. She added the formal request for proposal document will be what the System bases any plans off of. No official review of the plan has occurred, Safady said, and the Board of Regents has not considered its specifics. "The acquisition plan is an early step. This contract is an important contract, and it is something we want to take our time in preparing, because we want to make sure it's done right," said NNSA spokesman Bryan Wilkes. "It's not the official request for proposals - it's not part of that formalized contractual process - but it's basically to help lay the groundwork for those preparing bids." Although the acquisition plan is not a binding contract, it does represent the key requirements that must be met by each bidder to be eligible for the award. "The LANL contract will require the contractor to conduct all work in a manner that will protect the environment and assure the safety and health of employees and the public," the plan states. Any group awarded the contract will be required to implement various management, security, academic and maintenance programs, both found in the plan and in the anticipated request for proposal, which is scheduled to be released mid-October. Los Alamos is owned by the Department of Energy, but has been managed by the University of California System since 1943. It was also the site of the development for the first atomic bomb. In April 2003, the department put the management of the lab up for bid for the first time in its history due to a series of security lapses. The NNSA, a division of the Department of Energy, is expected to ask for management proposals by the end of the year. Officials from the University of California System did not return phone calls Monday. Los Alamos National Laboratory Bidding Process + Groups interested in competing for the contract had an opportunity in July to formally express interest. + The National Nuclear Security Administration, the government agency in charge of awarding the contract, is expected to ask for a complete draft request for proposals for the contract in mid-October. + After the request, NNSA waits 30 days for comment and will then interview bidders. + The NNSA will release a final request for proposals and conduct a subsequent 60-day development period in time to award the contract by July 1, 2005, for a three-month transition period. + The winning contractor will undertake complete operation of the lab by Oct. 1, 2005. Source: NNSA Formal Aquisition Plan for Project/Procurement ***************************************************************** 40 DOE: Computer Software Available for License FR Doc 04-22357 [Federal Register: October 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 192)] [Notices] [Page 59584-59585] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05oc04-39] AGENCY: Office of General Counsel, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of computer software available for license. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy announces that the following computer software is available for license: ``MASTER'' (Mathematical Software for Teaching, Education, and Research). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John T. Lucas, Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585; Telephone (202) 586-2802. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The above-captioned computer software was developed under the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC) project 1478.2. The software is used to solve physical problems by means of computer simulation. It is capable of simulating the following non-stationary processes in one-dimensional approximation: gas, fluid, and solid matter movement under gradients of [[Page 59585]] pressure, temperature, or energy release; propagation of shock, detonation, and sound waves in continuous and porous substances; destruction and spallation; heat transfer; and magneto hydrodynamics. The software is meant for undergraduates, post graduates, teachers, and researchers. It can be a supplement to courses on continuum mechanics and condensed matter physics. It can exhibit examples of classical problems, illustrate features of physical process, conduct qualitative and quantitative assessments of a phenomenon under study, and solve applied tasks. The software currently may be in need of revision, and the Department is looking for one or more private-sector parties who will revise and maintain the software at their own expense. The private sector party or parties will have the right to market the software to non-Government parties. The Government will retain an unlimited, royalty free, non-exclusive license in the original version of the software for Govern mental purposes. Parties will be given 45 calendar days from the date of this Notice to contact the Department. After the period for response has elapsed, respondents will be sent a series of questions on their plans for revising, maintaining, and commercializing the software and under what terms they would make it available to the Government. DOE will then decide which party or parties to select. Issued in Washington, DC, on September 29, 2004. Paul A. Gottlieb, Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property. [FR Doc. 04-22357 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 41 DOE: Computer Software Available for License FR Doc 04-22358 [Federal Register: October 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 192)] [Notices] [Page 59585] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05oc04-40] AGENCY: Office of General Counsel, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of computer software available for license. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy announces that the following computer software is available for license: ``Thermal Safety Software'' or TSS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John T. Lucas, Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585; Telephone (202) 586-2802. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The above-captioned computer software was developed under the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC) project 1498. The system, called ``Thermal Safety Software'' or TSS, is designed to address the complex problems associated with performing reactive hazard assessment (RHA) of chemical processes. This is achieved by extensive use of mathematical models and computational methods implemented in the software set. TSS application can significantly improve reliability of results, speed up the design, research, and development work and reduce its cost. TSS has the following general features: (1) Sequential simulation as the approach to reactive hazard assessment; (2) combination of powerful numerical methods and researcher's skills; (3) up-to-date numerical methods and web-based technologies; (4) integration of the software suite in one system; (5) a unified user-friendly interface; (6) advanced graphics; and (7) an advanced training system. The software currently may be in need of revision, and the Department is looking for one or more private-sector parties who will revise and maintain the software at their own expense. The private sector party or parties will have the right to market the software to non-Government parties. The Government will retain an unlimited, royalty free, non-exclusive license in the original version of the software for Governmental purposes. Parties will be given 45 calendar days from the date of this Notice to contact the Department. After the period for response has elapsed, respondents will be sent a series of questions on their plans for revising, maintaining and commercializing the software, and under what terms they would make it available to the Government. DOE will then decide which party or parties to select. Issued in Washington, DC, on September 29, 2004. Paul A. Gottlieb, Assistant General Counsel for Technology, Transfer and Intellectual Property. [FR Doc. 04-22358 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************