*****************************************************************
04/01/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.74
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 US: toledoblade.com: Nuclear fuel cycle is low in emissions
NUCLEAR REACTORS
2 IPS-English ENVIRONMENT: French Finally Confront Chernobyl
3 US: York Dispatch: PEACH BOTTOM: Report cites gains
4 Bellona: Nuclear clean-up works at the Russian navy sites can take 2
5 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collecti
6 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collecti
7 US: NRC: Notice of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Signif
8 US: NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Vogtle Electric
9 US: NRC: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Withdrawal
10 US: NRC: Sacramento Municipal Utility District Issuance of Environme
NUCLEAR SECURITY
11 UN Committee Adopts Draft Treaty Against Nuclear Terrorism
12 IPS-English DISARMAMENT: U.N. Goes After Nuclear Terrorists
13 FT.com: Pakistan will hand nuclear parts to IAEA
14 Bellona: UK agreement to strengthen nuclear security in Russia
15 BBC: US dismisses N Korea talks offer
16 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Lowey calls for NRC to release report
17 Xinhua: China continues efforts to maintain peace on Korean Peninsul
18 AU ABC: N Korea says US poses nuclear threat.
19 US: Progressive News: WMD Commission Continues the Stonewall for Bus
20 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Still Waiting for U.S. Apology
21 US: Guardian Unlimited: Bush Intel Panel Sees Difficult Task Ahead
NUCLEAR SAFETY
22 [du-list] Will US apply Army regs on DU?
23 US: AP Wire: California regulators set perchlorate drinking water go
24 US: Platts: Nuclear fuel safety study deal reached
25 US: EC: California May Allow Rocket Fuel Pollution to Remain in Drin
26 US: KLAS: Down-Winder Study Stopped, No More Funding
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
27 US: [NukeNet] Editorial: NRC stonewalling spent fuel report
28 US: [NukeNet] NY Times and Washington Post: Spent Fuel Storage
29 US: [NukeNet] Exelon does not plan to change nuclear waste storage
30 North Lake Tahoe Bonanza: Yucca e-mails turned over to Congress
31 Nevada Appeal - Opinion: All the eggs in Yucca's basket could be rot
32 US: Las Vegas RJ: Bill would block nuclear waste storage in Utah
33 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Federal agencies criticized
34 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca Scientists Investigated Over E-Mails
35 BBC: Sellafield 'wind down' under
36 AU NINEMSN: Nuclear waste ship off Australian coast
37 Las Vegas SUN: From the Yucca E-Mails
38 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Bishop will revive bill to block N-waste
39 Xinhua: New Zealand asks nuclear waste shipment sheer off sea
40 Elizabethton Star: Judge upholds NRC review of BLEU Project
41 Nevada: Presentations at Waste Management 2005 Tucson, AZ -
42 US: Las Vegas SUN: EPA issues initial order in Yerington mine cleanu
43 Pahrump Valley Times: Congress schedules Yucca e-mail hearing
44 Pahrump Valley Times: Playing tourist in their own backyard
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
45 Tri-City Herald: Hanford empties a second waste tank
46 Cincinnati Enquirer: Fernald cancer payment pushed
47 Inside Bay Area: Hold on, UC Los Alamos isn't in bag
48 KTVB.COM: New INL site managers meet employees
49 lamonitor.com: Costs soar for laboratory cleanup
50 DOE: Office of Environmental Management; Notice of Availability of
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 toledoblade.com: Nuclear fuel cycle is low in emissions
Article published Friday, April 1, 2005
Helen Caldicott's March 16 diatribe against the Nuclear Energy
Institute was loaded with false claims about the nuclear fuel
cycle.
Her claim that uranium enrichment plants use electricity
generated from "two coal plants" is untrue. There is only one
enrichment plant in the United States - in Paducah, Ky. By
contract, it obtains electricity from the Tennessee Valley
Authority's fleet of power plants, so about 40 percent of its
electricity comes from non-emitting nuclear and hydroelectric
power plants.
Ms. Caldicott also mangles the truth with her claim of CFC gas
emissions from the uranium enrichment process. The Paducah
facility doesn't produce CFC-114, more commonly known as
"Freon." It uses it as a coolant for safety purposes in its
enrichment operations. There is some leakage into the
environment, but this amount is well within Environmental
Protection Agency guidelines. In addition, Freon is no longer
manufactured in the U.S. The enrichment plant uses Freon
recycled from cars and home air conditioning units.
USEC, the company operating the Kentucky facility, has an active
Freon leak-reduction program under way and has applied for a
license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to a build
and operate a centrifuge enrichment plant that will not use any
CFCs.
Although all industrial and manufacturing activities have
environmental impacts and produce waste byproducts, nuclear
power has one of the smallest environmental impacts of any
source of electricity and manufacturing processes.
In fact, a study by the International Energy Agency in 2003
showed that the entire nuclear energy life cycle resulted in the
second-lowest emissions of greenhouse gases next to wind, which
is hardly a technology Americans can rely on today to provide
the round-the-clock, bulk electricity supplies that nuclear
power plants provide.
Scott Peterson
Vice President
Nuclear Energy Institute
Washington, D.C.
2005 The Blade. The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior
St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000
*****************************************************************
2 IPS-English ENVIRONMENT: French Finally Confront Chernobyl
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:29:05 -0800
ROMAIPS EU IP HE
ENVIRONMENT: French Finally Confront Chernobyl Risks
By Julio Godoy
PARIS, Apr 1 (IPS) - The French government concealed the enormous risks
from radioactive clouds in the weeks following the explosion at the
Chernobyl nuclear plant in April 1986, new evidence claims.
Official documents presented at a judicial inquiry in Paris this week
supported claims made earlier by several independent scientists and by
people suffering from cancer, especially of the thyroid glands.
The documents presented at the inquiry include a report by two nuclear
scientists, Paul Genty and Gilbert Mouthon based on documents classified
earlier as confidential. Their report says French authorities had "full
knowledge" that radioactivity detected in France had surpassed safety levels.
The Central Service for Protection against Ionic Radiation (SCPRI, after
its French name) "obviously concealed information at its disposal, and
denied that high risks of contamination existed," they say. "As
consequence, basic measures such as the administration of iodine (to the
population at risjk) were never put in practice."
The explosion at the nuclear power plant at Chernobyl in Ukraine, then a
part of the Soviet Union, released numerous radioactive elements including
iodine 131, an isotope that attacks the thyroids and provokes glandular
cancer. Regular iodine pills are a known antidote.
Other documents that surfaced at the judicial hearings in Paris this week
include minutes of government meetings at which officials warned of
considerable health risks associated with the consumption of fresh
vegetables and milk.
"We have figures (of radioactive contamination) that cannot be made
public," an official had said at the meeting then. He gave an example:
"goat milk: more than 10,000 becquerel per litre" (becquerel is a unit for
measuring decay brought on by radioactivity).
European legislation at the time required that all food products containing
more than 500 becquerel per litre of iodine 131 be taken off the shelves.
After the explosion at Chernobyl Apr. 26, all European governments ordered
urgent measures to protect their people from radioactivity. In Germany the
government banned consumption of fresh vegetables for a month, starting May
1986. It also banned fresh milk for children.. All swimming pools were
closed, and sports activities in open air were declared dangerous.
The Italian government banned the sale of fresh vegetables starting May 12,
and recommended that pregnant women and children under 10 avoid fresh milk.
It set up strict border controls on all food products from abroad.
Similar measures were taken across Europe. Austria, Sweden, Denmark and
Finland stopped children from playing in open air, and ordered substitution
of fresh dairy products by powder milk.
Only France refused to take such measures. On May 6 that year the ministry
of agriculture reassured people that "French territory, due to its distance
(from Chernobyl), has totally avoided being affected by the radioactivity."
In another statement early in May, then environment minister Alain Carignon
said the government had found "levels of radioactivity far below danger,
five, ten, hundred times below dangerous levels."
But the documents presented at the inquiry this week show that French
agencies commonly found radioactivity levels of between 2000 and 4000
becquerels per litre in milk and other food products.
The present judicial inquiry was initiated in 2001 by 51 people suffering
from thyroid cancer, who associate their illness with the Chernobyl
radioactive cloud, and by the Research Commission on Radioactivity, an
independent group of scientists who have been studying nuclear
contamination in France since the early 1990s.
"Even if we do not have all the conclusions yet, experts shows the
dimensions of the cover-up launched by the government of the time,"
Emmanuel Ludot, legal representative of some of the victims of thyroids
cancer, told IPS.
Ludot said his clients were not expecting any "confession" from the
politicians who mismanaged the case, "but because the political
responsibility is clearly established, the government should create an
indemnification fund to aid the victims of the Chernobyl radioactivity to
deal with their disease."
Stephane Lhomme, spokesperson of the group 'Get rid of nuclear power' said
the French government had its own reasons for downplaying the risk.
"In France, which has 58 nuclear power stations, and depends up to 80
percent on nuclear power for the generation of electricity, governments do
not want to associate nuclear power with health risks," he told IPS.
"Therefore, Chernobyl was for the government at that time a most unwelcome
catastrophe, whose risks had to be concealed, in order to avoid the
emergence of people's opposition to nuclear power."
(END/IPS/EU/IP/HE/JG/SS/05)
= 04011631 ORP011
NNNN
*****************************************************************
3 York Dispatch: PEACH BOTTOM: Report cites gains
www.yorkdispatch.com
April 01, 2005
By KATHY STEVENS The York Dispatch
Attendees seemed more in the dark last night after a 90-minute
session aimed at shedding light on Peach Bottom Atomic Power
Station's performance last year.
Exelon and Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials didn't
exactly wow the crowd of about 40 with a slide show highlighting
corporate progress, touting a 25 percent reduction in
radioactive exposure to employees and diagramming federal
"matrixes" and "cornerstone" safety guidelines.
One attendee asked why the commission couldn't just grade
performances A to F, drop bureaucraticese and spell out problems
that affect the public.
The bottom line: The NRC found that Peach Bottom improved in
2004 with two shutdowns of its Unit 2 reactor compared to three
in 2003.
Five shutdowns in Unit 2 over two years is a lot when compared
to the national average of less than one shutdown annually at
the country's 103 commercial plants, said Eric Epstein of Three
Mile Island Alert, a Harrisburg-based nonprofit citizens'
organization.
The NRC said the shutdowns, called "scrams," were low-level
safety risks but noteworthy nonetheless.
Want better procedures: Federal officials also warned the
plant, operated by Exelon Corp., that its procedure in finding
and reporting causes for shutdowns needs improvement. "They said
our focus regarding inspections was too narrow," said Robert
Braun, Exelon's site vice president at Peach Bottom. "We'll
apply what they told us, which was to broaden our investigation."
Braun said that the shutdowns pose no threat to the public but
only affect the company's bottom line. He further touted
adherence to safety guidelines saying the plant was taking a
"proactive approach." That tack, he said, would help plant
workers discover problems such as the cause of a Unit 2 shutdown
in July 2003.
A piece of broken fan belt that had been lost "a number of
years ago" entered a cooling system and caused the shutdown. The
debris wasn't found when the belt broke, but "years later it
came back to haunt the plant," Braun said. "We continue to
improve our existing processes," he added.
Epstein questions numbers: Epstein asked corporate and federal
officials how many workers were employed at Peach Bottom,
whether they had decreased in the past five years and if so,
would that affect plant performance and the reduction in
radiation exposure. NRC Chief of Projects Branch 4 Mohamed
Shanbaky said the plant was in federal compliance with the
number of employees needed for high-profile jobs such as reactor
operators.
Shanbaky further said the NRC doesn't focus on the overall
number of employees but rather whether federal rules are obeyed
and safety regulations adhered to.
"This meeting was the NRC's assessment for 2004," said April
Schlipp, Exelon spokeswoman, who added that there have been no
staffing changes since the 2003 assessment. "We've been able to
improve for the past two years; that's really the most relevant
here."
Beth Birchall, a Lancaster County resident, sat in the back of
the Peach Bottom Inn banquet room shaking her head.
"They seemed prepared," she said. "But there wasn't a lot of
information."
The NRC has scheduled quarterly, team and regional inspections
of the plant in 2005.
-- Reach Kathy Stevens at 505-5437 or .
2005 by The York Dispatch Publishing Co., LLC
*****************************************************************
4 Bellona: Nuclear clean-up works at the Russian navy sites can take 20 years
Sergey Antipov, deputy head of the Federal Nuclear Power Agency,
said on March 25 it would take from 15 to 20 years to tackle the
harmful consequences of the activity of Russia's nuclear fleet.
2005-04-01 20:04
"We estimate that it will take until 2010 to dismantle
decommissioned nuclear submarines," Interfax quoted him saying.
"But that is just for the submarines. Regarding the liquidation
of all the harmful consequences of the nuclear fleet's activity,
it will take at least 15 or 20 years." The main problem for
Federal Nuclear Power Agency is to clean up coastal navy bases
that have big amounts of liquid and solid radioactive waste from
nuclear submarines stored on their territory, Antipov said.
Of the 250 nuclear submarines built by Russia and the Soviet
Union, 195 have been decommissioned. All radioactive materials
have been removed from 111 of these. It is expected that more
submarines will be decommissioned off in the near future,
according to Federal Nuclear Power Agency. "But these will be
single vessels. There will not be such a fast rate of
decommissioning as there was before," Antipov said.
Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge
Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact:
webmaster@bellona.no
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
5 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
FR Doc E5-1447
[Federal Register: April 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 16876] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01ap05-117]
Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to submit an information
collection request to OMB and solicitation of public comment.
SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a submittal to OMB for review of
continued approval of information collections under the
provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
Information pertaining to the requirement to be submitted:
1. The title of the information collection: NRC Form 445,
Request
For Approval of Official Foreign Travel.
2. Current OMB approval number: 3150-0193.
3. How often the collection is required: On occasion.
4. Who is required or asked to report: Non-Federal consultants,
contractors and NRC invited travelers (i.e., non-NRC employees).
5. The number of annual respondents: 200.
6. The number of hours needed annually to complete the
requirement or request: 200 hours (1 hour per response).
7. Abstract: Form 445, ``Request for Approval of Foreign
Travel,'' is supplied by consultants, contractors, and NRC
invited travelers who must travel to foreign countries in the
course of conducting business for the NRC. In accordance with 48
CFR part 20, ``NRC Acquisition Regulation,'' contractors
traveling to foreign countries are required to complete this
form. The information requested includes the name of the Office
Director/Regional Administrator or Chairman, as appropriate, the
traveler's identifying information, purpose of travel, listing of
the trip coordinators, other NRC travelers and contractors
attending the same meeting, and a proposed itinerary.
Submit, by May 31, 2005, comments that address the following
questions:
1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the
NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have
practical utility?
2. Is the burden estimate accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology?
A copy of the draft supporting statement may be viewed free of
charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB
clearance requests are available at the NRC World Wide Web site:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The
document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days
after the signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions about the information collection
requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Brenda
Jo. Shelton (T-5 F3), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, by telephone at 301-415-7233, or by
Internet electronic mail to INFOCOLLECTS@NRC.GOV. Dated at
Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of March 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Services.
[FR Doc. E5-1447 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
6 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
FR Doc E5-1448
[Federal Register: April 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 16876-16877] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01ap05-118]
Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to submit an information
collection request to OMB and solicitation of public comment.
SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a submittal to OMB for review of
continued approval of information collections under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). Information pertaining to the requirement submitted:
1. The title of the information collection: NRC Form 450,
``General Assignment''.
2. Current OMB approval number: 3150-0114.
3. How often the collection is required: Once during the closeout
process.
4. Who is required or asked to report: Contractors, Grantees, and
Cooperators.
5. The number of annual respondents: 100.
6. The number of hours needed annually to complete the
requirement or request: 200 hours (2 hours per response).
7. Abstract: During the contract closeout process, the NRC
requires the contractor to execute a NRC Form 450, General
Assignment. Completion of the form grants the government all
rights, titles, and interest to refunds arising out of the
contractor performance.
Submit, by May 31, 2005, comments that address the following
questions:
1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the
NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have
practical utility?
2. Is the burden accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of
the information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology? A copy of the draft supporting
statement may be viewed free of charge
[[Page 16877]]
at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance
requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site
(http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html.
The document will be available on the NRC homepage site for 60
days after the signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions about the information collection
requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Brenda
Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, T-5 F52,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, by telephone at 301-415-7233, or by
Internet electronic mail to INFOCOLLECTS@NRC.GOV. Dated at
Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of March 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Services.
[FR Doc. E5-1448 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
7 NRC: Notice of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
FR Doc E5-1449
[Federal Register: April 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 16879-16881] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01ap05-121]
Impact of License Amendment for Augustana College at Sioux Falls,
SD AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact for license amendment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Blair Spitzberg, PhD., Fuel
Cycle and Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials
Safety, Region IV, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 611 Ryan
Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, TX 76011. Telephone: (817)
860-8100; e-mail dbs@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
considering the issuance of an amendment to NRC Materials License
No. 40-06921-03 to remove a former burial site from the license.
This licensing action will allow Augustana College to release the
property for unrestricted use. If approved, Augustana College
will continue to possess radioactive materials in accordance with
the conditions of its license but will not be required to
maintain radiological control over the burial site. The NRC has
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this
action in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 51.
Based on the EA, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The radioactive burial site is located on the campus of Augustana
College (the licensee) in the central part of Sioux Falls, South
Dakota. The burial site is located in a grove of crabapple trees
on the east side of the Gilbert Science Center near the corner of
33rd Street and Summit Avenue. Based on the licensee's records,
the burial site consists of a line of six pits (holes) containing
radioactive material. The holes were dug using manual equipment
(post-hole digger & shovel) to a depth of 5 feet (1.5 meters) and
are arranged in 6-foot (1.8- meter) intervals.
The licensee has been authorized by the NRC and its predecessor,
the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), to possess radioactive
material since 1958. The docket file records indicate that
Augustana College first began possessing radioactive material
during 1963.
The licensee's records document that about 12 millicuries (0.44
gigabecquerels) of carbon-14, a long-lived beta particle emitter,
were disposed at the burial site between 1968 and 1969.
Review Scope
By letters dated February 17, April 25 and August 25, 2003, the
licensee requested that the former radioactive materials burial
site located on campus property be released for unrestricted use.
Prior to January 28, 1981, the NRC permitted licensees to dispose
of small quantities of licensed materials by burial in soil
without specific NRC authorization. This was authorized pursuant
to 10 CFR 20.304. This regulation has since been rescinded by the
NRC. The NRC is considering the issuance of an amendment to
Materials License No. 40-06921-03 to release the burial site for
unrestricted use. In accordance with 10 CFR 30.36 and NUREG-1757,
Volume 1, Revision 1, a decommissioning plan was not required
from the licensee. The purpose of this EA is to assess the
environmental consequences of this licensing action using the
guidance provided in NUREG-1748.
Proposed Action The proposed action would approve the licensee's
request to amend its license to release the former burial site
located at Augustana College in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, for
unrestricted use. The licensee would not be required to remediate
the burial site if the NRC approves the license amendment
request.
Purpose and Need for Proposed Action The proposed action is
necessary to release the burial site from the license for
unrestricted use. The need for the proposed action is for the
licensee to be in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR
30.36, ``Expiration and Termination of Licenses and
Decommissioning of Sites and Separate Buildings or Outdoor
Areas.'' By releasing the site for unrestricted use, the
applicant will not be burdened with additional regulations that
would no longer be applicable to them.
Alternatives
The alternatives to the proposed action are (1) the no-action
alternative, or (2) to deny the amendment request and require the
licensee to take additional actions such as the remediation of
the burial site.
Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action
By letter dated March 25, 1968, the licensee requested
information from the AEC on ``* * * how and where to dispose of
solid and liquid form carbon-14 wastes * * * accumulated.'' The
AEC responded in a letter dated April 1, 1968, stating that the
disposal options available to the licensee at the time included
disposal by burial in soil. Licensees were authorized to dispose
of radioactive material by burial in accordance with 10 CFR
20.304 between 1959 and 1981. The April 1, 1968, letter reminded
the licensee of the regulatory requirements--that each burial may
not exceed 50,000 microcuries (50 millicuries, or 1.85
gigabecquerels) of carbon-14, each burial must be made at a depth
of at least 4 feet (1.2 meters), and each burial must be
separated from other burial sites by at least 6 feet (1.8
meters).
[[Page 16880]]
Based on the licensee's records, no more than 12 millicuries
(0.44 gigabecquerels) of carbon-14 were buried. The licensee's
estimate was based on available disposal records from the 1968 to
1969 time frame. Although the records do not clearly identify the
amount of material buried, the licensee made the assumption from
the records available that each hole contained the maximum amount
of carbon-14 that could have been received under the license's
authorization limit.
Since six holes were constructed, the licensee assumed that the
maximum possession limit of 2 millicuries (0.074 gigabecquerels)
were buried in each hole. This total may be an overestimate of
the amount buried but is below the regulatory limit of 50
millicuries (1.85 gigabecquerels) per year that was allowed
during 1968 to 1969.
According to the licensee's records, only dry wastes were buried.
Liquid wastes were disposed via the sewer as allowed by AEC
regulations at that time. In addition, the experiments involved
carbon-14 in a chemical form that would have resulted in a loss
of carbon to the atmosphere during the experiments. Therefore,
the actual amount of carbon-14 buried could be less than 12
millicuries (0.44 gigabecquerels). The NRC conducted a review of
archived records to ascertain whether the licensee's estimate was
accurate. Nothing was identified in the NRC's records that
refuted the licensee's claim that only 12 millicuries (0.44
gigabecquerels), or less, of radioactive material were buried
during 1968 to 1969.
The licensee's request to release the former burial site for
unrestricted use was based on dose modeling calculations using
the NRC- approved RESRAD Computer Code, Version 6.21. The
licensee used the code's default values for its calculations,
including a default value of 100 picocuries (3.7 becquerels) per
gram of carbon-14. [The NRC and the licensee's contractor
estimated that the actual concentration was around 1 picocurie
(0.037 becquerels) per gram based on the amount of material
buried and the volume of the burial pit.] Using this conservative
approach, the individual dose summed over all pathways was
calculated at time zero (1969) to be 77.8 millirems (0.778
millisieverts) per year. At Year 10 (1979), the dose had fallen
to less than 1 millirem (0.01 millisievert) per year, and by Year
30 (1999) the dose had fallen to 0.00 millirems (0.0
millisieverts) per year. These calculations were independently
verified by the NRC. The NRC notes that the calculated values
beyond Year 10 (1979) are below the 25-millirem (0.25
millisieverts) limit for unrestricted release of the site as
stipulated in 10 CFR 20.1402. Furthermore, the radiological
impacts of releasing the burial site for unrestricted use are
bounded by the impacts evaluated in NUREG-1496, ``Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on
Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed
Nuclear Facilities.'' The NRC staff considered the potential
impacts of the leaching of radioactive and non-radioactive
material into the groundwater.
The licensee estimated that the groundwater table is at a depth
of 20 feet (6 meters), and the depth of the disposed material was
about 4-6 feet (1.2-1.8 meters) deep. The shallow surface
groundwater in the vicinity of the site is not used as a drinking
water supply. Local members of the public obtain water from the
city. Further, the impacts that potentially contaminated
groundwater would have on members of the public were considered
as part of the RESRAD modeling scenario.
The NRC believes that the burial site, if left undisturbed, will
not have a radiological impact on the site groundwater.
Environmental Impacts of Alternative Actions
1. Environmental Impacts of the No-Action Alternative The
no-action alternative would result in impacts similar to or the
same as the proposed action. However, this alternative would be
inconsistent with the Commission's regulations, therefore, it is
not a reasonable alternative.
2. Environmental Impacts of Alternative 2
Alternative 2 to the proposed action is to deny the amendment
request and require the licensee to take some additional action
such as the remediation of the burial site. If the licensee were
required to remediate the burial site, the potential harm to the
workers or members of the public from exposure to radioactive
material would be bounded by the RESRAD calculations. In other
words, the remediation of the site would most likely have a
minimal radiological impact on site workers and members of the
public.
Remediation of the site may have short-term health and safety
consequences caused by the excavation, packaging, and shipping of
the residual radioactive material. These non-radiological impacts
would include the normal risks of exhuming the wastes with
earth-moving equipment and transportation of the material to an
out-of-state disposal facility. The risks include death or injury
from a construction or transportation accident.
The remediation of the former burial site would cause some
environmental harm. The waste material would have to be
excavated, packaged, and transported to an out-of-state disposal
facility.
The excavation process would be accomplished by heavy equipment
and trucks that would disturb the general area. The prevailing
winds will most likely disperse some of the excavated material
offsite. The resulting surface void would have to be refilled
with clean soil and contoured. Vegetation in the vicinity of the
reclaimed site would be temporarily disturbed.
Since the licensee successfully demonstrated that the current
dose is 0.00 millirems (0.0 millisieverts) using the RESRAD
program, the NRC has determined that the remediation of the
burial site is not a practical option.
Conclusion
Based on its review, the NRC staff has concluded that there are
no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action and the preparation of an environmental impact statement
is not warranted. The staff has determined that the proposed
action, approval of the license amendment request to release the
former burial site from the license for unrestricted use, is the
appropriate alternative for selection.
Agencies and Persons Contacted
The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is not a
major construction activity and will not affect listed or
proposed endangered species. Additionally, it is not an
undertaking that will affect historic properties. Therefore, the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the State Historic Preservation
Office were not contacted.
The Department of Environment & Natural Resources, State of South
Dakota, was consulted by the NRC. The State responded by letter
dated September 23, 2004, and suggested that the NRC consider use
of institutional controls to prevent the unintentional
disturbance of the burial site. The NRC responded by letter dated
October 27, 2004, stating that it was appropriate to release the
site without restrictions, including institutional controls. The
NRC contacted the Administrator, Waste Management Program, South
Dakota Department of Environment & Natural Resources, for the
State's response. The State accepted the NRC's position as
documented in the October 27, 2004, letter, but plans to pursue
the issue of
[[Page 16881]]
institutional controls directly with the College.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff concludes that the proposed action complies with
the radiological criteria for unrestricted use as stipulated in
10 CFR 20.1402. The licensee demonstrated that any remaining
residual radioactivity will not result in radiological exposures
in excess of the 25 millirem (0.25 millisievert) total effective
dose equivalent limit specified in Sec. 20.1402. Dose modeling
indicates that current and future members of the public will not
receive any radiological dose from the burial site. The NRC staff
prepared this EA in support of the proposed action to amend the
license. On the basis of this EA, the NRC has concluded that
there are no significant environmental impacts and the license
amendment does not warrant the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Statement. Accordingly, it has been determined that a
FONSI is appropriate.
IV. Further Information
A copy of this document will be available electronically for
public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the
Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's document
system.
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and
image files of NRC's public documents. The following references
are available for inspection at NRC's Public Electronic Reading
Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public
Electronic Reading Room). ADAMS accession numbers are located in
parentheses following the reference.
1. Wanous, Michael, Augustana College letter to NRC, February 17,
2003 (ML030850812).
2. Wanous, Michael, Augustana College letter to NRC, April 25,
2003 (ML031220675).
3. NRC, ``Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions
Associated with NMSS Programs,'' NUREG-1748, August 2003
(ML032540811).
4. Wanous, Michael, Augustana College letter to NRC, August 25,
2003 (ML032400519).
5. NRC, ``Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance,'' NUREG-1757,
Volume 1, Revision 1, September 2003 (ML032530410).
6. NRC, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of
Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of
NRC- Licensed Nuclear Facilities,'' NUREG-1496, July 1997
(ML042310492).
7. Satorius, Mark, ``Request for Comments Regarding Environmental
Assessment of Former Burial Site at Augustana College,'' NRC
letter to State of South Dakota, September 10, 2004
(ML042540432).
8. Lancaster, Rick, ``Request for Comments Regarding
Environmental Assessment of Former Burial Site at Augustana
College,'' State of South Dakota letter to NRC, September 23,
2004 (ML042730227).
9. Satorius, Mark, ``Request for Institutional Controls Over
Former Burial Site at Augustana College,'' NRC letter to State of
South Dakota, October 27, 2004 (ML043010521).
10. Evans, Robert, ``Telephone Call With State of South Dakota
Regarding Former Burial Site at Augustana College,'' NRC
Memorandum To Docket File, December 8, 2004 (ML0434400520).
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at (800) 397-4209, (301)
415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Documents may also be
viewed electronically on the public computers located at the
NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee.
Dated at Arlington, Texas this 22nd day of March 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patricia K. Holahan, Director, Division of Nuclear Materials
Safety, Region IV.
[FR Doc. E5-1449 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
8 NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Vogtle Electric
FR Doc E5-1450
[Federal Register: April 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 16877-16879] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01ap05-120]
Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2; Exemption 1.0 Background
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC, or the licensee)
is the holder of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-68 and
NPF-81 that authorize operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating
Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Vogtle, Units 1 and 2). The license
provides, among other things, that the facility is subject to all
rules, regulations, and orders of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, the Commission) now or hereafter in effect.
The facility consists of two pressurized water reactors located
in Burke County, Georgia.
2.0 Request/Action Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR) part 50, Appendix G requires that pressure-temperature
(P-T) limits be established for reactor pressure vessels (RPVs)
during normal operating and hydrostatic or leak rate testing
conditions. Specifically, 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G states that
``[t]he minimum temperature requirements * * * pertain to the
controlling material, which is either the material in the closure
flange or the material in the beltline region with the highest
reference temperature. * * * the minimum temperature requirements
and the controlling material depend on the operating condition
(i.e., hydrostatic pressure and leak tests, or normal operation
including anticipated normal operational occurrences), the vessel
pressure, whether fuel is in the vessel, and whether the core is
critical. The metal temperature of the controlling material, in
the region of the controlling material which has the least
favorable combination of stress and temperature, must exceed the
appropriate minimum temperature requirement for the condition and
pressure of the vessel specified in Table 1 [of 10 CFR part 50,
Appendix G].'' Footnote 2 to Table 1 in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix
G specifies that RPV minimum temperature requirements related to
RPV closure flange considerations shall be based on ``[t]he
highest reference temperature of the material in the closure
flange region that is highly stressed by bolt preload.'' In order
to address provisions of amendments to modify the Vogtle, Units 1
and 2 Technical Specifications to revise the pressure-
temperature limits report methodology for each unit, SNC
requested in its submittal dated February 26, 2004, that the
staff exempt Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 from the application of
specific requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G, as they
pertain to the establishment of minimum temperature requirements,
for all modes of operation addressed by 10 CFR part 50, Appendix
G, based on the material properties of the material of the RPV
closure flange region that is highly stressed by the bolt
preload. The licensee's technical basis for this exemption
request is contained in Enclosure 4 of its February 26, 2004,
submittal: WCAP-16142-P, Revision 1, ``Reactor Vessel Closure
Head/ Vessel Flange Requirements Evaluation for Vogtle Units 1
and 2,'' and a response to an NRC staff request for additional
information contained in an SNC letter dated October 22, 2004.
The requirements from which SNC requested that Vogtle, Units 1
and 2 be exempted shall be referred to, for the purpose of this
exemption, as those requirements related to the application of
footnote (2) to Table 1 of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G.
WCAP-16142-P, Revision 1 included a fracture mechanics analysis
of
[[Page 16878]] postulated flaws in the Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 RPV
closure flange regions under boltup, 100 [deg]F per hour (/hr)
heatup, 100 [deg]F/hr cooldown, and steady-state conditions, with
the heatup and cooldown transients being modeled in accordance
with what would be permissible using P-T limit curves based on
the most limiting Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 beltline materials.
Westinghouse performed finite element analyses to calculate the
stresses present at the flange region and determined two limiting
locations: (1) The top head dome-to-torus weld at the end of the
100 [deg]F/hr heatup transient, and (2) the torus-to-flange weld
at the boltup condition. With these stresses, Westinghouse
calculated the applied stress intensity factor (Kapplied) for
semi-elliptical, outside diameter initiated, surface breaking
flaws with an aspect ratio (length vs. depth) of 6:1, and with
depths ranging from 0 to 80 percent of the thickness of the
component wall. The Kapplied values were calculated by using the
Raju-Newman stress intensity factor influence coefficients for
external surface cracks in cylindrical vessels and is in
accordance with the American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code) Section XI, Appendix
G, Subparagraph G-2220 requirements for the analysis of flange
locations. Westinghouse then compared these K applied values to
ASME Code lower bound plane strain fracture toughness (KIc)
values determined from the nil-ductility transition reference
temperature (RTNDT) values for the Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 RPV
closure flange materials. Westinghouse also provided an
assessment of the potential for changes in the material RTNDT
values for the Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 RPV closure flange materials
due to thermal aging resulting from exposure to the RPV operating
environment.
The use of ASME Code KIc as the material property for the
fracture mechanics analysis represents the most significant
change between the analysis provided in WCAP-16142-P, Revision 1
and the analysis that was performed as the basis for establishing
the minimum temperature requirements in 10 CFR part 50, Appendix
G. The minimum temperature requirements related to footnote (2)
to Table 1 of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G were incorporated into
the Code of Federal Regulations in the early 1980s and were based
on analyses that used ASME Code lower bound crack arrest fracture
toughness (KIA) as the parameter for characterizing a material's
ability to resist crack initiation and propagation. The use of
ASME Code KIA is always conservative with respect to the use of
ASME Code KIC for fracture mechanics evaluations, and its use in
the evaluations that established the requirements in 10 CFR part
50, Appendix G was justified based on the limited knowledge of
RPV material behavior that was available in the early 1980s.
However, the use of ASME Code KIC, not ASME Code KIA, is
consistent with the actual physical processes that would govern
flaw initiation under conditions of normal RPV operation,
including RPV heatup, cooldown, and hydrostatic and leak testing.
Based on our current understanding of the behavior of RPV
materials, the NRC staff has routinely approved licensees'
utilization of ASME Code KIC as the basis for evaluating RPV
beltline materials to demonstrate compliance with the intent of
10 CFR part 50, Appendix G through licensees' use of ASME Code
Cases N-640 and N-641, which have been incorporated into Appendix
G to Section XI of the 2001 Edition through the 2003 Addenda of
the ASME Code endorsed in 10 CFR 50.55a. Information in
WCAP-16142-P, Revision 1 and the licensee's October 22, 2004,
response to NRC staff questions indicated that the resulting
margin (KIC/Kapplied) from the fracture mechanics analysis is
3.19 for the boltup condition and 4.06 for the heatup condition,
assuming that the crack depth is one tenth of the wall thickness
(1/10t). The margins show that the boltup condition with lower
Kapplied (about one half the Kapplied of the heatup condition) is
more limiting because the low temperature associated with the
boltup condition gives a much lower KIC value. Using these
calculated margins and the Kapplied plot shown in WCAP Figures
4-1 and 4-2, the NRC staff found that the ASME Code Appendix G
margin of 2 can be maintained for a flaw much deeper than 1/10t
at these limiting locations.
In summary, the analysis provided in WCAP-16142-P, Revision 1 has
demonstrated that, for the most limiting transient addressed by
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, the combination of factors (high
stresses in the RPV flange region along with low temperature at
the metal of the flange region) cannot exist simultaneously, and
the structural integrity of the Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 RPV closure
flange materials will not be challenged by facility operation in
accordance with P-T limit curves based consideration of Vogtle,
Units 1 and 2 beltline materials. Therefore, the more
conservative minimum temperature requirements related to footnote
(2) to Table 1 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G are not necessary to
meet the underlying intent of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, to
protect the Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 RPVs from brittle failure
during normal operation under both core critical and core
non-critical conditions and RPV hydrostatic and leak test
conditions.
3.0 Discussion Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, upon
application by any interested person or upon its own initiative,
grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 when (1)
the exemptions are authorized by law, will not present an undue
risk to public health or safety, and are consistent with the
common defense and security; and (2) when special circumstances
are present. These circumstances include the special
circumstances where application of the regulation in the
particular circumstances is not necessary to achieve the
underlying purpose of the rule.
The underlying purpose of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, footnote
(2) to Table 1 is to protect the integrity of the reactor coolant
pressure boundary during hydrostatic pressure and leak tests, and
during normal operations, including heatup, cooldown, and
operational occurrences. This is accomplished through these
regulations that, in part, specify the minimum temperature
requirements in the closure flange region. The NRC staff accepts
the licensee's determination that an exemption would be required
to permit SNC to not meet those requirements related to the
application of footnote (2) to Table 1 of 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix G. The NRC staff examined the licensee's rationale to
support the exemption request. Based on a consideration of the
information provided in WCAP-16142-P, Revision 1 and SNC's
October 22, 2004 letter, an acceptable technical basis has been
established to exempt Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 from requirements
related to footnote (2) to Table 1 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G.
The technical basis provided by SNC has established that an
adequate margin of safety against brittle failure would continue
to be maintained for the Vogtle, Units 1 and 2 RPVs without the
application of those requirements related to the application of
footnote (2) to Table 1 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, for normal
operation under both core critical and core non-critical
conditions and RPV hydrostatic and leak test conditions.
Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii), the underlying purpose of 10 CFR part 50,
Appendix G will be achieved without the application of those
[[Page 16879]] requirements related to the application of
footnote (2) to Table 1 of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G, and the
proposed exemption should be granted to SNC such that those
requirements related to the application of footnote (2) to Table
1 of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G need not be applied to Vogtle,
Units 1 and 2.
4.0 Conclusion Accordingly, the Commission has determined that,
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), the exemption is authorized by law,
will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety,
and is consistent with the common defense and security. Also,
special circumstances are present. Therefore, the Commission
hereby grants SNC an exemption from the requirements 10 CFR Part
50, Appendix G, Table 1, footnote (2), for Vogtle, Units 1 and 2.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the
granting of this exemption will not have a significant effect on
the quality of the human environment (70 FR 13215).
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of March 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ledyard B. Marsh, Director,
Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-1450 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
9 NRC: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Withdrawal of
FR Doc E5-1451
[Federal Register: April 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 16877] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01ap05-119]
Application for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the
request of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee)
to withdraw its October 12, 2001, application for a proposed
amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-3 for the
Davis-Besse Nuclear Station, Unit 1, located in Ottawa County,
Ohio.
The proposed amendment would have made necessary revisions to the
DBNPS technical specifications to reflect an increase in the
authorized rated thermal power from 2772 MWt to 2817 MWt
(approximately 1.63 percent), based on the use of Caldon Inc.
Leading Edge Flow Meter (LEFM) CheckPlusTM System instrumentation
to improve the accuracy of the feedwater mass flow input to the
plant power calorimetric measurement.
The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register December
26, 2001 (66 FR 66467). However, by letter dated December 20,
2004, the licensee withdrew the proposed change.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated October 12, 2001, and the
licensee's letter dated December 20, 2004, which withdrew the
application for license amendment. Documents may be examined,
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR),
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible electronically from the
Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by
e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of March
2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jon B. Hopkins, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate
III, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-1451 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
10 NRC: Sacramento Municipal Utility District Issuance of Environmental
FR Doc E5-1452
[Federal Register: April 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 16881-16882] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01ap05-122]
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding an
Amendment AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental Assessment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James R. Hall, Senior Project
Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-1336; fax number:
(301) 415-8555; e-mail: .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the staff) is considering issuance of an
amendment to Special Nuclear Materials License No. 2510 that
would allow for the storage of Greater Than Class C (GTCC) waste
at the Rancho Seco Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
(ISFSI). The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) is
currently storing spent nuclear fuel at the Rancho Seco ISFSI on
the site of the decommissioned Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating
Station in Sacramento County, California.
Environmental Assessment (EA) Identification of Proposed Action
By application, dated July 29, 2004, SMUD submitted a request to
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in accordance with
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 72.56,
``Application for amendment of license,'' to amend the license to
allow for the storage of GTCC waste at the Rancho Seco ISFSI.
SMUD proposes to store the GTCC waste in a GTCC canister and load
the canister into a Horizontal Storage Module in the NUHOMS-24P
dry cask storage system used at the Rancho Seco ISFSI. SMUD
proposes to co-locate the GTCC waste canister with the spent fuel
canisters at the ISFSI, but no GTCC waste will be co-mingled with
the spent fuel.
The proposed action before the NRC is whether to approve the
amendment.
Need for the Proposed Action
SMUD is in the process of decommissioning the Rancho Seco Nuclear
Generating Station in Sacramento County, California. SMUD needs
to temporarily store GTCC waste resulting from plant operations
and from decommissioning, such as activated metals in the form of
baffles and formers, cut-up sections of incore-instrument tips,
and associated surface contamination, in the ISFSI until there is
a permanent repository that will accept GTCC waste. Approving the
amendment would allow the licensee to store GTCC at the Rancho
Seco ISFSI.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The staff has
reviewed the amendment request submitted by the licensee and has
determined that allowing the storage of GTCC waste at the Rancho
Seco ISFSI would have no significant impacts to the environment.
In its Safety Evaluation Report related to the ISFSI license, the
NRC staff found
[[Page 16882]]
that the proposed GTCC canister is functionally identical to
those spent fuel canisters currently being stored at the ISFSI.
Once the GTCC waste is loaded into the canister, the operational
steps to drain, seal and transfer the GTCC waste to the ISFSI are
essentially identical to those for a fuel canister except that
the GTCC waste canister loading and processing operations will be
conducted in the Reactor Building as opposed to the Spent Fuel
Building. There are no credible scenarios by which liquid or
gaseous effluents could be released from the GTCC waste canister.
Furthermore, the NUHOMS-24P dry cask storage system used at the
Rancho Seco ISFSI is a passive system which, by design, produces
no gaseous or liquid effluent.
The staff has determined that the proposed action would not
endanger life or property. Further, the staff concludes that
there is reasonable assurance that the proposed amendment will
have no impact on off-site doses because the licensee is
currently storing GTCC at the Rancho Seco Site under its 10 CFR
Part 50 license.
The proposed action would not increase the probability or
consequences of accidents, no changes would be made to the types
of effluents that may be released offsite, and there would be no
increase in public exposure, and only minimal increase in
occupational exposure. Therefore, there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action. Additionally, the proposed action would have no
significant impact on the safe storage of spent fuel at the
Rancho Seco ISFSI.
Furthermore, as documented in the Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact for the final
rule, ``Interim Storage of Greater than Class C Waste'' (66 FR
51823; October 11, 2001), the NRC staff found for the following
reasons that storing NRC-licensed reactor-related GTCC waste
using 10 CFR Part 72 has no significant environmental impacts:
(1) There is a smaller source term available for release from
normal operations, or as a result of an accident, involving GTCC
waste as compared to spent fuel or HLW; (2) There is a smaller
total volume and curie content of the GTCC waste as compared to
the spent fuel or HLW; (3) The previous findings related to the
environmental impacts in NUREG-0575, ``Final Generic
Environmental Impact Statement on Handling and Storage of Spent
Light Water Power Reactor Fuel,'' dated August 1979, and
NUREG-1092, ``Environmental Assessment for 10 CFR Part 72
Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Fuel
and High-Level Radioactive Waste'' concluded that there are no
significant environmental impacts for these activities; and (4)
GTCC waste is already being safely stored by 10 CFR Part 50
licensees. Re-licensing of this material under a 10 CFR Part 72
specific license requires an approved safety analysis report.
The approval process requires that each application or amendment
be individually reviewed and approved before storage would be
allowed under a specific 10 CFR Part 72 license.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the amendment request (i.e., the ``no-action''
alternative). If the request was denied, SMUD would need to
continue to store the GTCC waste under its 10 CFR Part 50
license, either in its existing location or in another
appropriately shielded configuration.
This would limit the extent to which SMUD could complete its
decommissioning activities for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating
Station.
Approval or denial of the amendment request would result in no
change in the environmental impacts. Therefore, the environmental
impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are
similar.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The NRC staff prepared this environmental assessment (EA) and
contacted the California Department of Health Services,
Radiologic Health Branch. Staff provided the State with a draft
copy of this EA for review. Mr. Steve Hsu responded on behalf of
the State of California and stated that he had no comments on the
EA or the Finding of No Significant Impact. The NRC staff has
determined that consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act is not required for this specific amendment, which
will not affect listed species or critical habitat. The NRC staff
has also determined that the proposed action is not a type of
activity having the potential to cause effects on historic
properties. Therefore, no consultation is required under Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
Conclusion
The staff has reviewed the amendment request submitted by SMUD
and has determined that allowing the storage of GTCC waste at the
Rancho Seco ISFSI would have no significant impact on the
environment.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of allowing the storage of GTCC waste
at the Rancho Seco ISFSI have been reviewed in accordance with
the requirements set forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based upon the
foregoing EA, the NRC finds that the proposed action of approving
the amendment to the license will not significantly impact the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has
determined that an environmental impact statement for the
proposed amendment is not warranted.
The request for amendment was docketed under 10 CFR part 72,
Docket 72-11. For further details with respect to this action,
see the request for the license amendment dated July 29, 2004.
Supporting documentation is available for inspection at the NRC's
Public Electronic Reading Room at: . A copy of the EA and FONSI
can be found at this site using the Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS). These documents may also be viewed
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR), O-1F21, 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 .
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of March, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James R. Hall, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E5-1452 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
11 UN Committee Adopts Draft Treaty Against Nuclear Terrorism
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 16:00:14 -0500
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_ORG,
SP_HAM_SUPER,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.2
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
UN COMMITTEE ADOPTS DRAFT TREATY AGAINST NUCLEAR TERRORISM
New York, Apr 1 2005 4:00PM
After seven years of negotiations, a United Nations committee today
<"http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/l3085.doc.htm">adopted
a draft international treaty to fight nuclear terrorism, with Secretary-General
Kofi Annan calling on all states to sign on in order
to pre-empt what he called "one of the most urgent threats of
our time" that with one attack could change the world forever.
The draft adopted by consensus defines acts of nuclear terrorism
and strengthens the international legal framework to combat it, requiring
those who threaten or commit such crimes to be extradited
or prosecuted and encouraging exchange of information and cooperation
among states and a broad range of mutual assistance obligations.
"The Nuclear Terrorism Convention will help prevent terrorists from
gaining access to the most lethal weapons known to man," Mr. Annan
<"http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=1378">told the Ad
Hoc Committee established by the General Assembly in 1996 to draw
up an international convention for the suppression of terrorist
bombings and entrusted in 1998 with drafting an international convention
for the suppression of acts of nuclear terrorism.
The draft aims to deal with both crisis situations by assisting states
in solving situations created by terrorist groups possessing
nuclear material, and post-crisis situations by rendering the nuclear
material safe in accordance with safeguards provided by the
UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Committee chairman
Rohan Perera of Sri Lanka told a <"http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2005/Terrorism_Convention_Briefing_050401.doc.htm">news
conference.
The text will now go to the full General Assembly within the next
two weeks or so for adoption and will open for signature on 14 September
at the high-level plenary meeting scheduled for the Assembly's
60th session.
"Nuclear terrorism is one of the most urgent threats of our time,"
Mr. Annan said. "Even one such attack could inflict mass casualties
and change our world forever. The prospect should compel all
of us to do our part to strengthen our common defences."
He also called on the Committee to finalize work on the convention
on terrorist bombings. "I remain confident that you will be able
to complete that work before the end of the 60th session of the
General Assembly," he said.
2005-04-01 00:00:00.000
________________
For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml
*****************************************************************
12 IPS-English DISARMAMENT: U.N. Goes After Nuclear Terrorists
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:29:05 -0800
ROMAIPS WD IP
DISARMAMENT: U.N. Goes After Nuclear Terrorists
By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Mar 31 (IPS) - After seven long years of negotiations, the
United Nations has finalised an international convention against nuclear
terrorism.
"It's a major achievement," Rohan Perera, chairman of the U.N. Adhoc
Committee on Terrorism, told IPS Thursday, just hours after the 191 member
states approved the draft treaty by consensus.
"I am sure that it is the shared sentiment of all delegations that this is
indeed a significant and commendable step forward" in the global fight
against terrorism, he added.
The treaty comes nearly eight years after Alexander Lebed, a decorated
Soviet war hero and a former national security chief under President Boris
Yeltsin, told a U.S. television network that there were about 100
suitcase-sized Russian nuclear weapons missing and unaccounted for.
The Russian secret intelligence agency, the KGB, is said to have acquired
an unspecified number of small nuclear weapons, each weighing less than 75
pounds, that were never included in any post-Cold War inventory on global
disarmament.
There have been continued fears that some of these weapons, still deemed
missing, may fall into the hands of terrorist groups.
The proposed treaty -- titled the Convention on the Suppression of Acts of
Nuclear Terrorism -- calls on all member states to help track down "loose
nukes" and thwart potential nuclear terrorists.
"It is vital that we deny terrorists access to nuclear materials," U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in his 62-page landmark report on the
restructuring of the United Nations, released last week.
"Our strategy against terrorism must be comprehensive and should be based
on five pillars: it must aim at dissuading people from resorting to
terrorism or supporting it; it must deny terrorists access to funds and
materials; it must deter states from sponsoring terrorism; it must develop
state capacity to defeat terrorism; and it must defend human rights," he added.
The international community has been warned of the possibility of either an
armed attack on a nuclear installation or the abuse of nuclear materials.
The Russian Federation, which was the lead player in the new treaty, was
primarily responsible for preparing the draft convention. The Russians
believe the convention would pre-empt potential acts of nuclear terrorism.
In February, U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir
Putin called for the early adoption of the nuclear terrorism convention.
This was part of a joint statement on nuclear security cooperation.
The newest treaty -- the 13th in a series of U.N. conventions against
terrorism -- will be ready for signature during the high-level summit
meeting of world leaders at the General Assembly sessions in September this
year. But it needs 22 ratifications before it becomes international law.
The last two treaties against terrorism were the 1997 International
Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombing and the 1999
International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism.
The 14th -- and perhaps the last -- of the treaties, titled a Comprehensive
Convention on Terrorism, which will encompass elements of all 13 previous
treaties, is expected to be finalised in mid-2006.
But that treaty remains deadlocked primarily over definitions relating to
"terrorists," "freedom fighters" and "state terrorism."
"I strongly urge world leaders to unite behind it and to conclude a
comprehensive convention on terrorism before the end of the 60th session of
the General Assembly next year," Annan said last week.
He also said that transnational networks of terrorist groups have global
reach and make common cause to pose a universal threat.
"Such groups profess a desire to acquire nuclear, biological and chemical
weapons, and to inflict mass casualties. Even one such attack and the chain
of events it may set off could change our world forever," he warned.
Although the world's five declared nuclear powers -- France, Britain, the
United States, China and Russia -- have pledged to curb the proliferation
of the deadly weapons, they have not agreed to eliminate them completely
from their military arsenals. All five countries are also veto-wielding
permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
The undeclared nuclear powers include India, Pakistan, Israel, and possibly
North Korea.
The continued existence of some 30,000 nuclear weapons long after the end
of the Cold War still poses a grave danger to humanity.
This is further worsened by the fact that 5,000 of these weapons are on
alert status -- meaning they are capable of being fired on 30 minutes' notice.
Since nuclear technologies were developed, the world community has also
encountered cases of "leakage" of nuclear components.
A 1997 Hollywood movie titled "The Peacemaker" -- partly shot outside the
United Nations -- dramatised the story of a disgruntled Bosnian diplomat
who acquires a backpack-sized nuclear weapon and brings it to New York to
blow it outside the U.N. headquarters.
*****
+U.N. Conventions Against Terrorism
(http://untreaty.un.org/English/Terrorism.asp)
+Secretary-General Kofi Annan's report on U.N. restructuring
(http://www.un.org/largerfreedom/)
(END/IPS/WD/IP/TD/KS/05)
= 04010850 ORP001
NNNN
*****************************************************************
13 FT.com: Pakistan will hand nuclear parts to IAEA
By Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad, Pakistan
Published: April 2 2005 03:00 | Last updated: April 2 2005 03:00
Pakistan yesterday announ-ced it had decided to hand over
components of used nuclear centrifuges to the International
Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], the UN's main nuclear watchdog,
helping to move forward a crucial investigation into Iran's
nuclear programme.
Confirmation of Pakistan's agreement to the IAEA's request for
centrifuge components followed last week's revelation by General
Pervez Musharraf, the military ruler, that such an arrangement
was being actively considered.
Senior western diplomats in Islamabad, however, say the
components may have already been handed over to the IAEA for
further investigation at the agency's laboratory at Seibersdorf
outside Vienna. The IAEA would not comment on the issue.
The Pakistani centrifuges have been sought by the IAEA to match
against traces of uranium found by its inspectors in Iran in
2003. Iranian officials blamed the traces on contaminated
centrifuge components that were bought from Pakistan.
If the traces match up with Pakistani centrifuges, nuclear
experts believe, that would confirm claims by Iran that its
centrifuges originally came from Pakistan and may help to
establish how far the Iranian nuclear programme has developed.
Pakistan has been dragged in to the Iranian controversy after
last year's revelations that A.Q. Khan, the so-called father of
the country's nuclear bomb project, had sold technology to Iran,
Libya and possibly North Korea. Dr Khan was publicly humiliated
when he was forced to make a public confession on television and
has since been under house arrest.
"In principle, some time back a decision was taken [to hand over
the centrifuges]" said Khurshid Mehmud Kasuri, Pakistan's
foreign minister.
Mr Kasuri said Pakistan had acted "as a responsible nuclear
power" in co-operating with the IAEA.
He repeated Pakistan's position that it would neither allow the
physical inspection of the country's nuclear facilities nor
allow anyone from outside the country to interview Dr Khan over
his activities.
Western diplomats said suspicions continued among western
governments over how far the network of Mr Khan extended and who
were the recipients of his supply chain.
"Pakistan needs to accept some globally recognised means to
independently verify the exact outcome of investigations in the
A.Q. Khan case," added the western official.
"Right now, it's only Pakistan's word to suggest that the Khan
network has been put out of business."
[ height=] © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT"
and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.
*****************************************************************
14 Bellona: UK agreement to strengthen nuclear security in Russia
UK agreement to strengthen nuclear security in Russia
The UK Government in March agreed a contract to undertake an
upgrade of physical security at a key Russian Nuclear Research
Centre.
2005-04-01 18:54
The contract, to be managed by experts from British Nuclear
Group, will focus on the Nikiet Institute in the centre of
Moscow. It is one of Russia's leading nuclear research centers.
The project is worth up to 2 million euro and will focus on the
provision of physical protection upgrades on fencing, lighting,
CCTV and access control systems.
Trade and Industry Minister Nigel Griffiths commented: This is
the first major contract under the DTI Global Partnership
Nuclear Security Program. We believe this work will play a vital
role in ensuring top level protection for nuclear materials,
which are based at the Nikiet Institute. Prevention of the
proliferation of nuclear materials is one of this Government's
highest international priorities, and this project represents a
significant landmark in our co-operation with the Russian
Federation to address this threat."
Welcoming the UK assistance, Nikiet Institute Director, Dr
Gabaraev said: We regard this as a vital step in improving
security at the Institute. We are pleased to be able to work
with UK experts in this area and look forward to successful
project implementation."
The UK Nuclear Security program is part of the UK Global
Partnership program against the spread of weapons and materials
of mass destruction agreed at the Kananaskis G8 summit in Canada
in June 2002. The Global Partnership program aims to support
specific co-operation projects, initially in Russia, to address
non-proliferation, disarmament, counter-terrorism and nuclear
safety issues.
Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge
Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact:
webmaster@bellona.no
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
15 BBC: US dismisses N Korea talks offer
Last Updated: Friday, 1 April, 2005
[US assistant secretary of state for east Asian and Pacific
affairs-designate, Christopher Hill, talks to the media during a
brief visit to Hong Kong, 31 March 2005]
Mr Hill is the US representative at the six-party talks process
The United States has dismissed a proposal from North Korea for
mutual disarmament talks.
The chief US negotiator, Christopher Hill, said the offer was not
helpful and not serious.
Pyongyang withdrew indefinitely from six-nation talks on its
nuclear status in February.
On Thursday, it said the focus of any future talks should no
longer be on the North alone, but on regional disarmament by all
parties involved.
Mr Hill said that if the North Koreans wanted to make "sarcastic"
statements, they should come back to the talks and make them
there, and not put out what he called "silly" press statements.
The BBC correspondent in Seoul, Charles Scanlon, says the
exchange underlines the width of the gulf between the two sides.
Until now, North Korea has been demanding security guarantees and
economic assistance in return for a nuclear freeze. It now seems
to be aiming for a much more ambitious outcome, our correspondent
says.
'US threat'
A North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said on Thursday that
Pyongyang had only felt compelled to build its own arsenal
because of the threat from the US.
"The US keeps many tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea on a
permanent basis. And it is ceaselessly shipping nuclear strike
means there," the spokesman said.
"The US claims that if the DPRK [North Korea] dismantles its
nuclear weapons first, it will be given 'collective assurances
for security' and get a 'benefit'. This is, however, nothing but
a gangster-like logic urging the DPRK to disarm itself and yield
to the US domination."
He added that because Pyongyang now possessed nuclear weapons,
rather than just the means to make them, the talks' emphasis
should change.
"Now that the DPRK has become a full-fledged nuclear weapons
state, the six-party talks should be disarmament talks where the
participating countries negotiate the issue on an equal footing,"
he said.
Since 2002, three rounds of discussions involving the US, Russia,
the two Koreas, Japan and China have sought to ease tensions on
the peninsula, with little success.
In February, North Korea said it was pulling out of the process,
claiming it was furious that US Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice had branded it an "outpost of tyranny".
*****************************************************************
16 JOURNAL NEWS: Lowey calls for NRC to release report
www.thejournalnews.com/
By MICHAEL RISINIT
(Original publication: April 1, 2005)
Delaying the release of an independent report on the terrorism
risk posed by nuclear waste, including material at Indian Point
in Buchanan, could endanger residents, Congresswoman Nita Lowey
told the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lowey, a Democrat from Harrison, joined U.S. Rep. Edward Markey,
D-Mass., in writing a letter this week to NRC Chairman Nils
Diaz, urging him to make public a study on radioactive waste
storage at reactor sites nationwide.
Congress commissioned the National Academy of Sciences to
produce the report, which was issued as a classified document in
July. Since then, debate between the physicists, engineers and
other scientists who authored the study and the NRC has revolved
around what information should be removed from the public
version so it doesn't become a blueprint for terrorists.
The wait is unacceptable, said Julie Edwards, Lowey's
spokeswoman. The congresswoman's outcry echoed a similar one
made recently by several activist groups. Last week, the Indian
Point Safe Energy Coalition and two Washington, D.C.-based
advocacy groups said the report's delay was threatening public
safety.
"The public should have this report," Edwards said. "The
classified version was released eight months ago."
Late yesterday, the NRC said a public version should come out
next week.
The report evaluates the safety and security of nuclear waste
storage, according to the academy's Web site, and whether the
NRC should favor depositing used fuel in steel-and-concrete
silos or hardening security measures around spent-fuel pools.
NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the academy's preference for
casks has "no sound technical basis" and the commission
considers either storage method to be safe. The delay in the
report's release, he said, arises from the need to balance
openness with protecting information regarding plant security.
"We believe the report that will be released strikes the
appropriate balance between the public's right to know and our
obligation to protect information that could be useful to
terrorists," Sheehan said.
Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, Indian
Point's owner, said, "We're in favor of releasing as much
information as possible but respect NRC's responsibility to
determine if releasing information would lessen security."
Copyright 2005 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper
serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York.
*****************************************************************
17 Xinhua: China continues efforts to maintain peace on Korean Peninsula
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-04-01 16:53:50
BEIJING, April 1 (Xinhuanet) -- Jia Qinglin, head of China's
top political advisory body, said here Friday that China will
continue its efforts to maintain peace and stability on the
Korean Peninsula.
"China will continue to promote dialogue to peacefully solve
the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and remains devoted to
the goal of a nuclear-free peninsula," Jia, chairman of the
National Committee of the Chinese People's Political
Consultative Conference, said while meeting with Yoon Kwang-ung,
minister of National Defense of the Republic of Korea (ROK).
To solve the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula, China,
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the United States,
Russia, the ROK and Japan have already held three rounds of
talks in Beijing. But so far there is no indication when the
six-party talks could be restarted.
During the meeting with ROK defense minister, Jia extolled
China's relations with ROK, saying that the two countries have
enjoyed all-round cooperation since they set up full diplomatic
ties in 1992.
"China is willing to improve neighborly friendship with the
ROKand promote mutual understanding and mutually beneficial
cooperation to deepen the comprehensive cooperative partnership
between the two countries," Jia said.
Yoon said promoting ROK-China comprehensive cooperative
partnership accords with the two countries' fundamental
interests.He also expressed his government's firm stance on the
one-China policy.
Yoon arrived in Beijing Wednesday and talked with Chinese
Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan on the following day. Enditem
Copyright 2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
18 AU ABC: N Korea says US poses nuclear threat.
01/04/2005. ABC News Online
North Korea says six-party talks aimed at ending a stand-off
over its nuclear program should be transformed into wider arms
reduction talks, and look at the nuclear threat the United
States poses to the Korean peninsula.
The statement issued through North Korea's official news agency
said the six-party dialogue could only bear fruit if it sought
ways to root out the threat that the United States poses.
In February the North Koreans acknowledged they had already
produced nuclear weapons before withdrawing from the talks
indefinitely.
Last week North Korean Premier Pak Pong-Ju held talks in Beijing
with China's top leaders and reiterated his country was ready to
resume negotiations on its nuclear programs, but only when
conditions were right.
AEST = Australian Eastern Standard Time which is 10 hours ahead
*****************************************************************
19 Progressive News: WMD Commission Continues the Stonewall for Bush
by David Corn
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that
matter. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
April 1, 2005
Two years after Bush launched the invasion of Iraq, there still
has been no official inquiry into how he and his lieutenants
handled the prewar intelligence. The question is whether Bush and
other administration officials exaggerated the intelligence
community's overstatements.
published by DavidCorn.com
The stonewall continues.
On Thursday, President Bush's commission on weapons of mass
destruction intelligence released a 692-page report that harshly
criticizes the US intelligence establishment. It notes that "the
Intelligence Community was dead wrong in almost all of it
pre-war judgments about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. This
was a major intelligence failure." That's no news flash. The
Senate intelligence committee issued a report last July that
said the same. But like the Senate committee, Bush's
commission--cochaired by Judge Laurence Silberman, a Republican,
and former Senator Chuck Robb, a Democrat--ignored a key issue:
whether Bush and his aides overstated and misrepresented the
flawed intelligence they received from the intelligence
agencies. As I wrote about days ago, Senator Pat Roberts, the
Republican chairman of the intelligence committee, promised last
summer that his committee would investigate the administration's
prewar use (or abuse) of the WMD intelligence after the 2004
election, but more recently Roberts backed away from that vow,
claiming such an inquiry would now be pointless. The commission,
which claimed it found no evidence that Bush officials pressured
intelligence analysts to rig their reports, notes in a footnote,
Our review has been limited by our charter to the question of
alleged policymaker pressure on the Intelligence Community to
shape its conclusions to conform to the policy preferences of
the Administration. There is a separate issue of how
policymakers used the intelligence they were given and how they
reflected it in their presentations to Congress and the public.
That issue is not within our charter and we therefore did not
consider it nor do we express a view on it.
So two years after Bush launched the invasion of Iraq, there
still has been no official inquiry into how he and his
lieutenants handled the prewar intelligence. The question is
whether Bush and other administration officials exaggerated the
intelligence community's overstatements. And the evidence
suggests they did. Bush claimed Saddam Hussein was "dealing
with" al Qaeda before the war, but the CIA had not reported
that. Bush said Hussein had amassed a "massive stockpile" of
biological weapons, yet the intelligence community had only
reported (errantly) that Iraq had an active research and
development program for biological weapons. Bush and his
Republican allies in Congress have so far succeeded in keeping
his role in the WMD scandal out of the picture. (Democrats,
where are you?)
The presidential WMD commission found numerous problems within
the intelligence community. It says, "we still know disturbingly
little about the weapons programs and even less about the
intentions of many of our most dangerous adversaries." (This is
bad news for anyone who wants to bomb Iran or North Korea.) The
report is mostly depressing, as it describes severe dysfunctions
within the intelligence establishment. But the commission casts
little, if any, blame toward the person ultimately responsible
for the intelligence community: the president of the United
States. And the current president even bestowed upon former CIA
director George Tenet, who was at the helm during this period of
screw-ups, the presidential Medal of Freedom. (Deputy Defense
Secretary Paul Wolfowitz received one, too. And yesterday the
Rand Corporation released a report concluding that his Pentagon
failed to plan adequately for the aftermath of the Iraq
invasion. The Rand study says that stabilization and
reconstruction issues "were addressed only very generally" and
"no planning was undertaken to ensure the security of the Iraqi
people.")
The WMD commission took only a few modest steps toward
addressing--in the most general terms--the role played by Bush
and the policymakers in the Iraq WMD intelligence failure. For
instance, the commission notes,
The Intelligence Community needs to be pushed. It will not do
its best unless it is pressed by policymakers-sometimes to the
point of discomfort. Analysts must be pressed to explain how
much they don't know; the collection agencies must be pressed to
explain why they don't have better information on key topics.
While policymakers must be prepared to credit intelligence that
doesn't fit their preferences, no important intelligence
assessment should be accepted without sharp questioning that
forces the community to explain exactly how it came to that
assessment and what alternatives might also be true.
It's obvious that Bush did not push the intelligence services in
this fashion. As the White House has conceded, Bush did not even
read the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq produced in
October 2002. This was the intelligence community's ultimate
summary of its intelligence on Iraq. A close reading of the
document could have led Bush or national security adviser
Condoleezza Rice (who also did not read the 90-page paper) to
raise the sort of questions the commission suggests. But that
did not happen. When Silberman was asked at a press conference
if Bush had been inquisitive enough, he referred to a passage in
Bob Woodward's latest book in which Bush is depicted asking
Tenet if the intelligence is sound and Tenet maintains it is a
"slam-dunk." That clearly was not good enough.
The commission also observes,
The analysts who worked Iraqi weapons issues universally agreed
that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or
alter any of their analytical judgments. That said, it is hard
to deny the conclusion that intelligence analysts worked in an
environment that did not encourage skepticism about the
conventional wisdom.
The commission suggests that it is partly the responsibility of
the president to guarantee that conventional wisdom is
questioned. But Bush did no such thing. With this report, the
CIA is again cast as the fall guy. And Bush escapes merrily.
A government nonproliferation expert with experience dealing
with intelligence analysts, who has read the report, sent me
his/her assessment. This source asked to go unnamed, fearing
retribution at the workplace for publicly blasting the report.
Below is an excerpt of his/her analysis:
[The commission] focuses on how and why the dogs barked [and got
it wrong]. The real point, however, is: why didn't someone look
out the window? And why have no policymakers taken
responsibility, anywhere, for drastically wrong assessments on
Iraq?
The Commission's report is a good read and thorough. The
recommendations -- to collect better intelligence, do better
analysis, and communicate better -- however, reflect the
absurdity of having intelligence experts tell each other how to
do their job better. The users of intelligence should be
involved. The Commission had 60 staff members, but only three
have identifiable expertise in nonproliferation and none have
nonproliferation policy experience. Why didn't the Commission
include more nonproliferation experts?
There are lots of reasons....The Commission was appointed by the
president and it is politically easier for this administration
to focus on intelligence rather than policy failures, for
obvious reasons. Nonproliferation experts might point out that
even though the intelligence was flawed, someone with enough
nonproliferation experience would have asked more questions.
Despite the fascinating details of how and why the intelligence
on uranium from Niger was faulty, an expert would point out that
there were tons of natural and low-enriched uranium already in
Iraq: even if Iraq got uranium from Niger, it wouldn't make a
discernible difference in the quantity it could enrich. Iraq's
first choice would be to take the safeguarded material (just as
it planned to do before the 1991 war) and use that. Faster and
less complicated. A nonproliferation expert would also know that
the CIA's arguments that Iraq was reconstituting its cadre of
nuclear weapons personnel were an old, tired mantra repeated
since the early 1990s. In interagency meetings ten years ago, I
used to ask them, what evidence do you have? "Well," the
analysts would say, "we think he's doing it." Apparently their
evidence never got any better.
For Bush--or the commission--to say he was misled by the
intelligence community is not a sufficient explanation or
defense. First, Bush didn't ensure the intelligence he received
was solid. Then he and his lieutenants repeatedly said in public
that the intelligence was beyond doubt, and they made dramatic
assertions about the supposed threat presented by Hussein's WMDs
that went far beyond what the intelligence (wrongly) claimed. In
keeping the spotlight exclusively on the intelligence gang and
not turning it also on the policymakers at the White House, the
WMD commission has served Bush well, but not the public.
A Public Interest Newsletter and Policy Information Service.
website copyright 2003, 2004
www.ProgressiveTrail.Org
*****************************************************************
20 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Still Waiting for U.S. Apology
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday April 1, 2005 5:46 AM
By BURT HERMAN Associated Press Writer
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea is waiting for the United
States to apologize for calling it an ``outpost of tyranny''
before the communist state will return to nuclear talks, a
senior official said, as the North announced Friday it will
convene a rubber-stamp parliament expected to endorse its
boycott of the talks.
In a one-sentence dispatch, the communist country's official
Korean Central News Agency said the meeting of the Supreme
People's Assembly would be held April 11.
Pyongyang originally said it would convene the meeting in early
March, after its bold Feb. 10 statement that it had nuclear
weapons and would indefinitely boycott six-nation disarmament
talks.
The parliament, filled with regime loyalists and lacking any
real power, was expected then to endorse the North's decision to
avoid the arms talks. A week before the February meeting, the
session was postponed without explanation.
The delay triggered speculation among North Korea watchers, with
some believing Pyongyang might be leaving itself room to back
down from its Feb. 10 statement and return to the talks.
Friday's announcement that the parliament will meet comes after
North Korea said Thursday that it wanted to be treated as an
equal at the six-nation disarmament talks, now that it claims to
have nuclear weapons. It also urged the United States to
verifiably remove all its potential nuclear threats in the
region.
``Now that we have become a nuclear power, the six-party talks
should be disarmament talks where participants can solve the
issue on an equal basis,'' an unidentified North Korean Foreign
Ministry spokesman said.
Still, Pyongyang is waiting for the United States apologize over
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labeling the North one
of the world's ``outposts of tyranny.'' Rice has refused to
apologize, but during a trip to the region last month she
pointedly labeled the North a ``sovereign'' country - a comment
many saw as an attempt to soften her earlier remark.
However, Han Song-ryol, deputy chief of the North's mission to
the U.N., said Pyongyang felt Rice's recent comment ``cannot be
taken as being equivalent to an apology.''
``In order to reopen the talks, there should be the right
justification and conditions,'' South Korea's Yonhap News Agency
quoted Han as saying. ``That is a clear apology from the U.S.
for the outpost of tyranny remarks.''
Han said the North's statement Thursday was meant to highlight
Pyongyang's view that the latest crisis stems from a perceived
U.S. nuclear threat. Washington has said it has withdrawn all
nuclear weapons from the Korean Peninsula.
``It depends on the U.S. whether the six-party talks resume or
not,'' he said. ``But, I don't think the U.S. will drop its
hostile policy.''
Three rounds of nuclear disarmament talks - which involve the
two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the U.S. - have been held
since 2003 with no breakthrough. A September session was never
held because the North refused to attend, citing Washington's
alleged hostile policy toward Pyongyang.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
21 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Intel Panel Sees Difficult Task Ahead
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday April 1, 2005 8:31 AM
AP Photo WHRE102
By JOHN J. LUMPKIN Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The presidential commission investigating U.S.
intelligence and weapons of mass destruction describes a world
in which the threats are legion and growing ever more deadly,
and lays out a difficult path for the nation's new intelligence
chief.
``It is not hyperbole to suggest that the lives of millions, and
the very fabric and fate of our society, may depend on the way
in which the (intelligence) community is configured, and the
powers it can bring to bear against the challenges posed by
(weapons) proliferation,'' the commission said.
The 3 years since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks have
seen little improvement in the U.S. intelligence community's
ability to acquire hard information about nuclear and biological
threats, the commission said in findings it released Thursday.
The panel suggested numerous organizational changes and said
President Bush could implement most of them without
congressional action. It emphasized that the White House needed
to put its full weight behind John Negroponte, the president's
choice to coordinate the spy community, as Negroponte confronts
the intelligence agencies' ``almost perfect record of resisting
external recommendations.''
Bush promised immediate action.
``To win the war on terror, we will correct what needs to be
fixed,'' the president said at a news conference with retired
Judge Laurence Silberman, a Republican, and former Democratic
Sen. Charles Robb of Virginia, the commission's co-chairmen.
Bush said he had directed his White House-based homeland
security adviser, Fran Townsend, to ``assure that concrete
actions are taken.''
The CIA's new director, Porter Goss, said in a statement: ``We
appreciate constructive criticism. We acknowledge mistakes when
we make them.''
Commissioners avoided blaming Bush and other policy chiefs for
leading the United States into a war on the faulty basis of
Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction. Nor did it suggest
they were at fault for the problems that continue to plague
intelligence agencies.
Robb and Silberman said they found no evidence that senior Bush
administration officials sought to change the prewar
intelligence in Iraq. The report was silent on whether the
administration manipulated the data for political purposes, as
Democrats have contended, with commission members saying they
were not empowered to examine that.
Democrats, including Bush's 2004 opponent, Massachusetts Sen.
John Kerry, used the findings to demand faster changes and to
point fingers.
``The investigation will not be complete unless we know how the
Bush administration may have used or misused intelligence to
pursue its own agenda,'' House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi,
D-Calif., said.
The commission's 600-plus-page report described an intelligence
community hampered by internal turf battles and a fundamental
lack of access to hard information, through human sources. It
blamed agencies for seeing weapons that didn't exist in Iraq,
and it harped on them for failing to find them in other dark
corners of the world.
``The flaws we found in the intelligence community's Iraq
performance are still all too common,'' the report said.
``Across the board, the intelligence community knows
disturbingly little about the nuclear programs of many of the
world's most dangerous actors. In some cases, it knows less now
than it did five or 10 years ago.''
It said, ``Biological weapons are also the mass casualty threat
the intelligence community is least prepared to face.'' And, it
added, ``We would like to emphasize that the United States has
not made (intelligence) collection on loose nukes a high
priority.''
The commission saved for a classified report details about U.S.
knowledge of weapons programs in Iran, North Korea, China and
Russia.
But in the unclassified section, the report said, ``We found
that we have only limited access to critical information about
several of these high-priority intelligence targets.''
The Bush administration promised repeated reforms after the
Sept. 11 attacks and again after the blown intelligence on Iraq
became known. It created counterterrorism centers, the Homeland
Security Department and finally a national intelligence
director's post, nominating Negroponte, the U.S. ambassador to
Iraq, to fill it.
But so far, little has changed, according to commission.
``Perhaps above all, the intelligence community is too slow to
change the way it does business. It is reluctant to use new
human and technical collection methods; it is behind the curve
in applying cutting-edge technologies; and it has not adapted
its personnel practices and incentives structures to fit the
needs of a new job market,'' the report said.
Intelligence agencies, who have faced constant criticism since
Sept. 11, argue otherwise, saying they already have instituted
many of the changes various reports and commissions have sought.
The report urges wide authority for Negroponte, who would become
Goss' boss once confirmed. The commission offered 74
recommendations aimed at changing the structure and culture of
the nation's 15 spy agencies. It called for more clarity in the
powers of the newly created national intelligence director, an
overhaul of national security efforts in the Justice Department
and dozens of changes in intelligence collection and analysis.
---
Associated Press writers Katherine Shrader and Matt Kelley
contributed to this report.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
22 [du-list] Will US apply Army regs on DU?
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:32:44 -0800
http://www.traprockpeace.org/depleted_uranium_regs.html
The US military has recently 'recognized' its own Army regulations on
uranium weapons (DU) in two publications. But will it now comply with its
environmental and health care mandates? Or will Iraq be left to deal with
this radioactive and toxic mess on its own?
While the military continues to claim that DU is virtually harmless, its own
documents admit to its serious health risks to soldiers and civilians alike.
This article cites numerous resources, and asks people to take action.
Charles Jenks, attorney at law
President of the Core Group
Traprock Peace Center
103A Keets Road
Deerfield, MA 01342
413-773-5188; Fax 413-773-7507
charles@mtdata.com
http://traprockpeace.org
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RzSHvD/UOnJAA/79vVAA/FGYolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
23 AP Wire: California regulators set perchlorate drinking water goal
| 04/01/2005 |
DON THOMPSON
Associated Press
SACRAMENTO - California regulators said Friday they will keep
the state's existing public health goal for a rocket fuel
component that can foul drinking water, because it is consistent
with a recent study by the National Academy of Sciences.
Setting a health goal is the first step toward establishing a
limit on the amount of perchlorate allowed in drinking water.
The California Environmental Protection Agency's Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment set the goal a year ago,
but reviewed it considering the academy's study released in
January.
The agency set six parts per billion as the level of perchlorate
in drinking water that won't affect health. California's
national defense and space industries used perchlorate heavily,
mostly as a component of rocket fuel, explosives, fireworks,
road flares and air-bag inflation systems.
It has been found in drinking water sources around the state,
including Colorado River water that serves 15 million customers.
Environmental groups say the goal is set too high to prevent
health threats, including thyroid disorders, particularly for
pregnant women and children.
But the hazard assessment office's director, Joan E. Denton,
said the science academy's report "provides strong support for
the approach that we took in developing our public health goal."
The goal also was reviewed by University of California
scientists.
The academy said the health effects should be gauged using the
same 2002 study based on human trials that was used by state
regulators. Other findings by the national academy also are
consistent with California's review, and nothing conflicted with
California's decision, the state office said.
The state office also said a new study by three Texas Tech
University researchers on perchlorate levels in human breast
milk does not justify any revisions in the California decision
because it did not track whether the perchlorate came from
drinking water.
The agency promised to keep monitoring scientific studies, and
noted it is required by law to update its findings every five
years.
Based on the health goal, the state Department of Health
Services sets a standard for the chemical that is required to be
as close to the goal set by the EPA as economically and
technically feasible.
Perchlorate contamination has shut down hundreds of wells, and
the chemical has been found in crops produced in affected areas.
Thousands of lawsuits are pending by people claiming that years
of drinking contaminated water has caused cancers and other
illness.
ON THE NET
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment:
www.oehha.ca.gov
*****************************************************************
24 Platts: Nuclear fuel safety study deal reached
+ Staffs of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the National
Academy of Sciences reached agreement today on an unclassified
version of an NAS study on the safety and security of spent fuel
storage at US nuclear plants, NRC spokesman Eliot Brenner said.
Brenner called the agreement conditional on management approval
by both NRC and NAS. If agreed to, a public version of the
report could be published by NAS next week, Brenner said.
The classified version of the study was completed last July.
Since then, the agency has been in talks with NAS over what
information should be withheld from public disclosure, and
controversy has simmered over whether the study's findings
indicate enough risk for plant spent fuel pools that NRC should
require utilities to expand dry cask spent fuel storage.
Brenner said NRC agreed with most points NAS raised in the report
and wanted only to ensure that no information made available was
useful to terrorists.
Nuclear fuel safety study deal reached
Washington (Platts)--31Mar2005
Copyright 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
25 EC: California May Allow Rocket Fuel Pollution to Remain in Drinking
Water Supplies of Millions
Environment California
For Immediate Release:
April 1, 2005
For More Information: Sujatha Jahagirdar (323) 309-6120
Penny Newman (951) 360-8451
Despite new data showing the presence of the rocket fuel chemical
perchlorate in the milk of nursing mothers and widespread
contamination of food, California Environmental Protection Agency
will move forward with a final public health goal (PHG) for
perchlorate that fails to protect newborn infants from
perchlorate and may let the biggest polluters in the state off
the hook.
"We are absolutely appalled that the State will not protect our
babies from rocket fuel contamination in our drinking water,"
stated Penny Newman, Executive Director for the Inland
Valley-based Center for Community Action and Environmental
Justice (CCAEJ). "This public health goal does not protect
public health. It protects polluters." The recommendation will
be used by the Department of Health Services in setting a final
cleanup standard for the contaminant in drinking water.
According to a letter issued by state officials yesterday, the
decision to move forward with a public health goal of 6 ppb does
not incorporate recent findings of perchlorate in the milk of
nursing mothers throughout the country and is six times weaker
than a similar recommendation issued in Massachusetts last year.
"The State is openly telling us that our babies don't count,"
said Jan Misquez, Campaign Director for the Inland Valley
Perchlorate Task Force in San Bernardino. "They clearly stated
that they did not consider the impacts on breast fed babies and
have no plans to do so-this is truly policy setting by ignoring
the scientific evidence available."
A final standard set at six parts per billion may avert a legal
requirement for Kerr McGee Corporation to fully cleanup
contamination leaking into the Colorado River, which supplies
water to 135 California cities and irrigates much of the
nation's winter produce crop. A December Environmental
Protection Agency reports lists the maximum level of perchlorate
in the Colorado River at Parker Dam at 5.7 ppb, just under the
new health recommendation.
Federal regulators and community activists have described Kerr
McGee's contamination of the Colorado River with perchlorate as
the single largest pollution problem in the nation.
"The bottom line is that rocket fuel has no place in our water
supplies. Polluters put it there, they should get it out. All of
it." stated Sujatha Jahagirdar, Clean Water Advocate for
Environment California Research &Policy Center and co-author of
the recent Center study, Perchlorate and Children's Health.
"It seems a bit too coincidental that the suggested public
health goal is just above the levels found in the Colorado
River, relieving the polluters from having to clean up the
contamination," said CCAEJ's Newman. Recent studies of lettuce
and other crops that largely originate from regions irrigated
with Colorado River water have shown an elevated concentration
of the chemical in food. "By setting a level at 6ppb, we're
guaranteeing that our food supply will be contaminated."
According to a health studies conducted by state and federal
regulators, and the National Academy of Sciences, at low levels,
perchlorate can harm the thyroid gland. Deficiencies in hormones
controlled by the thyroid gland are linked to problems in brain
development that can lead to conditions such as attention
deficit disorder, learning disabilities and decreased IQ.
Massachusetts regulators have suggested one part per billion as
a safer threshold to protect babies. When adjusted to protect
infants and account for exposure through food, recent EPA and
National Academy of Sciences studies point to the same.
In addition to allowing contamination to continue to pollute the
Colorado River, the public health goal issued today may lead to
a cleanup standard that will let polluters in the Morgan Hill
area off the hook for cleaning up 75 percent of the wells it has
contaminated.
"What we are talking about here is the brain development of our
babies. Protecting them should be a top priority for every state
official," concluded Jahagirdar.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. #385 Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone (213) 251-3688 Fax (213) 251-3699
E-mail: Top Photo Br. Alfred Brousseau, Saint Mary's College
*****************************************************************
26 KLAS: Down-Winder Study Stopped, No More Funding
April 01, 2005
Adrian Arambulo
We may never know if nuclear tests in the 1950s caused a higher
rate of thyroid cancer among "down-winders" -- those who lived
in fallout zones. The government has cut off funding for a study
trying to find answers.
The Centers for Disease Control says it no longer has the money
to fund research that focused on the long-term effects of those
who lived down wind of the aboveground nuclear testing done in
Nevada. Prior studies that centered on the connection between
the testing and thyroid disease were not promising.
Fiery explosions, ballooning mushroom clouds, and gaping craters
were all common sights at the Nevada Test Site in the 1950s and
60s.
Today, some people are living with the consequences.
"They don't care about us, they don't want to acknowledge what
happened," said Colleen Hill.
Hill is a "down-winder," a person who lived downwind from a
nuclear test site. She grew up in Utah, when work at the Nevada
Test Site was at its peak.
Hill considers herself lucky, "'Cause I'm still alive."
She has health problems and so does her sister. Their brother
died of non-Hodgkins lymphoma>, just one of many deaths in her
community.
Probably 40-50 percent of the children, when they reached the
age of 35-40, were dying of cancer," said Hill.
For years, the federal government spent millions studying health
risks for those living in fallout zones. One study showed that
residents of Utah, Nevada, and Arizona were three times more
likely to develop thyroid tumors
A map from Nuclearfiles.org shows the impact of testing, well
beyond this region. Nuclearfiles.org is a project of the Nuclear
Age Peace Foundation.
"The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation's nuclear files project is a
web site devoted to the history of the nuclear age. By providing
background information, analysis and access to primary
documents, this site is an educational resource exploring the
political, legal and ethical challenges stemming from the
continued existence of nuclear weapons."
But with the study not even halfway done, the federal government
says the project has run dry of funding.
Dina Titus (D) State Senator said, "This is a typical way for
government saving money on the backs of people they don't think
are a high priority."
"What they have found is an increased level in thyroid cancer,
and it would seem to me the CDC would want to know the full
extent of the problem," said Peggy Maze Johnson, executive
director of Citizen Alert.
A spokesperson with the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services says funding has already been extended twice.
Local community activists say they will ask Nevada elected
officials to pressure the federal government to find a way to
finish the study.
Eyewitness News tried contacting the Nevada Test Site and CDC
officials at a late hour. They were not available at the time.
Learn more:
The Manhattan Project | Biographies The Nuclear Disarmament
Movement
Copyright 2000 - 2005 WorldNow and KLAS. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
27 [NukeNet] Editorial: NRC stonewalling spent fuel report
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:32:39 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
March 29, 2005
EDITORIAL
Asbury Park Press
NRC stonewalling spent fuel report
Wary of conflicting claims about the safety of spent nuclear fuel storage
at commercial nuclear power plants, Congress in late 2003 directed the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to pay the National Academy of Sciences to
study the issue.
Its classified report was completed last summer, but an unclassified
summary of its finding has not been made public, despite explicit
instructions from Congress to do so. The first insight into what the report
contained came two weeks ago in a letter the NRC sent to Congress rebutting
the report's findings and objecting to several of its recommendations.
Among other things, the NRC opposed NAS' call for fuller analysis of the
implications of the loss of coolant in spent fuel pools - including a loss
triggered by a terrorist assault - and an analysis detailing the
vulnerabilities of various spent fuel pool designs.
The NRC also took exception to the report's finding that it needed to
consider "maximum-credible scenarios" in analyzing spent fuel pool safety
and security. The NRC said "that analysis of bounding or unrealistic
scenarios can lead to a misinterpretation of the actual risk and this can
cause confusion among the public." Nonsense. The NAS wasn't suggesting
"unrealistic scenarios." It was proposing security standards that posed
realistic worst-case scenarios - a perfectly reasonable request given the
consequences of a catastrophic event.
For people living in the shadow of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in
Lacey, and the state and federal elected officials responsible for
safeguarding public health and safety, the NRC's refusal to release the
findings of the NAS report, and its repeated failure to adequately address
the risks posed by spent fuel, should be cause for grave concern.
Oyster Creek, the oldest commercial nuclear power plant in the nation, is
one of 32 plants whose design makes its spent fuel pools particularly
vulnerable to airborne attack. The pool is located high inside the reaction
building and is protected by thin roofs and walls that could be easily
penetrated by an aircraft. In August 2004, the attorneys general of seven
states, including New York and Connecticut, asked the NRC to order security
upgrades at nuclear power plants with such designs to better guard against
terrorist attacks from the air and water. There has been no response.
In addition to assessing the vulnerability of spent fuel storage to
terrorist attacks, the NAS studied the potential health risks posed by
storing far more spent fuel rods in the pools than many scientists believe
is safe - as is the case at Oyster Creek - and the potential safety
advantages, if any, of various dry cask storage designs. It is not clear
from the NRC response what the NAS recommended on these points.
Scientists and public interest groups have suggested relatively inexpensive
solutions to decrease vulnerability from airborne attacks - suggestions
stubbornly ignored by the industry and the NRC. But no has come up with a
long-term answer to how to dispose of the millions of tons of nuclear waste
that continue to pile up at the nation's more than 100 nuclear plants.
Despite the security and safety threats posed by Oyster Creek, New Jersey's
U.S. senators, Jon Corzine and Frank Lautenberg, have yet to take a
position of whether to oppose Oyster Creek's bid for a 20-year license
extension. They need to take a stand. And they need to start putting
pressure on the NRC to release the full NAS study and to begin taking steps
to improve spent fuel security. Rep. James Saxton, a Republican whose
district includes the communities most at-risk should there be a disaster
at Oyster Creek, also should start making some noise. At the same time,
acting Gov. Codey, environmental commissioner Bradley M. Campbell and the
state Assembly Environment Committee, which has been holding hearings on
Oyster Creek, should pay close attention to the threat posed by spent fuel
pools.
In the preface to the NRC's letter to Congress, NRC Chairman Nils J. Diaz
concluded, "The results of security assessments completed to date clearly
show that storage of spent fuel... provides reasonable assurance that
public health and safety, the environment, and the common defense and
security will be adequately protected."
Given the risks associated with a cataclysmic event at a nuclear power
plant, "reasonable assurance" is far too low a standard. The state's
elected officials and residents must hammer that point home to the NRC and
to Congress until it's clear they understand it.
Suzanne Leta
Energy Associate
NJPIRG
11 N. Willow St
Trenton, NJ 08608
609 394 8155 x310
sleta@njpirg.org
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
28 [NukeNet] NY Times and Washington Post: Spent Fuel Storage
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:32:37 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Agencies Fight Over Report on Sensitive Atomic Wastes
By MATTHEW L. WALD
6864e.jpg
Published: March 30, 2005
6867b.jpgASHINGTON, March 29 - A semisecret debate is raging between the
National Academy of Sciences and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission about
the vulnerability of nuclear wastes to terrorist attack and about how
secret the debate should be.
The academy, under orders from Congress, produced a study last summer about
whether the spent-fuel pools at nuclear reactors were vulnerable to
terrorist attacks. The pools hold most of the radioactive material ever
produced at the reactors, far more than the reactors themselves. After the
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, an independent group of scientists published a
paper in a Princeton scientific journal asserting that an enemy could drain
a pool and set a fire that would be "significantly worse than Chernobyl."
68684.jpg
Advertisement
6868d.jpg
Academy officials say they have hit a roadblock in releasing their report.
By law, the academy, which Congress charters, coordinates the work of
academic experts from around the country, and it is supposed to make its
findings public. In cases like the nuclear waste one, it is supposed to
work with the relevant federal agency to develop a version of its report
that has no information that would be useful to terrorists.
The academy sent a draft to the regulatory commission in November. But the
two have not agreed on what information to release. A commission official
said the problem was "aggregation." Although no secret facts appear in the
academy version, piecing together the material disclosed would provide
useful information.
This month, the academy took the unusual step of sending its version to
members of Congress, with classified information removed but still
including "safety sensitive information."
A few days later, the commission sent several lawmakers, Democrats and
Republicans, a rebuttal to the classified report. A spokesman, Eliot
Brenner, said this was not a response to the academy, but because Congress
wanted to know what actions the commission would take.
According to the commission, the academy panel had "identified some
scenarios that are unreasonable."
The rebuttal, sent by Nils J. Diaz, chairman of the commission, said using
those situations could "lead to a misinterpretation of the actual risk, and
this can cause confusion."
Some ideas put forward by the academy "lacked a sound technical basis,"
including having reactor operators move more fuel from the pools to dry
casks, said the rebuttal, which was sent to Senator Pete V. Domenici, the
New Mexico Republican who is chairman of a Senate subcommittee on energy
and water.
Among engineers, those are fighting words. The rebuttal's characterization
is "an incomplete and, consequently, less than accurate description of what
our classified report had to say," the executive officer of the academy, E.
William Colglazier, said in a telephone interview.
In separate interviews, two of the scientists who provided peer review of
the academy study and an author of the study agreed. All three said they
could not talk about what the report said because it remained classified at
the insistence of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
When nuclear fuel is taken out of the reactor, it has to stay in the pool
because it generates so much heat. After about five years, it cools enough
to be put in a sealed cask of steel and concrete.
The casks are filled with inert gas to prevent rust. The fuel warms the
gas, which transfers its heat to the exterior of the cask. Nearly half the
reactors in the United States use such casks because they have run out of
space in their fuel pools and because the government has not accepted the
waste for permanent disposal. Building the casks is expensive, and the
power plant operators have constructed them only as needed and not fast
enough to lower the inventories in the pools.
The commission has repeatedly said cask storage and pool storage are
equally safe. On March 14, Dr. Diaz told reporters at the National Press
Club, "I don't see them as a significant radiological risk."
At many plants, the pools are below ground or nearly so, making attacks
difficult. But at some reactors, the plants are well above grade. In Mr.
Diaz's rebuttal, he refers to a recommendation by the academy that plants
be analyzed individually to evaluate their vulnerability and that at some
the commission "might determine that earlier movements of spent fuel from
pools to dry storage would be prudent."
Frank N. von Hippel, a Princeton professor and co-author of the study that
brought the issue to prominence, was also brought in as a peer reviewer of
the academy study. He said it did not go nearly far enough in urging dry
storage.
"I found it peculiar that the N.R.C. said they did," Dr. von Hippel said.
A declassified version might explain the apparent discrepancy. Mr. Brenner,
the commission spokesman, said his agency sent a new draft to the academy
on Tuesday.
Storage of Nuclear Spent Fuel Criticized
Science Academy Study Points to Risk of Attack
By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 28, 2005; Page A01
A classified report by nuclear experts assembled by the National Academy of
Sciences has challenged the decision by federal regulators to allow commercial
nuclear facilities to store large quantities of radioactive spent fuel in
pools of water.
The report concluded that the government does not fully understand the risks
that a terrorist attack could pose to the pools and ought to expedite the
removal of the fuel to dry storage casks that are more resilient to attack.
The
Bush administration has long defended the safety of the pools, and the nuclear
industry has warned that moving large amounts of fuel to dry storage would be
unnecessary and very expensive.
The report was requested by Congress after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11,
2001, as homeland security officials sought to understand the potential
consequences of a Sept. 11-scale attack on a nuclear facility.
Because the report is classified, its contents were not made public when it
was delivered to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) last summer. Even a
stripped-down, declassified version has remained under wraps since November
because the commission says it contains sensitive information.
However, the commission made excerpts of the report public when Chairman Nils
Diaz sent a letter to Congress on March 14 rebutting some of the academy's
concerns. His letter also suggested that the academy had largely backed the
government's views about the safety of existing fuel storage systems.
E. William Colglazier, executive officer of the academy, said the letter was
misleading and warned that the public needs to learn about the report's
findings.
"There are substantive disagreements between our committee's views and the
NRC," he said in an interview. "If someone only reads the NRC report, they
would
not get a full picture of what we had to say."
Although the commission said it is keeping the report under wraps for
security reasons, some officials who have seen the document suggest that
the NRC is
merely suppressing embarrassing criticism.
"At the same time that the NRC is saying that the National Academy's study is
classified and not releasable to the public, it has somehow managed to send a
detailed rebuttal of the report's conclusions to Congress in unclassified
form," said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who has seen the report.
"I am concerned that the totality of the Commission's actions reflect a
systemic effort to withhold important information from . . . the public,
rather
than a genuine effort to be protective of national security," Markey said in a
March 21 letter to the commission's inspector general.
NRC spokesman Eliot Brenner countered that the commission is "a very open
agency" and that regulators are working with the academy to make the report
public.
"Our core concern is making sure that information that could reasonably be
expected to be available to a terrorist is not publicly available," he
said. "We
are continuing to work with them on finding the right balance."
The report was solicited by Congress to study how best to store spent nuclear
fuel -- tons of rods containing radioactive byproducts of nuclear fission
reactions are produced each year by the nation's 103 electricity-generating
nuclear reactors. Spent fuel rods generate intense heat and dangerous
long-term
radiation that must be contained.
Most of the spent rods are stored in large swimming-pool-like structures
called spent fuel pools, said David Lochbaum, a nuclear safety engineer at the
science and advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists, who has worked at
several plants. The pools are about 45 feet deep and 40 feet square and are
filled
with about 100,000 gallons of circulating water to remove heat and serve as a
radiation shield, he said.
Storage of Nuclear Spent Fuel Criticized
After cooling for about five years, the rods can be moved to dry storage --
heavy casks of lead and steel. But the casks are expensive, and commercial
reactors have elected to leave the rods in the pools until the pools fill up.
Lochbaum said some pools hold 800 to 1,000 tons of rods. In the event of a
terrorist strike, Lochbaum said, the dry casks would be much safer, because
explosions could drain the pools and set off fire and radiation hazards.
The nuclear industry wants the fuel moved to a storage site in Nevada, but
that project has long been plagued by delays and opposition. Steven Kraft,
director of waste management at the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry
group,
said studies had shown that the pools are as safe as the dry casks -- the same
position adopted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
"If the pool is safe and the casks are safe and they both meet the
requirements, there is no justification for going through what is a huge
amount of
expense and worker exposure" to move the rods to dry storage, he said.
In his letter to Congress, Diaz said the academy's recommendation to move
fuel to dry storage was based on "scenarios that were unreasonable."
But Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear engineer with the Institute for Energy and
Environmental Research, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization that
supports underground dry storage of the rods, said the commission had been
lax.
"There is no question that any terrorist who wants to know about spent fuel
has plenty of information already," he said of the withheld report.
"Publication of a report on security will not help terrorists. The only
thing it is
hindering is discussion of public safety."
Diaz's letter to Congress shows that the academy recommended that the
government conduct additional analyses to evaluate "the vulnerabilities and
consequences" to storage pools of "attacks using large aircraft or large
explosives."
The academy also called for a review and upgrade of security measures to
prevent theft of spent fuel rods by insiders and an assessment of security
by "an
independent organization."
The commission letter defended measures it has in place and said that "the
likelihood an adversary could steal spent fuel . . . is extremely low." The
letter said the additional analysis demanded by the academy study was "more
than
is needed" and rejected the call for an independent security analysis, saying
the commission's own assessments were "sound and realistic."
To keep the report secret, the federal agency used a classification called
"Safeguards Information" that it applies to data that are unclassified but
reveal sensitive details about nuclear facilities and security procedures.
Brenner,
the spokesman, emphasized that the academy's report and the commission's
response had been seen by the Department of Homeland Security and members of
Congress charged with oversight. "The full report is there with those with the
appropriate clearances," he said.
The academy's Colglazier said the science organization had produced many
classified reports but had never encountered such hurdles in creating a public
version.
"We don't want to provide information in our report that could be used by
terrorists to exploit vulnerabilities," he said. "But we also want the
public and
decision makers to know what things need to be addressed."
The scientist also rejected Brenner's reassurance that the classified report
had been seen by relevant decision makers. Governors of states with nuclear
plants need to see the report, he said, and the public had an important
role as
well.
"The way our political system works, when politicians hear from their
constituents, they are motivated to take action that they don't when the
public is
unaware," he said.
Suzanne Leta
Energy Associate
NJPIRG
11 N. Willow St
Trenton, NJ 08608
609 394 8155 x310
sleta@njpirg.org
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
Attachment Converted: 6864e.jpg: 00000001,5af9f8ec,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: 6867b.jpg: 00000001,5af9f8ed,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: 68684.jpg: 00000001,5af9f8ee,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: 6868d.jpg: 00000001,5af9f8ef,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
29 [NukeNet] Exelon does not plan to change nuclear waste storage
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:32:43 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Friday, April 1, 2005
By Robert Manor, Tribune staff reporter.
Exelon: No plans to change its storage of nuclear waste
Science group cites risk of terror attack
Despite recommendations by the National Academy of Sciences, Chicago-based
Exelon Corp. says it has no plans to store radioactive nuclear waste from
its reactors in heavily armored containers.
It was disclosed earlier this week that the academy, which advises the
federal government on scientific issues, is suggesting that spent nuclear
fuel be stored in dry casks--massive concrete and steel containers nearly
the size of a truck trailer. Nearly all such highly radioactive waste is
now stored in pools of water, which the academy indicates are at risk of
terrorist attack.
On Thursday, Exelon Chief Executive John Rowe said his company, the largest
operator of nuclear plants in North America, does not intend to empty its
numerous spent-fuel pools and transfer the waste to dry casks.
"There is not such a plan at the moment," Rowe said.
Other company executives said they have not had a chance to see the academy
report. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has held up its release, though a
partial summary is available. The NRC has said the pools are adequate for
storing spent fuel, and it is not necessary to store nuclear waste in dry
casks.
Exelon says that moving the spent waste from storage pools to dry casks
involves exposing workers to some radiation, a practice it avoids whenever
possible.
Money is apparently not an issue. An Exelon spokesman said the government
will reimburse the company for the costs of storing waste in dry casks
because the federal repository in Yucca Mountain is unable to accept waste
for permanent storage.
Critics of the nuclear industry say Exelon's oldest reactors, General
Electric Mark 1 and Mark 2 models, pose the worst threat because their
spent-fuel pools are especially vulnerable to terrorist attack, with the
potential for a catastrophic release of radiation into the atmosphere over
a wide area. General Electric maintains the facilities are safe.
Those reactor models store their spent fuel in deep pools of water mounted
atop the reactor, in some cases more than 100 feet in the air. The pools
are enclosed by sturdy rooms, but are located outside the massive
containment structure that protects the reactor and could not resist an
aerial attack like that of Sept. 11.
"The Mark 1 and Mark 2 are so vulnerable, the fuel has to be removed," said
Deb Katz, executive director of the Citizens Awareness Network.
Other reactor models store their waste in pools set into the ground,
reducing their profiles as a target.
In Illinois, Exelon has a total of six above-ground spent-fuel pools: at
the Dresden 2 and 3 nuclear plant near Morris, the LaSalle 1 and 2 plant in
LaSalle County, and the Quad Cities 1 and 2 plant near Cordova.
It has one elevated spent-fuel pool at the Oyster Creek plant in New Jersey
and four at the Limerick and Peach Bottom plants in Pennsylvania.
Nuclear waste was originally intended to remain in the spent-fuel pool for
five years or so to allow its temperature and radioactivity to decline.
Then it was to be removed for permanent disposal.
"The pools were designed to hold very small amounts of fuel," said Gordon
Thompson, executive director of the Institute for Resource and Security
Studies.
But because the nation has no permanent storage site for spent nuclear
fuel, the pools contain nearly all the waste generated by the plants over
their lifetime, in some cases more than 30 years. Thus, they contain far
more radioactive material than the reactor core.
The waste is kept cool only by the pool's water. Were that water to drain
away, Thompson said, the spent fuel would heat up and eventually ignite.
"It would be exceedingly difficult, impossible even, to put out the fire,"
Thompson said. "All this has been known for many years."
Last year, nuclear physicist Jan Beyea released a paper estimating the cost
if spent nuclear fuel were to burn at selected plants, among them Illinois'
LaSalle.
He said that under one optimistic analysis, a fire at a LaSalle spent-fuel
pool would cause $270 billion in property damage and decontamination
expense. He estimated 6,400 people would die of cancer.
Craig Nesbit, a spokesman for Exelon's nuclear arm, said the prevailing
belief is that the spent-fuel pools are just as safe as dry casks.
"I don't think most people even worry about it one way or the other,"
Nesbit said.
Exelon does put spent nuclear waste into dry casks at two of its plants
because the spent-fuel pools there are full. But the pace of the work is
such that the pools are always full. As new spent fuel comes out of the
reactor and into the water, older fuel is transferred into dry casks.
The report by the highly respected National Academy of Science has been
held up by the NRC, which has stopped releasing information that it says
could aid terrorists in attacking a nuclear plant.
But some details about the report's conclusions were revealed in a letter
and report sent by NRC Chairman Nils Diaz to Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) in
March. For example, the academy wants the NRC to examine scenarios such as
terrorists crashing an airplane into a spent-fuel storage facility. The NRC
said such "unrealistic scenarios" might "cause confusion among the public
and other stakeholders."
Eliot Brenner, spokesman for the NRC, said the agency actually agrees with
many of the academy's suggestions and observations. He said negotiations
with the academy have yielded a tentative agreement to release the report,
probably next week.
----------
rmanor@tribune.com
Captions: PHOTO: Exelon CEO John Rowe says "there is not such a plan at the
moment" to transfer nuclear waste to dry casks. Tribune photo by Chuck Berman.
Suzanne Leta
Energy Associate
NJPIRG
11 N. Willow St
Trenton, NJ 08608
609 394 8155 x310
sleta@njpirg.org
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
30 North Lake Tahoe Bonanza: Yucca e-mails turned over to Congress
April 1, 2005
The Associated Press
LAS VEGAS - In advance of a hearing set for next week, the
government on Tuesday gave a congressional subcommittee e-mails
suggesting workers on the Yucca Mountain project may have
falsified documents.
The Energy Department and the Interior Department complied with a
request for the e-mails from Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., chairman of
a House Government Reform Committee panel that has scheduled a
hearing on the matter April 5.
Subcommittee spokesman Chad Bungard confirmed the e-mails were
turned over, along with some other documents. He said staffers
planned to make redacted versions available to the public on
Friday.
The Energy and Interior departments disclosed earlier this month
that e-mails written by a U.S. Geological Survey scientist from
1998 to 2000 indicated he had fabricated documentation of his
work.
At the time, the USGS was studying how water moves through the
site of the proposed nuclear waste dump 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas - a crucial issue in determining the potential spread of
radiation from the dump.
The inspectors general of the Energy and Interior departments
are investigating.
All contents Copyright 2005 tahoebonanza.com North Lake Tahoe
Bonanza - 925 Tahoe Blvd., Suite 206 - Incline Village, NV 89452
*****************************************************************
31 Nevada Appeal - Opinion: All the eggs in Yucca's basket could be rotten
April 1, 2005
Barry Smith
Here's what the Yucca Mountain falsification of documents
investigation appears to be about: Back in 2000, a U.S.
Department of Energy employee named James Raleigh sent an e-mail
raising questions about the calibration of equipment used to
monitor tests on the flow of water.
In particular, according to a report by Mary O'Driscoll for the
Greenwire Web site, Raleigh was concerned that scientists filled
out paperwork assuring the equipment was properly calibrated
before they had actually received the equipment.
If that's true, then it would explain the FBI's involvement in
the investigation. The documents say right on them that it's
against the law to falsify the information.
It would also explain the potential house-of-cards effect on the
entire DOE project to turn Yucca Mountain into a repository for
the nation's nuclear waste.
Some of the testing in question dates to 1997, which means years
of research that followed could have been based on faulty, or at
least unverifiable, results.
Here's how Raleigh described another problem in an e-mail,
according to Greenwire:
Discrepancies in paperwork for a multimeter "would lead an
auditor to believe the record had been falsified."
"It gives the appearance that the proper signature page is not
available and another record's signature page was used in its
place," Raleigh wrote.
How serious could all this be? Couldn't it just be a matter of
some bureaucratic paperwork being shuffled into the wrong
cubbyhole?
Yes, it could. But as one of Nevada's lawyers put it, "It makes
you wonder if they did anything right."
Indeed, this is an $8 billion project involving thousands of
people over many years so far - and it hasn't even gotten started
yet.
There are bound to be mistakes along the way. In fact, the DOE's
spin so far has been to say the e-mails may well do nothing more
than show the department's quality-control programs were working
correctly.
If mistakes were caught and corrected, if shortcuts were headed
off and procedures followed properly, if no data were actually
compromised and the science remains sound, then no foul. That
kind of damage-control talk is to be expected from the DOE.
But Nevadans are jumping on the disclosures, and for good reason.
The fix has been in almost since the beginning, in more ways than
one.
The first fix was in the selection of Yucca Mountain to be
studied because it appeared to satisfy requirements that humans
could be protected from radioactivity in the nuclear waste
primarily by geological isolation.
The fact it became the only site to be studied was a political
maneuver, yet it might have held up if the initial reasoning had
stood up. But it didn't. The geology at Yucca Mountain won't
protect us from radiation, so the DOE's mission was changed.
Figure out a way - an engineering solution - to store the waste
there, the scientists were told. That's what they've been working
on for several years.
Then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham made his pronouncement in
February 2002 that "sound science supports the determination that
the Yucca Mountain site is scientifically and technically
suitable for the development of a repository." President Bush
acted on the recommendation, and the DOE began its work to prove
that statement to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
As the case has been for more than a decade, Yucca Mountain is a
waiting game.
When Nevadans such as Gov. Kenny Guinn and Attorney General Brian
Sandoval say the state is winning, they mean we're winning the
waiting game.
Already the project is years behind schedule, even for the
postponed 2010 deadline, and there's no new projection. Certainly
the revelation of possible falsification of documents will set it
back years more.
Ultimately there are two possible winning scenarios for Nevada in
the waiting game - that the nuclear industry gets fed up and
begins lobbying for a different political solution, or that
science develops a better, safer way to deal with radioactive
waste.
Columnist George Will recently accused Nevadans of being NIMBYs,
because we don't want a nuclear dump in our back yard. "Nevada is
mostly back yard," notes Will.
Then he goes on to minimize the state's concerns:
"It is insisting on a degree of certainty - absolute certainty,
over 100 millennia - that is unreasonable, even considering the
stakes. And it is making testable assertions about geological and
metallurgical matters about which scientists are now reaching
conclusions that are beyond reasonable doubts.
"Three truths: America must store nuclear waste more safely, can
never prove perfect safety forever, and hence cannot store waste
anywhere it will be welcomed. An axiom: Put all your eggs in one
basket and watch that basket."
Thanks for the advice, George. Not only do you have the axiom
wrong, you overlook the fact that it's the 39 states producing
nuclear waste who are playing the part of NIMBYs.
A nuclear waste site like Yucca Mountain has never before been
attempted. That it can be done remains only a theory. If the
people researching it can't get the paperwork right, it seems
reasonable to believe Nevada could end up with a basket of rotten
eggs.
n Barry Smith is editor of the Nevada Appeal. Contact him at
editor@nevada appeal.com or 881-1221.
All contents Copyright 2005 nevadaappeal.com
Nevada Appeal - 580 Mallory Way - Carson City, NV 89701
*****************************************************************
32 Las Vegas RJ: Bill would block nuclear waste storage in Utah
Friday, April 01, 2005
Lawmakers, environmental groups seek to designate 100,000 acres
wilderness
By TRAVIS REED THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
SALT LAKE CITY -- U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop announced Thursday he
would resurrect a bill designating 100,000 acres of Utah's West
Desert as wilderness, which would preempt a plan to store spent
nuclear fuel 50 miles west of Salt Lake City.
Bishop, R-Utah, was joined by Reps. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and
Chris Cannon, R-Utah, Republican Gov. Jon Huntsman and
representatives from environmental groups in announcing he would
reintroduce the twice-defeated measure.
The legislation says nothing about a plan by the Skull Valley
Band of Goshutes to store nuclear waste on its reservation near
the proposed wilderness, but the designation would mean the
tribe couldn't use a rail spur running through the land to
transport waste to the site.
It also could help protect the Utah Test and Training Range.
Combined with nearby Dugway Proving Ground, the range provides
3.2 million acres of restricted air space for military training
and is the only place in the country to test cruise missiles.
The Skull Valley nuclear depository has wound its way through
the federal regulatory process since 1997. Some fear that if it
is approved, military activities would be restricted at the
range because flight patterns crossing the site engender the
possibility of a catastrophic plane crash into a nuclear waste
storage cask.
The training space is also considered an important asset to
nearby Hill Air Force Base, which Utah is fighting to save in a
new round of military base closures. Closing the base could cost
the state millions of dollars and thousands of jobs.
The coalition gathered for the Thursday announcement represented
a broad spectrum of interests in Utah.
The legislation "brings together our concerns and points us
toward a common solution," said Heidi McIntosh, with the
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, adding that it was a rare
instance in which there was "unanimous agreement" on a
wilderness designation in Utah.
The proposed Cedar Mountains Wilderness contains habitat for
elk, deer, bats, golden eagles, reptiles and scores of other
species.
The legislation is virtually identical to a piece that passed
the U.S. House last year, but failed in the Senate. The only
substantive difference this time is that it also grants the
Goshutes development rights on some nearby federal land, an
attempt to compensate the small, impoverished tribe for its
inability to turn the barren land into a lucrative nuclear dump.
The nuclear storage area would hold up to 4,000 casks filled
with depleted nuclear fuel, about 10 million rods, across 100
acres of the Skull Valley. The waste would be shipped mostly
from reactors east of the Mississippi River. Utah has no nuclear
power plants.
It would be operated by Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of
eight utilities.
The site still faces several regulatory hurdles, including
approval by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but those
gathered Thursday said this was a powerful legislative tool that
could make those irrelevant.
"We are running out of options when it comes to Private Fuel
Storage," Matheson said.
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
33 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Federal agencies criticized
Friday, April 01, 2005
Energy, Interior officials ignore panel's requests for e-mails
By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Rep. Jon Porter House panel chairman plans hearings Tuesday
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Jon Porter charged Thursday that government
agencies are stonewalling Congress by not allowing the public
release of e-mails that suggest Yucca Mountain documents may
have been falsified.
Porter, R-Nev., said a confrontation is looming after Energy
Department and Interior Department officials did not send a
House subcommittee redacted copies of the e-mails and other
documents at the heart of the allegation.
"DOE and (the Interior Department) are not being cooperative,"
said Porter, the subcommittee chairman. "We requested redacted
documents to make sure we could preserve an ongoing criminal
investigation and they have not complied with our request."
The agencies did turn over unredacted documents, but Porter said
that only filled part of the request.
Porter said the development complicates plans to make the
e-mails public in advance of a hearing scheduled for Tuesday.
Without redaction of certain names and potentially incriminating
material, the documents contain information that might
jeopardize investigations being conducted within the two
departments, and now at the FBI, he said.
FBI officials Thursday confirmed it has become involved in
pursuing the Yucca Mountain allegations, raising the possibility
of criminal activity within the nuclear waste project.
"We are involved. We have been assisting the Department of
Energy in looking into the matter," said David Schrom, an FBI
spokesman in Las Vegas, who declined to disclose further
information.
Porter said attorneys with the Subcommittee on the Federal
Workforce and Agency Organization were examining the dispute
with the federal departments. He said he planned to have the
documents released today one way or another.
"I'm not surprised and it is to be expected, because that is how
(the Energy Department) has operated in the past," Porter said.
"At this point, we are going to force them to provide redacted
versions or redact them ourselves."
The Energy and Interior departments acting jointly sent
unredacted material to the House subcommittee this week.
Porter said he examined more than 90 pages of e-mail messages
and internal memos.
He said the documents chronicle 30 to 40 e-mail conversations
plus memos in which officials ponder initial courses of action
when the potentially harmful information surfaced last month.
Porter said Thursday the material he reviewed was "very
disturbing and very damning." He wouldn't describe the documents
in detail, however, citing the dispute over their release.
Energy Department spokesman Mike Waldron said Thursday that DOE
"has been working to provide the committee with as complete
documentation as possible."
Responding to Porter's charge, Waldron said DOE officials were
not stonewalling.
"When this situation came to light (Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman) personally issued a statement explaining what the
problem was," Waldron said. "It is in the department's interest
to comply with Congressman Porter's request in the most complete
manner possible."
One DOE official said department officials concluded, "It would
not serve the purpose of any investigations for (documents) to
be made public in a redacted form."
Controversy has been simmering since Bodman and Charles Groat,
the head of the U.S. Geological Survey, disclosed on March 16
that a worker had indicated in electronic messages between 1998
and 2000 that he fabricated documentation of work at the nuclear
waste site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Officials with the Geological Survey said the fabrication dealt
with processing data used in computer models that attempt to
predict how surface water will move through the mountain under
certain climate conditions.
Water flow is a key issue in determining whether a Yucca
Mountain repository can be deemed safe. Nevada leaders who have
long fought the project have charged the allegations cast a long
shadow over the entire project.
Nevada's senators said they welcomed the FBI's pursuit of the
allegations.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said FBI participation underscores the
significance of the matter, potentially raising it to criminal
levels.
Reid called for the Energy Department to put the Yucca program
"on hold" while multiple investigations continue.
"Falsifying legal documents is clearly a crime, and should be
prosecuted," Reid said. "Falsifying these particular documents,
and creating fake scientific data about the storage of nuclear
waste would have also put the health and safety of Nevadans in
grave danger."
Reid and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., had urged the FBI and the
Justice Department to enter the case.
"The FBI's involvement in this investigation is very important
to ensuring that the truth is revealed," Ensign said. "For too
long, the Department of Energy has run this show with little or
no oversight from outside agencies."
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
34 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca Scientists Investigated Over E-Mails
Today: April 01, 2005 at 22:02:15 PST
By ERICA WERNER ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) - E-mails by several government scientists on
the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump project suggest workers
were planning to fabricate records and manipulate results to
ensure outcomes that would help the project move forward.
"I don't have a clue when these programs were installed. So I've
made up the dates and names," wrote a U.S. Geological Survey
employee in one e-mail released Friday by a congressional
committee investigating suspected document falsification on the
project.
"This is as good as it's going to get. If they need more proof,
I will be happy to make up more stuff."
In another message the same employee wrote to a colleague: "In
the end I keep track of 2 sets of files, the ones that will keep
QA happy and the ones that were actually used." QA apparently
refers to "quality assurance."
The e-mails, written from 1998 to 2000, were in a batch of
correspondence released in advance of next week's hearing by the
House Government Reform Subcommittee on the Federal Work Force
and Agency Organization, chaired by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev.
The Energy and Interior departments revealed the existence of
the e-mails March 16, and inspectors general of both departments
are investigating. The FBI also is conducting a probe, according
to a subcommittee staffer.
Yucca Mountain, approved by Congress in 2002, is planned as the
nation's underground repository for 77,000 tons of defense waste
and used reactor fuel from commercial power plants. The material
is supposed to be buried for at least 10,000 years beneath the
Nevada desert, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Many Nevadans and some environmentalists say the waste can never
be safely stored and the plan puts local residents at risk.
There also are concerns among others outside the state that
hauling the waste to Nevada puts at risk those along the routes.
But the Bush administration, the energy industry and others say
a central storage site is needed, and would provide better
security for tens of thousands of tons of commercial and defense
waste now housed at sites in 39 states.
The e-mails, dating from the Clinton administration, were
circulated among a team of USGS scientists studying how water
moves through the planned dump site, a key issue in determining
whether and how much radiation could escape.
Scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey validated Energy
Department conclusions that water seepage was relatively slow,
so radiation would be less likely to escape.
Many of the dozens of pages of e-mails released appear to
involve not initial scientific experiments, but rather attempts
to provide documentation of work done in the past. Several
include admonitions from the writers to "delete this memo after
you've read it" or "please destroy this memo."
The Energy Department is working to submit an application to the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to run the dump, and
must turn over extensive documentation.
The e-mails, most of them from geological survey field workers
in Las Vegas, provide a window into the environment surrounding
the project, first considered over 20 years ago. Names and some
proper nouns were blacked out by congressional staffers before
they were released.
"Science by peer pressure is dangerous but sometime (sic) it is
necessary," says one message, by a second scientist at the
geological survey.
The emergence of the e-mails was the latest setback for Yucca
Mountain, which has also suffered money shortfalls and an
appeals court decision last summer that is forcing a rewrite of
radiation exposure limits for the site. The Energy Department
recently abandoned a planned 2010 completion date, and
department officials have not given a new date.
The department's concern about the e-mails is evident in a
portion of an internal memo, apparently written around the time
they were discovered, that was also released Friday: "These
e-mails may create a substantial vulnerability for the program."
An Energy Department spokeswoman declined comment on the memo or
the contents of the e-mails because of the continuing
investigations.
---
On the Net:
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management:
http://www.ymp.gov
State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects:
http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste
Nuclear Regulatory Commission: http://www.nrc.gov
--
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
35 BBC: Sellafield 'wind down' under
Last Updated: Friday, 1 April, 2005
Sellafield]
The NDA has now assumed responsibility for Sellafield
Decommissioning of the Sellafield nuclear plant has begun - a
process which will eventually result in the loss of thousands of
jobs.
The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) officially assumed
responsibility for the clean-up of the nuclear reprocessing
complex on 1 April.
According to the NDA, the process could take up to 100 years, but
heavy job losses are expected within 10 years.
Trade union Amicus says permanent staff posts are likely to be
cut by 8,000.
The current figure of 12,000 employees could be reduced to 4,000
by 2011, said the union.
From 1 April, the two organisations that have historically owned
and operated the site - British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) and the UK
Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) - will effectively become
contractors for the NDA, the new owners.
'Dramatic reduction'
Currently-employed staff will remain on the payroll of the
British Nuclear Group. The decommissioning process, which is
being funded by the government, is expected to cost the taxpayer
48bn.
Sir Anthony Cleaver, chairman of the NDA, said it took its
responsibility to the local community very seriously.
He said: "If we look at the current plans there will be a
dramatic reduction in jobs, but that's a long way ahead.
"We have a responsibility to look at the local economic and
social impact of anything we organise. We will look at the amount
of jobs that may be lost and work with the local community to see
how we can best address that issue.
"I can understand the concerns of employees but, having said
that, BNFL has the contract for the next two, maybe three or four
years, which means there should not be a major change in the
short term."
The trade union Amicus has called for permanent staff to be
retrained to carry out the decommissioning work and plans to
oppose the outsourcing of any core work.
*****************************************************************
36 AU NINEMSN: Nuclear waste ship off Australian coast
19:48 AEDT Fri Apr 1 2005
A ship carrying dangerous nuclear waste from France was sailing
off Australia en route to the Pacific, the environmental group
Greenpeace has reported.
The Pacific Sandpiper, carrying the 10th return shipment of
nuclear material between France and Japan since they began in
1995, should be south of Tasmania and entering the Tasman Sea as
early as this weekend, according to Greenpeace.
"The release of even a small fraction of this cargo from either
an accident or a deliberate attack could lead to an
environmental and public health catastrophe," Greenpeace
campaign manager Cindy Baxter said.
The waste from plutonium reprocessing at a plant in La Hague,
France, using Japanese irradiated fuel, is transported from the
port of Cherbourg by Pacific Nuclear Transport Limited (PNTL).
The Pacific Sandpiper left Cherbourg on February 17 carrying
five casks which hold 124 canisters of vitrified nuclear waste -
a solid glass-like substance - and is due to arrive in Japan
later this month.
Japan, which operates nuclear power stations, ships waste to
France for reprocessing. France extracts plutonium from the
material, returning it to Japan for long-term storage.
Greenpeace describes the Pacific Sandpiper as a floating "dirty
bomb", vulnerable to a marine accident or terrorist act.
"These ships are very corroded (and) they're about to go up into
the Pacific though the economic zones of a whole lot of
countries who are nuclear free," Baxter said.
Pacific island nations have objected to the shipments since they
began.
The New Zealand government, which bans nuclear-armed warships,
said Britain had notified Wellington of the shipment.
The company British Nuclear Fuels is the majority shareholder of
PNTL.
"New Zealand accepts that international law allows freedom of
navigation rights on the high seas," a spokesman for Acting
Foreign Minister Marion Hobbs said.
"But we ask that states making shipments of radioactive
materials in proximity of New Zealand stay out of our exclusive
economic zone."
An Australian government spokeswoman said the shipments were not
considered dangerous.
"The waste is in a form that is difficult to disperse hence
unattractive as a terrorist target," the Department of Foreign
Affairs and Trade spokeswoman said.
"The safety record of maritime transport of such material has
been excellent with no incidents leading to release of radiation
occurring in thousands of shipments," she said.
The spokeswoman said Australia accepted international law giving
countries the right to make such shipments on the high seas and
through the exclusive economic zones of coastal states.
©AAP 2005
1997- 2005 ninemsn Pty Ltd - All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
37 Las Vegas SUN: From the Yucca E-Mails
Today: April 01, 2005 at 22:02:16 PST
By The Associated Press ASSOCIATED PRESS
Quotes from a sampling of e-mails written by government
scientists to colleagues on the Yucca Mountain project between
1998 and 2000. Some of the e-mails were released Friday by a
House panel, with names and certain other details blacked out.
Most were written by U.S. Geological Survey field workers in Las
Vegas.
---
"I don't have a clue when these programs were installed. So I've
made up the dates and names. ... This is as good as it's going
to get. If they need more proof, I will be happy to make up more
stuff, as long as it's not a video recording of the software
being installed." - Writer identified as USGS Employee 1.
---
"Here's my question: When we go to start (quality assurance)'ing
the site-scale modeling work, will I get taken to the cleaners
because I am not referencing either a tech procedure or a
scientific notebook? In other words, would it be cost-effective
to create a (scientific notebook) for the site-scale work and
back-date the whole thing??" - Unidentified worker.
---
"This is now CYA and we had better be good at it. I seem to have
let this one slip a little too much in an attempt to cover all
our work (and get us the hell out of the long-term problem of
Yucca Mountain) but now it's clear that we have a little to no
choice. In all honesty I've never felt well-managed or helped by
the USGS (Yucca Mountain Project) folks. In fact, as you know,
I've often felt abandoned. This time it's no different, or
worse, and we have to work together to get out of this one." -
USGS Employee 2.
---
"Some nights I have a hard time going to sleep because I realize
the importance of trying to get the right answer, and I know how
many serious unknowns are still out there, and how many quick
fixes are still holding things together." - Unidentified worker.
---
The Yucca Mountain project "has now reached a point where they
need to have certain items work no matter what, and the
infiltration maps are on that list. If USGS can't find a way to
make it work, Sandia will (but for now they are definitely
counting on us to do the job)." - USGS Employee 1.
--
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
38 Salt Lake Tribune: Bishop will revive bill to block N-waste
Article Last Updated: 04/01/2005 02:09:01 AM
The designation, if successful, would block a rail line to the
Goshute reservation
By Patty Henetz The Salt Lake Tribune
Utah Rep. Rob Bishop will try for a third time to establish a
wilderness area in Utah's west desert that would block a rail
line needed to deliver spent nuclear fuel rods to a site on the
Skull Valley Goshute reservation.
At a news conference Thursday at the state Capitol, Bishop
was joined by wilderness advocates, Hill Air Force Base
supporters, Utah Reps. Chris Cannon and Jim Matheson and Gov.
Jon Huntsman Jr. as he announced he would introduce a bill in
Congress this year to set aside 100,000 acres of wilderness in
the Cedar Mountains.
A similar attempt failed in December when Bishop couldn't get
the support of the Senate.
This time, he said, the bill's chances are better because he
is introducing it earlier in the congressional session.
"I think we've got the procedure right," said the 1st
District Republican. "I know we've got the bill right."
Bishop said his bill, called the Utah Test and Training
Range Protection Act, would protect the nation's largest
overland military training range by stopping the Private Fuel
Storage above ground nuclear waste storage facility.
The sprawling range is used by the Air Force for training
missions and weapons tests. Bishop said storing the nuclear
waste so near the range could severely limit its usefulness,
which in turn could hurt the state's case when the Defense
Department begins its upcoming round of base closures.
The bill will include language providing parcels of land the
Skull Valley Band of Goshutes can use for economic development
projects, Bishop said.
It also would release a section of wilderness study area to
multiple uses.
Despite opposition from the state and its congressional
delegation, Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of eight nuclear
power utilities, last month received preliminary licensing
approval from a panel of Nuclear Regulatory Commission judges.
PFS wants to store 44,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste
on the reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City.
The Goshutes have been embroiled in leadership disputes
since three tribal members in 1997 signed a confidential lease
agreement with PFS for the $3.1 billion facility.
Last year, Bishop's proposal received unanimous support in
the House only to fail in the Senate. That could be a repeat
scenario, said Utah Sen. Bob Bennett.
"I'd be supportive of the bill but I'd be misleading you if
I said it has much of a chance in the Senate," Bennett said.
"There are a variety of senators who opposed it for a variety of
reasons."
---
Reporter Robert Gehrke contributed to this story.
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
39 Xinhua: New Zealand asks nuclear waste shipment sheer off sea
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-04-02 09:15:25
WELLINGTON, April 2 (Xinhuanet) -- New Zealand government
has asked that a shipment of radioactive nuclear waste, expected
to pass through the Tasman Sea this weekend on its way to Japan,
not enter New Zealand waters, an official said Saturday.
The British Nuclear Fuels shipment is carrying containers of
vitrified nuclear waste which Japan sends to France for
reprocessing, a spokesman for Environment Minister Marian Hobbs
said, noting the British government had notified New Zealand
authorities about the shipment.
"New Zealand accepts that international law allows freedom
of passage on the high seas. But we do ask that states making
shipments of nuclear waste close to New Zealand stay out of our
Exclusive Economic Zone."
Tasman Sea is an arm of the southern Pacific Ocean between
southeast Australia and western New Zealand, and New Zealand has
insisted that no shipment of nuclear fuel or waste should come
within its 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone.
The mixed oxide plutonium (MOX) waste had been reprocessed
into a solid glass-like substance for storage in Japan, said the
spokesman.
It is the tenth such shipment to pass through the Pacific,
the spokesman said. Enditem
Copyright 2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
40 Elizabethton Star: Judge upholds NRC review of BLEU Project
By Thomas Wilson star staff twilson@starhq.com
ERWIN -- An administrative law judge appointed by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to review petitions against
the Blended Low Enriched Uranium (BLEU) Project has affirmed the
NRC's decision to grant three license amendments for the project
spearheaded by Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS).
In an opinion released Tuesday, Judge Alan Rosenthal found
that the NRC had properly reviewed all aspects of the BLEU
Project and was correct in its application of regulations
governing its issuance of operating license amendments granted
to NFS for the project.
The State of Franklin Group of the Sierra Club, together with
three other groups, filed hearing requests in October 2002
regarding three applications to amend the Special Nuclear
Materials license held by NFS. The consortium of petitioners
included Friends of the Nolichucky River Valley; Oak Ridge
Environmental Peace Alliance, and Tennessee Environmental
Council.
In his ruling, Rosenthal found that the NRC had properly
reviewed all aspects of the BLEU Project and was correct in its
application of regulations governing its issuance of operating
license amendments granted to NFS for the project.
Sierra challenged the BLEU Project and argued NRC staff
failed to comply with the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Attorneys representing Sierra
argued that the NRC failed to consider information that shows
that the potential impacts of the BLEU Project are of such
severity that the preparation of an EIS is required. The NRC and
NFS maintained the agency complied with NEPA requirements and
commission regulations in approving the license amendments.
The environmental consortium sought to hold public hearings
about the regarding potential environmental and public safety
concerns related to the BLEU Project. The groups' legal filings
argued additional environmental studies were necessary and
claimed that the potential for accidents had not been properly
reviewed by NRC staff.
Sierra responded to the license amendments in three separate
hearing requests, which were later consolidated for
consideration. Sierra identified a number of areas of concern.
In its initial written presentation it focused on the NRC
Staff's conclusion in an environmental assessment (EA) that
there was no necessity to prepare a full environmental impact
statement (EIS), a conclusion reflected in the issuance of a
finding of no significant environmental impact.
Sierra insisted that the evidentiary record, in particular
NFS' license amendment application and the NRC Staff's review
documents, showed that "the potential for a range of serious
accidents at the proposed BLEU Project falls squarely within the
probability range considered by the NRC to be reasonably
foreseeable and, therefore, to require preparation of an EIS."
Sierra further asserted that the BLEU Project met the NRC's
qualitative criteria requiring preparation of an EIS.
NRC Staff performed two additional reviews, determining in
each that the June 2002 EA adequately assessed the environmental
impacts of the entire BLEU Project. A finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) was issued for the first license amendment in
July 2002, and an EA and FONSI were issued for the second and
third license amendments on September 2003, and June 2004,
respectively.
Sierra's argument pointed to evaluation testing found in
Project Integrated Safety Analyses (ISAs) that NFS had supplied
to NRC that represent exact accident probabilities corresponding
to accident frequencies per accident per year. Sierra maintained
that accidents with such high probabilities and consequences are
of sufficient severity that the preparation of an EIS is
required. Petitioners argued that NRC Staff failed to consider
these estimates in its environmental review.
In December 2004 the Licensee and the NRC filed their
responses to Sierra Club's written presentation claiming NRC
staff complied fully with NEPA in performing an environmental
assessment of the project as a whole and supplemental
environmental reviews for each of the three associated license
amendments. NFS officials maintained that the Staff fully met
statutory and regulatory requirements under NEPA.
The BLEU Project involves converting surplus highly enriched
uranium from U.S. Cold War stockpiles into low enriched uranium
for the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) commercial nuclear
reactors. The BLEU Project is one of the largest highly enriched
uranium conversion projects in the U.S. with 39 metric tons of
surplus uranium to be converted into commercial nuclear fuel.
The NRC had granted the license amendments previously and
allowed work to begin while Judge Rosenthal reviewed the claims
by the opponents. Since that time, NFS and its partner in the
project, Framatome ANP, have been processing the uranium
materials. Earlier this year, the first shipment of fuel
assemblies containing the converted uranium was delivered to
TVA's Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Alabama for use in one of
the plant's nuclear reactors.
NRC Staff considered three categories of potential accidents:
criticality, radiological, and chemical. For each type of
accident, the agency evaluated the accidents with the most
potentially significant consequences to determine whether they
were bounded by previous environmental assessments.
A criticality accident, according to the NRC's case filing,
was the most potentially serious credible accident that might
occur at the BLEU Project. The possibility of such an accident
was previously evaluated in both the 1991 and 1999 license
renewal EAS prepared in connection with the activities in which
the Licensee was then engaged. The only potential difference
recognized by the Staff between a criticality accident at the
BLEU Project and one occurring during the previously conducted
license activities is the location of the material being
processed.
However, although an accident at one of the new buildings
could take place slightly closer to the site boundary than an
accident occurring at the present facility, NRC concluded that
this difference would have only a minimal impact on any off-site
dose, and thus that the license amendments at issue would not
result in the potential for a new, or more serious, criticality
accident, according to the case background.
Rosenthal wrote there was "simply no basis in the record at
hand for a determination on our part that the (NRC) Staff's
environmental review failed adequately to consider the
possibility of the occurrence of an accident with serious
environmental consequences. Rosenthal refused to overturn either
the NRC's conclusion that an EIS was not required or the FONSI
that accompanied it.
Rosenthal's opinion stated the court was "satisfied that the
approach" that NRC Staff took in addressing the accident
probability issue met the NEPA standard.
The State of Franklin Chapter of the Sierra Club has 15 days
from the date of the judge's ruling to file a petition for
review of his decision by the commissioners of the NRC.
Elizabethton Newspapers, Inc. Elizabethton Newspapers,
Inc., 300 Sycamore Street Elizabethton, Tennessee 37643 -
423.542.4151
*****************************************************************
41 Nevada: Presentations at Waste Management 2005 Tucson, AZ -
State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects
February 28, 2005
+ The Curious History of Transportation Planning for HLW
Repositories in the US- Bob Halstead, Fred Dilger, PhD and Dave
Ballard, PhD (pdf-3.72M)
+ Hot Time in The City: Which Shipment Mode for High Level
Radioactive Waste, Affects Urban Areas Most?- Fred Dilger PhD
and Robert J. Halstead (pdf-1.86M)
+ Integrating Hazards Assessment and Impact Assessment: The
Case of The Caliente Rail Corridor to Yucca Mountain- Fred
Dilger Ph.D, Robert J. Halstead (pdf-1.26M)
+ Planning for an Unpredictable Event: Vulnerability and
Consequence Reassessment of Attacks on Spent Fuel Shipments-
Robert J. Halstead, James D. Ballard, Ph.D., Fred C. Dilger,
Ph.D. (pdf-502K)
+ State of Nevada Views on the Proposed Caliente Rail
Corridor- Bob Halstead, Fred C. Dilger, Ph.D. (pdf-4.26M)
+ Assessing Tribal Impacts- Fred C. Dilger, Ph.D. (pdf-5.96M)
State of Nevada Office of the Governor Agency for Nuclear
Projects Nuclear Waste Project Office 1761 E. College Parkway,
suite 118 Carson City, NV 89706 (775) 687-3744 voice (775)
687-5277 fax nwpo@nuc.state.nv.us
*****************************************************************
42 Las Vegas SUN: EPA issues initial order in Yerington mine cleanup
Today: April 01, 2005 at 18:34:07 PST
ASSOCIATED PRESS
RENO, Nev. (AP) - The U.S. Environmental Protection has issued
an order outlining preliminary measures for cleaning up an
abandoned copper mine contaminated with radioactive and
cancer-causing byproducts in Yerington.
The order issued Thursday replaces one previously issued by the
Nevada Department of Environmental Protection. The state agency
asked the federal EPA to assume oversight of the mine in
December.
Much of the work outlined in the new directive already is being
carried out by Atlantic Richfield Co., which manages the
Anaconda mine site that covers 6 square miles, the EPA said.
But it also directs additional measures be taken, including
securing the site, identifying contaminated areas and preparing
plans to monitor air for radiological contamination.
Latest tests show elevated radiation levels and concentrations
of radionuclides in the mine's processing area. Experts say
readings at a few isolated spots are more typical of uranium
mills where the raw material used to fuel nuclear reactors -
yellowcake uranium - was the target of the mining operation, not
a byproduct of processing copper.
Residents fear the poisons spread off the site in wind-blown
dust or leaked through unlined evaporation ponds into
groundwater supplies used for drinking water and irrigation.
The mine, about 60 miles southeast of Reno, produced copper for
about 30 years until 1978.
Arco, a former owner of the mine site, is responsible for the
cleanup because the most recent owner, Arimetco Inc. of Tucson,
Ariz., filed for bankruptcy in 1997 and abandoned the site in
2000.
--
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
43 Pahrump Valley Times: Congress schedules Yucca e-mail hearing
April 1, 2005
MOVE PROMPTED BY DISCLOSURES REGARDING QUALITY ASSURANCE DATA AT
NYE REPOSITORY
LAS VEGAS - Congress is scheduling hearings about the Yucca
Mountain project after recent disclosures that quality-assurance
documents for the proposed nuclear waste repository might have
been falsified.
Leaders of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
announced Monday they will hold a hearing Thursday about the
Nevada nuclear waste site.
A House subcommittee led by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., is
preparing for a Tuesday hearing.
The Senate committee chairman is Pete Domenici, R-N.M., an
influential voice on nuclear issues who has been promoting talk
of alternatives while the Yucca Mountain project is delayed.
The Energy Department had focused on a 2010 opening date, but
project officials have said in recent months that opening the
underground repository could occur in 2012 or later. Project
critics have said it could be 2015 or 2017.
Domenici spokeswoman Angela Harper said the Senate committee is
compiling a witness list and defining the scope of its inquiry.
In the House, Porter has called on the Energy Department to
provide copies of an estimated 20 e-mails in which a U.S.
Geological Survey hydrologist suggested that some
quality-assurance documents related to climate studies and water
infiltration to the repository level had been falsified.
The March 16 disclosure has prompted at least three
investigations at the Energy Department and the Interior
Department.
Gov. Kenny Guinn and Attorney General Brian Sandoval are among
Nevada representatives scheduled to testify before the House
subcommittee.
Opponents say the issue of water travel through the mountain is
crucial and that the disclosure raises new credibility problems
for the Energy Department.
Also Monday, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce
Committee gave a boost to the proposed repository, saying that
Yucca Mountain remains "the safest option" for disposing of
nuclear fuel.
Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, called a National Academy of Sciences
report questioning the safety of radioactive spent fuel stored
in 45-foot-deep pools of water at nuclear reactor sites another
argument for finishing Yucca Mountain.
"Temporary storage in spent-fuel pools will never be as secure
as disposal in Yucca Mountain," Barton said. "A single, remote,
underground facility would be impervious to aircraft impacts,
far more difficult for terrorists to penetrate and safer than
storage facilities scattered across the country."
An academy report recommends the nuclear industry consider
storing more spent fuel in aboveground cement, lead and steel
casks.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Nils Diaz said in a
letter to Congress last week that the recommendation to move
more spent fuel into dry casks was based on "scenarios that are
unreasonable."
Joe Egan, the lawyer heading Nevada's legal opposition to the
repository, said the academy report bolsters arguments that
nuclear waste can be stored in casks at reactor sites for
hundreds of years rather than be taken to a Nevada repository.
On the Net:
Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov
Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects:
http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste
U.S. Geological Survey: www.usgs.gov
For comment or questions, please e-mail
Copyright Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2005
*****************************************************************
44 Pahrump Valley Times: Playing tourist in their own backyard
April 1, 2005
CENTRAL NEVADA RESIDENTS TOUR ENERGY DEPARTMENT'S YUCCA MOUNTAIN
REPOSITORY
By HEIDI J. BERTOLINO SPECIAL TO THE PVT
While increasingly harsh political debate carries on nationwide
regarding Yucca Mountain, it is the citizens of Nye County who
are most interested in staying abreast of the project as it
progresses toward licensing and prepares for - what seems to
many in Nye to be a foregone conclusion - construction.
The Yucca Mountain repository, proposed to store at least 77,000
metric tons of the nation's high-level nuclear waste generated
by private entities and the military in 39 states - none in
Nevada - is not far from the minds of those who live and work in
the region.
As time goes by, and the affected counties take a more active
role in preparing for the repository, the citizens of Esmeralda
and Nye counties are also becoming more active in the project as
it progresses. Many Esmeralda and Nye county residents take part
in Yucca Mountain citizen advisory groups, taking every
opportunity to publicly comment whenever the Energy Department
will give them the opportunity, which is not often enough,
according to many residents in both counties.
At any given "public scoping meeting" the answers to citizens'
questions typically "depend on Congress, depend on funding or
the industry." As the political issue of whether the repository
will open has yet to play itself out, nearby citizens are
increasingly worried transportation or other economic decisions
will be made without their knowledge or input. With many county
leaders openly eager to gather economic benefits promised with
the project, citizens are increasingly expressing a wish to know
more about the repository as it develops.
Each seems to be trying to decide for themselves if the project
is what it seems, or what it has been said to be by those who
either oppose or promote Yucca Mountain.
Last week more than 45 Esmeralda and northern Nye County
residents took advantage of a free tour to the Nevada Test Site
and Yucca Mountain hosted by the Esmeralda County oversight
office and its director, George McCorkell, to aid them in
keeping informed on the project.
Many of the "tourists" had visited the Yucca Mountain
repository a time or two in the past - some said they simply
went along again to find out what had changed, how things looked
or to hear the "facts and figures" again firsthand. Those who
had not attended a tour before admitted a curiosity to see the
project to help make their own conclusions regarding the
feasibility of the repository. McCorkell said the seats on the
most recent tour were secured almost immediately and he expects
an overflow tour to be scheduled in the coming months.
The tour group met up at the Esmeralda County Courthouse at 7
a.m. and headed south to Beatty where each member signed in with
Bechtel SAIC personnel and collected their special access badges
for the Nevada Test Site. The tour switched buses at the Beatty
Yucca Mountain Information Center, picking up tour guides,
longtime Bechtel SAIC employees and Yucca Mountain experts John
Hartley and Max Powell.
Once inside the highly secure site at Mercury, the bus made its
way another 40 miles, north again, to the Yucca Mountain
repository site, situated on the western edge of the Nevada Test
Site, partially on Bureau of Land Management property. The site
is roughly 20 miles east of Beatty, 20 miles north of Amargosa
Valley and 50 miles northeast of Pahrump. Yucca is roughly 90
miles southeast of Tonopah and 65 miles southeast of Goldfield.
The guides pointed out geological features along the way and
explained that Yucca Mountain was formed from volcanic activity
13,000 years ago. The activity formed "tuff," the major rock
formation found in the 1,200 foot, 6-mile long mountain,
proposed as the dumping ground for the nation's radioactive
waste.
According to the guides the location was optimal for storage of
radioactive waste because of its dry, arid desert terrain, low
annual precipitation, remote location and proximity to the
Nevada Test Site. The guides explained the proposed underground
storage facility was slated to store 77,000 metric tons of the
radioactive material, only half of the storage space needed by
the repository's projected opening in 2015. The original opening
was slated for 2010 but recent delays have pushed back the
project.
The guides said it was possible for Congress to change the
dimensions of the repository to allow for the extended storage
needs of the nation. They estimate approximately 140,000 tons of
material needed disposing of nationwide and the facility under
Yucca Mountain would be able to accommodate the waste if
Congress approved.
Upon reaching the repository the group changed vehicles,
climbed into six vans and headed up a washboard dirt road to the
flattop ridge of the mountain. Extending east to west the view
from the mountain was breathtaking. The white-capped peaks of
Mt. Whitney were visible in the distance, the highest point in
the region; Death Valley was visible to the west and was called
the lowest point in the region. The day was clear, though
breezy, and Hartley and Powell explained further the geological
makeup of the mountain and said the radioactive waste was to be
stored 1,000 feet below the surface where the group stood. The
tunnel and storage units would be 1,000 feet above the water
table and 1,000 feet below the surface of the mountaintop.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
Copyright Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2005
*****************************************************************
45 Tri-City Herald: Hanford empties a second waste tank
This story was published Friday, April 1st, 2005
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Hanford has emptied the nuclear waste from a second underground
tank, state and federal officials said Thursday.
It's an accomplishment not only because it means another of
Hanford's 177 massive tanks is ready to be closed, but also
because of the amount of waste contractor CH2M Hill Hanford
Group was able to remove.
"They retrieved more than 99 percent, which is incredibly
impressive," said Sheryl Hutchison, spokeswoman for the
Washington State Department of Ecology.
As the United States raced to build an atomic bomb during World
War II, it built single-shell tanks intended for temporary
storage of radioactive and chemical waste left from the
separation of plutonium from irradiated fuel.
But 62 years after those first tanks were built, all but two
still hold waste. Of Hanford's 149 single-shell tanks, 67 may
have leaked a total of about 1 million gallons of radioactive
waste into the ground.
The newly emptied tank, Tank C-203, is listed as a potential
leaker because of an unexplained four-inch drop in its contents.
The radioactive waste it held had begun accumulating shortly
after World War II.
That's one of the reasons it was picked to demonstrate a
retrieval method that looked promising for tanks that Hanford
officials fear might leak if more liquid is added.
Last year, the last of the liquid contents were emptied from all
the single-shell tanks, but the tough job of removing sludge or
hardened salt cake at their bottoms remained.
On the first tank to be emptied of solids, Tank C-106, Hanford
workers used a sluicing method that involved adding acid to
dissolve sludge and then using water to wash away the waste.
For Tank C-203, workers used a vacuum with a hose inserted
within the closed tank to suck up a sludge that contained cesium
and strontium. A high-pressure spray of water was used sparingly
to break up stubborn clumps of waste that couldn't be sucked up
otherwise.
The earlier removal of liquid waste had emptied the
55,000-gallon tank of all but 3,075 gallons of waste, said Zack
Smith, acting assistant manager for the tank farms project for
DOE's Office of River Protection.
The Tri-Party Agreement, which regulates Hanford, required that
no more than about 240 gallons of waste could remain at the
bottom of the huge tank.
Workers were able to vacuum up all but 35 gallons on the bottom
of the tank and an estimated 50 gallons that clings to its
walls, said Roy Schepens, manager of DOE's Office of River
Protection.
"This certainly meets and exceeds the TPA," or Tri-Party
Agreement, Hutchison said.
Contents were pumped into newer double shelled tanks to wait for
processing for permanent disposal. Much of the 53 million
gallons of tank waste is expected to be turned into a stable
glass form at the $5.8 billion vitrification plant under
construction.
Fourteen months have passed since workers finished emptying the
first single shell tank.
Work at Tank C-203 was delayed in recent months because of
equipment failures. Work also has proceeded somewhat more slowly
as CH2M Hill instituted new procedures to protect workers from
chemical vapors that vent into the air from the single-shell
tanks.
After demonstrating that vacuuming works well on some tank
waste, CH2M Hill is ready to use the technique again. It expects
to start vacuuming the remaining waste from the three other
smaller tanks at the C Tank Farm. They all were built with a
55,000-gallon capacity, although some single-shell tanks could
hold up to 1 million gallons.
Work also is progressing to empty two other tanks. Work to empty
Tank S-112 using a sluicing method is 95 percent complete, Smith
said. All that remains is a crust at the bottom the consistency
of concrete. Work at Tank S-102 has proved more difficult and is
about 10 percent complete.
The two empty tanks still need to be permanently closed. But
that work will wait until a policy decision is made with public
input. Among options that have been discussed is grouting the
residual waste in place and then filling the rest of the tank
with grout to keep it from collapsing.
2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
46 Cincinnati Enquirer: Fernald cancer payment pushed
Friday, April 1, 2005
Union wants to make it easier to get lump sum
By Dan Klepal
Enquirer staff writer
CROSBY TWP. - The union that represents past and present Fernald
employees is trying to make it easier for people to get
government compensation if they became ill by working at the
Cold War-era uranium foundry.
Over the next couple of months, union leaders will begin
building the case that workers at the Fernald plant should be
treated like those at other plants, such as in Portsmouth, Ohio,
and Paducah, Ky., where former employees who have cancer get
lump-sum payments of $150,000 with much less red tape.
Retired Fernald workers get the payment only after a panel of
doctors reconstructs the amount of radiation the individual
worker was exposed to, and determines if there is a 50 percent
chance or more that the illness was caused from that radiation.
The so-called "dose reconstructions" are the source of
frustration and dispute in many cases because the records were
often poorly maintained and are decades old. Some have alleged
that records were falsified to show lower exposures than really
happened.
If the union's bid is successful, Fernald will be granted
special status by Congress, and former employees will have to
prove only that they worked at the plant and have one of 22
forms of cancer to get the payout.
"A lot more people will get paid if we're successful," said Ray
Beatty, financial secretary for the union. "We'll have to show
that the same (toxins) were used at Fernald as those other
plants. And we'll have to show that a lot of the medical
histories are - oh, I don't want to say bogus - let's say flawed.
"Shouldn't be too hard."
The effort - which is technically called a petition for special
cohort status - was mentioned during a public meeting where
about 200 former employees asked questions about the government
compensation programs.
Thomas Beaver, 71, a supervisor at the plant from 1982 until
1991, said there's no doubt his prostate cancer and respiratory
problems stem from Fernald. He resents having to go through the
dose reconstruction and probability study.
"Fernald sent me home with my (health) problems," Beaver said.
"Under normal circumstances, that would be enough for me to get
worker's compensation. But because I worked at Fernald, I have
to go through this process that they set up."
More than 4,000 former Fernald employees could be eligible for
some form of compensation. Many of them worked during the
so-called production era, when uranium was mined from raw ore
for the country's nuclear weapons program.
The production facilities closed in 1989.
A $4.4 billion effort to clean up the site is scheduled for
completion in June 2006.
1995-2005. , a newspaper.
*****************************************************************
47 Inside Bay Area: Hold on, UC Los Alamos isn't in bag
Article Last Updated: 04/01/2005 03:56:57 AM
Lockheed Martin decides to challenge university's bid to run lab
once considered a UC lock
By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER
Reversing an earlier decision, defense giant Lockheed
Martin Corp. is challenging the University of California to run
the Los Alamos National Laboratory, reinvigorating a race that
was flagging for lack of contractors experienced in nuclear
weapons work.
Almost immediately, the University of Texas, another would-be
lab operator that dropped out, suggested it too might be
interested in rejoining the competition, side-by-side with
Lockheed.
University of California officials had estimated the chances
were excellent of rewinning the contract to run the birthplace
of the bomb. But the return of the nation's largest defense
contractor and the operator, in part or whole, of two
nuclear-weapons labs casts a shadow on that assessment.
The sudden flush of outside interest in Los Alamos comes after
federal contract officials tripled the contractor fee at Los
Alamos, then doubled it again,and trails an effort by a powerful
congressman to make UC compete for national labs that it has run
for more than half a century without challenge.
Ohio Republican Dave Hobson, chairman of the House Energy and
Water Development appropriations subcommittee, cautioned new
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman in Feb. 8 letter that the
competition seemed to favor the university with a greater
emphasis on science than on management. Hobson and other
lawmakers have taken issue with the university's management of
finances, safety and security at Los Alamos.
Before and since Hobson's letter, federal contractor officers
have been proposing removal of what they call barriers to
competition. They boosted the fee to about $60 million a year,
or seven times what UC is paid now for running Los Alamos. They
recommended a longer contract period, the creation of separate
legal entities to run the lab and the creation of a separate
pension fund for Los Alamos, apart from the $40 billion
University California Retirement Plan. Potential challengers
requested all those changes, and Lockheed officials said together
they made for a very different competition.
"It made our business people go back and take a look and say, 'It
looks like the things they added make it a decent business
opportunity,'" said Don Carson, a Lockheed Martin spokesman. Nine
months ago, Lockheed officials dropped out of the competition,
saying that it would have to wager too much in money and
management personnel to reform Los Alamos, compared to the risk
to Lockheed's reputation.
"You have to make sure you can do it and do it well," he said.
"We feel under the terms of this contract we can do it and
excel."
Lockheed Martin runs Sandia National Laboratories, the sole U.S.
nuclear-weapons engineering design lab with campuses in New
Mexico and California, and is part of a team running the sole
British nuclear-weapons lab, known as Aldermaston AWE.
On Thursday, the University of Texas issued a brief, enigmatic
statement recalling its agreement with Lockheed to share
academic expertise with Sandia labs.
Contact Ian Hoffman at ihoffman@angnewspapers.com.
*****************************************************************
48 KTVB.COM: New INL site managers meet employees
11:03 AM MST on Friday, April 1, 2005
Associated Press
BOISE -- More than 400 workers got a chance to meet with managers
from the organization that will soon take over cleanup at the
Idaho National Laboratories.
CH2MWG was chosen by the Department of Energy to be the prime
contractor. The group is a combination of CH2M Hill, Washington
Group and Premier Technology.
It takes over cleanup work on May First.
The cleanup mission consists of treating and disposing
radioactive waste, managing nuclear fuel, dismantling nuclear
reactors and other buildings. As well as other environmental
remediation.
Cleanup workers have been concerned about the future of their
jobs, especially since the new contractor plans to hire some
subcontractors.
CH2M Hill manager Amy Leintz says she can't discuss specific
plans yet but says the team has a transition plan for employees.
*****************************************************************
49 lamonitor.com: Costs soar for laboratory cleanup
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor
SANTA FE - The consent order between the New Mexico Environment
Department and Los Alamos National Laboratory may add $200
million or more to the environmental restoration program over
the next ten years.
David Gregory, the Department of Energy 's project director,
said the cost estimates are currently under discussion with
officials in Washington. He said he would be making the case for
the additional funds on a visit to headquarters this month.
"The order imposed extra costs," he said.
The more sampling and drilling of wells required under the
state's clean up prescription, for example, will necessarily
cost more money than the current baseline projection of $680
million over the next ten years.
The baseline has a certain level of commitment from Congress,
but there are additional uncertainties and contingencies in the
projections.
Enlarging the scope of the cleanup program alone is expected to
cost an additional $150 million, but that depends on the outcome
of the corrective action process and the remedies that are
selected.
Another $50 million or more may be needed to tear down and
decontaminate excess facilities at Technical Area 21, the DP
site.
The remediation can be done, Gregory said, but the job will be
harder unless Congress agrees to clear out those structures.
The process specifically invites public input at several key
points, which adds another variable to each cleanup remedy.
Questions about the budget considerations came up during a
meeting of the Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board
Wednesday that featured a presentation on the consent order by
James Bearzi, NMED hazardous waste bureau chief.
Bearzi referred to TA-21 as one of the cleanup parcels most
deserving of the board's attention.
"It was Rocky Flats before there was a Rocky Flats," he said,
referring to one of the most polluted sites in the nuclear
complex, where plutonium triggers were made for hydrogen bombs
during the Cold War.
Bearzi was invited to give the board a review of the background,
contents, highlights and current status of the consent order,
which was formally signed on March 1, although it was virtually
in effect during much of last year.
Ken Hargis, who directs the LANL environmental restoration
project, said he agreed with Bearzi's characterization of the
voluminous legal document.
"We are totally committed to meeting the terms of the order,"
Hargis said.
He passed out a summary of project deliverables due before the
end of May, showing seven scheduled reports, evaluations or
plans that are on schedule.
The NNMCAB is officially chartered by DOE to provide citizens'
input on environmental cleanup and issues related to waste
management.
The board has made special efforts to increase its public
profile during the last year and sought suggestions from
participants at Wednesday's meeting.
"I don't think this board or any board could get its arms around
50 years of environmental problems," said Bearzi. "But,
candidly, the CAB needs to broaden its reach and scope. You have
more people around the table, but still don't have that
audience."
He admitted that the environment department has the same problem.
"If you want to see a very expensive, empty meeting room, just
have the environment department call a public meeting," he said.
In an effort to catch the attention of a larger public, the
board has scheduled a forum on the laboratory's Area G. The
subject of much controversy, the radioactive waste disposal area
is located on Mesita del Buey not far from the community of
White Rock.
The forum will be held in the Jemez conference room of the main
building of the Santa Fe Community College from 6-9 p.m. May 3.
It will be proceeded by a poster session that begins at 4 p.m.
2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
50 DOE: Office of Environmental Management; Notice of Availability of
FR Doc 05-6459
[Federal Register: April 1, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 62)]
[Notices] [Page 16809-16810] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr01ap05-53]
Draft Section 3116 Determination for Salt Waste Disposal at the
Savannah River Site AGENCY: Office of Environmental Management,
Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) announces the
availability of a draft Section 3116 determination for the
disposal of separated, solidified, low-activity salt waste at the
Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina. The
determination was prepared pursuant to Section 3116 of the Ronald
W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005. Section 3116 authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in
consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), to
determine that certain waste from reprocessing is not high-level
waste (HLW) and that it may instead be disposed of as low-level
waste (LLW) if it meets the provisions set forth in Section 3116.
Although not required by the Act, DOE is making the draft waste
determination available for public review and comment.
DATES: The comment period will end on May 16, 2005. Comments
received after this date will be considered to the extent
practicable.
ADDRESSES: The draft waste determination is available on the
Internet at http://apps.em.doe.gov.swd, and is publicly available
for review at the following locations: U.S. Department of Energy,
Public Reading Room, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington,
DC 20585, Phone: (202) 586-5955, or Fax: (202) 586-0575; and U.S.
Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office, Public
Reading Room, 171 University Parkway, Aiken, SC 29801, Phone:
(803) 641-3320, or Fax: (803) 641- 3302. Written comments should
be addressed to: Mr. Randall Kaltreider, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Environmental Management, EM-20, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. Alternatively,
comments can be filed electronically by e-mail to
saltwastedetermination@hq.doe.gov, or by Fax at (202) 586-4314.
Supplementary Information: There are presently 36.4 million
gallons (Mgal) of liquid radioactive waste stored in underground
waste storage tanks at SRS. The waste consists of two distinct
kinds of material: approximately 2.6 Mgal of sludge, comprised
primarily of metals that settled at the bottom of the tanks; and
approximately 33.8 Mgal of salt waste, which is comprised of
concentrated salt solution (supernate) and crystallized saltcake.
DOE's plans call for stabilizing and disposing of retrieved
sludge in a deep geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and
high-level radioactive waste. This will be done by stabilizing
the HLW in a borosilicate glass matrix through vitrification in a
facility known as the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF).
This process has been ongoing since 1996.
Regarding the salt waste, DOE contemplates removing fission
products and actinides from these materials using a variety of
technologies, combining the removed fission products and
actinides with the sludge being vitrified in DWPF, and
solidifying the remaining low- activity salt stream into a grout
matrix, known as saltstone grout, suitable for disposal in vaults
at the Saltstone
[[Page 16810]] Disposal Facility at SRS. The disposal of this
low-activity salt stream is the subject of this draft waste
determination.
DOE is separating the salt waste to segregate the low-activity
fraction using a two-phase, three-part process. The first phase
will involve two parts to treat the lower activity salt waste:
(1) Beginning in 2005, DOE will process a minimal amount of the
lowest-activity salt waste through a process involving
deliquification, dissolution, and adjustment (DDA) of the waste;
and (2) beginning in approximately 2007, DOE will process a
minimal amount of additional salt waste with slightly higher
activity levels using an Actinide Removal Process and a Modular
Caustic Side Solvent Extraction Unit, along with deliquification
and dissolution of the saltcake. The second, and longer-term
phase, which is scheduled to begin in approximately 2009,
involves the separation and processing of the remaining (and by
far the majority) of the salt waste using a Salt Waste Processing
Facility (SWPF), augmented as necessary by the Actinide Removal
Process.
This second phase will begin as soon as the Salt Waste Processing
Facility is constructed, permitted by the State of South
Carolina, and operational.
DOE believes that this two-phase, three-part approach to
processing and disposing of the salt waste at SRS will enable it
to complete cleanup and closure of the tanks years earlier and
maximize reduction of the potential risks that the tank wastes
pose to the environment, the public, and SRS workers. Taken
together, the various technologies that will be used are expected
to result in the removal and vitrification through the Defense
Waste Processing Facility of approximately 98% to 99% of the
total radioactivity currently contained in the salt waste, while
minimizing the time that waste will be stored in the underground
tanks, some of which have a known history of leaks.
Final Determination: DOE will issue a final salt-waste
determination following the completion of consultation with the
NRC, and consideration of any public comments.
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 28, 2005.
Charles Anderson, Environmental Management.
[FR Doc. 05-6459 Filed 3-31-05; 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:
*****************************************************************