*****************************************************************
06/06/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.129
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Extends Freeze on Nuclear Enrichment
2 Guardian Unlimited: Japan Believes N. Korea Wants Nuke Talks
3 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Withdraws Threat Against North Korea
4 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul Simulated Bombing of N.Korean Nucle
5 US: USA Making WMDs & Violating A.E.C. Act, Making Tritium At NPPs F
6 US: [NukeNet] Act Now: Stop Nuclear Rocket, "Project Promethius" &
7 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th
8 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th
NUCLEAR REACTORS
9 [NukeNet] China Looks To Expand Commercial Nukes, Iran Extends
10 The Hindu: 25 pc nuclear energy necessary for economic growth - AEC
11 Guardian Unlimited: China Said Weighing Bids on Nuke Plants
12 UPI: Analysis: China and nuclear power -
13 US: NRC: NRC to Send Team to Review Seabrook Security
14 US: StarNewsOnline.com: Nuke plant sirens can lose juice
15 Z TV: Construction of Pak nuclear reactor to begin year end
16 US: toledoblade.co: Feds vow to keep tabs on plant's operations
17 The Standard: 400b yuan investment planned for power plants -
18 US: PRN: Susquehanna Unit 2 Shuts Down Because of Non-Nuclear Proble
19 US: Telegraph: Disturbing deficiency at Seabrook plant
20 NEWS.com.au: Bracks says no to N-power
NUCLEAR SECURITY
21 US: WIND: Nuclear Plant Security: Concerns Over Spent Nuclear Fuel C
22 US: Guardian Unlimited: Radiation Detectors to Scan Calif. Ports
NUCLEAR SAFETY
23 US: [RADFOOD] Good news!
24 AU ABC: Mayor seeks depleted uranium reassurance
25 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
26 US: courant.com: Nuclear-Worker Groups Contest Rules
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
27 US: Casks Gain Favor as Method for Storing Nuclear Waste As Domenici
28 [NukeNet] Casks Gain Favor as Method for Storing Nuclear Waste
29 US: Guardian Unlimited: Radioactive Waste Transported to Texas
30 AU ABC: Cabinet to consider nuclear waste site
31 Bellona: Tender results for 50 containers for spent nuclear fuel to
32 BBC: Sellafield must clean up its
33 US: Cincinnati Enquirer: Waste starts leaving Fernald today
34 US: Indianapolis Star: Don't worry about truckloads of waste
35 US: The Blade: Davis-Besse targets Utah as waste site
36 US: AU ABC: Federal Cabinet to discuss uranium mining bans
37 AU ABC: Martin opposes nuclear dump for NT.
38 US: AU ABC: China uranium talks progressing: Macfarlane.
39 AU ABC: Cabinet to assess nuclear waste dump sites
40 Belfast Telegraph: Nuclear waste in corroding towers 'yet another wo
41 US: The Day: Nuclear Waste Bill Is Cause For Concern In Connecticut
42 NEWS.com.au: Territory refuses to take N-waste
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
43 DHHS: CDC: Oak Ridge Y-12 Petition
44 PRN: BWXT Receives Contract Extensions at Pantex, Y-12
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Extends Freeze on Nuclear Enrichment
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday June 6, 2005 9:01 AM
AP Photo XHS111
By NASSER KARIMI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran said it will extend its suspension of
uranium enrichment until the end of July to give European
negotiators time to prepare a proposal it can accept, but Tehran
also warned against wasting the opportunity to strike a deal.
The announcement Sunday followed Iran's agreement last month to
review a European Union proposal for a new round of negotiations
in the summer. Tehran's decision injects some breathing space
into the international crisis over its nuclear program, at least
temporarily.
``The Europeans have time up to the end of July to prepare
details of their proposal,'' said Ali Aghamohammadi, a spokesman
for Iran's Supreme National Security Council.
``To make Iran's nuclear facilities active in a proper way, both
sides should work toward providing guarantees,'' Aghamohammadi
was quoted as saying by the official Islamic Republic News
Agency.
Europe sees suspension of uranium enrichment by Tehran as a
precondition for further talks. No date has been set for the
summer negotiations.
Iran suspended enrichment last November under international
pressure led by the United States. Iran maintains its program is
peaceful, but the EU and the United States fear the program is
being used to develop nuclear weapons in violation of the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Six months of talks with Europe have made no progress on the key
point of contention - Iran's insistence on the right to enrich
uranium and European opposition to such plans. And Iran
threatened in May to restart some uranium reprocessing
activities, the stage that precedes actual enrichment of
uranium.
Enriched uranium can be used to produce warheads, but it also
can be used in the production of electricity, which Iranian
officials insist is the sole purpose of their nuclear program.
Iran has said repeatedly that its November decision to suspend
all uranium enrichment-related activities was voluntary and
temporary. The Europeans have been offering economic incentives
in the hope that Iran will make it permanent.
Aghamohammadi called on the Europeans to firm up the agreement
reached between Iran and the Europeans last November in Paris,
which committed Tehran to suspension of enrichment and all
related activities while the two sides discuss a pact meant to
provide Iran with EU technical and economic aid and other
concessions. Since then, the two sides have sparred over the
exact terms of the agreement.
France, Britain and Germany, acting on behalf of the 25-nation
EU, want Tehran to abandon its enrichment activities in exchange
for economic aid, technical support and backing for Iran's
efforts to join the World Trade Organization.
Efforts to resolve the crisis got a boost last month when the
World Trade Organization agreed to open membership negotiations
with Iran - a move widely seen as an immediate reward for
Tehran's decision to stick with talks with Europe.
Iran first applied to join the WTO in 1996, but the United
States blocked its application 22 times. The United States said
in March it would drop its veto, after consultations with
France, Germany and Britain.
The United States has been skeptical of Europe's approach to
Iran's atomic program, although of late President Bush has
struck a gentler note. Last week he insisted that Europe-led
talks with Iran ``are making some progress'' and defended his
decision to allow Iran to apply for WTO membership as a key, but
measured, step to advance those discussions.
The EU has threatened to take Iran to the U.N. Security Council
for possible sanctions if it resumes uranium reprocessing.
Tehran says it won't give up its right to enrichment but is
prepared to offer guarantees that it is not seeking to build
nuclear weapons.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
2 Guardian Unlimited: Japan Believes N. Korea Wants Nuke Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday June 6, 2005 7:01 PM
TOKYO (AP) - Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi believes
North Korea wants to return to stalled six-party talks and
resolve the international standoff over its nuclear weapons
program, according to a report Monday.
``I believe that North Korea really does want to somehow hold
six-party talks and resolve the matter,'' the Kyodo News Agency
quoted Koizumi as telling reporters during a visit to the 2005
World Expo in Aichi.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda also said he believed
North Korea ``was moving'' closer toward returning to nuclear
negotiations.
A Japanese newspaper reported Saturday that North Korea and the
United States had telephone talks and likely discussed resuming
the six-way talks. North Korea's U.N. representative in New York
called the State Department, the Mainichi newspaper reported,
citing officials it did not identify.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan, talking to reporters
Monday, said, ``There is a New York channel that they can
communicate with us if they need to. I'm not aware of any
response from North Korea at this point.
``We are hopeful that North Korea will be responding soon,'' he
said. ``We continue to urge North Korea to return to the
six-party talks at an early date without preconditions.''
With negotiations aimed at eliminating Pyongyang's nuclear
weapons stalled for almost a year, calls have emerged to take
the issue to the United Nations for possible sanctions - a move
North Korea says would be tantamount to a declaration of war.
At an Asian security conference in Singapore on Saturday, both
U.S. and Japanese officials floated such a possibility.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Monday the United
States has not set a deadline to decide whether to bring the
issue of North Korea's nuclear weapons program to the United
Nations.
Since the last round of disarmament talks, North Korea has
declared it has atomic bombs, claiming they were a deterrent
against a possible attack by the United States. The North's
nuclear claim has not been verified, but U.S. intelligence and
other estimates say it has as many as six atomic weapons.
President Bush and other U.S. officials have repeatedly said
they have no intention of attacking North Korea.
The six-party talks include the two Koreas, the United States,
Russia, China and Japan.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
3 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Withdraws Threat Against North Korea
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday June 6, 2005 8:16 PM
By BARRY SCHWEID
AP Diplomatic Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States met Monday with North Korea
on halting its nuclear weapons program and withdrew a threat to
try to punish the North Koreans soon with U.N. sanctions.
The meeting was requested by North Korea and held in New York,
where the two sides had last met May 13, State Department
spokesman Sean McCormack said.
The U.S. aim is to resume six-nation negotiations after a nearly
yearlong impasse. McCormack and other Bush administration
officials did not say if the talks in New York made progress in
that direction.
But in Tokyo, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said he
believed North Korea wanted to return to the negotiations and
resolve an international standoff over its nuclear weapons
program.
``I believe that North Korea really does want somehow to hold
six-party talks and resolve the matter,'' the Kyodo news agency
quoted Koizumi as telling reporters during a visit to the 2005
World Expo in Aichi.
In the May 13 meeting, U.S. diplomats had urged the North
Koreans to return to the negotiations. ``We are hopeful that
North Korea will be responding soon,'' White House Press
Secretary Scott McClellan said Monday. ``We continue to urge
North Korea to return to the six-party talks at an early date
without preconditions.''
State Department envoy Joseph DiTrani and James Foster, who is
in charge of the department's office of Korean affairs, were the
diplomats who met with North Korean officials.
In a conciliatory move, meanwhile, Secretary of Defense Donald
H. Rumsfeld said in Bangkok, Thailand, that no deadline had been
set to bring the dispute to the U.N. Security Council.
Rumsfeld's statement nullified one by a senior defense official
traveling with him that there could be a decision on going to
the United Nations within weeks.
U.S. chances of punishing North Korea with economic or political
sanctions would not be great, in any event, since China, which
opposes sanctions generally, could veto a U.S. motion.
The insular North Korean government, meanwhile, has denounced
sanctions as tantamount to a declaration of war.
Rumsfeld said news reports that the United States was setting a
deadline on U.N. action were ``incorrect and mischievous.''
Word that the two sides had been in touch, at least by
telephone, gave way Monday to the disclosure that new talks had
been held in New York. But it did not soften North Korean
rhetoric.
The state-run Korean Central News Agency excoriated the United
States in several commentaries, saying the nuclear standoff
cannot be defused ``as long as the U.S. clings only to its
anachronistic hostile policy toward the DPRK.''
In the meantime, before Rumsfeld stepped in, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice disagreed with the anonymous Pentagon
official's statement that action in the United Nations could be
imminent.
``I think the idea that within weeks we are going to decide one
way or another is a little forward-leaning, I would say,'' Rice
told reporters traveling with her to a meeting of the
Organization of American States in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
``I don't put timelines on things, and I think the president, he
doesn't put timelines on issues,'' Rice said.
Last week, at an unannounced meeting in Washington, senior
American negotiator Christopher Hill met with South Korean and
Japanese diplomats and reaffirmed the strategy of using
diplomacy to induce North Korea to halt its nuclear weapons
programs.
The talks involve North and South Korea, the U.S., Japan, China
and Russia.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
4 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul Simulated Bombing of N.Korean Nuclear Plant
Home> National/Politics Updated Jun.6,2005 22:51 KST
Satellite photo of Yongbyon nuclear facilities
Seoul, Washington to Talk Fresh N.K. Contingency Plans
U.S. Stealth Bombers Already Arriving
U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Visits Korea
Deal with Operational Control After Devising Measures for
Sudden Changes in N. Korea
Korea, U.S. Agree to Compromise N.Korea 'Concept Plan'
'N.K. Nuke Crisis Started With Aluminum Imports¡¯
Security Council Threat to N.Korea Was Premature: Rice
Simulations secretly commissioned by the South Korean military
suggest bombing of North Korea¡¯s nuclear facilities could in
the worst case make the whole of Korea uninhabitable for a
decade, it has been revealed. The military commissioned the
simulations amid rising tension following North Korea¡¯s launch
of a Taepodong missile over Japan in 1998 and when suspicions
surfaced a year later that the North was operating underground
nuclear facilities.
The simulation revealed that destruction of the Yongbyon nuclear
plant could cause enormous destruction, with nuclear fallout as
far away as China and Japan. U.S. research institutes have
conducted similar simulations, but this is the first time it has
been confirmed that South Korean military authorities
commissioned them.
If the 8 megawatt research reactor and 5 megawatt test reactor
at Yongbyon were destroyed by bombs while they were in
operation, the simulation showed that radiation would affect
people as far as 1,400 km away. Eighty to 100 percent of those
living within a 10-15 km radius of the reactors would die within
two months, and only 20 percent within a 30-80km radius were
expected to survive. As Seoul is about 200 km away from
Yongbyon, the capital would suffer direct radiation damage.
Areas 400-1,400 km away from Yongbyon would still experience 5
rem of radiation, about 10 times the recommended maximum annual
exposure. Even five years after air strikes, the area within a
700 km radius of Yongbyon could be radioactive.
If all of Yongbyon¡¯s nuclear facilities besides the reactors
such as the reprocessing facilities and nuclear waste storage
facilities were destroyed, the devastation would be even
greater. About a quarter of people living within 50 km of the
facilities would die within hours, while the soil of the entire
Korean Peninsula would be contaminated for five to 10 years. The
extent of resulting damage differs depending on weather
conditions like wind direction and speed, as well as on whether
the reactors are in operation at the time of the bombing.
Some feel the worst-case scenario is exaggerated. The research
reactor at Yongbyon is currently in operation but the test
reactor was shut down in late March to extract its roughly 8,000
spent fuel rods.
(englishnews@chosun.com )
*****************************************************************
5 USA Making WMDs & Violating A.E.C. Act, Making Tritium At NPPs For Nuclear Weapons
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:09:45 -0400
This is from Frieda Berryhill, long time
anti-nuclear activist and irrespective of the 2002
and 1999 dates is completely relevant right now.
Please call your Senators and Rep at either:
1-877-762-8762 or 202-224-3121 and/or fax them
via: http://www.house.gov & http://www.senate.gov
The media needs to do it's role and inform the
public of just what is going on.
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Items of Interest
Week Ending March 15, 2002
Tritium Production Program
The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB),
established to preside over a proceeding involving
Tennessee Valley Authority's license amendment
requests to produce tritium at Watts Bar and
Sequoyah, previously received petitions to
intervene from the Blue Ridge Environmental
Defense League, We the People of Tennessee, and
Jeannine Honicker.
-
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/secys/2002/secy2002-0049/2002-0049scy.html
READ - More Below
The Tennessee Valley Authority and US Department
of Energy have contracted to produce tritium,
radioactive hydrogen used in nuclear warheads, at
TVA's commercial power reactors at Watts Bar and
Sequooyah. This should be stopped and I strongly
urge you to bring this to the publics
attention.This is not classified material.
As you know The l954 Atomic Energy Act
specifically prohibits the production of material
for nuclear bombs at commercial nuclear power
plants.By violating this co-mingling prohibition,
the US will establish a precedent for other
nations to produce material for nuclear weapons at
their civilian reactors.
I
As you know I have been involved in commercial
nuclear reactor matters ever since my intervention
in the Summit Plant 30 years ago. I have always
been assured that there is NO CONNECTION between
commercial and weapons reactors. This is no longer
the case thereby setting a dangerous precedent for
other nations
The US and Russia have agreed (START I and START
II treaties) to reduce their nuclear stockpiles,
this production of tritium by the US threatens to
rekindle the cold war arms race at unprecedented
levels.The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which
we signed has as its goal the elimination of
nuclear weapon stockpiles by nuclear weapon states
as well as prohibiting non-nuclear nations
acquiring them, this tritium production program
reduces US credibility by raising strong doubts in
non-nuclear nations about the intentions of the US
to adhere to the goals of the treaty.
The United States strongly opposes the production
of weapons of mass destruction by other nations
and I am deeply concerned about our Country's
loss of credibility and honor by disregarding
treaties which we signed in good faith.
Sincerely
Frieda Berryhill
cc: Sen. Carper
*****************************************************************
6 [NukeNet] Act Now: Stop Nuclear Rocket, "Project Promethius" &
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:46:52 -0700
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Please contact both your Senators and your Rep
at either: 1-877-762-8762 or 202-224-3121.
http://www.space4peace.org/actions/rep_mckinney_help.htm
http://www.space4peace.org/articles/cynthia_mckinney.pdf
Please pass this around to as many lists,
NGOs, individuals & media as possible.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
7 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the
FR Doc E5-2867
[Federal Register: June 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 107)]
[Notices] [Page 32851-32852] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06jn05-60]
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice
of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of
public comment.
SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the
following proposal for the collection of information under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision. 2.
The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 100,
``Reactor Site Criteria''.
3. The form number if applicable: Not applicable. 4. How often
the collection is required: As necessary in order for NRC to
assess the adequacy of proposed seismic design bases and the
design bases for other geological hazards for nuclear power and
test reactors constructed and licensed in accordance with 10 CFR
parts 50 and 52 and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
5. Who will be required or asked to report: Applicants and
licensees for nuclear power and test reactors.
6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 2. 7. The
estimated number of annual respondents: .33 (1 respondent every 3
years).
8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to
complete the requirement or request: 8,711.
9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13
applies: Not applicable.
10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 100, ``Reactor Site Criteria,''
establishes approval requirements for proposed sites for the
purpose of constructing and operating stationary power and
testing reactors pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR parts 50 or
52. These reactors are required to be sited, designed,
constructed, and maintained to withstand geologic hazards, such
as faulting, seismic hazards, and the maximum credible
earthquake, to protect the health and safety of the public and
the environment. Non-seismic siting criteria must also be
evaluated. Non-seismic siting criteria include such factors as
population density, the proximity of man-related hazards, and
site atmospheric dispersion characteristics. NRC uses the
information required by 10 CFR part 100 to evaluate whether
natural phenomena and potential man-made hazards will be
[[Page 32852]] appropriately accounted for in the design of
nuclear power and test reactors.
A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of
charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB
clearance requests are available at the NRC Worldwide Web site:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The
document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days
after the signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer
listed below by July 6, 2005. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of
consideration cannot be given to comments received after this
date.
John A. Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(3150-0093), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC 20503.
Comments can also be e-mailed to John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or
submitted by telephone at (202) 395-4650.
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301-415-7233.
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of May, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Services.
[FR Doc. E5-2867 Filed 6-3-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
8 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the
FR Doc E5-2868
[Federal Register: June 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 107)]
[Notices] [Page 32852] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06jn05-61]
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request
AGENCY: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice
of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of
public comment.
SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the
following proposal for the collection of information under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a current valid OMB control number.
1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision. 2.
The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 20--
Standards for Protection Against Radiation.
3. The form number if applicable: Not applicable. 4. How often
the collection is required: Annually for most reports and at
license termination for reports dealing with decommissioning.
5. Who will be required or asked to report: NRC licensees,
including those requesting license termination.
6. An estimate of the number of responses: 5,019 (507 plus 4,512
recordkeepers).
7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 4,512. 8. An
estimate of the number of hours needed annually to complete the
requirement or request: 128,669 hours (4,909 hours for reporting
[9.68 hours per response] plus 123,760 hours for recordkeeping
[27.43 hours per recordkeeper]).
9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13
applies: Not applicable.
10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 20 establishes standards for protection
against ionizing radiation resulting from activities conducted
under licenses issued by the NRC. These standards require the
establishment of radiation protection programs, maintenance of
radiation records, recording of radiation received by workers,
reporting of incidents which could cause exposure to radiation,
submittal of an annual report to NRC of the results of individual
monitoring, and submittal of license termination information.
These mandatory requirements are needed to protect occupationally
exposed individuals from undue risks of excessive exposure to
ionizing radiation and to protect the health and safety of the
public.
A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of
charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F23, 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 should be directed to the OMB reviewer
listed below by July 6, 2005.
Comments received after this date will be considered if it is
practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be
given to comments received after this date.
John Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-
0014), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington,
DC 20503.
Comments can also be e-mailed to John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or
submitted by telephone at (202) 395-4650.
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301-415-7233.
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of May, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Services.
[FR Doc. E5-2868 Filed 6-3-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
9 [NukeNet] China Looks To Expand Commercial Nukes, Iran Extends
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:59:26 -0700
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Mothersalert Home: http://www.mothersalert.org
http://www.mothersalert.org/moreinfo.html
Videos, Including Space Weaponization,
Nuclearization, NPPs, More:
http://www.envirovideo.com
1.China Said Weighing Bids on Nuke Plants
2. Iran Extends Freeze on Nuclear Enrichment
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-China-Nuclear-Power.html
China Said Weighing Bids on Nuke Plants
a.. E-Mail This
b.. Printer-Friendly
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: June 6, 2005
Filed at 6:01 a.m. ET
BEIJING (AP) -- China is still weighing bids by
competing U.S., French and Russian suppliers of
nuclear power technology before making a closely
watched multibillion-dollar decision on equipping
two new power plants, a senior official said
Monday.
The contracts, reportedly worth up to $8 billion,
are expected to be the biggest in years in the
world's nuclear power industry, which is looking
to China to drive equipment sales as it tries to
meet surging energy needs.
Suppliers' willingness to transfer technology to
China is among key issues still being examined,
said Kang Rixin, general manager of the China
National Nuclear Corp.
Chinese news reports have said contracts for the
two nuclear plants might be awarded in October.
But asked about timing at a news conference, Kang
would say only, ''We will make a decision in due
time.''
The two planned facilities are at Sanmen in the
eastern province of Zhejiang, just south of
Shanghai, and Yangjiang in Guangdong province,
which borders Hong Kong.
Competitors to equip the facilities are the French
nuclear group Areva; Westinghouse Electric Co.,
the U.S. unit of British Nuclear Fuels PLC; and
Russia's AtomStroyExport.
China is in the midst of a boom in power plant
construction as it tries to cope with rapidly
increasing energy demands that have caused
blackouts in areas throughout the country.
Kang rejected speculation that France or Russia
might have an edge in the bidding because
Beijing's relations with Washington are cooler.
''We don't consider politics,'' Kang said. ''We
choose the best technology for China's power
development.''
China expects the share of its power supplied by
nuclear generation to grow to 4 percent by 2020
from 2.3 percent today, Kang said.
''But that 4 percent isn't our final goal,'' he
said.
The country has a total of nine nuclear generating
units operating, with two more under construction.
The Qinshan plant in Zhejiang, with five
generating units, was built with Chinese
technology. But the government says future plants
will rely more on foreign designs.
China's government promotes nuclear power as a
cleaner alternative to the abundant but dirty coal
that fuels most of its power plants and has left
cities smothered in smog.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iran-Nuclear.html
Iran Extends Freeze on Nuclear Enrichment
a.. E-Mail This
b.. Printer-Friendly
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: June 6, 2005
Filed at 8:20 a.m. ET
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran said it will extend its
suspension of uranium enrichment until the end of
July to give European negotiators time to prepare
a proposal it can accept, but Tehran also warned
against wasting the opportunity to strike a deal.
The announcement Sunday followed Iran's agreement
last month to review a European Union proposal for
a new round of negotiations in the summer.
Tehran's decision injects some breathing space
into the international crisis over its nuclear
program, at least temporarily.
''The Europeans have time up to the end of July to
prepare details of their proposal,'' said Ali
Aghamohammadi, a spokesman for Iran's Supreme
National Security Council.
''To make Iran's nuclear facilities active in a
proper way, both sides should work toward
providing guarantees,'' Aghamohammadi was quoted
as saying by the official Islamic Republic News
Agency.
Europe sees suspension of uranium enrichment by
Tehran as a precondition for further talks. No
date has been set for the summer negotiations.
Iran suspended enrichment last November under
international pressure led by the United States.
Iran maintains its program is peaceful, but the EU
and the United States fear the program is being
used to develop nuclear weapons in violation of
the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Six months of talks with Europe have made no
progress on the key point of contention -- Iran's
insistence on the right to enrich uranium and
European opposition to such plans. And Iran
threatened in May to restart some uranium
reprocessing activities, the stage that precedes
actual enrichment of uranium.
Enriched uranium can be used to produce warheads,
but it also can be used in the production of
electricity, which Iranian officials insist is the
sole purpose of their nuclear program.
Iran has said repeatedly that its November
decision to suspend all uranium enrichment-related
activities was voluntary and temporary. The
Europeans have been offering economic incentives
in the hope that Iran will make it permanent.
Aghamohammadi called on the Europeans to firm up
the agreement reached between Iran and the
Europeans last November in Paris, which committed
Tehran to suspension of enrichment and all related
activities while the two sides discuss a pact
meant to provide Iran with EU technical and
economic aid and other concessions. Since then,
the two sides have sparred over the exact terms of
the agreement.
France, Britain and Germany, acting on behalf of
the 25-nation EU, want Tehran to abandon its
enrichment activities in exchange for economic
aid, technical support and backing for Iran's
efforts to join the World Trade Organization.
Efforts to resolve the crisis got a boost last
month when the World Trade Organization agreed to
open membership negotiations with Iran -- a move
widely seen as an immediate reward for Tehran's
decision to stick with talks with Europe.
Iran first applied to join the WTO in 1996, but
the United States blocked its application 22
times. The United States said in March it would
drop its veto, after consultations with France,
Germany and Britain.
The United States has been skeptical of Europe's
approach to Iran's atomic program, although of
late President Bush has struck a gentler note.
Last week he insisted that Europe-led talks with
Iran ''are making some progress'' and defended his
decision to allow Iran to apply for WTO membership
as a key, but measured, step to advance those
discussions.
The EU has threatened to take Iran to the U.N.
Security Council for possible sanctions if it
resumes uranium reprocessing. Tehran says it won't
give up its right to enrichment but is prepared to
offer guarantees that it is not seeking to build
nuclear weapons.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
10 The Hindu: 25 pc nuclear energy necessary for economic growth - AEC
Monday, June 6, 2005 : 1100 Hrs
Hyderabad, June 6. (UNI): Even as the country is targeting to
generate 20,000 megawatts (MWe) of nuclear power by 2020, Atomic
Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman Anil Kakodkar on Sunday
cautioned that India's economic growth would be in jeopardy
unless in the next five decades at least 25 per cent of its
total electricity was derived from "nuclear mode."
Delivering the keynote address at the 14th National Symposium on
Environment organised by the Osmania University's Physics
Department and BARC's Human Safety and Environment Group here,
Dr Kakodkar said the Department of Atomic Energy's recent study,
covering a "horizon for the next 50 years," pointed out a
"sizeable deficit" in the energy sector.
This was despite liberal collation of "all" sources, including
nuclear power and DAE's expansion of electricity generating
capacity to cope with the economic growth.
Unless nuclear power attained a minimum 25 per cent share of the
total electricity production, it would be difficult to sustain
the economic growth and empower its people by 2050, he said.
Later in his brief interaction with the media, he said the
projection will mean "a 13-14 fold" increase for nuclear power
to contribute atleast one-fourth of the electricity generation
in the country.
"It will mean doubling our (nuclear power) generation every six
to eight years," he said, expressing confidence that financial
resources would not be a obstacle for the nuclear programme.
The AEC Chairman pointed out that Uranium, the base material for
nuclear power generation, needed "at least 15-20 times less"
material excavation than either coal or oil and had "million
times" higher calorific value than coal.
With the Fast breeder reactor and thorium reactors, programmed
by the DAE, the quantity of same Uranium can be recycled for
generation of electricity.
The Atomic Energy Programme had developed the process for
efficient extraction per tonne of (nuclear) material and the
technology for the management of (nuclear) waste which was on
par with the best technologies in the world.
He said the major challenge before India was to arrest
degradation of its natural resources, including water and
minerals, energy and food to support the economic development
needed to cope with increasing population growth.
"The challenge of development is to restore to the original," he
said.
Copyright © 2005, The Hindu.
*****************************************************************
11 Guardian Unlimited: China Said Weighing Bids on Nuke Plants
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday June 6, 2005 11:16 AM
By JOE McDONALD
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - China is still weighing bids by competing U.S.,
French and Russian suppliers of nuclear power technology before
making a closely watched multibillion-dollar decision on
equipping two new power plants, a senior official said Monday.
The contracts, reportedly worth up to $8 billion, are expected
to be the biggest in years in the world's nuclear power
industry, which is looking to China to drive equipment sales as
it tries to meet surging energy needs.
Suppliers' willingness to transfer technology to China is among
key issues still being examined, said Kang Rixin, general
manager of the China National Nuclear Corp.
Chinese news reports have said contracts for the two nuclear
plants might be awarded in October. But asked about timing at a
news conference, Kang would say only, ``We will make a decision
in due time.''
The two planned facilities are at Sanmen in the eastern province
of Zhejiang, just south of Shanghai, and Yangjiang in Guangdong
province, which borders Hong Kong.
Competitors to equip the facilities are the French nuclear group
Areva; Westinghouse Electric Co., the U.S. unit of British
Nuclear Fuels PLC; and Russia's AtomStroyExport.
China is in the midst of a boom in power plant construction as
it tries to cope with rapidly increasing energy demands that
have caused blackouts in areas throughout the country.
Kang rejected speculation that France or Russia might have an
edge in the bidding because Beijing's relations with Washington
are cooler.
``We don't consider politics,'' Kang said. ``We choose the best
technology for China's power development.''
China expects the share of its power supplied by nuclear
generation to grow to 4 percent by 2020 from 2.3 percent today,
Kang said.
``But that 4 percent isn't our final goal,'' he said.
The country has a total of nine nuclear generating units
operating, with two more under construction.
The Qinshan plant in Zhejiang, with five generating units, was
built with Chinese technology. But the government says future
plants will rely more on foreign designs.
China's government promotes nuclear power as a cleaner
alternative to the abundant but dirty coal that fuels most of
its power plants and has left cities smothered in smog.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
12 UPI: Analysis: China and nuclear power -
(United Press International)
June 07, 2005
By Edward Lanfranco
UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL
Beijing, China, Jun. 6 (UPI) -- China's incessant demand
for energy to fuel its burgeoning economy includes doubling
nuclear power use by 2020, a leading industry official said
Monday.
Kang Rixin, general manager of China National Nuclear Corp.,
made the comment at a briefing on the development of
nuclear-powered electricity and his company's cooperation with
the international community. China analysts noted the news
conference was timed to coincide with the start of an
anticipated summer power crunch in parts of the country.
In May, United Press International reported there will be a 5
percent gap between electricity production and consumption in
China during 2005.
Power transfers among provinces and regions, as well as
stabilizing coal prices and delivery of supplies, will be major
challenges for the State Electricity Regulatory Commission this
summer.
Commission Vice Chairman Shi Yubo announced a four-pronged plan
in May for the shortfall period, including energy production
safety as an overriding priority; tight demand-side management
to stagger peak usage times; intensifying regional and
provincial power transfers; and maintaining electricity market
order.
Staggering of peak periods means satellite cities outside major
centers such as Beijing, Guangzhou and Shanghai will experience
brownouts, though these are not predicted to be as bad as in
summer 2004.
A quarter century ago, opponents of nuclear energy in the
United States coined the phrase "China Syndrome" to warn about
dire results stemming from the lack of power plant safety
precautions. Today's risk of a China Syndrome is to the global
economy if the Asian giant doesn't redress its mounting energy
crisis, one that includes increased electricity production as
well as greater efficiency in the power it uses.
According to the U.N. Development Program, within the next 15
years China's gross domestic product is predicted to quadruple
while its production of energy is expected only to double. It is
already the planet's second-largest consumer of energy after the
United States. Combined, the two economies account for nearly
one-third of world energy consumption, with the United States
using 21 percent and China 8.5 percent.
The U.S. Department of Energy reported in March 2005 that
Chinese industries were energy intensive and economy-wide waste
was significant. The country uses three times more energy per
dollar of its GDP than the global average and 4.7 times more
than the United States, the department's Energy Information
Administration said.
Khalid Malik, U.N. Resident Coordinator and UNDP Resident
Representative in China, said Monday the country faced a "
significant challenge to improve energy efficiency and to
address the issue of climate change."
Malik made the comment at the start of the China End-Use Energy
Efficiency Program, a joint initiative involving the UNDP and
the country's National Development and Reform Commission to
tackle the country's dilemma of growing energy demand and severe
energy shortage.
China's electricity problem lies in its heavy reliance on
thermal power (approximately 75 percent) followed by hydro power
(almost 23 percent), and Kang from the CNNC saying Monday
nuclear energy accounted for 2.3 percent of power production.
Scott Roberts, a Beijing-based analyst with Cambridge Energy
Research Associates, told UPI that thermal energy in China was
"overwhelmingly coal," responsible for over 90 percent of the
electricity produced in such a manner as opposed to power plants
fueled by oil or natural gas.
The country's heavy dependence on coal as a primary source of
electricity poses great pressures on sustaining its impressive
economic development. The high sulfur content of Chinese coal
has resulted in the country having 16 of the world's 20 most
polluted cities. China's coal mines have the worst safety record
on the planet, resulting in thousands of deaths each year and
raising the prospect of labor unrest.
Moreover, the locations of coal resources are in the country's
interior provinces whereas most of its energy demand is focused
in coastal provinces, the engine driving the economy. Rail and
trucking infrastructure bottlenecks have stretched distribution
capacities to the breaking point.
Kang told reporters China has 19 nuclear facilities; nine that
are operational and 10 under currently construction, including
two that will come on line in late 2005 or early 2006. The two
reactors at Daya Bay in southern Guandong were supplied by
Framatome, a French company. It supplies 70 percent of its
energy to neighboring Hong Kong with the remainder used in the
province.
There are two reactors at another location in Guangdong,
Ling'ao, which also use Framatome.
The other littoral province providing nuclear energy in China
is Zhejiang's Qinshan facility which has a mixed bag of Japanese
(Mitsubishi), Canadian (AECL) and locally produced technologies
in its five reactors on line.
According to a report issued by the World Nuclear Association
in April 2005, two Russian AES-91 power plants (with 1000 MWe
VVER reactors) are being constructed at Tianwan in Liangyungang
Jiangsu province under a cooperation agreement between China and
Russia. Additional reactors are planned in China, to give a
fivefold increase in nuclear capacity to 40 MWe by 2020 Kang
told reporters.
U.S. nuclear power plant provider Westinghouse faces French and
Russian competition in contracts for third generation CNNC
plants at Sanmen (Zhejiang) and Yanjiang (Guandong) to be
awarded this year.
Analysts say these bids are critical in shaping foreign
participation in the nuclear power industry up to 2020.
Recognizing that nuclear technology sales to China would help
the United States address its massive trade imbalance with the
Chinese, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has cleared the
transfer of technology while the U.S. Export-Import bank has
approved $5 billion in loan guarantees for the Westinghouse bid.
Kang said the CNNC had not made its final choice yet, but a
decision was impeding.
Concerning a decision of such magnitude involving billions of
dollars Kang noted, "we are looking at three things: technology
levels, technology transfer and price sensitivity."
His response on whether the ups and downs of Sino-American
relations were a consideration was diplomatic: "from my
perspective, there's no politics, the decision is about
technology for economic development."
The most important perspective on Chinese nuclear power derives
from its history, the non-peaceful use of the technology.
China detonated its first atomic device in 1964 without outside
help; it will continue to rely on its own development capacities
first then take what it can grab from the outside world second.
All site contents copyright © 2005 News World Communications,
Inc.
*****************************************************************
13 NRC: NRC to Send Team to Review Seabrook Security
News Release - Region I - 2005-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-05-032
June 6, 2005 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A.
Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov
team to continue the review of security at Seabrook Station in
Seabrook, N.H. The on-site portion of the inspection began
today. The plant is operated by FPL Energy.
Consisting of five inspectors, the NRC team is tasked with
following up on NRC-identified findings from an inspection
conducted in May. The multi-disciplinary team will look at the
companys root cause analysis and evaluate the long-term
corrective actions planned by the company. Prior to leaving the
site after the May inspection, NRC inspectors reviewed the
companys short-term corrective actions that included on-site
compensatory measures and found them to be appropriate and in
accordance with the companys security plan.
NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins said, "Since
conducting our inspection last month, NRC continued to assure
that the company was addressing the inspection findings. This
special inspection will provide us with an in-depth look at the
companys efforts to correct any problems and prevent
recurrence."
The NRC inspection team includes specialists from the Region I
office in King of Prussia, Pa., and the NRCs headquarters in
Rockville, Md. The team is expected to spend about one week on
site before returning to the regional office, where information
they gather will be analyzed and evaluated.
The NRC routinely conducts inspections of security at the
nations nuclear power plants. The details of those inspections
are not publicly available. The NRC has determined that certain
security information should not be publicly available if it
could reasonably be useful to an adversary.
Last revised Monday, June 06, 2005
*****************************************************************
14 StarNewsOnline.com: Nuke plant sirens can lose juice
The Voice of Southeastern North Carolina
Last updated: June 06. 2005 12:00AM
You might have missed this story, or you might not have quite
believed it, but apparently it's true: The warning sirens for
the Brunswick Nuclear Plant can't wail if the power goes out.
Warning sirens would be equally silent at more than a dozen
nuclear plants around the country, according to information
dragged out of the U.S. Nuclear "Regulatory" Commission.
Apparently this is one regulation the NRC doesn't think is
important.
Not important even though a terrorist attack that threatened to
release radioactivity probably would knock out power to the
surrounding area – and thus the sirens that are supposed to warn
people of potential danger.
Brunswick has 36 sirens, according to spokesman Mike McCracken,
and not one of them has backup power.
He says it isn't necessary because the public could be alerted
by cops with bull horns, wildlife officers in boats and
announcements on radio and television. Also, he says, the
company tests the sirens regularly and hustles to get them back
on if power goes out.
Despite the extremely low risk that the sirens might not work
when they're needed, Mr. McCracken said, Progress Energy might
install batteries in them. "We're looking at that for the near
future," he says.
Publicity has a way of prompting such decisions. The federal
officials we pay to protect us haven't.
All material ©2005 Wilmington Star-News
*****************************************************************
15 Z TV: Construction of Pak nuclear reactor to begin year end
Zee Television ZeeNext.com
Beijing, June 06: Construction of a 300 megawatt Chinese-made
nuclear power plant in Pakistan is expected to begin as early as
the end of this year, a leading Chinese official said today.
"In May last year, CNNC signed with the Pakistani side a
contract concerning the second 300 megawatt power plant in
Chashma," Kang Rixin, General Manager of the state-owned China
National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) told journalists.
"Now the contract is being carried out and by the end of this
year or the beginning of next year construction on this project
will be started and the first concrete will be poured."
The reported 700 million dollar project is the second phase
of the Chashma power plant, which already has a similar 300
megawatt Chinese-made reactor that began operation in 2000.
The design of the reactor is based on china's homemade Qinshan 1
nuclear reactor in its eastern province of Zhejiang.
In December, the two sides signed an agreement for the
utilisation of 150 million dollars of the "preferential export
credit" provided by china for construction of the second unit at
Chashma which sits in Pakistan's central Punjab province.
China agreed to build the 300 megawatt power plant last year
and both sides have insisted it is for civilian use only.
Pakistan's archrival India has in the past expressed its
reservations about nuclear and military cooperation between
Pakistan and China.
Bureau Report
inews@zeenetwork.com
Copyright © 2000 Econnect India Ltd. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 toledoblade.co: Feds vow to keep tabs on plant's operations
Article published Monday, June 6, 2005
DAVIS-BESSE
By TOM HENRY BLADE STAFF WRITER
OAK HARBOR, Ohio - Although the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
said the phaseout of its special oversight panel at Davis-Besse
demonstrates renewed confidence in FirstEnergy Corp.'s ability
to run the nuclear plant, all doubts haven't completely
dissipated.
Steve Reynolds, the oversight panel's chairman, made that clear
in his public remarks, when he compared the situation to a
bicycle being given back to a child without removing the
training wheels.
The panel is leaving the Ottawa County plant July 1, but Mr.
Reynolds said Davis-Besse will continue to be subjected to
inspections above and beyond normal for an indefinite period.
The scrutiny will entail closer looks at a backlogged list of
routine maintenance items and the company's efforts to improve
workplace morale.
Mr. Reynolds' comments about training wheels, made at the
oversight panel's final meeting on May 24, stand in contrast to
the harsher tone of John Zwolinski, the NRC's former director of
licensing and project management, when he spoke under oath in
2002 about the NRC's relationship at the time with FirstEnergy.
"How can [the NRC] have faith, trust, and confidence we've
gotten the right anything from that facility?" Mr. Zwolinski
asked investigators with the NRC's Office of Inspector General.
"I mean, this kind of thing shakes me 100 percent," he said.
His comments occurred a few months after the near-rupture of
Davis-Besse's reactor head was revealed on March 6, 2002, a
degree of maintenance neglect that had never been documented
before.
Ultimately, nuclear operators in Europe wanted to know from the
NRC what had happened inside Davis-Besse.
By just about every yardstick, FirstEnergy has worked hard to
regain the NRC's trust.
The NRC, for its part, has acknowledged progress, while also
saying it has been taught for the second time in 20 years to
guard against complacency at Davis-Besse.
The plant's recent two-year shutdown surpassed a 19-month
shutdown that followed an incident there on June 9, 1985. In
that event, a series of pumps and valves failed, causing a loss
of coolant water to its reactor core that could have led to a
meltdown.
Senior NRC officials, including Jim Dyer - the former Midwest
regional chief and its reactor regulation director - said the
Davis-Besse saga has caused a lot of "soul-searching" within the
agency itself.
"Nobody in this business wants another Davis-Besse to happen.
Period, " Mr. Reynolds said.
Oversight panels such as the one formed at Davis-Besse, with NRC
officials from Washington and the agency's Midwest office near
Chicago, are rarely formed.
The NRC said it assembles them only when something has occurred
that would keep a plant shut down for months.
At three years, Davis-Besse's intensified scrutiny is the
longest on record at this level of oversight, said NRC spokesman
Viktoria Mitlyng.
Formed April 29, 2002, the oversight panel held monthly public
meetings until Davis-Besse got its restart authorization on
March 8, 2004, then scaled back to bimonthly meetings.
Bill Ruland, the panel's vice chairman, said those meetings
served an important "public accountability" function, because
they forced FirstEnergy and the NRC to face the public on
credibility issues.
"This process has taught them both how easy it is to lose that
public trust and how difficult it is to get it back, " Mr.
Ruland said.
Barring unforeseen circumstances, Davis-Besse will return to a
more-normal oversight process in which the public will be
invited to hear about the plant's status at annual meetings.
The next such annual meeting is to occur in early 2006,
officials said.
Contact Tom Henry at: thenry@theblade.com or 419-724-6079.
The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660
, (419) 724-6000
*****************************************************************
17 The Standard: 400b yuan investment planned for power plants -
China Section
plans to invest 400 billion yuan (HK$376.24 billion) building
power plants between now and 2020.
The nation's largest builder of nuclear power plants expects to
make a decision soon on awarding the contract to construct two
pairs of nuclear reactors at Sanmen in Zhejiang, and Yangjiang in
Guangdong, said president Kang Rixin.
Framatome - a venture between France's Areva and Germany's
Siemens - British Nuclear Fuels' Westinghouse Electric and
Russia's AtomStroyExport are bidding for the projects.
``We're still analyzing the bids and have some issues to
clarify, including technology transfer and pricing, which are
sensitive,'' said Kang in Beijing Monday. ``We hope to make a
decision as soon as possible.''
He rejected speculation that France or Russia might have an edge
in the bidding with Washington are cooler.
``We don't consider politics,'' said Kang. ``We choose the best
technology for China's power development.''
The mainland needs to add two reactors a year to meet a target
of generating 4 nuclear plants by 2020.
It currently gets about 2.3 percent of its electricity from this
energy source, according to Kang.
The country wants to increase the amount of installed
nuclear-power capacity to 40,000 megawatts from 6,700 megawatts.
Plants with 9,300 megawatts of nuclear capacity are under
construction, and there are plans for a further 24,000 megawatts,
said Kang.
The mainland plans to construct the new reactors in provinces
such as Fujian, Shandong and Guangdong.
``Nuclear power is the cleanest and one of the safest forms of
energy,'' said resources are in the north and west and consumers
are in the south and southeast, so it makes economic sense to
build nuclear plants in
the coastal areas.''
China, which relies on coal and oil for 90 percent of its energy
needs, wants to alternative fuels. It is encouraging the use of
cleaner fuels to reduce pollution and cut the country's reliance
on crude oil imports.
China National Nuclear is developing a new form of reactor
technology that it projects, known as CNP 1,000, said Kang. A
design of a prototype for the reactor may be ready by the end of
the year.
The new reactor type is expected to be cheaper to construct,
costing about US$1,300 (HK$10,140) per kilowatt, compared with
US$1,330 per kilowatt at existing plants. Those using CNP 1,000
technology may cut the cost of power sold to distributors by five
cents per kilowatt, he said.
Areva, the world's biggest maker of nuclear reactors, plans to
bid for nine projects in the mainland this year as the country's
energy use rises, said chief executive Anne Lauvergeon last
month. The mainland plans to build up to 25 nuclear power plants
by 2020, she said.
BLOOMBERG, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Standard, Sing Tao Newspaper Group and
Global China Group. All rights reserved. No content may be
redistributed or republished, either
*****************************************************************
18 PRN: Susquehanna Unit 2 Shuts Down Because of Non-Nuclear Problem
[PR Newswire - A United Business Media Company]
BERWICK, Pa., June 6 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Unit 2 of PPL's
Susquehanna nuclear power plant shut down automatically at 12:33
p.m. EDT Monday (6/6) because of a problem with the electric
transmission network.
"The reactor shut down safely," said Lou Ramos, PPL's community
relations manager for Susquehanna. "We are investigating the
cause of the problem."
The plant's Unit 1 reactor continues to operate at 100 percent
power.
The Susquehanna plant, which is operated by PPL and located in
Luzerne County about seven miles north of Berwick, is owned
jointly by PPL Susquehanna LLC and Allegheny Electric Cooperative
Inc.
PPL Susquehanna is one of PPL Corporation's generating
facilities. Headquartered in Allentown, Pa., PPL Corporation
(NYSE: PPL) controls about 12,000 megawatts of generating
capacity in the United States, sells energy in key U.S. markets
and delivers electricity to nearly 5 million customers in
Pennsylvania, the United Kingdom and Latin America. More
information is available at http://www.pplweb.com.
SOURCE PPL Corporation
Web Site: http://www.pplweb.com
Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
Reserved.
A United Business Mediacompany.
*****************************************************************
19 Telegraph: Disturbing deficiency at Seabrook plant
[NashuaTelegraph.com]
Published: Saturday, Jun. 4, 2005
BACKGROUND: A leaked Nuclear Regulatory Commission report showed
that the perimeter intruder detection system at the Seabrook
nuclear power plant probably hadn’t worked in six months.
CONCLUSION: While a plant spokesman says at no time had the plant
lost its ability to protect public health and safety, the report
remains a matter of concern.
The public relations spokesman for the Seabrook nuclear power
plant makes it abundantly clear that the people who run the
operation think that security was never compromised, but its
hard not to be more than a little concerned that the “perimeter
intrusion detection system” has probably not been working since
it was installed more than six months ago.
According to an internal plant document, that appears to be the
conclusion reached by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission after it
inspected the system, or fence, earlier last month.
Heres some other scary things in the document:
Several “zones” in the detection system “failed” testing and
were declared “inoperable.” (Translation: The thing didnt work.)
The systems design was “inadequate.” (Translation: It would
never have worked.)
The “testing” to “commission the system” and “to ensure
operability” were “deficient.” (Translation: Somebody or some
people at the plant screwed up.)
The plants owners review and approval of the system vendor
“lacked vigor.” (Translation: They really dropped the ball on
this one.)
The plant had or has, at least where this system is concerned,
“inadequate security organizational effectiveness.”
(Translation: The plants security agency and managers were not
doing a good enough job, at least where the detection system was
concerned.)
That kind of information makes it sounds like intruders
(terrorists) could have walked right up to the plant on a dark,
moonless night.
But, spokesman Al Griffith insists that is not the case. He
assures that “At no time have we lost our ability to protect
public health and safety.”
Griffith says the detection system was a “segment” of the
security system that was “not operating the way we wanted it
to.” And, “full compensatory measures” are now in place.
He is not allowed, nor should he, go into details about what
those measures might be, but an image of additional security
guards, dogs, night vision goggles and the like comes to mind.
Nonetheless, this is a major embarrassment for the plant and its
security.
The plant didnt want this information before the public. It was
leaked. And we, for one, are glad it was.
This was a serious deficiency in plant security that was
mandated after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
We are thankful the NRC discovered the problem and that measures
have been taken as a result.
We want to believe Griffith when he says were safe and not to
worry.
But we would rather know that something went wrong and is being
fixed than to have had the information hidden from us. And we
would feel better about the situation had it been the plant or
the NRC that had made the matter public. The Exeter
News-Letter
Contact The Telegraph of Nashua Privacy Policy and User Agreement
© 2005, Telegraph Publishing Company PO Box 1008, Nashua, NH
03061 (603) 594-6440 All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
20 NEWS.com.au: Bracks says no to N-power
(06-06-2005)
June 06, 2005 From: AAP Advertisement:
NUCLEAR power was not an option for Victoria, Premier Steve
Bracks said today. Mr Bracks was responding to controversial
comments by his New South Wales counterpart Bob Carr who has
called for public debate on the issue.
"I don't support nuclear energy or the use of uranium to fuel
electricity generation in Victoria," Mr Bracks said.
"We need to find cleaner ways of burning greenhouse gases and
to make sure we can reduce greenhouse gases."
Instead, the Victorian Premier said his Government had
earmarked $85 million in its last Budget to investigate methods
of drying brown coal which is used to generate most of
Victoria's power.
"We're looking at the resources we have, looking at how we can
do it better with less greenhouse gas emissions and I think
that's the right way forward."
In NSW, Mr Carr stood by his comments that nuclear power could
act as a bridge between coal-fired power and a new era of
renewable energy.
"We've got to debate seriously whether global warming is
proceeding at such a pace that nuclear power might be the bridge
to the era of renewables," Mr Carr told the Nine Network last
night.
"The polar ice caps are melting, the rainfall is more erratic,
it's getting hotter and hotter."
Green groups last week labelled Mr Carr's comments a ploy to
divert attention from the problems with polluting coal-fired
power stations.
Queensland Premier Peter Beattie said there was no need to
consider such a proposal while his state had a 300-year supply
of coal.
Victoria burns brown coal – in contrast to the black coal used
in the northern states – and is negotiating to extend the life
of Hazelwood power station, dubbed the nation's dirtiest by
environmentalists.
*****************************************************************
21 WIND: Nuclear Plant Security: Concerns Over Spent Nuclear Fuel Continue
Illinois Conservative Politics
[WIND 560AM News Talk]
GUEST OPINION:
Monday, June 06, 2005
- Jim Kouri, CPP
OPINION - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the
regulatory responsibility to, among other things, ensure that
the nation's 103 commercial nuclear power plants are operated in
a safe and secure manner.
While the nuclear power industry's overall safety record has
been good, safety issues periodically arise that threaten the
credibility of NRC's regulation and oversight of the industry.
Recent events make the importance of NRC's regulatory and
oversight responsibilities readily apparent. The terrorist
attacks on September 11, 2001, focused attention on the security
of facilities such as commercial nuclear power plants, while
safety concerns were heightened by shutdown of the Davis-Besse
nuclear power plant in Ohio in 2002, and the discovery of
missing or unaccounted for spent nuclear fuel at three nuclear
power plants.
Government reports have documented many positive steps taken by
NRC to advance the security and safety of the nation's nuclear
power plants. It has also identified various actions that NRC
needs to take to better carry out its mission.
First, with respect to its security mission, experts found that
NRC needs to improve security measures for sealed sources of
radioactive materials---radioactive material encapsulated in
stainless steel or other metal used in medicine, industry, and
research--which could be used to make a "dirty bomb."
They also found that, although NRC was taking numerous actions
to require nuclear power plants to enhance security, NRC needed
to strengthen its oversight of security at the plants. Second,
with respect to its public health and safety, and environmental
missions, the Government Accountability Office found that NRC
needs to conduct more effective analyses of plant owners'
funding for decommissioning to ensure that the significant
volume of radioactive waste remaining after the permanent
closure of a plant are properly disposed.
In addition, NRC needs to more aggressively and comprehensively
resolve issues that led to the shutdown of the Davis-Besse
nuclear power plant by improving its oversight of plant safety
conditions. Security and safety experts believe NRC needs to do
more to ensure that power plants are effectively controlling
spent nuclear fuel, including developing and implementing
appropriate inspection procedures.
The GAO has identified several cross-cutting challenges
affecting NRC's ability to effectively and credibly regulate the
nuclear power industry. Recently, NRC has taken two overarching
approaches to its regulatory and oversight responsibilities.
These approaches are to develop and implement a risk-informed
regulatory strategy that targets the most important
safety-related activities; and strike a balance between
verifying plants' compliance with requirements through
inspections and affording licensees the opportunity to
demonstrate that they are operating their plants safety.
NRC must overcome significant obstacles to fully implement its
risk-informed regulatory strategy across agency operations,
especially with regards to developing the ability to identify
emerging technical issues and adjust regulatory requirements
before safety problems develop. NRC also faces inherent
challenges in achieving the appropriate balance between more
direct oversight and industry self-compliance.
Incidents such as the 2002 shutdown of the Davis-Besse plant and
the unaccounted for spent nuclear fuel at several plants raise
questions about whether NRC has the risk information that it
needs and whether it is appropriately balancing agency
involvement and licensee self-monitoring.
NRC's resources have already been stretched by the extensive
effort to enhance security at plants in the wake of the
September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Pressure on NRC's
resources will continue as the nation's fleet of plants age and
the industry's interest in expansion grows, both in licensing
and constructing new plants, and re-licensing and increasing the
power output of existing ones.
© 2005 IllinoisLeader.com -- all rights reserved
Jim Kouri, CPP, is currently fifth vice-president of the
National Association of Chiefs of Police. He's former chief at a
New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed
"Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In
addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey
university. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and
trained police and security officers throughout the country. He
writes for many police and crime magazines including Chief of
Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer, Campus Law Enforcement
Journal, and others. He's appeared as on-air commentator for
over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah,
McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His
book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com,
Booksamillion.com, and can be ordered at local bookstores.
*****************************************************************
22 Guardian Unlimited: Radiation Detectors to Scan Calif. Ports
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Saturday June 4, 2005 5:16 AM
AP Photo CACC103
By ALEX VEIGA
Associated Press Writer
LOS ANGELES (AP) - The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach will
receive radiation detectors to scan every incoming cargo
container for nuclear weapons or dirty bombs, Homeland Security
Secretary Michael Chertoff said Friday.
The 20-foot-high devices, already in use in at seaports in
Jersey City, N.J., and elsewhere, should be at the Southern
California ports by the end of the year, Chertoff said. They are
part of the U.S. government's strategy to prevent a possible
attack by terrorists using nuclear or radiological weapons at
the nation's busiest port complex.
``A key element of that strategy is detection,'' Chertoff said
after touring the waterways surrounding the ports aboard a Coast
Guard ship. ``If we know this radiological material is coming in
... we can take the appropriate steps to intercept a threat.''
About 4.3 million containers are shipped to the dual ports each
year. The Southern California harbor will become the second
major U.S. harbor to have all incoming cargo screened, Chertoff
said.
In April, officials announced Oakland was the first major harbor
to install enough radiation machines to check all incoming
cargo. It has 25.
Trucks carrying containers unloaded from ships will pass through
the detectors. If the machines find signs of radiation,
containers will get another scan and possibly inspection by
hand-held devices.
At a cost of about $250,000 each, the machines were funded by
federal dollars and take about five seconds to screen each
container, officials said.
Union officials representing port workers said some cargo
containers linger on the docks for hours or days - and might not
be checked right away.
``We think it's hypocritical that they don't screen it
immediately after it's unloaded, said Miguel Lopez, port
representative of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
whose union has about 500 truckers at the ports. ``It puts
everybody in jeopardy, not just the truckers.''
Chertoff said the process of checking containers could be
optimized to reduce delays in scanning, citing officials in
Baltimore who found ways to speed up the process.
He also said scanning would not slow the flow of cargo at the
ports, which last year experienced delays handling a large
volume of cargo from the Far East.
``Taking an extra couple minutes to promote homeland security is
something the trucking industry would endorse,'' said Patty
Senecal, vice president of Transport Express Inc., a harbor
trucking and warehouse company. ``It's a different story if
trucks are delayed for hours and hours ... but we don't expect
that.''
^----
Associated Press Writer Jeremiah Marquez contributed to this
report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
23 [RADFOOD] Good news!
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:36:58 -0500 (CDT)
This spring, the Food and Nutrition Service of the USDA conducted a
nationwide survey of school districts to find out which school districts
are interested in ordering irradiated meat products for the 2005-06
school year. The answer: no school districts have placed orders! This
lack of interest is a significant change over last year, when a number
of Texas, Minnesota, and Nebraska school districts placed orders for
irradiated ground beef (although they never received the irradiated
product because of the high price). At the end of the summer, we will
follow-up with the USDA to make sure that no school districts have
submitted last minute requests for irradiated product, but the results
of this survey are a very good sign.
Why are school districts not interested in ordering irradiated meat
this year?
There are a number of potential reasons why school districts who made
requests last year would not do so again. Firstly, the price of
irradiated meat for school districts is much higher than for
non-irradiated meat. Last year, the price bids were 29-80 cents higher
per pound for the irradiated ground beef. Since then, CFC Logistics, an
irradiation facility which was going to irradiate meat for schools, has
closed down their irradiation capabilities due to a lack of
profitability.
Another factor in the lack of interest in irradiated meat in schools is
public participation. This means you! Congratulations to everyone who
has made a phone call or written to a public official expressing their
concern about this product in schools. Other groups' efforts, such as
NoCobalt-4-Food and Minnesota Voices for Choices, have raised awareness
about problems with irradiated food, and led many other parents and
citizens to speak out. We will keep you updated on this issue as the
2005-06 school year approaches.
---------
In other news, Public Citizen is initiating a new campaign, which seeks
to ban new and expanding factory farms. Factory farms, also known as
concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), consist of hundreds to
thousands of animals confined tightly together with little access to
sunlight, fresh air, or room for movement. Factory farms crowd out small
family farms, as well as create significant public health and
environmental problems.
The idea of a national moratorium on new factory farms was inspired by
a resolution passed by the American Public Health Association in 2003.
The resolution, which can be viewed at
http://www.apha.org/legislative/policy/2003/2003-007.pdf, outlines
the impacts factory farms have on the communities surrounding them. It
also states that the APHA will "urge federal, state and local
governments and public health agencies to impose a moratorium on new
Concentrated Animal Feed Operations [CAFOs]."
To work toward a factory farm ban, as well as pursuing other federal
avenues to address this issue, we have created a new factory farm
listserve. If you, or people you know, would like to join this
listserve, please go to http://www.citizen.org/email/enteremail.cfm and
enter your email address and hit Submit. Then fill in all of your
information (including address and zipcode.) Having all the information
allows us to send local and state-specific actions, identify one's
congressional district, and update our contact list. Below the form for
contact information, select the "Factory Farm" list from the Critical
Mass Energy and Environment Program section.
***
Audrey Hill
Organizer
Public Citizen
215 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE
www.safelunch.org
Washington, DC 20003
(202) 454-5185
********************
If you would like to be removed from the radfood list, send an email to listserv@listserver.citizen.org with the words "unsubscribe radfood" in the message.
If you would like to be added to the radfood list, send an email to listserv@listserver.citizen.org with the words "subscribe radfood" in the message.
To learn more about food irradiation, visit our website at http://www.citizen.org/cmep/
Questions about the radfood list can be directed to RADFOOD-request@LISTSERVER.CITIZEN.ORG
-Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program
*****************************************************************
24 AU ABC: Mayor seeks depleted uranium reassurance
"Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online">
Monday, 6 June 2005. 10:58 (AEST)Monday, 6 June 2005. 10:58
Residents have raised concerns about the use of depleted uranium
ammunition.Reuters
A central Queensland Mayor says verbal assurances that depleted
uranium weapons will not be used in the joint US-Australian
military exercise later this month do not go far enough.
He says written confirmation of the Australian Defence Force's
position would reinforce community support for military
exercises.
The ADF has held a series of public meetings about Operation
Talisman Sabre, which will centre on Shoalwater Bay, north of
Rockhampton.
Livingstone Shire Mayor Bill Ludwig says residents asked many
questions about the possible use of depleted uranium weapons,
but he says there are still some lingering concerns.
"The exercises are a very positive economic driver for the area,
it's also an excellent opportunity for cultural exchange with
both US forces and the Singaporeans who come here on an annual
basis, so there certainly are some positives," he said.
"Our issue effectively has been to make sure the area is managed
from an environmental point of view."
The ADF estimates that the exercise will inject about $5 million
into the local communities.
About 11,000 US and 6,000 Australian defence personnel are
expected to take part.
Talisman Sabre starts on June 12 and involves four weeks of
intensive training.
Defence says the exercise's main aim is to practise
inter-operability between Australian and US forces.
"Based on fictional scenarios, the exercise includes combined
Special Forces operations, parachute drops, amphibious landings
at Shoalwater Bay, artillery and infantry manoeuvres, air combat
training and advanced maritime operations," the ADF says on its
web site.
Other sites involved in Queensland are Cowley Beach, Townsville,
Port Alma, Galdstone, Amberley and Brisbane.
Darwin's port and the Dalamere bombing range, Sydney's port and
the Timor, Tasman and Coral seas will also be used in the
exercise.
*****************************************************************
25 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
FR Doc E5-2866
[Federal Register: June 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 107)]
[Notices] [Page 32852-32853] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06jn05-62]
of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for the Department
of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration,
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition AGENCY: Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betsy Ullrich, Commercial and R
Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, 475
Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, 19406, telephone
(610) 337-5040, fax (610) 337-5269; or by e-mail: .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing a license amendment to the Department
of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration,
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (FDA/ CFSAN) for
Materials License No. 19-30771-01, to authorize release of its
facility in Washington, DC for unrestricted use. 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 concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) is appropriate. The amendment will be issued following
the publication of this Notice.
II. EA Summary The purpose of the action is to authorize the
release of the licensee's,
[[Page 32853]] Washington, DC, facility for unrestricted use. The
FDA/CFSAN was authorized by NRC from 1965 to use radioactive
materials for research and development purposes at the site. On
January 31, 2005, the FDA/ CFSAN requested that NRC release the
facility for unrestricted use. The FDA/CFSAN has conducted
surveys of the facility and provided information to the NRC to
demonstrate that the site meets the license termination criteria
in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted use.
The NRC staff has prepared an EA in support of the license
amendment. The facility was remediated and surveyed prior to the
licensee requesting the license amendment. The NRC staff has
reviewed the information and final status survey submitted by the
FDA/CFSAN. Based on its review, the staff has determined that
there are no additional remediation activities necessary to
complete the proposed action. Therefore, the staff considered the
impact of the residual radioactivity at the facility and
concluded that since the residual radioactivity meets the
requirements in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20, a Finding of No
Significant Impact is appropriate.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact The staff has prepared the
EA (summarized above) in support of the license amendment to
release the facility for unrestricted use.
The NRC staff has evaluated the FDA/CFSAN's request and the
results of the surveys and has concluded that the completed
action complies with the criteria in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20.
The staff has found that the radiological environmental impacts
from the action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by
NUREG-1496, Volumes 1-3, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement
in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License
Termination of NRC-Licensed Facilities'' (ML042310492,
ML042320379, and ML042330385). The staff has also found that the
non- radiological impacts are not significant. On the basis of
the EA, the NRC has concluded that the environmental impacts from
the action are expected to be insignificant and has determined
not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the action.
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action,
including the application for the license amendment and
supporting documentation, are available electronically at the
NRC's Electronic Reading Room at .
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 ADAMS accession
numbers for the documents related to this notice are: The
Environment Assessment (ML051430302), Final Status Survey Report,
Federal Building 8, 200 C Street, SW., Washington, DC, December
22, 2004, Final Report (ML050340555). 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 (800) 397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by
e-mail to .
Documents related to operations conducted under this license not
specifically referenced in this Notice may not be electronically
available and/or may not be publicly available. Persons who have
an interest in reviewing these documents should submit a request
to NRC under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Instructions
for submitting a FOIA request can be found on the NRC's Web site
at .
Dated in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, this 27th day of May,
2005.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James Dwyer, Chief, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear
Materials Safety, Region I.
[FR Doc. E5-2866 Filed 6-3-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
26 courant.com: Nuclear-Worker Groups Contest Rules
CONNECTICUT NEWS
June 3, 2005
By THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, Courant Staff Writer
Four nuclear-worker organizations are claiming the new rules
governing compensation of sick nuclear weapons workers exposed to
on-the-job hazards are so burdensome, that workers will likely
never receive any benefit.
Those eligible are U.S. Department of Energy facility or
contract workers who became ill from exposures to about 40,000
chemicals, metals or dust. A dozen nuclear weapons plants doing
work for the U.S. Department of Energy, and formerly the Atomic
Energy Commission, are located in Connecticut.
The problems arise from complex U.S Department of Labor
determinations for sick worker impairment ratings and from
burdensome application requirements for workers suffering from a
covered illness, said the Alliance of Nuclear Worker Advocacy
Groups. It represents nuclear workers' advocacy groups located in
four states, Colorado, Missouri, Tennessee and California.
The Alliance is concerned about application guidelines for a
new, federal compensation program for sick nuclear weapons
workers or families of deceased workers who were exposed to
hazardous materials on the job. The Labor Department took over a
nuclear-worker compensation program formerly under the U.S.
Department of Energy that helped workers obtain state workers'
compensation benefits. Workers under this new program will now
receive federal benefits.
"Once again federal agencies have thwarted congressional intent
to compensate the sick nuclear weapons workers," said Harry
Williams, one of the advocates. "I'm disgusted. We knew the
regulations would not be perfect, but what they wrote is riddled
with obstacles for the claimants. DOL has decided to walk down
the same unjust path that the U.S. Department of Energy did."
Williams works with the Coalition for a Healthy Environment in
Knoxville, Tenn.
U.S. Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro, D-3rd District, on Thursday said she
agrees.
"The government has a moral responsibility to compensate workers
injured because of their on-the-job exposure to hazardous
materials," DeLauro said. "The Department of Labor should
revisit the unfair rules that may delay the compensation these
workers deserve. It is important that the government follow up
with Connecticut workers suffering from exposure with the
information they need for reparation."
But U.S. Department of Labor officials say they need an
opportunity to show that the new system will work.
"Early judgment and misrepresentation of this important interim
regulation is unhelpful to workers who may be eligible for
compensation, but may now be discouraged from applying for
them," said Shelby Hallmark, director of Labor's workers'
compensation programs.
"The DOL will continue its outreach efforts and is planning to
carry out a very extensive round of town hall meetings in all of
the major Department of Energy sites, beginning in mid-June,"
said Hallmark. "We would urge the community to hold its judgment
until our representatives are able to get to your cities."
The Labor Department has its own nuclear worker compensation
program covering radiation-induced cancer and beryllium disease.
Silicosis is covered too, but only for those digging tunnels for
nuclear facilities.
courant.com is Copyright © 2005 by The Hartford Courant
*****************************************************************
27 Casks Gain Favor as Method for Storing Nuclear Waste As Domenici Wants PU For Reprocessing
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 20:53:01 -0400
Greatest Threat To Life On Earth:
http://www.heatisonline.org
Senator Domenici, a strong supporter of nuclear
power, said in a statement that he believed that
the Yucca Mountain project should proceed but that
the spent fuel should be kept on the surface to
allow reprocessing to recover its plutonium, which
can be used as reactor fuel. "Interim storage is a
key component of that," he said. "I certainly want
to keep that option on the table."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/05/politics/05waste.html?
Casks Gain Favor as Method for Storing Nuclear
Waste
a.. E-Mail This
b.. Printer-Friendly
c.. Single-Page
d.. Reprints
By MATTHEW L. WALD
Published: June 5, 2005
WASHINGTON, June 4 - As the Energy Department
falters in its effort to bury nuclear waste at
Yucca Mountain in Nevada, the nuclear industry and
Congress are taking steps toward a radically
different storage strategy: putting the waste in
huge casks that could be parked in a handful of
high-security lots around the country for decades.
That idea advanced on two fronts last month. A
panel of judges at the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission recommended on May 24 that a private
utility consortium be allowed to open a lot to
store 4,000 casks of waste on an Indian
reservation west of Salt Lake City. On the same
day, the House voted to order the Energy
Department to establish similar storage areas,
providing $10 million for the project.
In the Senate, Pete V. Domenici, the New Mexico
Republican who is chairman of the Energy
Committee, has expressed interest in the concept.
And the Energy Department itself has opened the
door to considering an alternative to what has
long been the favored strategy of deep burial of
nuclear wastes.
But even if President Bush receives and signs
legislation, it may be years before the Energy
Department sets up any lots. The proposal has
already encountered opposition from elected
officials whose districts include potential
storage lots.
Laying out the rationale for the new approach,
Representative David L. Hobson, an Ohio Republican
who is chairman of the House Energy and Water
Development Committee, said: "It is time to
rethink our approach to dealing with spent fuel.
If we want to build a new generation of nuclear
reactors in this country, we need to demonstrate
to Wall Street that the federal government will
live up to its responsibilities under the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act to take title to commercial spent
nuclear fuel."
Since the act was passed in 1982, the Energy
Department has focused on deep burial of nuclear
waste and the government has signed contracts with
reactor owners guaranteeing that it would take the
waste. Congress later voted to make Yucca
Mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas,
the prime storage site. The Energy Department was
supposed to have the site ready by 1998, but the
effort has stumbled, and it is now unclear whether
it will open.
When it became obvious, more than a decade ago,
that the government would not fulfill its
obligations on time, reactor owners built steel
casks to put the waste in, filled them with inert
gas to inhibit rust and loaded them into concrete
silos.
The Yucca project is now so far behind that some
of the reactors have been retired and torn down,
leaving nothing but a field of storage casks.
An Energy Department spokeswoman, Anne Womack
Kolton, suggested this week that federal officials
would consider the storage lots as an interim
solution. "The administration believes that
permanent storage at a geologic repository is the
appropriate approach, Yucca Mountain is the place
to accomplish that, and we are moving forward with
that goal," Ms. Kolton said.
But she added, "Yucca Mountain's capacity is
currently limited by statute, and therefore we are
studying Chairman Hobson's proposal."
Ms. Kolton said lawyers were exploring whether a
site that her department established would need a
license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A
spokesman for the commission, Eliot Brenner, said
that it would, if it were going to store civilian
fuel.
Senator Domenici, a strong supporter of nuclear
power, said in a statement that he believed that
the Yucca Mountain project should proceed but that
the spent fuel should be kept on the surface to
allow reprocessing to recover its plutonium, which
can be used as reactor fuel. "Interim storage is a
key component of that," he said. "I certainly want
to keep that option on the table."
A utility consortium, Private Fuel Storage, has
negotiated a 50-year lease with the Skull Valley
Band of Goshute Indians for a storage site on 840
acres of the tribe's reservation about 50 miles
southwest of Salt Lake City. The group has applied
to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a
license, uncertain whether they would need to
build.
In May, a panel of administrative law judges
appointed by the commission rejected the last
technical objection, an argument raised by Utah
that a plane from a nearby Air Force base could
crash into the silos and release radiation. The
state will appeal to the full five-member
commission and plans a variety of other
challenges, including trying to block the
transportation routes.
Members of the commission said they would not talk
about Skull Valley before they had voted. But the
chairman, Nils J. Diaz, was asked in a public
appearance in March if the commission could back
such a project, because it conflicts with a
23-year-old federal policy to focus on deep
burial.
He replied, "This is an issue of the law. The
Atomic Energy Act asks us to proceed with certain
types of actions, including license applications,
that meet the qualification of protection of
public health and safety."
Another member, Jeff Merrifield, said in a
telephone interview, "We've basically said if you
put fuel into an approved storage cask, and you
place it on a concrete storage pad, that that, as
a general matter, is a safe way of storing fuel.
Obviously, that's subject to site-specific
considerations."
He added that the commission would probably act on
the application "in a fairly timely way."
Many reactor sites have casks, usually a few
dozen, and unless Yucca Mountain opens for burials
or unless big surface storage sites like Skull
Valley are established, the nation could
eventually have more than 60 of these sites.
The casks are licensed by the regulatory
commission for 20 years but the licenses can be
renewed. Nuclear engineers said they could last a
century or more, a tiny fraction of the time it
would take the radioactivity to die away. If
burial plans eventually go forward, experts say,
it will be easier to handle fuel that has been
stored in casks and that no longer generates as
much heat.
Just before the House vote, Representative Jay
Inslee, Democrat of Washington, said: "This is a
hazardous and capricious idea that does not take
into consideration the environmental, safety and
health impacts of storing such waste in the ground
near the Columbia River. There have not been any
hearings or public input into this idea, which is
an obvious backdoor attempt to circumvent
longstanding bipartisan policy."
But there are also strong reasons for casks. For
the commission, one problem is a decades-old
policy stating that building reactors was
environmentally sound because there would be a
waste solution in place by 2025. A century of
interim storage could sidestep the problem.
Another problem is money. Every reactor operator
has sued the Energy Department for failure to
accept the waste on time. The department, the
courts have ruled, must pay storage costs beyond
the date when it was supposed to accept the fuel.
"The Department of Energy recognizes that the only
way to mitigate its damages is to find someplace
to put this material, to get it off the utilities'
hands, so they can get out of these lawsuits,"
said Joe Egan, a lawyer for the State of Nevada,
which opposes construction at Yucca Mountain.
*****************************************************************
28 [NukeNet] Casks Gain Favor as Method for Storing Nuclear Waste
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:59:25 -0700
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Greatest Threat To Life On Earth:
http://www.heatisonline.org
Senator Domenici, a strong supporter of nuclear
power, said in a statement that he believed that
the Yucca Mountain project should proceed but that
the spent fuel should be kept on the surface to
allow reprocessing to recover its plutonium, which
can be used as reactor fuel. "Interim storage is a
key component of that," he said. "I certainly want
to keep that option on the table."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/05/politics/05waste.html?
Casks Gain Favor as Method for Storing Nuclear
Waste
a.. E-Mail This
b.. Printer-Friendly
c.. Single-Page
d.. Reprints
By MATTHEW L. WALD
Published: June 5, 2005
WASHINGTON, June 4 - As the Energy Department
falters in its effort to bury nuclear waste at
Yucca Mountain in Nevada, the nuclear industry and
Congress are taking steps toward a radically
different storage strategy: putting the waste in
huge casks that could be parked in a handful of
high-security lots around the country for decades.
That idea advanced on two fronts last month. A
panel of judges at the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission recommended on May 24 that a private
utility consortium be allowed to open a lot to
store 4,000 casks of waste on an Indian
reservation west of Salt Lake City. On the same
day, the House voted to order the Energy
Department to establish similar storage areas,
providing $10 million for the project.
In the Senate, Pete V. Domenici, the New Mexico
Republican who is chairman of the Energy
Committee, has expressed interest in the concept.
And the Energy Department itself has opened the
door to considering an alternative to what has
long been the favored strategy of deep burial of
nuclear wastes.
But even if President Bush receives and signs
legislation, it may be years before the Energy
Department sets up any lots. The proposal has
already encountered opposition from elected
officials whose districts include potential
storage lots.
Laying out the rationale for the new approach,
Representative David L. Hobson, an Ohio Republican
who is chairman of the House Energy and Water
Development Committee, said: "It is time to
rethink our approach to dealing with spent fuel.
If we want to build a new generation of nuclear
reactors in this country, we need to demonstrate
to Wall Street that the federal government will
live up to its responsibilities under the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act to take title to commercial spent
nuclear fuel."
Since the act was passed in 1982, the Energy
Department has focused on deep burial of nuclear
waste and the government has signed contracts with
reactor owners guaranteeing that it would take the
waste. Congress later voted to make Yucca
Mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas,
the prime storage site. The Energy Department was
supposed to have the site ready by 1998, but the
effort has stumbled, and it is now unclear whether
it will open.
When it became obvious, more than a decade ago,
that the government would not fulfill its
obligations on time, reactor owners built steel
casks to put the waste in, filled them with inert
gas to inhibit rust and loaded them into concrete
silos.
The Yucca project is now so far behind that some
of the reactors have been retired and torn down,
leaving nothing but a field of storage casks.
An Energy Department spokeswoman, Anne Womack
Kolton, suggested this week that federal officials
would consider the storage lots as an interim
solution. "The administration believes that
permanent storage at a geologic repository is the
appropriate approach, Yucca Mountain is the place
to accomplish that, and we are moving forward with
that goal," Ms. Kolton said.
But she added, "Yucca Mountain's capacity is
currently limited by statute, and therefore we are
studying Chairman Hobson's proposal."
Ms. Kolton said lawyers were exploring whether a
site that her department established would need a
license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A
spokesman for the commission, Eliot Brenner, said
that it would, if it were going to store civilian
fuel.
Senator Domenici, a strong supporter of nuclear
power, said in a statement that he believed that
the Yucca Mountain project should proceed but that
the spent fuel should be kept on the surface to
allow reprocessing to recover its plutonium, which
can be used as reactor fuel. "Interim storage is a
key component of that," he said. "I certainly want
to keep that option on the table."
A utility consortium, Private Fuel Storage, has
negotiated a 50-year lease with the Skull Valley
Band of Goshute Indians for a storage site on 840
acres of the tribe's reservation about 50 miles
southwest of Salt Lake City. The group has applied
to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a
license, uncertain whether they would need to
build.
In May, a panel of administrative law judges
appointed by the commission rejected the last
technical objection, an argument raised by Utah
that a plane from a nearby Air Force base could
crash into the silos and release radiation. The
state will appeal to the full five-member
commission and plans a variety of other
challenges, including trying to block the
transportation routes.
Members of the commission said they would not talk
about Skull Valley before they had voted. But the
chairman, Nils J. Diaz, was asked in a public
appearance in March if the commission could back
such a project, because it conflicts with a
23-year-old federal policy to focus on deep
burial.
He replied, "This is an issue of the law. The
Atomic Energy Act asks us to proceed with certain
types of actions, including license applications,
that meet the qualification of protection of
public health and safety."
Another member, Jeff Merrifield, said in a
telephone interview, "We've basically said if you
put fuel into an approved storage cask, and you
place it on a concrete storage pad, that that, as
a general matter, is a safe way of storing fuel.
Obviously, that's subject to site-specific
considerations."
He added that the commission would probably act on
the application "in a fairly timely way."
Many reactor sites have casks, usually a few
dozen, and unless Yucca Mountain opens for burials
or unless big surface storage sites like Skull
Valley are established, the nation could
eventually have more than 60 of these sites.
The casks are licensed by the regulatory
commission for 20 years but the licenses can be
renewed. Nuclear engineers said they could last a
century or more, a tiny fraction of the time it
would take the radioactivity to die away. If
burial plans eventually go forward, experts say,
it will be easier to handle fuel that has been
stored in casks and that no longer generates as
much heat.
Just before the House vote, Representative Jay
Inslee, Democrat of Washington, said: "This is a
hazardous and capricious idea that does not take
into consideration the environmental, safety and
health impacts of storing such waste in the ground
near the Columbia River. There have not been any
hearings or public input into this idea, which is
an obvious backdoor attempt to circumvent
longstanding bipartisan policy."
But there are also strong reasons for casks. For
the commission, one problem is a decades-old
policy stating that building reactors was
environmentally sound because there would be a
waste solution in place by 2025. A century of
interim storage could sidestep the problem.
Another problem is money. Every reactor operator
has sued the Energy Department for failure to
accept the waste on time. The department, the
courts have ruled, must pay storage costs beyond
the date when it was supposed to accept the fuel.
"The Department of Energy recognizes that the only
way to mitigate its damages is to find someplace
to put this material, to get it off the utilities'
hands, so they can get out of these lawsuits,"
said Joe Egan, a lawyer for the State of Nevada,
which opposes construction at Yucca Mountain.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
29 Guardian Unlimited: Radioactive Waste Transported to Texas
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday June 6, 2005 8:46 PM
CINCINNATI (AP) - About 40,000 pounds of radioactive waste from
a long-closed uranium-processing plant were loaded onto a
flatbed truck Monday for a 1,300-mile journey to storage in
Texas.
It was the first Texas-bound shipment of Cold War-era waste
being cleaned up at the former Fernald plant just outside
Cincinnati after neighbors fought for years to get rid of it and
the government struggled to find a place to take it.
The waste will be transported in 2,000 shipments through the end
of the year to Andrews, Texas, near the New Mexico line, in
large, sealed containers.
In April, Waste Control Specialists of Dallas won a $7.5 million
contract from Fluor Fernald, the contractor cleaning up the
plant, to store the waste after earlier plans to take it to Utah
and Nevada fell through because of opposition.
About 45,000 tons of waste was to be sent to the Texas site,
Fluor Fernald officials said. The trip will take between two and
four days. The trucks used will be tracked by global positioning
satellites.
The Ohio plant processed and purified uranium metal for use in
reactors to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons from the 1950s
until 1989.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
30 AU ABC: Cabinet to consider nuclear waste site
"Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online">
Monday, 6 June 2005. 20:35 (AEST)Monday, 6 June 2005. 20:35
The federal Environment Minister has refused to say whether the
Government is no longer planning to store Australia's nuclear
waste offshore.
Before last year's federal election Ian Campbell said the
Commonwealth was not pursuing any options for a nuclear waste
dump on the mainland, and the Government's preferred option was
to store the waste on an island.
Senator Campbell says federal Cabinet will discuss the location
of a depository for the Commonwealth's nuclear waste tomorrow.
"We'll be deciding where to put our waste, and obviously WA and
the Northern Territory and the other states will have to figure
out where to put their waste since Labor scuttled the very
sensible plan for a single, national repository," he said.
The federal Resources Minister has refused to rule out a dump
being established in the Northern Territory.
Speaking at a conference in Darwin, Ian Macfarlane said he was
not aware of any new sites being proposed for a dump on the
Australian mainland.
Mr Macfarlane says it is time for an intelligent debate on the
management of nuclear waste, which is predominantly medical in
Australia.
But he says any decision to establish a facility in the Northern
Territory is a matter for the Territory Government.
"I'm not aware of a proposal to put a waste dump in the
Territory at the moment and that's up to Clare Martin to decide
whether or not she wants to participate in that debate," he
said.
"No doubt we'll discuss the matter further in Cabinet at some
future time."
The Federal Opposition says the Government should come clean on
its plans.
Opposition resources spokesperson Martin Ferguson says the
Government has broken its election promise.
"For the last twelve months we were told, especially during the
campaign, that there would be no nuclear waste dump on the
Australian mainland," he said.
"Yet all of a sudden out of the blue dropped through a major
media outlet, we're told there's another suggestion on the
drawing board to go to Cabinet."
Related Video
Cabinet to consider sit for nuclear waste
Federal Cabinet is expected to discuss a site to store
Australia's nuclear waste at its meeting tomorrow. Real
BroadbandWin BroadbandReal DialupWin DialupMPEG2
*****************************************************************
31 Bellona: Tender results for 50 containers for spent nuclear fuel to be
announced in June
TUK-120 transport packing containers should accommodate
icebreakers’ spent nuclear fuel stored currently onboard service
ship Lotta.
2005-06-06 19:47
The containers should be further placed at the storage facility
at the nuclear icebreakers’ base Atomflot in Murmansk.
Atomflot’s Deputy Director Mustafa Kashka said the results of
the tender and the winner would be announced by the end of June.
Four companies are taking part in the tender: Barrikada from
Volgograd, Sevmash from Severodvinsk, EnergoTEKS from Kurchatov
and Izhora plants from St Petersburg. According to Kashka, they
will look at the following criteria: project cost, licence for
work, time frame, and quality guarantee, Interfax reported.
The UK sponsors the containers’ construction in the frames of
the Global Partnership program. It was planned originally to
announce tender back in November 2004, but due to the lack of
the agreement with the British partners, the tender was
postponed. At the moment ”the money issue is solved”, Kashka
said.
Thanks to this project Lotta will get place for 14 additional
reactor zones from the laid-up submarines, what should
significantly increase the rate of the nuclear submarines
dismantling.
Publisher: , President:
Information: , Technical contact:
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
32 BBC: Sellafield must clean up its
Last Updated: Monday, 6 June, 2005
[Sellafield]
Sellafield bosses say no discharge limits have been breached
Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria has been told to improve the
way it discharges low level radioactive waste water into the
Irish Sea.
Inspectors from the Environment Agency have issued the unit with
an enforcement notice after finding its filtering system needed
to be improved.
But it stressed that radiation doses were well within "legal
limits."
Operators British Nuclear Group said no discharge limits had been
breached and it was "committed" to improvements.
Inspectors also found that the plant needed to cut down on the
build-up of solid material in its lagoon - this is the container
where waste water is held before it is pumped into the sea.
They also found inconsistencies in the way some discharges were
measured and reported.
'Minimise discharges'
Environment Agency nuclear regulator, Andy Mayall, said: "In
recent years we've seen significant improvements in some areas at
Sellafield.
"Radioactive discharges from the site are already low - radiation
doses to the public are well within legal limits and any risk to
the public is very small.
""However, being in compliance with limits does not mean that the
company should not be committed to continuous improvement - it
needs to address certain issues to demonstrate this."
A spokesman for Sellafield said the plant was committed to making
improvements.
He said: "No authorised discharge limits have actually been
breached, however we are committed to making improvements to
minimise discharges and improve monitoring of our discharges."
Last month it emerged a leak at the plant's Thorpe reprocessing
complex lay undiscovered for three months.
More than 20 tonnes of uranium and 160kg of plutonium spewed onto
a floor in a sealed cell when a pipe fractured in January.
*****************************************************************
33 Cincinnati Enquirer: Waste starts leaving Fernald today
Monday, June 6, 2005
Truck Texas-bound with nuclear material
By Dan Klepal
Enquirer staff writer
CROSBY TWP. - The first shipment of waste from the long-closed
Fernald uranium foundry will roll through the plant's gates this
afternoon on its way to Texas.
The shipment is the first of an estimated 2,100 shipments of the
Cold War-era radioactive material that has been stored in two
aging concrete storage silos at the plant since the 1950s.
The shipments represent the last major hurdle in completing the
$4.4 billion environmental cleanup being paid for by taxpayers.
Today's shipment will be the only one for a few days.
Project Manager Dennis Carr said the second shipment isn't
scheduled until the end of the week, and it will take about two
months before the project is fully ramped up and sending out 15
shipments a day.
"We're just going to have one vehicle on Monday with a technical
person on board," Carr said. "We want the opportunity to talk
with the individuals at the weigh stations along the route, and
answer any questions they have. They'll be seeing these
shipments for the next nine or 10 months."
Government officials don't consider the shipments to be
potential targets for terrorists. Still, the drivers have been
trained to watch out for any sort of strange behavior when they
pull over to rest, eat or gas up, said Dee Markelonis, vice
president of the Tennessee-based Visionary Solutions, the
trucking company that will haul the waste.
"Our drivers are trained to notice if someone is following them,
watching them, or hanging around their truck," Markelonis said.
"Basically, if that happens the person in question will get to
spend some quality time talking to a state trooper."
Although the waste is the most radioactive material at the
Fernald site - a byproduct of the chemical process that removed
uranium from metal - it isn't thought to be terribly dangerous
on the road because it is being mixed with fly ash and concrete,
then poured into steel canisters to harden for transport. The
mixture contains between 15 percent and 20 percent waste and,
even in the event of an accident, probably would not spill out
of the canister, Carr said.
"We've done tests where we've dropped the canisters (filled with
a surrogate material) from various heights and the canisters
have never broken open," Carr has said.
The government has been trying to figure out how to get rid of
the waste almost since the start of the cleanup in the early
1980s. A failed 1990s attempt at vitrification - turning the
waste into glass - wasted tens of millions of tax dollars.
More recently, the problem was not having a place to send it. A
Utah waste handler withdrew from consideration after public
outcry against dumping the containers in that state.
The government's fallback plan - burying the stuff in the Nevada
desert - fell apart when the attorney general there threatened a
federal lawsuit to keep the waste out of his state.
Then last month, Waste Control Specialists agreed to store the
material in its Andrews, Texas, facility, while it pursues a
license to permanently dispose of it there. Even if it doesn't
get its disposal license, the material cannot return to Ohio.
"This is a major accomplishment," Carr said. "It's been a long
process, and my whole team is pretty excited about getting this
job done."
[Cincinnati.Com]
*****************************************************************
34 Indianapolis Star: Don't worry about truckloads of waste
June 6, 2005
Coming through: Shipments of radioactive waste will be
routed around I-465 en route to a disposal site in Texas. --
Matt Detrich /
Our position is: While caution should be exercised in shipping
radioactive waste, safety record of past shipments is impressive.
One disadvantage of being labeled the Crossroads of America is
that on occasion not everything that comes through Indianapolis
is desirable.
Shipments of radioactive waste that will be routed around I-465
en route to a disposal site in Texas are as welcome as a
thunderstorm on the Fourth of July. But the 4,000 containers of
low-level radioactive waste, moving via flatbed trucks across
Indiana through the end of the year, are probably less dangerous
than most chemicals routinely traversing Hoosier highways and
railroads.
Jeff Wagner, a spokesman for the contractor involved in cleaning
up the source of the waste, a former uranium processing plant in
Cincinnati, told Star reporter Tammy Webber that even in the
event of an accident, there is little risk of a release of
radiation.
For the past two decades, thousands of truckloads of waste,
along with more than 150 train trainloads of radioactive
material, have been shipped through here from the Cincinnati
facility without incident.
If a nuclear repository is created in Nevada, thousands of spent
fuel rods likely will be shipped across Indiana from nuclear
power plants in the eastern United States. It's something the
state will have to deal with by virtue of its centralized
location.
Nationwide, there have been 72 incidents involving spent nuclear
fuel shipments over more than a half-century. None has resulted
in serious contamination or injuries related to radiation
exposure, according to U.S. Atomic Energy Commission reports.
Dealing with and minimizing the risk is the price of living in a
post-industrial society and maintaining a viable national
defense.
Copyright 2005 IndyStar.com. All rights reserved Gannett Indiana
*****************************************************************
35 The Blade: Davis-Besse targets Utah as waste site
toledoblade.com
Article published Monday, June 6, 2005
Utilities wait for NRC nod on disposal
By BLADE STAFF WRITER
A consortium of eight utilities that includes FirstEnergy Corp.
believes it has cleared one of the biggest hurdles for storing
spent reactor fuel from Davis-Besse and other nuclear plants on
tribal land in Utah for up to 40 years.
The issue centers around whether the public stands an
unreasonable risk of being exposed to radiation if 40,000 metric
tons of the spent fuel gets stored outside in bunkers on a
reservation owned by the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians.
The reservation is 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, but
only 11 miles from one of the nation's largest military test and
bombing ranges where pilots at Hill Air Force Base are trained
to fly F-16 fighter jets.
Critics, including the state of Utah, claim the odds are too
great of jets crashing into the concrete and steel bunkers.
There would be up to 4,000 such vaults, each holding an
individual canister of spent reactor fuel.
A Nuclear Regulatory Commission atomic safety and licensing
board has upheld a Feb. 24 decision that favored utilities
promoting the Utah land for a disposal site. That board agreed
in February - after a 16-day hearing closed to the public
because of security concerns - that the odds of a crash exceeded
the NRC's one-in-a-million probability threshold.
But that board also concluded the chances of an impact direct
and hard enough to break open a container were inconsequential.
The issue over potential F-16 crashes and all other remaining
ones are now before the NRC's five commissioners, who have the
final say over a nearly eight-year-old request for a license to
build and operate the Utah site, according to Jay Silberg, the
consortium's Washington-based attorney.
The consortium, called Private Fuel Storage LLC, represents
FirstEnergy and seven other power companies: Entergy Corp., Xcel
Energy, Southern Nuclear, Florida Power &Light, Southern
California Edison, Dairyland Power Co., and Indiana Michigan
Power Co.
With nothing else left on the NRC hearing board's docket, a
decision on the project's fate could be made by agency
commissioners within a few months. The consortium is seeking a
20-year license from the government and a 25-year lease from the
Goshute tribe, both with options to renew.
Utilities are negotiating with the Goshutes for use of their
domestic sovereign land, the second time in recent years that
utilities have undertaken formal discussions with a tribe to
send radioactive nuclear waste off to Native American soil.
In the 1990s, FirstEnergy was part of a different consortium
that was unsuccessful in finalizing a deal with the Mescalero
Apaches in New Mexico.
Spent reactor fuel is the only material in civilian hands
classified as high-level radioactive waste.
The government for years has focused its efforts for a national
dump on Nevada's Yucca Mountain - a dry and isolated mountain
between Las Vegas and California's Death Valley that is under
heavy military surveillance.
Under the Nuclear Energy Policy Act that Congress passed in
1982, the federal government was to start taking spent reactor
fuel away from nuclear plants by Jan. 31, 1998. That didn't
happen and there is no national dump site.
Consequently, many utilities have been forced to spend millions
to create their own temporary storage. In the 1990s, Toledo
Edison Co. - now a FirstEnergy Corp. subsidiary - spent more
than $5 million to move some of Davis-Besse's spent reactor fuel
into sealed outdoor storage casks. That was done to free up room
inside the plant's high-security containment pool, where spent
fuel goes to decay for years after being removed from the
reactor.
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed the government had a
contractual obligation to start taking spent reactor fuel from
utilities in 1998 and has given utilities the right to pursue
government compensation for their additional storage costs.
A deal with the Goshutes means that spent fuel could be on its
way to Utah in two to four years, depending on how long it takes
to obtain the license and get contractors lined up to do the
work, Mr. Silberg said.
Most waste would come from older nuclear plants in the Northeast
and would travel by truck or by rail through northwest Ohio in
sealed containers, the federal Energy Department has said.
The Nuclear Energy Institute estimates that 78 of the nation's
103 nuclear plants could fill their spent fuel pools by the end
of the decade, forcing them to either store waste outside or
shut down. The industry group says the best solution is to have
the government live up to its obligation for a national dump at
Yucca Mountain or elsewhere.
Detroit Edison Co.'s Fermi II nuclear plant near Monroe, Mich.,
will likely join Davis-Besse in that group of 78 unless
something happens to get the Yucca Mountain project moving
faster.
Fermi II is 10 years younger than Davis-Besse and has just
enough room in its spent fuel pool to keep storing waste indoors
until 2010. But one of its top executives, Douglas Gipson, has
warned there is the potential for moving waste outdoors for at
least a few years.
Richard Wilkins, FirstEnergy spokesman, said his utility has
been a part of industry groups negotiating with the Mescaleros
and Goshutes "as a contigency in case it looks like Yucca
Mountain's not going forward."
"Our first choice is to ship to Yucca Mountain," he said.
Uncertainty over nuclear waste disposal has been one of the
industry's greatest impediments toward expansion for years.
President Bush, who has made nuclear power a cornerstone of his
national energy proposals, wants government officials to resolve
the uncertainty over Yucca Mountain to help stimulate
construction of more nuclear plants. No new plants have been
approved for construction since the late 1970s.
Utah's opposition stems largely from the belief that storage on
the Goshute land would become more than a temporary solution.
Opponents have included that state's former governor, Mike
Leavitt, who serves as Mr. Bush's Department of Health and Human
Services secretary and was previously U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency administrator.
Dianne Nielson, Utah Department of Environmental Quality
executive director, told The Blade that officials in her state
"think clearly there would be a release of radioactivity" if an
F-16 ever crashed into a storage vault.
She also fears Utah storage would become permanent, based on
Yucca Mountain's anticipated capacity and the projected volume
of nuclear waste being generated.
"We realize there needs to be permanent solutions in managing
spent fuel," Ms. Nielson said. "We just don't believe this is a
wise decision."
Contact Tom Henry at: thenry@theblade.com or 419-724-6079.
The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660
, (419) 724-6000
*****************************************************************
36 AU ABC: Federal Cabinet to discuss uranium mining bans
[ABC Online Navigation Bar]
AM - Monday, 6 June , 2005 08:04:00
Reporter: Louise Yaxley
TONY EASTLEY: Federal Cabinet will this week discuss the future
of uranium mining and Australia's nuclear industry. Already the
Federal Minister for Resources Ian Macfarlane has urged all
States to scrap their export bans.
New South Wales Premier Bob Carr has again called for a debate
on the future use of nuclear power. He says if India and China
rely on coal-fired power stations to meet their energy needs for
the future, the world could be wrecked by global warming.
But Mr Macfarlane says Mr Carr's statements are hypocritical.
Louise Yaxley reports.
LOUISE YAXLEY: This week Cabinet will look again at where to
store Australia's nuclear waste. There are reports Cabinet will
drop the controversial plan to ship the waste offshore. That
plan was adopted when the South Australian Government won a
court case to stop the dump being put in its State.
Mr Macfarlane won't confirm that the offshore option's been
dropped, but he's calling for a new attitude from the State
Premiers, indicating that onshore is again being considered.
IAN MCFARLANE: Well, I haven't been prepared to comment on that
before, and I'm not going to now. The reality is that Australia
needs to find a very safe repository for its own nuclear waste,
and we'll be working towards that, and I only hope we have the
support of the Premiers in a sensible debate this time around.
LOUISE YAXLEY: The debate about the greenhouse effect is driving
the push for more nuclear energy. Last week New South Wales' Bob
Carr said it was particularly important for nations with massive
energy needs, like India and China.
Mr Macfarlane says they will buy more Australian uranium.
IAN MACFARLANE: Both India and China will increase their nuclear
generation, and it's important that Australia exports to those
opportunities. The biggest priority for Bob Carr is to lift the
ban that he's got on uranium mining in New South Wales.
LOUISE YAXLEY: But Mr Macfarlane takes a swipe at Bob Carr.
IAN MACFARLANE: And I was surprised last week by his comments in
so far as while he seems to be advocating a debate on nuclear
energy, he has yet to have a realistic debate about mining
uranium in his own State.
LOUISE YAXLEY: Other States also with significant uranium
deposits have a similar ban, particularly in Western Australia.
What's your message to Geoff Gallop?
IAN MACFARLANE: Well, the Labor States who ban uranium mining
are now completely out of step. We're seeing uranium mining in
both South Australia and the Northern Territory, both Labor
governments there advocate more mining of uranium.
In Western Australia we're missing a fantastic opportunity.
Australia's demand on uranium exports could quadruple in the
next five years with this growing international demand, and
Labor Premiers need to get in synch and ensure that Australia
doesn't miss any export opportunities.
LOUISE YAXLEY: A spokeswoman for Mr Carr says his point was that
Australia should be part of the international debate on nuclear
power. She says the debate's occurring around the world in a way
it hasn't been discussed for decades.
TONY EASTLEY: Louise Yaxley reporting.
*****************************************************************
37 AU ABC: Martin opposes nuclear dump for NT.
06/06/2005. ABC News Online
Update: Monday, June 6, 2005. 5:43pm (AEST)
Campaigning for the Northern Territory election, Chief Minister
Clare Martin says a Labor Government will strongly oppose any
nuclear waste dump in the Territory.
Ms Martin says she sent a letter to Prime Minister John Howard
today reiterating her position.
"I stand here today on behalf of all Territorians and say to
the Prime Minister very clearly, do not use the Territory as the
dumping ground for Australia's nuclear waste," she said.
Country Liberal Party leader Denis Burke says a CLP government
would also strongly oppose a nuclear waster dump being
established in the NT.
*****************************************************************
38 AU ABC: China uranium talks progressing: Macfarlane.
06/06/2005. ABC News Online
Update: Monday, June 6, 2005. 8:38pm (AEST)
Federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says he hopes
negotiations to supply uranium to China will lead to more mining
of uranium ore in Australia.
Mr Macfarlane says the discussions are progressing well and
should help Australia take advantage of a huge expansion in
nuclear energy in China, planned from 2010.
He has deflected questions about mining new deposits at
Koongarra and Jabiluka in the Northern Territory.
But the Minister says any deal to supply uranium to China would
create demand for more uranium ore.
"Uranium mining in Australia is an export income earner and it
creates jobs," he said.
"It supplies uranium yellow cake under the strictest standards
in the world and we should make sure that we improve our market
share which at the moment is pretty ordinary."
*****************************************************************
39 AU ABC: Cabinet to assess nuclear waste dump sites
Lateline - 06/06/2005
"Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online">
Reporter: Hamish Fitzsimmons
TONY JONES: Tomorrow the Federal Cabinet meets to discuss
possible locations for a nuclear waste dump after ruling out
using an offshore site. The Northern Territory is emerging as a
likely place for the dump as the debate about whether or not to
embrace nuclear power as an alternative to coal gains momentum.
Hamish Fitzsimmons reports.
HAMISH FITZSIMMONS: What to do with the waste is just one of the
key issues in the current debate about nuclear power. Much of
Australia's nuclear waste is currently stored at the Lucas
Heights facility in suburban Sydney. A new storage facility is
needed. Just where to put it is what Federal Cabinet will
discuss when it meets tomorrow.
IAN MACFARLANE, RESOURCES MINISTER: Australia needs to arrive at
a logical point to store already existing nuclear waste -
predominantly from medical services which Australians have,
including myself by the way, have benefited from, in a better
place than the basement, or in some cases sometimes as little as
a safe in a building in the middle of a capital city. We do have
to arrive at a sensible place to store nuclear energy.
HAMISH FITZSIMMONS: After last year indicating that an offshore
island could be the site, the Northern Territory is now emerging
as one of the front-runners for a nuclear dump, possibly using
land owned by the Defence Department. The New South Wales
Premier Bob Carr has long been calling for nuclear power to be
considered as a short-term option between the transition from
coal-based to renewable energy like solar power. This is what he
said last November:
BOB CARR, NSW PREMIER: We should have an argument because the
world needs a bridge, the world needs a transition, but
unresolved concerns about reactor safety and waste disposal will
lead to, I think, sufficient public opposition to slow down any
bid by any government or any group to get nuclear power going
here so that it doesn't emerge.
HAMISH FITZSIMMONS: But Mr Carr's counterparts, particularly
those with strong State coal industries, are blunt in their
assessment of nuclear power.
PETER BEATTIE, QLD PREMIER: The reality of this is if you want
to have safe cheap power, coal is the best option. Our coal is
low in sulphur, it's low in ash content and if we can master
this clean coal technology - and we're not far away - then we
will be able to sell 300 years worth of supply of coal to the
world plus we'll be able to sell the technology.
STEVE BRACKS, VIC PREMIER: I do not support nuclear energy or
the use of uranium to fuel electricity generation in Victoria.
We need to find cleaner ways of burning greenhouse gases and to
make sure we reduce greenhouse gases - yes, we do. And, of
course, we have a major project $85 million we've allocated in
this year's budget to look at the clean process of drying coal
so that we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
HAMISH FITZSIMMONS: Calls for a re-examination of nuclear power
come amid concerns about further global warming if countries
like Australia, the United States, India and China continue
their heavy reliance on coal for energy.
*****************************************************************
40 Belfast Telegraph: Nuclear waste in corroding towers 'yet another worry'
www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk
Allison Bray 06 June 2005
Towers storing nuclear waste from the 1950s are starting to
corrode and are yet another worry at Sellafield, according to a
European Parliament team which visited the UK facility on a
fact-finding mission last week.
Fine Gael MEP Mairead McGuinness said she came home with little
confidence in how the plant is being run after touring the
facility with two other MEPs late last week.
The recent revelation that a highly radioactive leak at Thorp -
the thermal oxide reprocessing plant at Sellafield - may have
gone undetected for almost a year is worrying enough, she said.
However, after looking around the plant herself, Ms McGuinness
said she was disturbed by some of what she saw.
"We were shown towers of waste material from the '50s that had
started corroding, and every scrap of it had to be re-wrapped in
concrete," she said. "But what we need is for this plant to be
managed almost to infinity by experts."
She questioned the ability of British Nuclear Group (formerly
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd, or BNFL) to properly decommission the
Thorp site after learning the leak may have begun as far back as
last August and not in January, as was previously believed.
"They are deeply embarrassed, as they should be, but on the
other hand I didn't feel that there was any sense of urgency
about it," she told the Irish Independent last night.
The Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII) was
advised on April 21 that 15,000 gallons of highly radioactive
material leaked into a sealed cell at the thermal oxide
reprocessing plant, prompting the UK Nuclear Installations
inspectorate to rate the accident a very serious Level 3 on the
Nuclear Event Rating Scale of 1 to 7.
None of the material leaked into the environment, but the RPII
has been told that the cell is filled 10 inches deep with
radioactive material, requiring remote control equipment to be
used to clean it up.
Despite the seriousness of the incident, the Fine Gael MEP said
she was unable to get a straight answer from BNG as to when the
leak actually began. "If they said August, then the presumption
is it could have been much earlier in the year," she said.
"This should not have happened. It's incredible," was her view
of the finding that the material had leaked due to metal fatigue
in a pipe.
"They only discovered it late in the day, almost by accident,
and yet it should be checked on a daily basis. To compound this
horror, Sellafield management now admit that they missed
detecting this very serious leak for several months," she added.
Environment Minister Dick Roche has called the latest incident a
Homer Simpson-style blunder.
It revealed a worrying pattern that "where a serious incident
occurs, the investigation reveals failures and weaknesses,
recommendations are drawn up and further assurances are given
that the plant is safe".
© 2005 Independent News and Media (NI)
*****************************************************************
41 The Day: Nuclear Waste Bill Is Cause For Concern In Connecticut
TheDay.com, New London, CT
Sunday, Jun 5, 2005
Groton sub base, if closed by BRAC, could become a temporary
disposal site
Turning any closed military base into a nuclear waste dump is
completely unacceptable."
U.S. Sen. Josep I. Lieberman, D-Conn.
By JUDY BENSON Health/Science/Environment Reporter Published on
6/4/2005
The federal Department of Energy would have to look for sites for
temporary disposal of nuclear waste, including closed military
bases, under a provision included in an energy and water bill
approved by the House of Representatives last week.
The provision is not expected to survive as the final version of
the bill goes through the Senate, but it has nonetheless
generated some concern among Connecticut officials because of its
potential implications for the Naval Submarine Base in Groton.
While local and statewide efforts are focusing on making a strong
case to remove the base from the Pentagon's list of recommended
closures, base advocates also want to protect against the
possibility of any worse-case-scenarios coming true, should the
base close.
Edward Wilds, director of the Radiation Division of the state
Department of Environmental Protection, said this week the state
would do everything necessary to make sure the 687-acre base on
the Thames River is never turned into a nuclear waste dump,
temporary or otherwise.
There's no way we would allow another spent-fuel site in
Connecticut, he said, referring to sites for temporary storage
at the Millstone Nuclear Power Station in Waterford and
Connecticut Yankee in Haddam. I can't see it ever going there.
It's in a populated area.
The federal energy department is likewise uninterested in
establishing new sites to temporarily store nuclear waste, either
at closed military bases or elsewhere, according to Jacqueline
Johnson, press officer.
We believe a permanent geological repository for handling
nuclear waste is what's needed, she said.
The department is focused on establishing that site at Yucca
Mountain, Nev., she said, and does not intend on seeking any
temporary sites.
The pertinent portion of the House bill was included by Rep.
David Hobson, R-Ohio. It calls for the energy department to
investigate temporary waste storage at three federal facilities,
including those in Harford, Wash., Savannah River, Ga., and
Idaho. If those prove unsuitable, the department should look to
other federal properties, including closed military bases.
Hobson's office did not return calls requesting comment. The
Department of Defense declined to comment on the possibility,
saying it is premature to talk about an ongoing legislative
process.
Todd Mitchell, chief of staff for Rep. Rob Simmons, R-2nd
District, said any concern that this provision opens to door for
the Groton base to become a nuclear waste storage facility is
unfounded. Simmons was among 416 representatives voting in favor
of the bill. Thirteen voted against.
There will not be a nuclear waste dump at the sub base, and
that's not the intent of the legislation, Mitchell said. The
bill is not mandating anything.
He added that the language of the provision needs to be
clarified, and perhaps should make allowances for bases that are
closed in communities that are interested in housing an interim
nuclear waste facility.
Mitchell also emphasized that concerns about the Groton base
should be focused on working to keep it open, not on what-if
scenarios.
Similar remarks came from Connecticut's two senators.
When it comes to sub base New London, I am focused on one thing
and one thing only keeping this critical military asset in
operation, said Democratic Sen. Christopher J. Dodd in a written
statement. ... We still have a great deal of work to do to save
this base, for the sake of Connecticut, the Navy, and, most
importantly, U.S. national security. Having said that, let me
make one thing clear the nuclear-waste provision on military
bases just passed by the House of Representatives is misguided
and reckless. Should the U.S. Senate take up a similar provision,
I will strongly oppose it.
Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., provided this statement:
Turning any closed military base into a nuclear waste dump is
completely unacceptable. It would be a slap in the face to any
community to lose a valuable military base, and then have it
replaced by a nuclear waste site, and I will do everything in my
power to stop this from happening.
[The Day Publishing Co.]
*****************************************************************
42 NEWS.com.au: Territory refuses to take N-waste
(06-06-2005)
By Denis Peters and Karen Michelmore June 06, 2005 From:
AAP
THE federal Government faces another contentious row over the
location of a nuclear waste disposal site after the Northern
Territory refused today to accept the material in its backyard.
In the midst of the Territory election campaign, both the NT
Labor Government and the Country Liberal Party Opposition flatly
refused to allow a dump in the territory.
A national nuclear waste dump, originally proposed for a site
in outback South Australia, was scrapped before last year's
federal election campaign after resistance from the SA
Government – despite expert advice that it would have been
perfectly safe.
The Australian newspaper reported today the Howard Government
would scrap plans to send nuclear waste to an island because of
terrorism and transportation fears.
The report suggested the Government was again looking to a
mainland site, probably in the NT.
But Territory Labor Chief Minister Clare Martin and Opposition
CLP leader Denis Burke today rejected any new bid for the dump
in the NT.
Ms Martin said she had written today to Prime Minister John
Howard.
"I stand here today on behalf of all Territorians and say to
the Prime Minister very clearly: Do not use the Territory as the
dumping ground for Australia's nuclear waste," she said.
Mr Burke said his position was also clear despite support
voiced by federal CLP MP Dave Tollner last year.
"Read my lips, no nuclear dump in the NT," he said. "The CLP
position is no nuclear dump in the NT."
And SA Premier Mike Rann said today the dump would not be
located in SA.
"They won't be putting it back in South Australia," he said.
Federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane today called for a
logical debate on the issue.
"Nuclear waste is already stored on the mainland of Australia.
It is stored in the basements of buildings in the centre of
Sydney," he said.
"Any logical debate on nuclear waste storage would surely have
the support of the state premiers, especially those state
premiers who are now advocating nuclear energy."
Federal Labor accused the Government of utter incompetence over
the waste issue.
"Now that the Howard Government seems to be ruling out its
absurd Pacific Solution for nuclear waste, it is targeting the
Northern Territory as a potential dumpsite," Opposition
environment spokesman Anthony Albanese said.
"Cabinet ministers always knew that an offshore nuclear dump
was a hare-brained scheme, but that's the Government's form when
it comes to nuclear waste."
Labor's science spokeswoman Jenny Macklin accused Science
Minister Brendan Nelson of utter incompetence.
"Brendan Nelson has had carriage of nuclear waste since 2001
but has totally failed to resolve the issue," she said.
"New figures obtained through Senate Estimates reveal that the
Howard Government will be spending a massive $13 million going
back to the drawing board and starting the process of finding a
location to dump nuclear waste.
"That's on top of an estimated $17.5 million already wasted on
the Howard Government's failed bid to dump waste in South
Australia, including $620,000 on a public relations campaign."
She said Dr Nelson's push for nuclear energy was utterly
meaningless until he resolved the issue of nuclear waste.
*****************************************************************
43 DHHS: CDC: Oak Ridge Y-12 Petition
FR Doc 05-11153
[Federal Register: June 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 107)]
[Notices]
[Page 32781-32782]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06jn05-34]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Y-12 Plant--Tennessee
Eastman Corporation AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services gives notice
as required by 42 CFR 83.12(e) of a decision to evaluate a
petition to designate a class of employees at the Y-12 Plant,
also known as the Y- 12 Plant--Tennessee Eastman Corporation, in
Oak Ridge, Tennessee, to be included in the Special Exposure
Cohort under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness
Compensation Program Act of 2000. The initial proposed definition
for the class being evaluated, subject to revision as warranted
by the evaluation, is as follows:
Facility: Y-12 Plant--Tennessee Eastman Corporation.
Location: Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
[[Page 32782]]
Job Titles and/or Job Duties: All Tennessee Eastman
Corporation employees that conducted laboratory equipment
cleaning work.
Period of Employment: From 1943 through 1947.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office
of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46,
Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a
toll-free number). Information requests can also be submitted by
e-mail to OCAS@CDC.GOV.
Dated: May 25, 2005. James D. Seligman, Associate Director
for Program Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 05-11153 Filed 6-3-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-01-P
*****************************************************************
44 PRN: BWXT Receives Contract Extensions at Pantex, Y-12
[PR Newswire - A United Business Media Company]
Contracts Worth $5.9 Billion
LYNCHBURG, Va., June 6 /PRNewswire/ -- BWX Technologies, Inc.
(BWXT) has received notification by the Department of Energy's
(DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) that its
contracts at Pantex Plant (Amarillo, Texas) and Y-12 National
Security Complex (Oak Ridge, Tenn.) will both be extended through
2010. The extensions are worth a combined total of approximately
$5.9 billion.
BWXT has managed and operated within the NNSA Nuclear Weapons
Complex since 2000.
"We are pleased to be awarded these significant extensions," said
John A. Fees, BWXT president and chief operating officer. "They
exemplify recognition by our customer of the accomplishments we
have achieved as DOE contractors at Pantex and Y-12. Over the
course of the past five years, we have developed a strong working
relationship with the NNSA and have demonstrated our core
competencies for safe, secure and cost-effective management and
operations critical to our national defense. We intend to
continue to earn this trust each and every day of this extension
period."
Michael Mallory, president and general manager of BWXT Pantex,
said that the award is indicative of the confidence placed in
BWXT by the customer. "Through innovative approaches and our
ongoing commitment to safety, security and the environment,
management and employees have worked together to deliver a
stellar performance at Pantex. We are pleased to be given the
opportunity to continue that performance."
According to Dennis Ruddy, president and general manager of BWXT
Y-12, the contract extension is a result of the commitment on the
part of the Y-12 management team and the employees to making the
site a leader in the Nuclear Weapons Complex. "We have taken
steps to help secure the future of Y-12. This contract extension
will allow us to move forward and execute our mission."
The Y-12 facility focuses on the production and refurbishment of
weapons components, storage of nuclear material and preventing
the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Pantex is charged with
maintaining the safety, security and reliability of the nation's
nuclear weapons stockpile.
Headquartered in Lynchburg, Va., and employing more than 11,000
people nationwide, BWXT is the nation's premier manager of
complex high-consequence nuclear and national security
operations. BWXT has a long history in nuclear manufacturing and
operations both in the DOE and in privately owned and operated
Nuclear Regulatory Commission sites. A supplier of nuclear
products and services to the U.S. government and commercial
clients for over 50 years, BWXT has unparalleled experience in
nuclear safeguards and security and has been recognized as a
model by the DOE.
SOURCE BWX Technologies, Inc.
Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************