*****************************************************************
07/06/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.154
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 [NYTr] Iran wants to break UN seals on frozen atomic parts
2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's Top Nuclear Negotiator Resigns
3 BBC: Puzzle over Iran nuclear official
4 Xinhua: No timetable for restarting six-party talks - FM
5 US: du list: The latest on the DU bill in Connecticut: it's now
6 US: Port Townsend Leader: Letter: Stop use of DU weapons
7 London Times: New Energy Policies to Combat Climate Change -
8 Arms Control Association: Is There a Role for Nuclear Weapons Today?
9 Guardian Unlimited: Leaders to Begin Arriving at G-8 Summit
NUCLEAR REACTORS
10 US: NRC: NRC to Meet with Nebraska Public Power District to Discuss
11 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Nigeria Begins Nuclear Power Programme
12 US: JS Online: Dominion buys Kewaunee reactor
13 US: Wisconsin State Journal: Alliant selling power plants
14 US: Monticello Times: NRC asks for feedback
15 US: Arizona Republic: Risks of nuclear power not worth it
NUCLEAR SECURITY
16 US: CBC Calgary: Stolen truck carrying radioactive material crashes
NUCLEAR SAFETY
17 US: US NAS Study: No Safe Dose for Radiation
18 [du-list] Gulf War Health impacts Update
19 US: [du-list] OSHA seeks information on ionizing radiation health
20 US: BoiseWeekly: Downwinders Decry Senate's Choice to Revive Nuke Re
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
21 US: Sun Herald: Phosphate spill endangers once-thriving lake
22 US: Bradenton Herald: Tallevast well tests to start today
23 US: Times Argus: Radioactive waste a permanent issue
24 US: AU ABC: Minister silent on scientific basis for uranium mining b
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
25 Tri-City Herald: Fluor delays 500 layoffs
26 Tri-City Herald: Vit plant price could near $10 billion
27 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah
28 Casper Star Tribune: Idaho mulls plutonium project plans
29 Tri-Valley Herald: Lab waves security flag for mighty laser
30 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho
31 lamonitor.com: Reports: Lower doses, but no floor for radiation risk
32 Times-News: Waste disposal still a question in DOE's plans for Idaho
33 Corvallis Gazette-Times: DOE plans hearings on plans for Idaho pluto
34 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Fernald
35 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Iran wants to break UN seals on frozen atomic parts
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:45:52 -0500 (CDT)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Reuters via Yahoo - July 6, 2005
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050706/wl_nm/nuclear_iran_dc&printer=1;_ylt=AiFkmaU_j_KMasM97_7eBzln.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
Iran wants to break UN seals on frozen atomic parts
By Louis Charbonneau
VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran has asked the U.N. nuclear watchdog to let it
temporarily break U.N. seals on atomic equipment that has been mothballed
under an agreement with the EU's three biggest powers, diplomats said on
Wednesday.
A senior Iranian official confirmed this was true but denied that it was a
violation of its pledge to freeze all activities linked to the production of
enriched-uranium fuel, a technology that can be used to in either atomic
power plants or weapons.
"The Iranians have approached the (U.N.) agency with a request to
temporarily remove seals from a component at the UCF (Uranium Conversion
Facility) in Isfahan to conduct a test on this component," a diplomat said
on condition on anonymity.
The United States and the European Union fear Iran is using its nuclear
energy program as a front to develop nuclear weapons and have called on Iran
to cease all sensitive atomic work. Tehran says its program is peaceful and
refuses to give up its sovereign right to a full atomic program.
The deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, Mohammad Saeedi,
confirmed what the diplomat said was true.
But he told Reuters in Tehran that the move had nothing to do with the
suspension Iran promised France, Britain and Germany it would maintain while
the four countries negotiate a permanent nuclear settlement.
"Iran's request to temporarily remove seals at some parts of the Isfahan's
UCF facility is not related to the suspension," Saeedi told Reuters by
telephone.
"We have asked the (International Atomic Energy Agency) to let us remove the
seal at some parts of the facility in the presence of the visiting IAEA
inspectors. We want to test equipment there to check whether those are
functional. It does not mean lifting the suspension," he said.
"NOT A SIGNIFICANT BREACH"
EU three diplomats have long said that testing of machinery used in the
enrichment and conversion process should be frozen under a suspension
agreement signed in Paris in November.
A diplomat from one of the EU trio said it was unclear how they would react.
"The odds are that we will see this as a maintenance operation that does not
amount to a significant breach of the Paris Agreement," the diplomat said.
A Western diplomat close to the IAEA agreed it would not break Iran's
agreement with the EU.
The diplomat who first informed Reuters about the Iranian request said it
was "aimed at testing Europe's degree of flexibility toward Iran, and the
strength of the seam line between the EU3 and the IAEA."
The EU trio has promised to give the Iranians by the end of July or
beginning of August a comprehensive offer of incentives in exchange for what
they call "objective guarantees" that Tehran's nuclear program is for
peaceful purposes only.
The Europeans say this can only be a permanent cessation of all
enrichment-related work, including the Isfahan UCF plant, which prepares raw
uranium for enrichment.
The Iranians, however, have said that increased inspections would provide
sufficient guarantees.
Separately, there was confusion in Iran regarding the future of Iran's top
nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani, with a close aide denying reports that he
had resigned.
Rumours over Rohani's fate began after hardline former Tehran mayor Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad won Iran's June 24 presidential election. Many diplomats and
analysts expect Ahmadinejad's new government to adopt a tougher nuclear
policy stance with the EU.
Also, several recent intelligence reports accuse North Korea of secretly
helping Iran develop its nuclear program, raising fresh concerns about
Pyongyang's nuclear proliferation and Tehran's atomic intentions.
"There has been a significant improvement in relations between Iran and
North Korea over the past few months," an intelligence report obtained from
a non-U.S. diplomat said.
(Additional reporting by Parisa Hafezi in Tehran)
Copyright ) 2005 Reuters Limited.
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's Top Nuclear Negotiator Resigns
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Wednesday July 6, 2005 1:31 PM
AP Photo VAH104
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's top nuclear negotiator has resigned,
the state news agency reported Wednesday, raising the prospect
that the country's newly elected hard-line president will put
forward a new team for fragile atomic talks with the Europeans.
Hasan Rowhani submitted his resignation to the outgoing
president, the Islamic Revolution News Agency reported. The new
president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is due to be inaugurated early
next month.
Rowhani was also the secretary of the powerful Supreme National
Security Council and has been at the head of negotiations with
Europe. He had expresses support for Ahmadinejad's more moderate
opponent, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, in last month's
presidential elections.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
3 BBC: Puzzle over Iran nuclear official
Last Updated: Wednesday, 6 July, 2005
[Hassan Rohani]
Rohani is the public face of Iran's atomic programme
The position of Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani is
uncertain after officials denied an official news agency report
that he had resigned.
Citing an "informed source", Irna said Mr Rohani had sent a
resignation letter to President Mohammad Khatami.
But officials from the Supreme National Security Council which Mr
Rohani leads are quoted saying the report is false.
Mr Rohani has led the Islamic state's often combative discussions
with the European Union since October 2003.
"It's a sheer lie. He has not resigned. Resigning at this time
would be meaningless," SNSC spokesman Ali Agha Mohammadi is
quoted as saying by Reuters news agency.
The confusion comes nearly two weeks after the election in Iran
of hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Correspondents say there has been intense speculation in recent
days about the future of Mr Rohani, who is believed to share the
reformist agenda of the outgoing president.
Unconfirmed reports in Iran say the new cabinet, which is
expected to be announced soon, excludes all former ministers in
the previous administration.
Mr Ahmadinejad has said his government will continue Iran's
nuclear programme - which the country says is purely peaceful and
is needed to meet its energy needs.
The US has accused Iran of using its atomic energy programme as a
front to develop nuclear weapons.
*****************************************************************
4 Xinhua: No timetable for restarting six-party talks - FM
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-07-05 19:04:57
¡¡[President Hu Jintao' visit to Russia is
"fruitful", said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman
Liu Jianchao here Tuesday. ] BEIJING, July 5 (Xinhuanet) -- No
timetable is expected for restarting the six-party talks on
DPRK's nuclear issue, and all parties involved are still working
for resuming the peace talks, said a Foreign Ministry spokesman
on Tuesday.
China welcomes recent contacts by the United States and the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) in New York when
the two parties attended an academic conference on northeast
Asian security, said the spokesman Liu Jianchao at a regular
press briefing.
"The contact is helpful to promote understanding between the
United States and DPRK," he said.
"We hope all relevant parties, especially the United States
and DPRK, can increase contacts, release more positive signals,
sincerely push the peace talks process in a flexible,
constructiveand pragmatic way, so as to create a favorable
condition for resuming talks at an early date," he said.
The academic conference, held between June 30 to July 1, was
co-hosted by the National Committee on American Foreign Policy
(NCAFP) and the DPRK Institute of Disarmament and Peace.
The officials discussed the nuclear issue on the Korean
Peninsula during the meeting, which, according to a press
release at the end of the meeting, was the third such conference
co-hostedby the two organizations.
Conference participants agreed that discussions were frank
and constructive and they are optimistic that the DPRK will
return to the six-party talks.
By June last year, three rounds of the six-party talks,
which involved the DPRK, Republic of Korea, the United States,
China, Japan and Russia, had been held.
To revive the talks, officials from the United States and
the DPRK held negotiations last November, December and this May
respectively through "New York channel".
EU leader to visit China
At the invitation of Chinese government, Jose Manuel
Barroso, President of EU Commission, will pay an official visit
to China from July 14 to 18, said Liu Jianchao.
Liu said, it is Barroso's first visit to China as president
of EU Commission. During his visit, Premier Wen Jiabao will hold
talks with him. The two sides will exchange views on issues of
common concern, including EU's recognition of China's full
market economy status and the lifting of EU's arms embargo on
China.
Besides Beijing, Barroso will visit Shanghai, Macao and Hong
Kong.
"We welcome Barroso's visit to China, and expect to exchange
ideas with him on deepening mutually-beneficial cooperation,"
Liu said.
Indonesian President to visit China
Liu Jianchao also announced that Indonesian President Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono will pay a state visit to China from July 13
to 16 at the invitation of his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao.
Liu said that China and Indonesia, as two good neighbors,
always enjoy good bilateral relations, withexchanges of
high-level visits being more frequent as well as mutual
understanding and trust continuously deepening.
President Hu Jintao made a successful visit to Indonesia
April this year. During the visit, Hu sand Susilo signed a joint
declaration on strategic partnership between China and
Indonesia, pushing the Sino-Indonesian relations to a new high.
"China is satisfied with the development of Sino-Indonesian
relations," Liu said.
According to the spokesman, bilateral trade volume between
the two countries reached 13.48 billion US dollars last year, a
recordhigh in history. The first five months of this year has
witnessed a bilateral trade volume of 6.7 billion US dollars, up
37 percentyear-on-year.
The two sides also expanded their cooperation in such fields
asscience, technology, culture, military and security, made
active civilian exchanges, and maintained close coordination in
international and regional affairs, especially in issues
concerning promoting regional cooperation and safeguarding
interests of developing countries, the spokesman said.
Liu said that during President Susilo's upcoming visit,
Chineseleaders will exchange views with him on expanding the
friendly cooperation between the two sides, and a series of
documents on economic and trade cooperation will be signed.
President Hu's Russia tour fruitful
President Hu Jintao' visit to Russia is "fruitful", Liu
commented.
"This fruitful visit is conducive for both sides to
deepening political trust, to strengthening strategic
cooperation, to increasing economic and trade cooperation, to
enhancing coordination in international and regional affairs, to
further promoting the development of China-Russia strategic
partnership ofcooperation," said Liu.
President Hu paid a state visit to Russia from June 30 to
July 3 at the invitation of his Russian counterpart Vladimir
Putin. Liu briefed a regular press conference on the general
situation of Hu's Russia tour.
During this visit, the two sides issued a joint statement on
a new world order in the 21st century and a joint
communique,signed some documents on cooperation in finance,
energy and electric power, and decided to hold the Russia year
in China in 2006 and the China year in Russia in 2007.
As to the energy cooperation, the two sides agreed that it
is of great importance to enforce bilateral cooperation in the
energy field. They decided to further implement the cooperation
projects in the fields of oil and natural gas, including the
construction of an oil pipeline and joint exploitation of oil
fields in both countries.
The cooperation agreements on oil, natural gas and electric
power signed at the summit of Hu and Putin marked a new step in
energy cooperation between the two countries, the communique
said.
According to the agreement reached by the two leaders,
before finishing the construction of the oil pipeline, the
Russian side promised to provide China with crude oil,
transported through railway, of 10 million tons this year and 15
million next year.
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
5 du list: The latest on the DU bill in Connecticut: it's now
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:56:44 -0700
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: The latest on the DU bill in Connecticut: it's now the L A W!
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 13:30:32 -0400
From: Williams, Dennie
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
***_http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-dutestslaw0706.artjul06,0,2413579.story_*********
*State Challenging Tests For Depleted Uranium*
By THOMAS D. WILLIAMS
Courant Staff Writer
July 6 2005
Connecticut is now the second state in the nation to challenge the
validity of the tests the federal government uses to check military
personnel for ingested or inhaled depleted uranium dust from U.S.
munitions explosions.
The new law requires the state adjutant general and the veterans'
affairs commissioner to assist Connecticut guardsmen and veterans in
obtaining "a best practice health screening test for exposure to
depleted uranium." Last month, Louisiana passed similar, less detailed
legislation demanding better depleted uranium testing paid for by the
federal government.
Connecticut's bill, signed by Gov. Jodi Rell last week, requires the
state adjutant general to train guardsmen so they can adequately
determine whether they have been exposed to the dust. It sets up a task
force to study the health effects of depleted uranium and other hazards
wartime service members have been exposed to since August 1990. And it
requires a registry of sick veterans, a plan to help them and a report
on the task force's operations by the end of January.
Before it became law, the Connecticut bill bounced around from committee
to committee and its wording was changed several times, but it retained
one of its central purposes. It challenges a Pentagon and U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs urine testing program that some health
experts insist is insufficient to detect the effects of depleted
uranium, and that advocates say has tested only a relative few of those
exposed to the dust.
One New Haven veteran, Melissa Sterry, 42, a former U.S. Army
Specialist, who said she suffered multiple illnesses as a result of
cleaning tanks and other vehicles during the first Persian Gulf War,
lobbied the bill at every turn. On several occasions, Sterry thought the
bill was dead.
"I'm just stunned. I think it is great!" Sterry said Tuesday when she
was told Rell had signed the bill. "I'm ecstatic that Connecticut has
chosen to lead the nation in proactive caring for veterans."
State Rep. Roger Michele, a Bristol Democrat and a veteran of the
Vietnam War, who shepherded the bill through its final stages, said: "I
remember Agent Orange and the problems our veterans had fighting to get
health care through the federal bureaucracy. DU is the Agent Orange of
the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. And our soldiers have made enough
sacrifices while risking their lives over there. We need to support them
here in saving their lives."
Two legislators initially proposed separate portions of the bill. State
Rep. Patricia Dillon, D-New Haven, called for scientific testing of
those exposed to depleted uranium dust, while State Sen. Gayle
Slossberg, D-West Haven, chair of the Veterans Committee, proposed the
task force to supervise efforts at helping veterans.
"I'm thrilled. I think it is a good step forward," said Slossberg, who
added that the state has to increase its efforts to help veterans as
federal health services are eliminated. Dillon could not be reached for
comment Tuesday.
Many veterans' advocates say thousands of service members in both Iraq
wars and the war in Afghanistan have become seriously ill from the dust
from the explosions of the DU munitions. The dust was created from tons
of U.S. and British ammunition and bombs used during those conflicts and
in the Balkan wars, as well as by the United States in Afghanistan. It
can be blown for hundreds of miles. If inhaled or ingested, it can cause
a host of maladies including cancers, kidney disease and birth defects.
/Copyright 2005, //_Hartford Courant_/ //
Picture (Metafile)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
6 Port Townsend Leader: Letter: Stop use of DU weapons
Wednesday, July 06, 2005
Editor, Leader:
Thanks for your article on the efforts of local citizens to
encourage the labeling of depleted uranium (DU) munitions as
radioactive materials. I wish you would have included more
background information so your readers could grasp the
significance of the proper labeling of these extraordinarily
hazardous materials.
DU remains toxic for millions of years. When it is inhaled or
ingested there is no dose too small to cause harm. Wherever it
has been used there has been an increase in multiple cancers and
birth defects. While there is some debate about just how toxic
depleted uranium is, there is no question that its use poses
long-term health and environmental risks to innocent bystanders.
The United Nations Subcommission on Human Rights decided that DU
violates the Geneva Conventions and the humanitarian laws for
armed conflict. Under international law, there are a number of
minimum requirements to remedy violations of the Geneva
Conventions. First is compensation for the victims. Another is
full disclosure of all facts about the weapons, their
development and deployment. The users of these weapons are also
obliged to carry out an effective cleanup or reimburse the
aggrieved state equal to the loss of those lands and waters.
States must try people alleged to have committed serious
violations of humanitarian laws. No state can absolve itself
from liability for serious violations.
The greatest danger we face from DU is not the hazards of
transporting or handling it; the greatest risk to our community
is the blatant disregard for international law by those
responsible for bringing it into our community in the first
place.
If we disagree with international laws we should work to change
the system rather than taking the law into our own hands. Our
military and political leaders of both parties have created a
permissive atmosphere where anything goes and the end justifies
the means – an atmosphere of lawlessness where there is no
longer respect for the fundamental moral principles common to
all belief systems that led to the international agreements on
what is proper conduct during war.
It's unconscionable that our leaders have allowed these people
to create such monstrous weapons. Our duty is clear. We must
join the law-abiding citizens of the world in putting an end to
the use of DU munitions, make amends, and send a clear message
to our political, corporate and military leaders that we will
not tolerate such behavior and prosecute those responsible for
war crimes.
JOHN BARR
Port Townsend
The Leader OnLine©2005 Port Townsend &Jefferson County Leader
226 Adams St, Port Townsend, Washington 98368, USA Phone: (360)
385-2900 Fax: (360) 385-3422 Contact info: Interact with Staff
Web Administrator: Fred Obee Software © 1998-2005 1up! Software,
All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
7 London Times: New Energy Policies to Combat Climate Change -
Climate change has been high on the agenda of the International
Energy Agency (IEA) and of its member countries for years. This
is not surprising as 80 per cent of greenhouse gases are emitted
through energy production or consumption. The answers to climate
change lie in both energy and environmental policies. And the
response has to be on a global scale. Tony Blair recognised this
strong link when he invited the IEA to participate in discussions
between the G8 and the outreach countries (Brazil, China, India,
Mexico and South Africa) on climate change and other global
economic issues.
The starting point for the international effort against global
warming is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) which has been signed by almost all countries and
which came into effect in 1994. Its ultimate goal is to stabilise
the CO2 content of the atmosphere by sharply reducing CO2
emissions worldwide.
Are we on track? Unfortunately not, far from it. According to
recent IEA analysis in the World Energy Outlook 2004, continuing
to do business as usual leads to a 60 per cent increase of CO2
emissions by 2030. It is the result of more world inhabitants,
more energy consumption per capita and more fossil fuels in the
energy mix. Most of the growth in emissions over the next 25
years will occur in developing countries, yet 1.4 billion people
will still not have access to electricity in 2030. Can we curb
such disastrous trends in a way consistent with the need for
economic growth and poverty alleviation?
The need for action is urgent. Any ton of carbon dioxide we do
not emit today is a ton our grandchildren will not have to deal
with in the future, probably at much higher costs. In the
meantime countries will need to deal with the effects of climate
change which will also pose a burden on their economies. We need
to start today. But how?
In the long term, there is general agreement that significant
technology breakthroughs will be needed to solve the problem.
Breakthroughs are needed in a number of domains: cost-effective
renewables, particularly cheap photovoltaics and advanced
biofuels; nuclear, with an acceptable solution for nuclear waste
management; energy transportation and use, especially in cars and
buildings; and last but not least carbon capture and
sequestration, as there is no foreseeable replacement for fossil
fuels for quite some time. Hydrogen used in fuel cells is another
promising technology.
Governments must actively promote and support energy research and
development budgets, and increase cooperative work, both among
countries and with the industry. That means not only reversing
present trends of shrinking public R budgets, but committing more
funding and increasing the budgets.
Governments should avoid prematurely picking "winning"
technologies. For the time being all avenues will need to be
explored and there is no silver bullet. No single energy source
should be idealised or demonised. Obviously some technologies
seem more promising than others. They should be identified and
more efforts should be targeted in these areas, but eventually
the winners will be selected by the market.
But in the shorter term, there are steps we can take today. In
its World Energy Outlook 2004, the IEA produced a so-called
"Alternative Scenario" based on more aggressive policies and
technology uptake. This scenario merely supposes that the energy
mix worldwide includes a little more renewables, a little more
nuclear and, most important, that energy efficiency improvements
reach again the pace they achieved in the 1970s and 1980s.
These measures would still not stabilise global emissions, and
more would need to be done. Nevertheless, the result is
impressive: CO2 emissions in the OECD begin to decline in 2020
and by 2030 are 16 per cent lower than the business as usual
scenario - some 50 billion tons of CO2 could be avoided by 2030.
Much of this is achieved through greater energy efficiency. For
example, if OECD households chose more efficient appliances,
they could save 30 per cent of the power consumed by OECD
appliances. There is also significant potential for energy
savings in transport, buildings and industry (including
coal-fired power plants), especially in developing economies.
That is not all. Energy efficiency is a policy with double or
even triple dividends. While reducing CO2 emissions, it improves
energy security of supply as well and, when available at zero or
negative costs, it contributes to economic growth. For example,
oil saving can help ease the pressures in the oil market by
slowing demand and, according to our analysis, help to dampen
oil prices by up to 15 per cent.
That is certainly the reason why the governments in most
consuming countries have now put energy efficiency among their
top priorities. Speaking at the U.S. Energy Efficiency Forum on
15 June, President Bush stated "The first step is … to improve
conservation and efficiency". Gathering for their biennial
meeting on 3 May, energy ministers from the IEA member countries
committed to reinforcing their efficiency efforts. The G8 Summit
agenda is a very timely opportunity to emphasise these
commitments and to explore ways of implementing them.
But nothing can be achieved within G8 or OECD countries alone.
The challenge of climate change needs to be addressed worldwide,
taking into account the concerns of developing countries. We
must not miss this opportunity!
The IEA is an intergovernmental body committed to advancing
security of energy supply, economic growth and environmental
sustainability through energy policy co-operation
http://www.iea.org
Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times.
*****************************************************************
8 Arms Control Association: Is There a Role for Nuclear Weapons Today?
More than a dozen years after the end of the Cold War, the
frozen nuclear strategies of that conflict have begun to thaw.
Russia is itching to make further cuts in its strategic forces.
Several European countries have opened a debate on whether
tactical nuclear weapons are still needed on that continent, and
the U.S. Congress may appoint a civilian commission to look at
nuclear policy, force structure, weapons readiness, and
estimates of likely threats. I think the time is now for a
thoughtful and open debate on the role of nuclear weapons in our
countrys national security strategy, Rep. David Hobson (R-Ohio)
said earlier this year.
We agree. Rather than the product of a well-thought-out but
grave security logic, todays nuclear weapons arsenals often seem
the product of inertia and inattention on the part of
policymakers. Few leaders in the United States or elsewhere have
stepped back from todays altered security landscape to ask what
purpose, if any, these weapons serve now. Arms Control Today
asked six global leaders and policy practitioners to respond to
the question, Do nuclear weapons serve a purpose today, and if
so, what is it? Their answers follow.
+ President Mikhail Gorbachev
+ John P. Holdren
+ Ambassador Henrik Salander
+ Frank Miller
+ Judge C. G. Weeramantry
+ Major General William F. Burns (Ret.)
The Arms Control Association is a non-profit, membership-based
organization. If you find our resources useful, please consider
joining or making a contribution. Arms Control Today encourages
reprint of its articles with permission of the Editor.
© 2005 Arms Control Association, 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW,
Suite 620 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: (202) 463-8270 | Fax: (202)
463-8273
*****************************************************************
9 Guardian Unlimited: Leaders to Begin Arriving at G-8 Summit
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Wednesday July 6, 2005 12:46 PM
AP Photo XMS111
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
AP Economics Writer
GLENEAGLES, Scotland (AP) - Compromise appeared within reach on
Wednesday among the world's most industrialized nations on
relieving Africa's crushing poverty and combating global
warming.
President Bush and other leaders of the Group of Eight nations
were to begin arriving at this posh golf resort. Their three
days of annual discussions were beginning over dinner at the
Gleneagles hotel.
Protesters who have vowed to disrupt the summit were already in
place. A group of about 100 activists smashed car windows, threw
rocks and attempted to blockade one of the main roads leading to
this luxury resort, prompting police to call off a protest march
in a nearby village on the grounds public safety could not be
guaranteed.
Police with armor, helmets and shields formed a chain across the
closed main highway to Gleneagles from the Scottish capital of
Edinburgh.
Leaders' aides, meanwhile, met behind closed doors on the two
issues British Prime Minister Tony Blair has made the main focus
of this year's summit.
Bush cleared the way for one compromise when he pledged last
week to double U.S. support for Africa to more than $8.6 billion
by 2010, up from the $4.3 billion the United States provided
last year. That amount wouldn't nearly meet Blair's target for
summit nations to increase Africa aid to 0.7 percent of their
gross national product, but still would be far higher than any
previous U.S. administration's commitment.
Bush, stopping in Denmark on the way to Scotland, warned that he
would emphasize the need for African nations to commit to good
governance.
``I don't know how we can look our taxpayers in the eye and say,
this is a good deal to give money to countries that are
corrupt,'' he said. ``What were interested in ... is helping
people and, therefore, we have said that well give aid,
absolutely, well cancel debt, you bet. But we want to make sure
that the governments invest in their people, invest in the
health of their people, the education of their people and fight
corruption.''
Compromise has proven even tougher on Blair's other key issue,
developing a plan to curb emissions of greenhouse gases, with
U.S. officials lobbying behind the scenes against setting any
specific goals or timetables for emission reductions as called
for in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.
Sir Michael Jay, Blair's representative in the discussions,
called the negotiations ``pretty intense.'' He predicted the G-8
would reach an accord that recognized the problem and the need
to combat it.
The United States is the only G-8 country that has not ratified
the Kyoto Protocol. The United States has been at odds with most
of the other nations regarding global warming, saying further
study is needed about scientific findings on climate change.
Bush said in Denmark that ``the surface of the Earth is warmer
and that an increase in greenhouse gases caused by humans is
contributing to the problem.''
However, he made plain that mandatory targets are off the table.
He referred repeatedly to the Kyoto treaty in the past tense,
even though it took effect in February, and said the goal for
his plan is to control greenhouse gases merely ``as best as
possible.''
Bush said he ``can't wait'' to talk with summit colleagues about
the United States' alternative proposed approach, which stresses
spreading clean-energy technologies to both developed and
developing nations.
``I think there's a better way forward,'' Bush said. ``I would
call it the post-Kyoto era, where we can work together to share
technologies.''
Blair was expected to try to salvage the climate change issue by
shifting debate away from disagreements with the United States
and toward gaining support for emission controls in China. The
country's surging economy has made it the world's second biggest
producer of greenhouse gases after the United States.
In addition to boosting aid for Africa, the G-8 leaders were
expected to endorse a deal their finance ministers reached in
June to wipe out $40 billion in debt that 18 poor countries - 14
of them in Africa - owe international lending agencies including
the World Bank.
Blair also was pushing the rich nations to reach agreement on
cutting the farm subsidies that they give their farmers but
which depress imports from poor nations.
Bush has said the best way to deal with agricultural subsidies
is for Europe and the United States to jointly agree to get rid
of them through the Doha Round of global trade talks.
This year's G-8 talks at an 850-acre resort marked the third
consecutive summit held at remote, sealed-off locales. Those
decisions followed the 2001 summit in Genoa, Italy, when
hundreds of thousands of protesters clashed violently with
police.
In addition to the two key issues Blair selected, the
discussions are expected to cover the world's political hot
spots, from Iraq to the Middle East peace process and the
nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea.
Energy was also expected to occupy discussion time as leaders
grapple with ways to halt a surge that has pushed global oil
prices to unprecedented heights, briefly topping $60 per barrel,
and threatening to slow the global economy.
Chinese President Hu Jintao and the leaders of India, Brazil,
Mexico and South Africa will meet with the G-8 on Thursday while
leaders of several African countries will hold talks with the
leaders on Friday.
The G-8 comprises the U.S., Canada, Britain, France, Germany,
Italy, Japan and Russia.
---
On the Net:
U.S. on G-8:
http://usinfo.org/usia/usinfo.state.gov/topical/econ/group8/g8wha
t.h tm
Answers.com on G-8: http://www.answers.com/topic/g8-1
Gleneagles Hotel: http://www.gleneagles.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
10 NRC: NRC to Meet with Nebraska Public Power District to Discuss March 14 Fire at
Cooper Nuclear Station
News Release - Region IV - 2005-02
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region IV
No. IV-05-027 July 6, 2005
CONTACT: Victor Dricks
Phone: 817-860-8128
E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov
Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
representatives of the Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) on
July 13, to discuss the companys response to a fire that
occurred at the Cooper Nuclear Station on March 14.
The meeting will begin at noon in the NRCs Region IV office in
Arlington, Texas. The public is invited to observe the meeting
and will have one or more opportunities to communicate with the
NRC after the business portion, but before the meeting is
adjourned. Persons interested in participating in the meeting
via telephone can do so by calling (800) 952-9677 and asking to
be transferred to the meeting.
NPPD asked the NRC for an opportunity to provide its perspective
on a non-cited violation regarding failure to properly implement
its emergency response plan during a March 14 fire that occurred
in part of the radiologically controlled area used as a storage
and machine shop.
The NRC determined that NPPD failed to declare the fire an
Unusual Event, as called for in its emergency plan, because it
took more than 10 minutes to extinguish.
It is important that licensees appropriately classify
emergencies as well as respond to them effectively, said Bruce
S. Mallet, NRC Region IV Administrator. NPPD disagreed with the
NRCs conclusions and requested a meeting to discuss the issues.
Last revised Wednesday, July 06, 2005
*****************************************************************
11 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Nigeria Begins Nuclear Power Programme
This Day (Lagos)
Posted to the web July 6, 2005
Onyebuchi Ezigbo
Abuja
Nigeria and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), have
taken the first major step towards the actualisation of the
country's nuclear power programme.
The Federal Government was said to have commenced discussions
early this week with the delegation from IAEA, which would lead
to the establishment of ground rules for cooperation on the
implementation of the nuclear programme.
Director of the Department of Technical Cooperation of the IAEA,
Dr Vincent Nkong-Njock, who confirmed the latest bilateral
engagement at the opening of a workshop for the public
presentation of Nigeria's Energy Policy in Abuja, said already,
a team of experts from the organisation are engaged in
discussions with relevant government authorities on the
development of nuclear power in the country.
Minister of Science and Technology, Professor Turner Isoun, said
government isplans to generate about 2000 Mega Watts from
nuclear energy system in the near future.
Njock said consultation between Nigeria and the IAEA is the
outcome of the visit of the Director General of the Agency to
the country early this year, in which Nigeria government sought
for assistance in that direction.
"IAEA team is in Nigeria this week to discuss with competent
authorities the development of technical cooperation with
Nigeria in the area of Sustainable Energy Development and assist
the country in its further work towards introducing Nuclear
Power in Nigeria", he said. He said the adoption of nuclear
energy has some global implications that requires multilateral
technical cooperation within the framework of the IAEA.
He lamented that Nigeria has an un-acceptable low level of power
output, posing as the bane to National development, adding that
with 4000 Megawatts of electricity produced by NEPA, "per capita
consumption of electricity in Nigeria is only about 70
kilowatt-hours per year. "This translates to an average
availability of 8 watts less than a normal light of a bulb", he
said.
Njock said the situation requires the establishment of
cost-effective and friendly-environmental systems of energy
production which nuclear energy can play an important role.
The IAEA scribe noted that apart from the popular role of
ensuring the security of nuclear materials and safety of nuclear
installations, the international body provides assistance to
developing countries to the tune of $100 million annually under
a technical cooperation programme.
He said that the Nigeria's situation needs urgent intervention;
hence the deployment of Nuclear Energy to augment the present
level is now imperative.
In his remarks, the Minister of Science and Technology,
Professor Turner T. Isoun collaborated that Nigeria government
has actually asked the IAEA to help in establishing a Nuclear
power plant that would generate 200 mega watt of electricity for
the country.
The Minister said that government is devoting lots of its funds
to boosting power infrastructure, especially that of
Transmission. "We would use most of the money saved in debt
cancellation to build a viable transmission infrastructure," he
said
The Paris Club has last week written off $18 billion dollar of
Nigeria's debt.
Presidential Adviser to the President on Petroleum and Energy
maters, Dr. Edmund Daukoru, listed wind, solar, tidal waves
energy as some of the various alternatives to oil and gas, which
FG is interested in exploiting.
He said that communities living within the 15 estuaries of the
Niger Delta could benefit from the Tidal wave energy if
harnessed.
Copyright © 2005 This Day. All rights reserved. Distributed by
AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). Click here to contact
*****************************************************************
12 JS Online: Dominion buys Kewaunee reactor
At $191.5 million, plant fetches 13% less than expected
By THOMAS CONTENT
tcontent@journalsentinel.com Posted: July 5, 2005
More than four months after the Kewaunee nuclear plant shut
down, the reactor was finally sold on Tuesday - for a lower
price.
The selling price was $191.5 million, or 13% lower than the $220
million that was expected when the deal to sell the reactor to
Dominion Resources Inc. of Richmond, Va., was announced in
November 2003.
The original sale price was subject to closing adjustments,
including costs relating to the reactor downtime and other
expenses, said Charlie Schrock, president of generation at
Wisconsin Public Service Corp., which was the majority owner of
the plant until Tuesday.
The Kewaunee plant was offline since mid-February to fix backup
cooling systems and other problems. The shutdown was originally
scheduled to last until the end of April but continued until
this weekend. The reactor started up on Saturday and reached
full power on Monday, officials said.
The sale of the plant was challenged by consumer groups in
Wisconsin that claimed it wasn't in the public interest. The
groups worry about the precedent being set by a utility selling
off a regulated power plant, and they claimed customers who paid
for the plant through electric rates will lose out on the chance
to reap profits from the sale of low-cost nuclear power into the
new wholesale power market.
Dominion said Tuesday it was pleased to complete the deal and
that it was starting to study ways of extending the life of the
reactor by 20 more years. The plant's operating license, which
transferred to Dominion, expires in 2013. But Dominion is
expected to apply to keep operating the plant until 2034.
The sale continues a trend of consolidation in the nuclear
industry, with reactors being bought by a handful of energy
companies that include Dominion, FPL Group and Exelon Corp.
Companies such as Wisconsin Public Service and Madison-based
Wisconsin Power &Light Co. say the risks of owning a nuclear
plant given the heightened scrutiny of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the unpredictability of shutting down aging
reactors as reasons for selling the plant.
Separately, Alliant Energy Corp., Wisconsin Power &Light's
parent company, said Tuesday it had reached a deal to sell the
598-megawatt Duane Arnold Energy Center to an FPL Group
subsidiary for $387 million. The deal to sell that reactor, near
Cedar Rapids, Iowa, must be approved by regulators in Wisconsin
and two other states but is expected to be finalized late this
year or early next year, Alliant said.
Opponents to the Kewaunee sale said they plan to keep fighting
the deal in a lawsuit pending in Dane County Circuit Court that
could be decided by early next year.
"We think, in the end, that the court will agree with us that
the record in the case will show that this surrender of state
jurisdiction is not in the public interest," said Dave
Benforado, president of the Municipal Electric Utilities of
Wisconsin, a group that sued to stop the sale.
The state Public Service Commission first rejected the sale as
contrary to the public interest and then reversed itself earlier
this year and endorsed the deal based on changes proposed by
Dominion.
Schrock said Tuesday "it's hard to argue that the sale is not in
the public interest" given the return of decommissioning funds
to customers and "price certainty through 2012 at a cost
approximately what the state utilities projected under continued
ownership" of Kewaunee.
The Wisconsin utilities said the cost of the Kewaunee shutdown
that just ended would have been borne by Dominion rather than
Wisconsin customers if the deal had closed sooner.
For Wisconsin Power &Light, those costs totaled more than $26
million through last week, said Janice Mathis, that utility's
spokeswoman. WPS has estimated its higher costs linked to the
shutdown at $35 million to $45 million.
From the July 6, 2005, editions of the Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel
Copyright 2005, Journal Sentinel Inc. All rights
reserved.
*****************************************************************
13 Wisconsin State Journal: Alliant selling power plants
www.madison.com
00:00 am 7/06/05
Judy Newman Wisconsin State Journal
[The Kewaunee nuclear power plant changed hands Tuesday and is
now owned by Dominion Resources, a Virginia energy company. The
568-megawatt re� actor also returned to service over the
weekend for the first time since Feb. 20. � � ]
The Kewaunee nuclear power plant changed hands Tuesday and is now
owned by Dominion Resources, a Virginia energy company. The
568-megawatt re� actor also returned to service over the
weekend for the first time since Feb. 20. � � (Tim Swoboda --
Manitowoc Herald Times)
Alliant Energy Corp.'s stable of assets is shrinking again, with
one nuclear power plant sold, another snaring a buyer and the
company's investments in China going up for sale.
• The Kewaunee nuclear power plant, back at full power Monday for
the first time in 4 months, changed hands Tuesday.
Dominion Resources, Richmond, Va., bought the 568- megawatt
reactor for $191.5 million from Alliant subsidiary Wisconsin
Power & Light Co. of Madison, and Wisconsin Public Service Corp.,
part of WPS Resources Corp. of Green Bay.
"We think it's a great asset and we think that the people working
there are very professional," said Dominion spokesman Richard
Zuercher.
Some of the plant's backup systems had to be modified, creating
the lengthy outage, Alliant spokeswoman Janice Mathis said.
Kewaunee's license expires in 2013. "Our intent is to seek to
renew the license for an additional 20 years," Zuercher said. He
said Dominion has no plans to build another nuclear reactor at
the site in Carlton, nine miles south of Kewaunee.
The Citizens Utility Board blasted the sale. "If this sale isn't
overthrown by the courts, WPS and WPL will have signed over
Wisconsin's nuclear future to an out-of-state corporation that
will run Kewaunee for profit rather than to preserve the
reliability of Wisconsin's electric system," said CUB executive
director Charlie Higley, in a written statement.
• FPL Energy, Juno Beach, Fla., said Tuesday it will buy
Alliant's 70 percent stake in the Duane Arnold nuclear plant near
Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for $380 million. FPL already has several
holdings in the Midwest, including a wind farm in Montfort.
• Alliant plans to sell its power plants in China by June 2006,
the company said Tuesday, but may get only half of what they're
worth.
That's largely because of the rising cost of coal in China and
the Chinese government's lack of action to pass along part of the
expense to customers, Alliant spokesman Scott Smith said.
Alliant's 11 Chinese power plants were valued at $192 million as
of March 31.
"We evaluated a number of alternatives and determined that
exiting the China generation market was in the long-term
interests of our shareowners," said president and chief executive
officer Bill Harvey in a written statement.
"They had no business being in those markets," said Mason
Carpenter, professor of strategic management at the UW- Madison
School of Business.
"It's just another example of U.S. hubris when investing abroad,"
he said. "It's a huge market, very attractive, so it's very
seductive, like a trap."
Alliant said it will use the proceeds to reduce debt at Alliant
Energy Resources, the subsidiary that oversees nonregulated
businesses.
Dave Parker, senior utilities analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co.,
said all three moves are good news. "Alliant has, historically,
made good money on its China investment," but conditions have
changed, he said.
Parker maintains an "outperform" rating on Alliant with a $30
price target.
Alliant shares closed at $28.61 a share, up 16 cents. Contact
reporter Judy Newman at jdnewman@madison.comor 252-6156.
Copyright © 2005 Wisconsin State Journal
*****************************************************************
14 Monticello Times: NRC asks for feedback
www.monticellotimes.com
July 06, 2005
Meeting allowed public comments on plant study
Eric O'Link News Editor
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission came to Monticello last week,
looking for public input about its environmental review of
Monticello’s nuclear power plant.
Representatives of the NRC were in Monticello to conduct a site
review of Monticello Nuclear Gener-ating Plant. They also hosted
two public meetings Thursday, seeking comments about what the
NRC should include in the scope of its environmental impact
statement (EIS). The EIS is being prepared in preparation of the
NRC’s decision to renew the operating license for the plant’s
reactor.
Jennifer Davis, the project manager for the environmental review
portion of the license application, told those at the meeting
that the NRC is asking the public for suggestions of
environmental issues that should be considered as part of the
NRC’s review.
Those issues would then be addressed in the NRC’s environmental
impact statement, which asks, “Is license renewal acceptable
from an environmental standpoint?” Davis said.
Davis said she, other NRC officials and scientists from a few
national laboratories conducted a site study at the plant
Tuesday and Wednes-day, June 28 and 29. Thursday’s afternoon and
evening meetings–where the NRC presented identical information
and asked for public comment–were the other part of that
information gathering process.
“This meeting is part of the public’s participation process in
our environmental review,” Davis said. “We do consider all
comments that we receive from the public.”
Seeking license extension
The meeting, not the first to convene in Monticello this year,
is part of the NRC’s review process to renew the operating
license for the plant’s reactor. The 40-year license for the
plant, which was built in 1971, expires in 2010.
Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy, which owns the plant, and Nuclear
Management Co., which operates it, are seeking a 20-year
extension of the license. Hudson, Wis.-based NMC officially
filed its renewal application earlier this year.
In a separate process, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
is reviewing Xcel’s request for dry-cask waste storage on the
site. The plant cannot continue to operate beyond 2010 without
the cask storage.
Decisions on both the license renewal and dry cask storage are
expected in 2007.
Nationwide, NRC officials said 32 plants at 18 sites have
completed the re-licensing process. All plants that have been
through the entire review process have had their requests for
license renewal approved, said Andrew Kugler, chief of the NRC’s
environmental impact section. Kugler attended and spoke at
Thursday’s meetings.
He added that two plants that began the license renewal process
did not complete it. One application was returned after some
review. “We did not feel it was technically adequate,” Kugler
said. He expected it would be submitted again at a later date.
The other plant’s application is indefinitely on hold because
information crucial to the application process was not readily
available, Kugler said.
While both Kugler and Davis offered some explanation of the
NRC’s environmental review process Thursday, the primary purpose
of the meetings was to allow comments. Statements came from all
sides, including NMC, Xcel Energy, the City of Monticello and
people representing environmental organizations.
Tom Palmisano, site vice president at the Monticello plant, said
that the mission of everyone at MNGP is to provide safe,
reliable operation of the plant. He said MNGP is more than just
a power plant, but part of the community with contribution to
and support of community organizations and initiatives.
“The plant has been a productive contributor to the energy needs
for the state of Minnesota,” he said.
He added that consideration of the environmental was important
at the plant.
“Monticello is a strong supporter of the environment,” Palmisano
said. “We take great care in our daily efforts to ensure the
environment is protected.”
John Grubb, director of engineering at Monticello, said the
plant would continue to focus on being a good neighbor to the
community and a good steward of the environment–and operating
safely.
“We have consistently demonstrated our ability to protect the
health and safety of the public and our employees,” Grubb said.
Both Palmisano and Grubb said they believed the plant was secure
and continually working to improve security, investing millions
of dollars in new equipment.
Supporting renewal
Kent Larson, Xcel Energy’s vice president of jurisdictions,
expressed support for the license renewal. He told those present
that Monticello and Prairie Island, Minnesota’s other nuclear
power plant, together produce 25 percent of the electricity
consumed in Minnesota.
“Monticello has operated safely and reliably for 35 years,” he
said. “Continued operation of the Monticello plant is vitally
important to the state’s energy needs.”
Speaking on behalf of the City of Monticello, city council
member Wayne Mayer said the plant was a good neighbor and had
demonstrated its commitment to the community. He commended NMC
employees for the plant’s “excellent safety record” and said the
city looks forward to working with Xcel Energy and NMC in the
future.
“(The plant) brings economic vitality to all of our community,”
Mayer said.
Monticello Mayor Clint Herbst also offered his support.
“I feel that it’s a very safe operation and a much-needed
operation,” he said. “I feel very confident that I can speak for
previous councils. Past councils and the present council are
behind Xcel.”
Attention to alternatives
Not everyone was quite so enthusiastic about reactor license
renewal, however.
George Crocker, executive director of the North American Water
Office in Lake Elmo, has been a longtime critic of the nuclear
industry. His suggestions to the NRC were pointed.
But he began with a compliment to NMC.
“The work force that we have at Monticello is...very
conscientious and well-trained,” he said. He noted that
Monticello compares favorably to some other nuclear plants,
after he had reviewed other plants’ procedures in the past.
Crocker’s main point to the NRC was to consider alternative
sources of energy as the agency considered the renewal of
Monticello’s license.
He explained that the Minnesota Legislature passed
Community-Based Energy Development (C-BED) legislation.
According to C-BED’s Web site, the legislation “stipulates that
electric utilities serving Minnesota consumers must develop a
framework to support the purchase of C-BED electricity by
December 2005.”
The main C-BED energy alternative right now is wind, Crocker
said, but it will soon be paired with combustive energy in
hybrid systems. Within the 20-year timeframe of the renewed
license, Crocker said, “we’re going to put reactors out of
business” with new energy alternatives.
“I want you, in your scoping, to help us understand how you
evaluate alternative sources,” he said to the NRC
representatives.
He called for better monitoring systems that keep track of where
released radioactive gasses go. The Monticello plant
occasionally releases small amounts of radioactive gas that have
decayed over several years until the radioactivity is at an
acceptable level for a release. Crocker has been critical that
monitoring systems designed to track the gasses only tell where
they are not.
If the whereabouts of the gasses continues to be unknown to the
NRC, “you have no business making any conclusions,” Crocker said.
He also criticized security. He said nuclear plants have “grave
security issues” that are not being addressed, particularly in
the case of things like a ground-fired missile attack. He
described current plant security as being “very good at keeping
out the graffiti man.”
He added that global warming could be a concern. If the
Mississippi River’s water levels drop over time, or if the water
increases in temperature, it could impact the plant’s capacity
to produce electricity.
Protecting a water source
Lea Foushee, also of the North American Water Office, and
Crocker’s wife, said she was concerned that Monticello is
located on the river, upstream from the Twin Cities. She noted
that the City of Minneapolis depends on the river for all of its
drinking water. An accident or attack at the plant that resulted
in radioactivity leaking into the river could be catastrophic to
the Minneapolis water supply.
“We have no alternatives...we would have a disaster that nobody
would recover from soon,” she said.
Carol Overland, an advocate from Northfield, also suggested an
alternative to nuclear power. She said that a new coal
gasification power plant project proposed for northern Minnesota
should be instead built in Monticello, namely to preserve the
500 jobs MNGP provides.
“In alternatives, there are options being considered in
Minnesota that would work really well here,” Overland said of
the Monticello site.
A couple of other comments were made at Thursday’s afternoon
meeting. No public comments were made at the evening meeting.
Both meetings were attended by 30-40 people, including NRC,
Xcel, NMC and state officials.
NRC officials noted that compared to some meetings, the turnout
was relatively light. In some public meetings regarding a nearby
nuclear power plant, several hundred people show up wanting to
make comments.
“It really depends on how comfortable the community is with the
plant,” Kugler said
The Monticello meetings’ light turnout could be telling.
“It may just be an indication of where people stand,” he said.
Copyright 2005, Monticello Times
*****************************************************************
15 Arizona Republic: Risks of nuclear power not worth it
[Arizona Republic Online Print Edition] July 6, 2005
Jul. 6, 2005 12:00 AM
Regarding "Toxic or Magic? Nation needs a fresh look at nuclear
power" (Editorial, June 27):
The editorial concludes, "Putting aside the rhetoric, there is
real promise in nuclear power for meeting our energy needs and
reducing global warming."
Few new nuclear plants have been built in the United States over
the last quarter century, for good reasons. The health risks,
security threat and environmental impact far outweigh any
benefits of nuclear energy.
Contrary to what the editorial portrayed, the process of uranium
enrichment for fuel releases huge quantities of carbon dioxide,
including the gases released during decommissioning and the
transport of nuclear waste. Additionally, the enrichment of
uranium is responsible for more than 90 percent of the
chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) 114 gas released into our air. CFCs are
10,000 to 20,000 times more potent as a global warmer than
carbon dioxide.
This is not "virtually no emission of greenhouse gases," as the
writers opined.
As far as storage of nuclear waste is concerned, leaks have been
detected - affecting all living species - from algae to
crustaceans, little fish, big fish and finally, humans.
As Helen Caldicott, founder of the Nuclear Power Research
Institute, said, "It takes a single mutation in a single gene in
a single cell to kill you." - Michael Hays, Grand Canyon
Steve Benson
Copyright © 2005, azcentral.com. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 CBC Calgary: Stolen truck carrying radioactive material crashes
Last updated Jul 6 2005 11:33 AM MDT
CBC
Two women are facing charges after a stolen truck carrying
radioactive material crashed into a hydro pole in Alberta Beach.
Const. Craig Albers says when the truck, stolen from
an Edmonton radiographics inspection company, hit the pole, the
container containing radioactive material was knocked loose and
damaged a cabin. Tests determined that none of the radioactive
material leaked from the container during Tuesday's crash. Both
women in the truck were taken to hospital, Albers said, with one
later released and the second in serious, but stable, condition.
Albers says the women will likely face a number of
charges, including theft of a motor vehicle. "We'll also be
looking at speed being a factor and that alcohol was involved,"
he said. "We'll be looking at those potential charges, possibly
undue care and attention, all depending on what has all
developed from the investigation."
Copyright © CBC 2005
*****************************************************************
17 US NAS Study: No Safe Dose for Radiation
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 01:31:27 -0500 (CDT)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050629.wxray0629/EmailBNStory/specialScienceandHealth
Wednesday, June 29, 2005 Updated at 11:59 AM EDT
Associated Press
Washington The preponderance of scientific evidence shows that
even very low doses of radiation pose a risk of cancer or other
health problems and that there is no threshold below which exposure
can be viewed as harmless, a panel of prominent U.S. scientists
concluded Wednesday.
The finding by the National Academy of Sciences panel is viewed as
critical because it is likely to significantly influence what
radiation levels government agencies will allow at abandoned nuclear
power plants, nuclear weapons production facilities and elsewhere.
The nuclear industry, as well as some independent scientists, have
argued that there is a threshold of very low level radiation where
exposure is not harmful or possibly even beneficial. They said
current risk-modelling may exaggerate the health impact.
The panel, after five years of study, rejected that assertion.
The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of
exposure below which low levels of ionized radiation can be
demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial, said Richard Monson, the
panel chairman and a professor of epidemiology at Harvard's School
of Public Health.
*****************************************************************
18 [du-list] Gulf War Health impacts Update
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:53:38 -0700
From: Steve Robinson srobinson@NGWRC.ORG
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 4:51 PM
A. GWI-related Items of Interest
1. House passes DOD appropriation for Gulf War Illness
research: On June 20, 2005, Congressmen Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH)
introduced and gained passage of a bipartisan amendment to the FY2006
Department of Defense Appropriations Bill. The amendment will provide $10
million for research for Gulf War illnesses, affecting veterans of the 1991
Persian Gulf War. The budget neutral amendment was co-sponsored by
Congressman Christopher Shays (R-CT) and Congressman Bernie Sanders
(I-VT). No action has been taken yet in the Senate. A copy of Congressman
Kucinich's press release can be found on the Committee's ftp website.
2. U.S. legislation pertaining to depleted uranium: On May
17, 2005, Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA) introduced, along with 21
original co-sponsors, the "Depleted Uranium Munitions Study Act of
2005." It would "require certain studies regarding the health effects of
depleted uranium munitions" to be conducted jointly by the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry and the Director of the Center for Disease
Control and Prevention. On June 3, 2005, the bill was referred to the
House Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. Copies of
Congressman McDermott's press release and original bill (HR 2410) can be
found on the Committee's ftp website.
There is one other pending depleted uranium bill in the House. It is
entitled the "Depleted Uranium Screening and Testing Act of 2005", and was
introduced on January 4, 2005. It was referred to the House Subcommittee
on Military Personnel on February 4, 2005. No further action has taken
place since then. A copy of this bill (HR 202) also can be found on the
Committee's ftp website.
B. Recent GWI Research Articles - Research Relevant to Gulf War
Service and Exposures
1. Evaluation of the effect of implanted depleted uranium on male
reproductive success, sperm concentration, and sperm velocity. (Arfsten
DP, et al. Environ Health Perspect. Jun 3, 2005 [Epub ahead of print])
2. Acquired nucleic acid changes may trigger sporadic amyotrophic
lateral sclerosis. (Armon C. Muscle Nerve. Jun 9, 2005 [Epub ahead of
print])
3. Book Review: Vaccine A - The covert government experiment that's
killing our soldiers and why GI's are only the first victims. (Axelsen
PH. JAMA. Jun 1, 2005; 293(21): 2664)
4. Probable topical permethrin-induced neck dystonia. (Coleman CI, et
al. Pharmacotherapy. March 2005; 25(3): 448-450)
5. The quantitative analysis of uranium isotopes in the urine of the
civilian population of eastern Afghanistan after Operation Enduring
Freedom. (Durakovic A. Mil Med. Apr 2005; 170(4): 277-284)
6. Gulf War veterans' health: medical evaluation of a U.S.
cohort. (Eisen SA, et al. Ann Intern Med. Jun 7, 2005; 142(11); 881-890)
[Also see related article: Summaries for patients: The health of Gulf
War veterans. (Ann Intern Med. Jun 7, 2005; 142(11): I22)]
7. Documented combat exposure of US veterans seeking treatment for
combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder. (Frueh BC, et al. Br J
Psychiatry. Jun 2005; 186: 467-472)
8. Changes in erythrocyte enzymes in humans long-term exposed to
pesticides - Influence of several markers of individual
susceptibility. (Hernandez AF, et al. Toxicol Lett. May 24, 2005 [Epub
ahead of print])
9. Neuromechanical effects of pyrethroids, allethrin, cyhalothrin and
deltamethrin on the cholinergic processes in rat brain. (Hossain MM, et
al. Lif Sci. Jul 1, 2005; 77(7): 795-807)
10. Can epidemiology clear the fog of war? Lessons from the 1990-1991
Gulf War. (Hotopf M, Wessely S. Int J. Epidemiol. May 23, 2005 [Epub
ahead of print])
11. Embedded weapons-grade tungsten alloy shrapnel rapidly induces
metastatic high-grade rhabdomyosarcomas in f344 rats. (Kalinich JF, et
al. Environ Health Perspect. Jun 2005; 113(6): 729-734)
12. Unexplained suffering in the aftermath of war. (Komaroff AL, et
al. Ann Intern Med. Jun 7, 2005; 142(11): 938-939)
13. The brain is a target organ after acute exposure to depleted
uranium. (Lestaevel P, et al. Toxicology. Jun 9, 2005; [Epub ahead of
print])
14. Long-term hematological and immunological complications of sulfur
mustard poisoning in Iranian veterans. (Mahmoudi M, et al. Int
Immunopharmacol. Aug 2005; 5(9): 1479-1485)
15. A link between ALS and short residence on Guam. (Majoor-Krakauer D,
et al. Neurology. May 24, 2005; 64(10): 1819-1820)
16. Chronic cholinergic imbalances promote brain diffusion and transport
abnormalities. (Meshorer E, et al. FASEB J. Jun 2005; 19(8): 910-922)
17. Genetic polymorphisms and activity of PON1 in Mexican
population. (Rojas-Garcia AE, et al. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. Jun 15, 2005)
18. Chronic neuropsychological sequelae of cholinesterase inhibitors in
the absence of structural brain damage: two cases of acute
poisoning. (Roldan-Tapi L, et al. Environ Health Perspect. Jun 2005;
113(6): 762-766)
19. Do cytosine guanine dinucleotide (CpG) fragments induce vasoactive
neuropeptide mediated fatigue-related autoimmune disorders? (Staines
DR. Med Hypotheses. 2005; 65(2): 370-373)
20. Acute military psychiatric casualties from the war in Iraq. (Turner
MA, et al. Br J Psychiatry. Jun 2005; 186: 476-479)
21. Smaller head of the hippocampus in Gulf War-related post-traumatic
stress disorder. (Vythilgam M, et al. Psychiatry Res. Jun 17, 2005 [Epub
ahead of print])
22. Risk, psychiatry and the military. (Wessely S. Br J
Psychiatry. Jun 2005; 186: 459-466)
23. War stories: Invited commentary on... Documented combat exposure of
US veterans seeking treatment for combat-related post-traumatic stress
disorder. (Wessely S. Br J Psychiatry. Jun 2005; 186: 473-475)
24. Cutaneous leishmaniasis in soldiers from Fort Campbell, Kentucky
returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom highlights diagnostic and
therapeutic options. (Willard RJ, et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. Jun 2005;
52(6): 977-987)
25. America's neglected veterans: 1.7 million who served have no health
coverage. (Woolhandler S, et al. Int J Health Serv. 2005; 35(2): 313-323)
Research on Diagnosis/Treatment of Chronic Multisymptom Illnesses
1. Cognitive behaviour group therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: a
non-randomized waiting list controlled study. (Bazelmans E, et
al. Psychother Psychosom. 2005; 74(4): 218-224)
2. Gray matter volume reduction in the chronic fatigue syndrome. (de
Lange FP, et al. Neuroimage. Jul 1, 2005; 26(3): 777-781)
3. Chronic fatigue syndrome: the need for subtypes. (Jason LA, et
al. Neuropsychol Rev. Mar 2005; 15(1): 29-58)
4. Fibromyalgia and headache: an epidemiological study supporting
migraine as part of the fibromyalgia syndrome. (Marcus DA, et al. Clin
Rheumatol. May 18, 2005 [Epub ahead of print])
5. Evaluation of autoantibodies to common and neuronal cell antigens
in chronic fatigue syndrome. (Vernon SD, Reeves WC. J Autoimmune
Dis. May 25 2005; 2(1): 5 [Epub ahead of print])
C. Gulf War Illness and Related News Stories
1. Department of Defense appeals judge's ban on mandatory anthrax
shots. CIDRAP (MN) (May 25, 2005)
2. Exposure to pesticides can cause Parkinson's. NewScientist.com
(UK) (May 26, 2005)
3. UN Environment Programme train Iraqis in measuring depleted
uranium. UN.org (May 31, 2005)
4. Measure would require uranium exposure test. 2theadvocate.com (LA)
(Jun 2, 2005)
5. Bill to study effects of uranium on soldiers moves to state
Senate. BristolPress.com (CT) (Jun 3, 2005)
6. Why did he die? GlobeGazette.com (IA) (Jun 6, 2005)
7. After a shower of anthrax, an illness and mystery. New York Times
(NY) (Jun 7, 2005)
8. Depleted uranium threat 'low'. The Advertiser (AU) (Jun 8, 2005)
9. Veterans of first Gulf War have more chronic fatigue,
fibromyalgia. Eurekaalert.org (US) (Jun 8, 2005)
10. Department of Defense study ongoing to investigate Marine's
health. DCMilitary.com (US) (Jun 10, 2005)
11. Anthrax vaccinations resume at Bolin, Air Force-wide. DCMilitary.com
(US) (Jun 10, 2005)
12. Voluntary anthrax vaccinations to resume for airmen in
Korea. Estripes.com (US) (Jun 13, 2005)
13. Collateral risk: DU research gap could impact Vermont
troops. Vermont Guardian (VT) (Jun 20, 2005)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
19 [du-list] OSHA seeks information on ionizing radiation health
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:52:49 -0700
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&
p_id=11343
Trade Release
Date: May 3, 2005
Contact: Frank Meilinger
Phone: (202) 693-1999
OSHA Seeking Information to Address Health Effects of Occupational Exposure
to Ionizing Radiation
WASHINGTON- The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is asking for
comments and information from the public to help the agency determine what,
if anything, the agency should do to address its standards for occupational
exposure to ionizing radiation. The request for information is published in
today's Federal Register.
Ionizing radiation has been used in workplaces for over a century and its
use has grown significantly in recent years. Ionizing radiation sources can
be found in a wide range of occupational settings, including health care
facilities, research institutions, nuclear reactors and their support
facilities, nuclear weapon production facilities, and various manufacturing
settings. These radiation sources can pose a considerable health risk to
affected workers if not properly controlled.
OSHA's current standard addresses the possession, use or transfer of
ionizing radiation sources and requires that employers maintain worker
exposures to below 1.25 rem per quarter (rem= roentgen- equivalent-man,
which is a unit of measure for the effects of ionizing radiation on
humans). The standard also requires employers to conduct exposure
monitoring, provide training for employees above 100 mrem
(milli-roentgen-equivalent-man), provide medical monitoring, maintain
records of employee exposures, and notify OSHA of excessive exposures.
The agency's request for information addresses current uses of ionizing
radiation in the workplace and issues related to its use, such as employee
exposure levels, health effects of ionizing radiation exposure, and
workplace programs to control such exposure. The agency will use the
information to determine if and how its ionizing radiation standards should
be updated.
Written comments must be submitted by Aug. 1, 2005. Written comments (10
pages or fewer) can be faxed to OSHA's Docket Office at (202) 693-1648 or
sent electronically to http://ecomments.osha.gov. Three copies of written
comments and attachments must be submitted to the OSHA Docket Office,
Docket H-016, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave.,
Washington, DC, 20210. Further information on submitting comments can be
obtained by calling the Docket Office at (202) 693-2350.
Employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthful workplace for
their employees. OSHA's role is to assure the safety and health of
America's workers by setting and enforcing standards; providing training,
outreach, and education; establishing partnerships; and encouraging
continual process improvement in workplace safety and health. For more
information, visit www.osha.gov.
# # #
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
This news release text is on the Internet at http://www.osha.gov.
Information on this release will be made available to sensory impaired
individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202) 693-1999.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
OSHA News Release - Table of Contents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Back to Top www.osha.gov www.dol.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Contact Us | Freedom of Information Act | Customer Survey
Privacy and Security Statement | Disclaimers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Occupational Safety & Health Administration
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20210
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
20 BoiseWeekly: Downwinders Decry Senate's Choice to Revive Nuke Research
JULY 6, 2005
BY NICHOLAS COLLIAS
The U.S. Senate made a strong vote of support for revitalizing
the military's nuclear arsenal last week, contradicting previous
action by the House of Representatives. By a vote of 53-43,
senators defeated an amendment proposed by California Democrat
Diane Feinstein that would have prohibited the use of government
funds to study the feasibility of the Robust Nuclear Earth
Penetrator, also known as the "bunker buster."
The failure of the measure means that beginning in October,
nuclear research laboratories could receive up to $4 million for
continued work on the bomb, which is designed to pierce and
demolish underground enemy facilities. Both of Idaho's senators,
Larry Craig and Mike Crapo, voted against Feinstein's amendment.
Earlier this year, the House of Representatives voted to
eliminate nuclear research from a similar energy and water
appropriations bill.
Following the vote, a group of nuclear fallout victims from
Idaho, Utah and California responded by blasting the Senate,
saying that the vote "tells us our suffering, our pain, the
deaths prematurely from cancers and other illnesses caused by
the fallout from nuclear testing have meant nothing, nor has the
lesson that there is no such thing as a safe nuclear test been
learned."
Senate Democrats had similar concerns, adding that the vote sent
a conflicted to countries like Iran and North Korea, whom the
U.S. has asked to abandon nuclear weapons programs.
In response, Republicans like Senate Armed Services Committee
Chairman John Warner downplayed the gravity of the funding.
"We're talking about a study," the Virginia senator told Reuters
following the vote. "What's the harm in a study?"
On November 6, hundreds of spectators gathered in Taco Bell
Arena to hear firsthand accounts of one of the darkest chapters
of Idaho history. They heard how qualities that have defined our
state since its inception-independence, self-sufficiency and an
affection for rural and small-town living-led the Atomic Energy
Commission to infamously label the American Mountain West in the
1950s as a "low-use segment of the population." They heard
grueling tales of how the U.S. government, in its quest to
become a nuclear superpower, secretly treated its rural denizens
like an expendable resource. And then they heard fears that it
might happen all over again. [November 17, 2004] MORE BY
NICHOLAS COLLIAS Quote of the Week
© Copyright 2005, BoiseWeekly
*****************************************************************
21 Sun Herald: Phosphate spill endangers once-thriving lake
| 07/06/2005 |
Parts of Jackson County's Bangs Lake are now lifeless
By BILL FINCH and BEN RAINES
MOBILE REGISTER
Weeks after millions of gallons of highly acidic chemicals
flowed into one of the Gulf Coast's most productive estuaries, a
wide river of rusty brown trees and dead marsh grass slices
through the summer green of Mississippi's Bangs Lake, near Grand
Bay on the Alabama line.
Portions of the shallow waters at the upper end of the brackish
lake, once hopping with redfish and mullet and home to some of
Mississippi's healthiest oyster beds, appear lifeless, except
for the fluorescent lime glow of algae, still spreading in
dense, sticky mats where the sudden burst of phosphate pollution
fuels its growth. Such algal mats tie up the water's oxygen as
they collapse and decay, scientists say.
Mississippi environmental regulators say they can't be sure the
worst effects of the April 14 spill at Mississippi Phosphates
Corp. are over for Bangs Lake. The 1-mile-long lake is part of
an arc of marshes and shallow waters in the Grand Bay National
Reserve, a federally protected ecosystem described as one of the
northern Gulf Coast's least disturbed stretches of coastline.
Estimating the damage
Mississippi regulators said last week that they were still
trying to determine what impact a soup of contaminants --
mercury, cadmium, lead, radioactive uranium and radium -- could
have on the long-term health of the oyster beds and fish
nurseries. They also said they were reassessing the measures
that the state had taken to protect the estuary from the
mountains of phosphate waste surrounding it.
Mississippi Phosphates was required "to do everything possible
to protect Bang's Lake," said Phil Bass, director of
Mississippi's Office of Pollution Control, who described the
area as "the most pristine part" of Mississippi's coast.
Bass said that while the investigation was far from complete, he
expected "some kind of enforcement action... some kind of
recapture of the environmental damage." He said he planned to
work closely with the Jackson-based company to prevent future
spills.
After speaking with Mobile Register reporters Thursday and
Friday morning about the spill, a spokeswoman for Mississippi
Phosphates called back Friday afternoon to say that senior
management had decided that the company "didn't want to be
quoted, and refused to participate because of the grave concern
over the accuracy" of the reporting.
In the earlier conversations, spokeswoman Melinda Hood blamed
the spill on unusually heavy rains, and said that the company
expected such an event would never happen again. The Register,
however, was unable to find evidence of unusually heavy rains in
the days just before the spill.
In 1998, the company also reported a spill that Hood said was
even larger than the one that occurred this year.
Hood offered various estimates of the size of the April spill,
at first estimating about 50,000 gallons. On Friday, Hood left a
message saying the spill was in the range of 17 million gallons.
The Register was unable to determine the exact concentrations of
acids, heavy metals and uranium in the mix, or the residual
concentrations in Bangs Lake.
Mounds of contamination
Mounds of phosphate waste, approaching 100 feet high and
stretching for hundreds of yards along Industrial Road, have
been a Pascagoula landmark since the 1950s, when the original
Mississippi Chemical Corp. first began producing phosphate
fertilizers there.
Phosphate, in moderate quantities, is needed by green plants for
growth. But the production of usable phosphate from phosphate
ores leaves a large volume of waste - 5 tons of waste for every
ton of product. Florida, which is naturally rich in phosphate
ores and is a center for the phosphate industry, produces 30
million tons of waste each year.
The bulk of the waste is composed of gypsum, a combination of
sodium and calcium that in itself is largely benign, and has
some uses as an agricultural supplement for compacted soils.
But the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency prohibits phosphate
producers from selling the gypsum wastes because of the spectrum
of contaminants present. Phosphate ore deposits often contain
significant quantities of other minerals - fluoride, selenium,
chromium, copper, cadmium, nickel, aluminum and even uranium -
which can be toxic in sufficient doses. In some parts of the
world, including Morocco, where Mississippi Phosphates now buys
its ores, concentrations of radioactive uranium in the phosphate
deposits are sometimes so high that they're extracted for
nuclear production.
As a result, massive gray hills of phosphate waste - often
called "gyp stacks" - are fixtures at phosphate processing
plants.
Scientists who have researched phosphate plants say that the
most immediate dangers posed by such stacks are the liquid
wastes poured into large settling ponds carved into the tops of
piles.
Mississippi regulators likened the gypsum stacks and their
hazardous waste ponds to a large heap of mashed potatoes, with a
craterlike depression in the top to hold the gravy. The "gravy"
in this case contains large quantities of phosphoric acid, which
many believe to be responsible for the rapid killing of much of
the marsh vegetation and aquatic life in Bangs
Lake, making the water and soil so acidic most life can't exist.
Explosions of algae
The liquid also contains high concentrations of phosphates and
nitrogen compounds. When these chemicals get into natural water
bodies, according to scientists, they fertilize explosions of
opportunistic algae, which strangle other life as they compete
for light and oxygen, until they essentially grow themselves to
death.
The sudden collapse of the algae ties up most of the oxygen in
the water, suffocating many of the fish and other creatures
living there.
These effects are already apparent over much of the northern end
of Bangs Lake. Mississippi regulators said they're still trying
to understand how widespread the impacts have been on the lake's
oyster beds, though Ed Cake, an environmental consultant in
Mississippi, said he heard from some observers that many beds
over a wide area in the lake may have been killed.
Ironically, Bass said, Mississippi had planned to use Bangs Lake
oysters as examples of what "clean" oysters should look like, as
regulators compared effects from contamination in various areas
along the Mississippi coast.
Even after life in Bangs Lake recovers from the immediate
toxicity of the phosphate spill, other contaminants could
persist for decades to come. The liquids from gyp stacks
typically contain relatively high concentrations of other
contaminants -- the heavy metals and the radioactive materials
-- that are found in phosphate ore.
The Mississippi regulators said they were still uncertain how
severe that contamination might be, but they would be monitoring
the oysters and other life in Bangs Lake in the months to come.
'The gyp stack failed'
In other news accounts, and in Register interviews, Mississippi
Phosphate's Hood has blamed the spill on unusually heavy
rainfall, conditions she said were not likely to occur again.
"Back in April, we had a tremendous amount of rain," Hood said
Thursday. "Because of the heavy rainfall, and the water level
being as high as it was in one of the ponds, the gyp stack
failed."
The company's permits from the Mississippi Department of
Environmental Quality specify that the waste ponds must be
designed to withstand a maximum 25-year, 24-hour rainfall - a
storm producing about 11 inches in a 24-hour period, according
to the standard calculations produced by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration for this part of the Gulf Coast.
Weather information from the Southern Climate Data Center
indicates there was no rainfall in Pascagoula on April 13 or 14,
when the spill occurred. Weather service radar and Southern
Climate Data Center reports indicate that two weeks before the
spill, on April 1, an area along the Mississippi/Alabama line
may have received about 8 inches of rain, the largest rainfall
the Climate Data Center reported for that month. NOAA records
indicate a storm of that intensity could be expected about once
every five years along the Mississippi coast.
Officials with the Mississippi Department of Environmental
Quality said their preliminary investigation indicates that the
failure of the waste pond was not ultimately the result of
excessive rainfall, but rather because the company was trying to
increase the capacity of the pond at a faster rate than normal.
"As they built it, they had a failure, they just lost part of
the dam," Bass said.
Bass said that a bigger issue itself may be that the levees
around the gyp stacks weren't sufficient to catch the pond spill
before it poured into the marsh. The gyp stacks are ringed by a
moat-like ditch-and-berm system, which environmental permits say
should be designed to capture such spills.
Reporters who accessed the marsh area by boat saw swaths of
dying vegetation that spread out toward Bangs Lake from two low
points in the levees.
Florida regulators have been dealing with the impacts of
phosphate spills for decades, and have reassessed the safeguards
placed on maintenance of gyp stacks. A 1997 spill of more than
50 million gallons in Florida's Alafia River was reported to
have killed 1 million fish, according to local news accounts.
Dumped into the Gulf
In Tampa in 2004, dangerously full gypsum stack ponds at a
phosphate factory were drained in an emergency action approved
by the EPA. In the controversial action, hundreds of millions of
gallons of the liquid were barged out and dumped into the Gulf
of Mexico. State officials said it was the only way of saving
Tampa Bay and averting what they described as "one of the
biggest environmental threats in Florida history."
Florida experienced two hurricane-related breaks at phosphate
facilities last year. In June of this year, regulators
overhauled design specifications for the phosphate ponds and
levees because they weren't believed to be sufficient to handle
the Gulf's heavy rainfalls and hurricanes, which can dump 20 to
30 inches of rain.
"Our regulations are being updated right now because we had
spills during hurricanes last year," said Mary Ellen Murphy,
with the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research. "Every time
there is a spill, we get new regulations."
Hood said that Hurricane Georges in 1998 precipitated another,
and much larger spill, at the Mississippi Phosphates plant. She
speculated that it didn't attract much notice because attention
was focused on an oil spill at the Chevron refinery next door to
her plant.
Bass said, "We're certainly going to use this incident to look
back at everything we regulate to make sure that everything is
protected as it should be."
*****************************************************************
22 Bradenton Herald: Tallevast well tests to start today
| 07/06/2005 |
DONNA WRIGHT
Herald Staff Writer
Tests on private wells outside of the plume of contamination
under Tallevast will begin today, Lockheed Martin Corp.
officials announced Tuesday.
Twenty wells owned by individuals and businesses within
one-quarter mile of the plume's known boundary will be sampled,
said Meredith Rouse Davis, a Lockheed spokeswoman.
The tests, Davis, said, are standard procedure once a toxic
plume has been defined.
The plume stems from the former Loral American Beryllium Co.
plant at 1600 Tallevast Road. Lockheed purchased the plant as a
part of corporate buyout in 1996 but never operated it.
When the defense giant sought to sell the property in 2000,
tests revealed an underground plume of contamination of
dangerous industrial solvents thought to have leaked from a
crack in an evaporation pool liner.
Tallevast residents were not informed of the poison in their
backyards until three years later, despite Lockheed's
notifications sent to county and state government officials.
The plant is now operated by WPI Inc., a cable manufacturer. But
because Lockheed owned the facility when the pollution was
found, the defense giant has assumed responsibility for
assessing the damage and cleanup costs.
Tests by Tetra Tech Inc., the scientific firm Lockheed hired to
measure the plume, has determined the dangerous industrial waste
now covers 131.3 acres.
Karen Collins Fleming, director of Manatee County Environmental
Management Department, said perimeter testing beginning today is
standard in remediation work.
"It's very difficult to get a grip on exactly where this thing
is," said Fleming. "To define it real closely, you have to do
incremental testing."
Davis said that Lockheed is confident that Tetra Tech has found
the outer edge of the plume and that the new well samplings are
being done to make sure those wells were not impacted.
"It's been our plan that once we had identified the boundaries,
we would test wells within a quarter of a mile of the plume,"
said Davis. "We are sampling the wells as a precautionary
measure."
The 20 wells identified include irrigation and observation
wells. Davis said none of the wells are known to be potable or
drinking water wells, although no data could be found on a few
that will be monitored.
The observation wells are located on commercial property and
were probably put there for monitoring purposes or past
remediation projects, Davis said.
None of them, she added, were drilled by Tetra Tech, nor had any
of them been sampled in previous tests to determine the extent
of the plume.
Ron Helgerson, Lockheed's point man in Tallevast, requested any
data the Manatee County Health Department might have on any
existing wells within and outside of the plume several weeks
ago, said Charles Henry, the health department's environmental
supervisor.
"I believe they were trying to make sure they had all of the
data they could find on wells," Henry said.
The health department's standard operation procedure in
contamination cases mirrors Lockheed's, Henry added.
When the county is investigating a contaminated drinking water
well, crews check other wells one quarter of a mile outside of
the known contamination zone, Henry said.
In the case of the public wells that supply water to a large
number of people, Henry said, crews check wells within half of a
mile of the contamination boundary.
"I believe they are doing this as a cautionary procedure," Henry
said. "I certainly don't think it is something they shouldn't
do."
Laura Ward and Wanda Washington, president and vice president of
the Tallevast advocacy group Family Oriented Community United
and Strong, could not be reached for comment.
Donna Wright, health and social services reporter, can be
reached at 745-7049 or at dwright@HeraldToday.com.
*****************************************************************
23 Times Argus: Radioactive waste a permanent issue
July 06, 2005
The big nuclear news of the Independence Day weekend this year
headlined with, "Entergy offers to increase safety margin at
Vermont Yankee."
This was inherently warped. During the sale and uprate cases
before the state's regulatory Public Service Board, and
occasionally before the Vermont State Nuclear Advisory Panel,
Entergy, the rent company of Vermont's sole nuclear reactor,
repeatedly stated that neither the uprate nor their
out-of-state, for-profit ownership of our nuclear reactor would
… "cut into safety margins."
Apparently now this is not the case.
It is time for Vermont to become independent of our apparent
need or self-proclaimed right to burden future generations of
Vermonters with disposing of our nuclear waste so we can have
"cheap" electricity. Surely when factoring in the cost of
protecting this toxic waste for thousands of years any illusion
of "cheap" or affordable disappears.
The time for independence from this toxic tea tax and undue
corporate burden is now. Our legislators proved themselves
servants of the corporate oligarchy.
The 600 jobs and baseload power source are temporary
shortsighted good fortune for Windham County and the state.
There is nothing temporary about radioactive waste.
Gary Sachs
Brattleboro
© 2005 Times Argus
*****************************************************************
24 AU ABC: Minister silent on scientific basis for uranium mining ban
06/07/2005. ABC News Online
The Northern Territory Minister for Mines, Kon Vatskalis, has
deflected questions during budget estimates hearings asking for
the scientific reasons behind Labor's policy ruling out any new
uranium mines.
Chief Minister Clare Martin promised in the lead-up to last
month's election that there would be no new uranium mines under
Labor.
The announcement was criticised by the mining industry while
the Federal Government estimated the NT was locking up about $12
billion in uranium resources.
Despite vigorous questioning from the Independent Member for
Nelson, Gerry Wood, Mr Vatskalis maintained it was simply the
Labor policy.
"This is the policy this Government has taken," he said.
*****************************************************************
25 Tri-City Herald: Fluor delays 500 layoffs
This story was published Wednesday, July 6th, 2005
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Fluor Hanford will delay laying off up to 500 employees until
March, but about that same number of jobs still will be
eliminated in September, employees were told Tuesday.
In May, Fluor had told employees that up to 1,000 positions
would be cut by the end of September from its Hanford work force
of 3,886.
"As we have collected and assessed input for our work force
restructuring effort, we have decided to conduct the reduction
of force in two separate actions," said Chief Executive Ron
Gallagher in a message sent to employees.
By rearranging work, cutting costs and limiting the replacement
of employees who have quit or retired, the company will be able
to keep some of its workers employed longer, said spokesman
Geoff Tyree.
Layoff notices for the first phase of cuts will be given out
Sept. 19, and Sept. 30 will be workers' last day on the payroll.
Under the earlier plan to do a single round of layoffs, Fluor
was required under the Work Adjustment and Retraining
Notification Act to notify employees who would lose jobs 60 days
in advance.
Because each phase now will lay off fewer than 500 workers, less
notice is required.
In May, Fluor had asked for volunteers for the layoffs, and had
expected to notify them in June if they had been selected. But
Fluor needed more time to review its options, Gallagher told
employees. Employees should hear Thursday if their application
was approved.
Those who are laid off, voluntarily or involuntarily, will
receive a week's severance pay for every year worked up to 20
years and continued payment of the company portion of monthly
medical insurance premiums for up to a year.
Fluor, a prime contractor for the Department of Energy at the
Hanford nuclear reservation, manages several major activities,
including dismantling former nuclear processing facilities,
cleaning up contaminated ground water, retrieving and processing
plutonium-contaminated waste for off-site shipment, maintaining
the site's infrastructure and operating the Volpentest HAMMER
training center.
Hanford is polluted with radioactive and chemical contaminants
from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear
weapons program.
In May, Fluor said the layoffs would be needed to reflect
changes in Fluor's remaining scope of work until its contract
expires in September 2006.
Fluor already has completed stabilizing 20 tons of plutonium
material at the Plutonium Finishing Plant and removed 2,300 tons
of spent fuel from Hanford's K Basins. In the coming months,
Fluor expects to complete more projects, including removing
plutonium residues from thousands of feet of process and drain
lines and equipment at the Plutonium Finishing Plant.
Although Fluor has not discussed budget cuts in connection with
the layoffs, the contractor likely will get less money for
cleanup in the Hanford budget for fiscal year 2006.
Other Hanford contractors also are considering layoffs. CH2M
Hill Hanford Group said that it might have to cut up to 350 jobs
if DOE's proposed budget cuts were passed by Congress. However,
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., succeeded in restoring $34
million of about $90 million cut for tank farm work managed by
CH2M Hill.
That budget figure will be reconciled with $67 million restored
in the U.S. House version for the tank farms thanks to U.S. Rep.
Doc Hastings, R-Wash. At the farms, fields of underground tanks
hold 53 million gallons of radioactive waste waiting to be
treated.
Bechtel National should finish laying off about 1,000 workers
this month. The layoffs began in April after concerns were
raised about whether parts of the vitrification plant under
construction could withstand a severe earthquake. The plant is
planned to turn some of the tank waste into a stable glass form
for permanent disposal.
© 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
26 Tri-City Herald: Vit plant price could near $10 billion
This story was published Wednesday, July 6th, 2005
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
New estimates indicate the cost to build and test Hanford's
vitrification plant could approach $10 billion, an increase of
more than $4 billion, according to a congressional letter asking
for a Government Accountability Office review of the project.
The Department of Energy's most recent official estimate for the
project was about $5.8 billion, and the plant was supposed to be
operating by a legal deadline of 2011.
But new estimates show completion may be delayed four years
until 2015, according to the letter sent by Rep. David Hobson,
chairman of the House appropriation subcommittee on energy and
water development, and the ranking minority member, Rep. Peter
Visclosky.
"If this information is correct, then the project is approaching
a cost that DOE concluded was not affordable in 2000 ...," the
letter said.
The congressmen attributed the cost increases to "technical
problems, poor design engineering, poor cost estimating and poor
contractor performance, among other problems."
Work has slowed on key portions of the vitrification plant since
a new seismic study showed the design standard might not be
adequate to withstand a worst-case earthquake.
In addition, solving technical challenges on the
first-of-its-kind project has depleted most of the six months of
contingency time that was built into the schedule.
The price of steel also has risen dramatically in the past two
years, more material is needed than estimated when construction
started, and Bechtel National has struggled to find
manufacturing facilities able to supply materials and equipment
to nuclear-quality standards.
The plant, which Hobson called DOE's largest and most complex
cleanup project, is intended to turn some of Hanford's worst
waste into a stable glass form for permanent disposal. Past
production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program
has left underground tanks at Hanford filled with 53 million
gallons of radioactive and chemical waste.
BNFL originally held the contract to build the vitrification
plant, but it was dismissed after its privatization plan and
accompanying finance charges would have increased costs for the
plant to $15.2 billion.
In 2000, DOE awarded an 11-year contract to Bechtel National to
design, build and certify the plant for operation. Two years
later, DOE decided to accelerate the construction project and
make other changes to more rapidly reduce environmental risks
and to achieve long-term cost reductions on the project,
according to Hobson's letter.
That increased the contract amount for construction by $1.4
billion to nearly $5.8 billion and increased the time needed to
design and build the plant by 16 months.
DOE has not released updated figures for the vitrification
plant, but has called for another Army Corps of Engineers review
of the cost and schedule.
This spring, DOE asked Bechtel National to prepare two cost
estimates for the plant. One was to look at how much work could
be done if the project continues to receive $690 million a year.
The second was to consider how soon the plant would be done if
more money is spent.
The Corps looked at Bechtel's projections, but could not
validate them with the information it had, according to DOE. The
Corps is just beginning its more in-depth validation of cost and
schedule.
"There have been various estimates as to what the cost may be,"
said DOE spokesman Mike Waldron in Washington, D.C. "However,
for the department to discuss a specific number without first
fully and accurately assessing the situation would be
premature."
DOE is hoping to receive the Corps report in a matter of months,
but is emphasizing the quality of the report over its rapid
completion, Waldron said.
"(Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman) shares the concerns expressed
by Chairman Hobson, and has laid out a very deliberate plan to
accurately assess both the cost and the timeline for the
completion of the vit plant," Waldron said.
The plan includes an internal look at how the cost and schedule
came to be underestimated and naming a six-person senior
management team to oversee the plant.
DOE last week announced plans to stop construction at plant
buildings affected by the new earthquake design standards until
the design is completed. Work at other buildings, including the
low-level waste facility and analytical laboratory, are not
affected.
Construction started on the plant before design was completed in
a plan to meet the 2011 deadline to begin operation.
Contractor Bechtel National began laying off workers in April as
construction slowed at the plant and should reach about 1,000
job cuts this month.
Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., has said he welcomes independent
reviews such as the one requested of GAO to ensure the plant's
completion and operation.
"At the end of the day, waste in the ground has to be treated"
and the plant has to be built to do that, said Sheryl Hutchison,
spokeswoman for the Washington State Department of Ecology. Work
needs to continue to prevent inflation from gobbling up the
budget for the project, she said.
"The secretary believes the completion of the vit plant is
central to the cleanup of Hanford and to fulfilling our
obligations" under the Tri-Party Agreement, a legally binding
cleanup schedule, Waldron said.
How cost and schedule changes could affect deadlines in the
Tri-Party Agreement is among the questions Hobson is asking the
GAO to consider.
"Does DOE believe that the project continues to be affordable?"
he asked in the letter.
He wants to know the main causes of the cost increases and
schedule delays and whether DOE's decision to accelerate the
construction project contributed to those.
He also requested that GAO look at whether the steps DOE is
taking to address the main problems on the project are adequate
to prevent a recurrence of similar projects.
* Reporter Annette Cary can be reached at 582-1533 or via e-mail
at acary@tri-cityherald.com.
© 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
27 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah
FR Doc 05-13227
[Federal Register: July 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 128)]
[Notices] [Page 38898-38899] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06jy05-71]
River AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Savannah River.
The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770)
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the
Federal Register.
DATES: Monday, July 25, 2005, 1 p.m.-6 p.m.; Tuesday, July 26,
2005, 8:30 a.m.-4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Newberry Hall, 151 Bee Lane, Aiken, SC 29803.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerri Flemming, Closure Project
Office,
[[Page 38899]] Department of Energy Savannah River Operations
Office, P.O. Box A, Aiken, SC, 29802; phone: (803) 952-7886.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of
environmental restoration, waste management, and related
activities.
Tentative Agenda Monday, July 25, 2005 1 p.m.--Combined Committee
Session. 5:15 p.m.--Adjourn. 5:15 p.m.--Executive Committee
Meeting. 6 p.m.--Adjourn. Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:30
a.m.--Approval of Minutes, Agency Updates. 9:15 a.m.--Public
Comment Session. 9:30 a.m.--Chair and Facilitator Update. 10
a.m.--Waste Management Committee Report. 11:30
a.m.--Administrative Committee Report. 11:50 a.m.--Public
Comments. 12 p.m.--Lunch Break. 1 p.m.--Nuclear Materials
Committee Report. 2 p.m.--Facilities Disposition & Site
Remediation Committee Report.
3 p.m.--Strategic and Legacy Management Committee Report. 3:50
p.m.--Public Comments. 4 p.m.--Adjourn. If needed, time will be
allotted after public comments for items added to the agenda, and
administrative details. A final agenda will be available at the
meeting Monday, July 25, 2005.
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements
pertaining to agenda items should contact Gerri Flemming's office
at the address or telephone listed above. Requests must be
received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision
will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct
business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the Department of Energy's Freedom of
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes
will also be available by writing to Gerri Flemming, Department
of Energy Savannah River Operations Office, P.O. Box A, Aiken, SC
29802, or by calling her at (803) 952-7886.
Issued in Washington, DC on June 29, 2005.
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-13227 Filed 7-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
28 Casper Star Tribune: Idaho mulls plutonium project plans
Casper, Wyoming - Wednesday, July 06, 2005
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (AP) -- The Department of Energy holds
hearings this month to lay out plans to produce plutonium at the
Idaho National Laboratory, but officials acknowledge they still
can't answer a key question: What to do with the radioactive
waste created by the new plant.
The federal government has proposed building a $300 million
complex at the eastern Idaho nuclear research site to
consolidate production of plutonium-238 and the assembly of the
long-lasting batteries that run off heat generated by the
decaying radioactive fuel. Currently, production is done at
three separate sites: Oak Ridge National Laboratory in
Tennessee, Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, and the
Idaho complex west of Idaho Falls.
Because the existing inventory of plutonium-238 will be gone in
five years, the agency says it needs to produce new supplies for
the batteries, which are needed for unspecified national
security missions and NASA's deep space exploration vehicles.
The Energy Department says the batteries will not be used in
military applications.
The agency wants to make 11 pounds of plutonium-238 annually for
35 years beginning in 2011, and estimates the program will
create 20 cubic meters a year of radioactive "transuranic" waste
-- such as gloves, rags, tools and other debris contaminated
during plutonium production and battery assembly.
The Energy Department wants to encase that radioactive debris in
melted glass and store it at the Idaho lab until it can be
shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M.,
where waste from nuclear weapons production is stored in ancient
salt beds, 2,150 feet underground.
But there are still unresolved questions as to whether the New
Mexico waste site can accept radioactive waste that does not
come from defense-related programs.
"The only piece that's missing is whether the waste can be
confirmed to go to (the New Mexico site)," said Tim Frazier,
head of radioisotope power systems for the Energy Department.
"We certainly wouldn't start operations without a disposal path
for the transuranics, but that's not until 2012."
Frazier said he is confident waste generated at the Idaho site
from the battery program will go to the New Mexico salt beds
because the facility already accepts similar waste from the
Idaho lab and from Los Alamos, where some of the plutonium
battery work is now done.
But opponents of the government's plan to begin producing the
highly toxic material at the Idaho site say they don't want the
Energy Department guessing on such a critical issue as
out-of-state waste disposal.
"They are sliding this thing under the door," said Jeremy
Maxand, director of the Boise-based watchdog group Snake River
Alliance.
The public has until Aug. 29 to comment on the Energy
Department's plutonium production plan. The agency will hold
public meetings to discuss the project July 18 at the Double
Tree Hotel in Oak Ridge, Tenn.; July 19 at the University of New
Mexico-Los Alamos in Los Alamos, N.M.; July 20 at the Sun Valley
Inn in Sun Valley, Idaho; July 21 at the Snow King Convention
Center in Jackson Hole, Wyo.; July 25 at the Shiloh Inn in Idaho
Falls, Idaho; July 26 at the Fort Hall Tribal Business Center in
Fort Hall, Idaho; July 27 at the College of Southern Idaho in
Twin Falls, Idaho; and July 28 at the Red Lion Hotel Downtowners
in Boise, Idaho. All meetings begin at 7 p.m.
Copyright © 2005 by the Casper Star-Tribune published by Lee
Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises,
*****************************************************************
29 Tri-Valley Herald: Lab waves security flag for mighty laser
Last Updated: 07/06/2005 09:45:13 AM
By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER
With the world's largest laser in the political crosshairs,
federal weapons officials and executives at Lawrence Livermore
nuclear weapons lab are playing their most powerful card:
suggesting that without all 192 beams of the National Ignition
Facility, U.S. nuclear bombs and warheads might well stop
working.
Faith in U.S. weapons would decline, former weapons designer
George Miller, associate director at large for Livermore Lab,
told the Los Angeles Times. Without the laser, the United States
may have to return to explosive nuclear testing, freeing the
rest of the world to advance the state of weapons know-how.
"There are very serious implications to canceling this project,"
said Miller.
But bomb designers disagree strongly on what relationship, if
any, the National Ignition Facility has to keeping the U.S.
nuclear arsenal in working order.
Livermore's most prolific weapons designer, retired physicist
Seymour Sack calls NIF "worse than useless" because it draws
money and attention from the less glamorous examination of
weapons for signs of degradation and replacement of the parts
that break down.
"There's a lot of nonsense" in claims that without NIF, the
nation won't have confidence in its weapons, Sack said. "It's
not a purely useless boondoggle but in terms of any critical
element of understanding of the stockpile, my answer is no."
Retired Sandia weapons manager Bob Peurifoy
said the big laser
makes "an interesting scientific playpen." Its beams will create
100 million-degree temperatures, crushing pressures and an
incredible density of energy, taking scientists on a tour inside
a miniature sun. "I understand that some scientists just wet
their pants to use this thing. NIF is fun science," Peurifoy
said. But "NIF has little if anything to do with the present and
future health of the enduring stockpile."
So far the nation has kept a stockpile of nuclear bombs and
warheads without having a $4 billion laser. In addition to
inventing new ones, scientists cut open weapons every year,
watching for problems and replacing bad parts. "We did it for 40
years," Peurifoy said.
Sen. Pete V. Domenici, chairman of the Senate Energy and Water
Appropriations subcommittee, killed construction funds for the
big laser for 2006, saying the "single-minded" pursuit of NIF
was choking off other valuable research programs, not least in
his home state of New Mexico. The Senate passed a bill Friday
with no construction money for the laser.
Weaponeers broke into pro- and anti-NIF camps in the mid-1990s,
when Congress approved building the laser for $1.2 billion. The
divide deepened as the price tag soared to more than $4 billion,
and the government cut other projects to keep NIF alive.
For years, Livermore executives barely could get more than a
tepid endorsement two weapons labs.
To an extent, the debate turns on different philosophies about
maintaining 20- to 40-year-old bombs and warheads.
Some scientists favor careful watching over the weapons as they
age and remanufacturing the parts that degrade. But since the
mid-1990s, two presidents have opted instead for a more
expansive and costly program called "stockpile stewardship."
Scientists are rebuilding the weapons with new parts, and they
are relying on supercomputers and giant experimental machines
such as NIF to verify those changes.
Do the changes affect the detonation? Do they impair energy flow
from one part of the bomb to another?
So far, scientists say stockpile stewardship answers those
questions reasonably well. But officials of the weapons labs
recently warned that the weapons are changing enough away from
the original, proven designs to lessen confidence in their
reliability.
As these warheads continue to age and are refurbished, an
accumulation of small changes could lead to increased risk or
increased uncertainty in warhead certification, four weaponeers
wrote in a paper endorsed by the labs' weapons chiefs.
They argued for designing new bombs and warheads, replacing
everything in the arsenal with simpler weapons that would be
easier to make. With a moratorium on nuclear testing in place
since 1992, weapons scientists would verify the new designs work
with software that simulates a nuclear weapon in detonation.
The software is full of physicists' best estimates and formulas
for things that are difficult to measure, such as the roiling
hot gases and radiation inside a star or a detonating nuclear
weapon. Fusion shots on NIF would explore those processes in
greater detail than possible before, albeit at very small scale.
Physicists would try to translate these small fusion
observations into more accurate physics for the computer
simulations.
Livermore weapons chief Bruce Goodwin argues that scientists
have to understand precisely what happens in the several
millionths of a second when the primary and the secondary are
subject to millions of pounds of pressure, unimaginable amounts
of energy and millions of degrees of temperature.
Once all 192 beams start firing in 2010, the National Ignition
Facility is expected to be the only way of creating those
conditions, short of an underground nuclear test, for a decade
or more.
"There ain't no place else we're going to do fusion burn on the
Earth in my lifetime," Goodwin said.
But many weaponeers see NIF as adding little to weapons
questions already answered by nuclear testing and concerning
bomb components no more delicate than a bowling ball.
U.S. thermonuclear weapons are like two eggs nestled in foam
inside a can. One egg supplies most of the fusion energy and is a
heavy, layered sphere usually of uranium and lithium salts. It is
called a secondary, and it is more or less a fuel tank.
There's more action in the other egg, called a primary — a
softball-size hollow shell of plutonium, wrapped in high
explosives and detonators. A pressurized gas canister with
explosive valves is poised to inject hydrogen into the egg's
hollow core at the right moment to deliver a small boost of
fusion but a big boost in explosive energy.
Physicists who design primaries tend to think not much else
matters.
"When you're all through, damned secondaries seem to work. They
have worked repeatedly, and that's thanks to a lot of really
smart physicists, chemists and materials scientists," Peurifoy
said.
The A-bomb creates such a torrent of energy that igniting fusion
in the spherical secondary is pretty much a given, they say,
like unleashing a flame thrower on a gas tank.
"I used to think like that," said Livermore's Goodwin, himself a
primary designer. "The issue isn't quite so simple."
Scientists need to understand fusion burn in both the primary
and secondary, as well as the energy flow between them, he said.
"Then you can say why this weapon that's 35 years old and has
had 52 significant findings (of possible problems) and has had
many parts replaced, still is worthy of confidence,"
Goodwin said.
Where scientists across the debate agree is that National
Ignition Facility will be a training ground for bomb design. The
laser's targets closely mimic H-bombs, with a sphere of fuel
inside a can full of radiation. The physics of implosion, hot
and turbulent radiation and thermonuclear burn are roughly the
same.
"At some point, say in eight or 10 years, there could be an
erosion of confidence, not in the (weapons) stockpile, but in
the intellectual understanding of what's going on. It's exactly
that area that NIF is supposed to address," said Berkeley
planetary scientist Raymond Jeanloz, who advises the University
of California on research at two weapons labs.
The question for NIF's critics is whether at $4 billion and
counting, the big laser offers better bomb tutelage than
anything else.
Tri-Valley Herald All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
30 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho
FR Doc 05-13228
[Federal Register: July 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 128)]
[Notices] [Page 38899] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06jy05-72]
National Engineering Laboratory AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
L. 92- 463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this
meeting be announced in the Federal Register.
DATES: Tuesday, July 19, 2005, 8 a.m.-6 p.m.; Wednesday, July 20,
2005, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Opportunities for public participation will
be held Tuesday, July 19, from 12:15 to 12:30 p.m. and 5:45 to 6
p.m.; and on Wednesday, July 20, from 11:45 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 4
to 4:15 p.m. Additional time may be made available for public
comment during the presentations.
These times are subject to change as the meeting progresses,
depending on the extent of comment offered. Please check with the
meeting facilitator to confirm these times.
ADDRESSES: Ameritel Inn, 645 Lindsay Boulevard, Idaho Falls, ID
83402.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon A. Brennan, Federal
Coordinator, Department of Energy, NE-ID Idaho Operations Office,
1955 Fremont Avenue, MS-1216, Idaho Falls, ID 83401. Phone (208)
526-3993; Fax (208) 526-1926 or e-mail:
Shannon.Brennan@nuclear.energy.gov or visit the Board's Internet
home page at: http://www.ida.net/users/cab.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of
environmental restoration, waste management, and related
activities.
Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the
meeting; please contact Shannon A. Brennan for the most current
agenda): Decontamination and decommissioning of nuclear reactors
and other complex facilities.
Review of the independent risk assessments developed by the
Consortium for Risk.
Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation.
Long-term stewardship at the Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory.
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral
presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Shannon
A. Brennan at the address or telephone number listed above. The
request must be received five days prior to the meeting and
reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in
the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to
conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly
conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their
comments.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the Department of Energy's Freedom of
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes
will also be available by writing to Shannon A. Brennan, Federal
Coordinator, at the address and phone number listed above.
Issued in Washington, DC on June 29, 2005.
Rachel Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-13228 Filed 7-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
31 lamonitor.com: Reports: Lower doses, but no floor for radiation risks
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor
Low-level doses of radiation took on opposite meanings in two
separate reports released last week, one by U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and the other by the National Academies of
Science.
The NRC proudly reported the lowest ever radiation exposure for
nuclear power plant workers, half the average of 10 years ago.
At the same time, the NAS concluded that there is no level of
exposure to ionizing radiation that may be considered harmless.
The average American receives a dose of about 360 millirem each
year from a variety of sources, the NRC reported.
In recent years, the average nuclear plant worker received
another 160 millirem from exposure on the job. NRC safety
regulations consider up to 5,000 millirem to be within
established safe standards.
"This report shows nuclear power plant operators have very
effective plans and procedures in place to reduce workers'
exposure while ensuring the necessary work is done to NRC
requirements," said Bruce Boger, director of the Division of
Inspection Program Management in the commission's Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation. His remarks were included in a press
release about the report.
Meanwhile, a committee of the National Academies National
Research Council issued an extensive long-term report raising
concerns about even low doses of ionizing radiation, like X-rays
and gamma rays.
"The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold
of exposure below which low levels of ionizing radiation can be
demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial," said the committee
chair, Richard R. Monson in an accompanying statement.
Monson is associate dean for professional education and a
professor of epidemiology at Harvard University.
He said health risks rise proportionally with exposure and that
the risk of inducing cancer is relatively small at low doses,
but increases with lifetime exposure.
Included in the study is an update on radiation-induced cancer
incidence from atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
about half of whom were still alive in 2000.
William Roentgen, a German scientist who discovered X-rays in
1895. They were first called cathode rays, after he noticed
invisible emissions from a vacuum tube lit up a nearby
fluorescent screen.
While Thomas Edison was experimenting with X-rays, one of his
assistants developed a degenerative skin disease and eventually
died of a related cancer in what the report said, "may have been
the first death associated with man-made ionizing rays in the
United States."
The U.S. departments of Defense, Energy and Homeland Security,
as well as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the
Environmental Protection Agency commissioned the report, the
seventh in a series.
According to the National Academies, 18 percent of human
exposure comes from man-made sources.
Medical X-rays (58 percent), nuclear medicine (21 percent) and
consumer products (16 percent) are the main sources of man-made
radiation. Occupational exposures and fall-out from atmospheric
testing account for two percent each.
Natural background radiation is responsible for 82 percent of
exposure to humans, primarily from the decay of radon, a
colorless, odorless gas, but also cosmic rays from the sun and
distant supernova explosions in space.
On the Net:
NAS, Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII,
http://www.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html
NRC, LWR Occupational Dose Data for 2004. Enter ML051530296 in
the search function of the NRC's ADAMS database, at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
32 Times-News: Waste disposal still a question in DOE's plans for Idaho
plutonium project
July 6, 2005 • Twin Falls, Idaho
IDAHO FALLS (AP) -- The Department of Energy holds hearings this
month to lay out plans to produce plutonium at the Idaho
National Laboratory, but officials acknowledge they still can't
answer a key question: What to do with the radioactive waste
created by the new plant.
The federal government has proposed building a $300 million
complex at the eastern Idaho nuclear research site to
consolidate production of plutonium-238 and the assembly of the
long-lasting batteries that run off heat generated by the
decaying radioactive fuel. Currently, production is done at
three separate sites: Oak Ridge National Laboratory in
Tennessee, Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, and the
Idaho complex west of Idaho Falls.
Because the existing inventory of plutonium-238 will be gone in
five years, the agency says it needs to produce new supplies for
the batteries, which are needed for unspecified national
security missions and NASA's deep space exploration vehicles.
The Energy Department says the batteries will not be used in
military applications.
The agency wants to make 11 pounds of plutonium-238 annually for
35 years beginning in 2011, and estimates the program will
create 20 cubic meters a year of radioactive "transuranic" waste
-- such as gloves, rags, tools and other debris contaminated
during plutonium production and battery assembly.
The Energy Department wants to encase that radioactive debris in
melted glass and store it at the Idaho lab until it can be
shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M.,
where waste from nuclear weapons production is stored in ancient
salt beds, 2,150 feet underground.
But there are still unresolved questions as to whether the New
Mexico waste site can accept radioactive waste that does not
come from defense-related programs.
"The only piece that's missing is whether the waste can be
confirmed to go to (the New Mexico site)," said Tim Frazier,
head of radioisotope power systems for the Energy Department.
"We certainly wouldn't start operations without a disposal path
for the transuranics, but that's not until 2012."
Frazier said he is confident waste generated at the Idaho site
from the battery program will go to the New Mexico salt beds
because the facility already accepts similar waste from the
Idaho lab and from Los Alamos, where some of the plutonium
battery work is now done.
But opponents of the government's plan to begin producing the
highly toxic material at the Idaho site say they don't want the
Energy Department guessing on such a critical issue as
out-of-state waste disposal.
"They are sliding this thing under the door," said Jeremy
Maxand, director of the Boise-based watchdog group Snake River
Alliance.
The public has until Aug. 29 to comment on the Energy
Department's plutonium production plan. The agency will hold
public meetings to discuss the project July 18 at the Double
Tree Hotel in Oak Ridge, Tenn.; July 19 at the University of New
Mexico-Los Alamos in Los Alamos, N.M.; July 20 at the Sun Valley
Inn in Sun Valley, Idaho; July 21 at the Snow King Convention
Center in Jackson Hole, Wyo.; July 25 at the Shiloh Inn in Idaho
Falls, Idaho; July 26 at the Fort Hall Tribal Business Center in
Fort Hall, Idaho; July 27 at the College of Southern Idaho in
Twin Falls, Idaho; and July 28 at the Red Lion Hotel Downtowners
in Boise, Idaho. All meetings begin at 7 p.m.
Story published at magicvalley.com on Wednesday, July 06, 2005
Copyright © 2005, Lee Publications Inc. Magicvalley.com is an
on-line division of The Times-News, published daily at 132 W.
Fairfield St., Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 by Lee Publications, Inc.,
a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises.
*****************************************************************
33 Corvallis Gazette-Times: DOE plans hearings on plans for Idaho plutonium project
[gazettetimes.com]
Last modified Tuesday, July 5, 2005 11:02 PM PDT
By The Associated Press
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho — The Department of Energy holds hearings
this month to lay out plans to produce plutonium at the Idaho
National Laboratory, but officials acknowledge they still can't
answer a key question: What to do with the radioactive waste
created by the new plant.
The federal government has proposed building a $300 million
complex at the eastern Idaho nuclear research site to
consolidate production of plutonium-238 and the assembly of the
long-lasting batteries that run off heat generated by the
decaying radioactive fuel.
Currently, production is done at three separate sites: Oak Ridge
National Laboratory in Tennessee, Los Alamos National Laboratory
in New Mexico, and the Idaho complex west of Idaho Falls.
Because the existing inventory of plutonium-238 will be gone in
five years, the agency says it needs to produce new supplies for
the batteries, which are needed for unspecified national
security missions and NASA's deep space exploration vehicles.
The Energy Department says the batteries will not be used in
military applications.
The agency wants to make 11 pounds of plutonium-238 annually for
35 years beginning in 2011, and estimates the program will
create 20 cubic meters a year of radioactive ``transuranic''
waste — such as gloves, rags, tools and other debris
contaminated during plutonium production and battery assembly.
The Energy Department wants to encase that radioactive debris in
melted glass and store it at the Idaho lab until it can be
shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M.,
where waste from nuclear weapons production is stored in ancient
salt beds, 2,150 feet underground.
But there are still unresolved questions as to whether the New
Mexico waste site can accept radioactive waste that does not
come from defense-related programs.
``The only piece that's missing is whether the waste can be
confirmed to go to (the New Mexico site),'' said Tim Frazier,
head of radioisotope power systems for the Energy Department.
``We certainly wouldn't start operations without a disposal path
for the transuranics, but that's not until 2012.''
Frazier said he is confident waste generated at the Idaho site
from the battery program will go to the New Mexico salt beds
because the facility already accepts similar waste from the
Idaho lab and from Los Alamos, where some of the plutonium
battery work is now done.
But opponents of the government's plan to begin producing the
highly toxic material at the Idaho site say they don't want the
Energy Department guessing on such a critical issue as
out-of-state waste disposal.
``They are sliding this thing under the door,'' said Jeremy
Maxand, director of the Boise-based watchdog group Snake River
Alliance.
The public has until Aug. 29 to comment on the Energy
Department's plutonium production plan. Public meetings to
discuss the project are scheduled this month in Idaho, Tennessee
and New Mexico communities.
Copyright © 2005 • Lee Enterprises
*****************************************************************
34 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Fernald
FR Doc 05-13229
[Federal Register: July 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 128)]
[Notices] [Page 38899-38900] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06jy05-73]
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Fernald. The
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770)
requires that public
[[Page 38900]] notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal
Register.
DATES: Thursday, July 14, 2005, 6:30 p.m.-9 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Ross Township Firehouse, 2565 Cincinnati-Brookville
Road, Ross Township, Ohio 45061.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Sarno, The Perspectives
Group, Inc., 1055 North Fairfax Street, Suite 204, Alexandria, VA
22314, at (703) 837-1197, or e-mail; .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of
environmental restoration, waste management, and related
activities.
Tentative Agenda: Goals: --Determine next steps on Fernald
Citizens' Advisory Board History Project.
--Discuss Impressions of the Fernald History Roundtable.
--Discuss Plans for Fernald Citizens' Advisory Board Retreat in
September.
6:30 p.m.--Call to Order. 6:35 p.m.--Updates and Announcements.
--Projects Updates.
--Ex-Officio Updates.
--Silos Projects Status.
--Site Transition Update.
7:30 p.m.--Fernald Citizens' Advisory Board Retreat and Upcoming
Meetings Schedule.
7:50 p.m.--Break. 8 p.m.--History Project Next Steps. 8:20
p.m.--Impressions of History Roundtable. 8:50 p.m.--Public
Comment. 9 p.m.--Adjourn. Public Participation: The meeting is
open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board chair either
before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral
statements pertaining to agenda items should contact the Board
chair at the address or telephone number listed below. Requests
must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable
provisions will be made to include the presentation in the
agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to
conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly
conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their
comments. This notice is being published less than 15 days before
the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues that had to be
resolved.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the Department of Energy's Freedom of
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday- Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will
also be available by writing to the Fernald Citizens' Advisory
Board, Phoenix Environmental Corporation, MS-76, Post Office Box
538704, Cincinnati, OH 43253-8704, or by calling the Advisory
Board at (513) 648-6478.
Issued in Washington, DC on June 29, 2005.
Rachel Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-13229 Filed 7-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
35 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah
FR Doc 05-13230
[Federal Register: July 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 128)]
[Notices] [Page 38900-38901] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06jy05-74]
AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Paducah. The
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770)
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the
Federal Register.
DATES: Thursday, July 21, 2005, 5:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m.
ADDRESSES: 111 Memorial Drive, Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky
42001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William E. Murphie, Deputy
Designated Federal Officer, Department of Energy
Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, 1017 Majestic Drive, Suite
200, Lexington, Kentucky 40513, (859) 219-4001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of
environmental restoration, waste management and related
activities.
Tentative Agenda: 5:30 p.m.--Informal Discussion. 6 p.m.--Call to
Order. Introductions.
Review of Agenda.
Approval of May Minutes.
Approval of June Minutes.
6:05 p.m.--Deputy Designated Federal Officer's Comments. 6:25
p.m.--Federal Coordinator's Comments. 6:30 p.m.--Ex-officios'
Comments. 6:40 p.m.--Public Comments and Questions. 6:50
p.m.--Task Forces/Presentations. Waste Disposition Task Force.
--3 D Model Presentation.
--Burial Grounds Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
Review.
Water Quality Task Force.
Long Range Strategy/Stewardship Task Force.
--Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF6) Project Overview.
Community Outreach Task Force.
7:50 p.m.--Public Comments and Questions. 8 p.m.--Break. 8:10
p.m.--Administrative Issues. Review of Workplan.
Review of Next Agenda.
8:20 p.m.--Review of Action Items. 8:25 p.m.--Subcommittee
Reports. Executive Committee.
--Chairs Meeting Recap.
8:40 p.m.--Final Comments. 9:30 p.m.--Adjourn. Public
Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements
pertaining to agenda items should contact David Dollins at the
address listed below or by telephone at (270) 441-6819. Requests
must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable
provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda.
The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of
business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the Department of Energy's Freedom of
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday- Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will
also be available at the Department of Energy's Environmental
Information Center and Reading Room at 115 Memorial Drive,
Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., on
Monday thru Friday or by writing to David Dollins, Department of
Energy, Paducah Site Office, Post Office Box 1410, MS- 103,
Paducah, Kentucky 42001 or by calling him at (270) 441-6819.
[[Page 38901]] Issued in Washington, DC on June 29, 2005.
R. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-13230 Filed 7-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more
information go to:
*****************************************************************