***************************************************************** 08/11/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.185 ***************************************************************** 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] IAEA Resolution Urges Iran to Stop Nuclear Work 2 UN Nuclear Watchdog Urges Iran To Reverse Decision Resuming Uranium 3 [NYTr] Iran 'risks relationship' w/West by breaking nuclear 4 [NYTr] S.Africa Offers Solution to Nuke Retart by Iran 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Resumes Full Conversion Operations 6 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Agency Debates Iran Nuclear Issue 7 Reuters: ANALYSIS-Iran nuclear restart reflects deep confidence 8 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Agency Concerned Over Iran Nukes 9 Reuters: IAEA board urges Iran to resume nuclear freeze 10 Reuters: EU, allies demand Iran resume nuclear freeze 11 Reuters: Bush calls IAEA Iran demand 'positive first step" 12 Reuters: IAEA draft demands Iran resume nuclear freeze 13 Reuters: S.Africa proposal on Iran nuclear exports unlikely - offici 14 Reuters: Export of Iran's nuclear plant output unlikely- official 15 Guardian Unlimited S. Korea: Peaceful Nukes in North Are OK 16 Reuters: U.S. says no need for N.Korea civil nuclear program 17 US: An Ominous Report: High Treason 18 US: Bellona: Climate blind squandering of energy continues in US 19 US: Deseret News: New era of uncertainty in N-age dawns 20 RIA Novosti: Russia to supply 15 million tons of oil to China 21 BBC: Bid to speed up nuclear run-down 22 Pakistan News: Britain to ease nuclear sanctions against Pak, India NUCLEAR REACTORS 23 [du-list] Dr Frank Barnaby on nuclear electricity and nuclear 24 US: [epa-impact] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Joseph M. Farle 25 US: [epa-impact] Southern California Edison; Notice of Availability 26 US: NRC: Energy Bill Provides for Enhanced Security at Commercial Nu 27 Guardian Unlimited: Ł8bn added to nuclear shutdown bill 28 US: Detroit News: Groups fight new license for Palisades nuclear sit 29 Bizchina: Promotion of clean energy stressed 30 Ireland Examiner: Letter: We have already said no to nuclear power - 31 US: NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Joseph M. Farley Nuclea 32 Japan Times: More nuclear plant mishaps spur Tokai reactor shutdown 33 US: The Advocate: Haddam seeks federal funds to for nuclear plant se 34 RedNova News: Ukraine Reconnects Two Reactors to Power Grid 35 Reuters: China may delay nuclear contract decision- sources 36 US: Reuters: Dominion Va. North Anna 2 nuke back at full power 37 US: TomPaine.com: Nukes Aren't Green 38 US: Newsday: Haddam seeks federal funds to for nuclear plant securit 39 CBC Toronto: NDP leader slams nuclear deal NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 40 US: Santa Fe New Mexican: LANL workers urged to report injuries 41 Bellona: Loose strontium discovered in Murmansk Region village 42 RIA Novosti: No radiation threat from Russian sub being towed 43 US: South Florida Sun-Sentinel: Suit blames illnesses on utility NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 44 RGJ: New standards don’t solve dump woes 45 US: RGJ: Mine clean up moving along 46 US: Bradenton Herald: Lawsuit: Nuclear waste hurt kids 47 US: AU ABC: NT may walk away from uranium framework 48 US: Deseret News: Keep fighting nuclear waste dump 49 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: EPA logic on radiation questioned 50 Interfax: Large beryllium consignment flown from Lithuania to Russia 51 BBC: Nuclear clean-up cost up to Ł56bn 52 BBC NEWS: Faster nuclear clean-up urged 53 BBC: Hard decisions of nuclear clean-up 54 BBC: Cumbria left with 'lethal 55 Las Vegas SUN: Nevada officials, scientists continue to spar over Yu 56 FT.com: UK - Nuclear clean-up cost may top ÂŁ60bn 57 Congressman Jon Porter: PORTER RESPONDS TO PROPOSED EPA RADIATION ST 58 Independent Online: Taxpayers face Ł56bn bill for clean-up of nuclea 59 The Telegraph Online: EPA goes real l-o-n-g on Yucca 60 US: Gainesville Sun: Decades-old nuclear sludge said to pose S. Flor 61 US: Herald Sun: All power to uranium 62 Ensign: ENSIGN: NEW EPA STANDARD APPALLING 63 Reid: Reid statement on EPA's proposed standards 64 Public Citizen: Lax Radiation Standards for Yucca Mountain 65 US: ABC News Online: Higher uranium prices lift Honeymoon mine hopes 66 US: ABC News Online: Uranium group to chart industry progress. 67 US: ABC News Online: Canadian uranium giant backs federal regulation 68 London Times: Cost of nuclear clean-up soars to Ł66bn - 69 RGJ: EPA releases Yucca radiation standards PEACE 70 US: Star-Gazette.COM: Don't expand nuclear weapons capability 71 Japan Times: 60 YEARS ON A-bomb gene 'shadow' may be fading 72 Japan Times: No rationalization for Nagasaki attack US DEPT. OF ENERGY 73 Las Vegas SUN: DOE reviewing Test Site contract bids 74 Daily Californian: Radioactive Blunder Fuels Criticism of Los Alamos 75 SF Chronicle: Los Alamos lab incident sends worker to hospital / ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [NYTr] IAEA Resolution Urges Iran to Stop Nuclear Work Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:58:43 -0500 (CDT) WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Reuters - Aug 11, 2005 http://olympics.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-08-11T222548Z_01_KWA814198_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-NUCLEAR-IRAN-DC.XML IAEA board urges Iran to resume nuclear freeze By Louis Charbonneau and Francois Murphy VIENNA (Reuters) - The governing board of the U.N. nuclear watchdog unanimously called on Iran on Thursday to halt sensitive atomic work it resumed this week in defiance of the West, a demand Tehran rejected as unacceptable and illegal. The resolution adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) board of governors said Iran must resume full suspension of all nuclear fuel related activities and asked the agency to verify Tehran's compliance. Iran, which has denied Western accusations that its atomic program is a front for covert bomb-making, resumed work at its uranium conversion plant in Isfahan on Monday. "The resolution on Iran was just adopted without a vote by consensus, full consensus. All 35 members of the board agreed the language of the resolution text," IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told reporters. President George W. Bush said the decision of the U.N. nuclear watchdog was "a positive first step." "The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) today issued a report that expressed serious concerns about Iranian decisions and that's a positive first step," Bush told reporters at his Texas ranch. He said the U.S. strategy was to work with the EU3, "so that the Iranians hear a common voice speaking to them about their nuclear weapons ambitions, and I appreciate the IAEA's positive first step." The IAEA board began meeting on Tuesday but adjourned to allow the EU time to negotiate the resolution with board members. It reconvened on Thursday to approve the draft after days of backroom haggling over the text. The resolution, drafted by Britain, Germany and France -- dubbed the EU3 for their long-standing negotiations with Tehran -- requests IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei "to provide a comprehensive report on the implementation of Iran's NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement and this resolution by 3 September 2005." SECURITY COUNCIL The text did not say Iran should be referred to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he would use September's U.N. General Assembly to bring Iran's new leader face-to-face with his Western critics if no deal on Tehran's nuclear program is reached by then. Top officials of Britain, France and Germany are supposed to next meet Iranian officials at the end of August. But if there is no session, "We will use the General Assembly to bring them together. It will be a way for all of us collectively to talk to them," Annan told Reuters in a brief interview. The United Nations intends to hold a summit, which Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is expected to attend, in mid-September followed by a foreign ministers' session. In spite of calls from the EU and the United States not to resume work at the Isfahan plant, Tehran on Wednesday broke U.N. seals there and made the facility fully operational. Iran says it needs to develop nuclear power as an alternative energy source to meet booming electricity demand and keep its oil and gas reserves for export. The resolution "urges Iran to re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related activities ... and to permit the Director General to reinstate the seals that have been removed at (Isfahan)." EU diplomats said if Iran did not comply they would ask the board to refer the matter to the Security Council in September. Iran rejected the resolution as unacceptable. "We do not accept this resolution and will not execute it. There are serious legal problems with this resolution and ... we are not obligated to implement it," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, told state television. "There is no doubt that the uranium conversion facility in Isfahan will continue operating, and we will continue relations with the agency and we will welcome inspections." The text of the resolution said there was still a "possibility of further discussions" between Iran and the EU trio aimed at resolving the nuclear impasse between Islamic Republic and the West. ELBARADEI OPTIMISTIC ElBaradei came away from the meeting optimistic the EU and Iran would continue negotiating. "I was very encouraged in fact by the statements both by Iran and by the three Europeans that they are ready to continue negotiations," ElBaradei told reporters. "I come from this board optimistic that we will continue on the path of dialogue." Iran voluntarily suspended all sensitive atomic work in November 2004 after reaching a deal with the EU trio called the Paris Agreement, under which Tehran froze work related to atomic fuel production while negotiating a permanent deal with the EU. Earlier this week, Iran rejected the EU's offer of political and economic incentives if it permanently abandoned enriched uranium fuel production, calling it "an insult to the Iranian nation for which the EU3 must apologize." Under the NPT, which Iran has signed, Tehran may process and enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. However, the EU trio says the only way to prove peaceful intentions is to renounce all technology that could be used to make atom bombs. Uranium conversion is the first step in process of creating enriched uranium, which can fuel nuclear power plants or, when very highly enriched, nuclear weapons. ) Reuters 2005. All rights reserved. * ================================================================ .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 UN Nuclear Watchdog Urges Iran To Reverse Decision Resuming Uranium Conversion Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:05:49 -0400 UN NUCLEAR WATCHDOG URGES IRAN TO REVERSE DECISION RESUMING URANIUM CONVERSION New York, Aug 11 2005 2:00PM The United Nations agency entrusted with curbing the spread of nuclear weapons today called on Iran to reverse its decision to resume uranium conversion activities, noting that outstanding issues relating to the country's nuclear programme have yet to be resolved. <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2005/transcr11082005.html">Talking to reporters after a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/index.shtml">IAEA) Board of Governors at its Vienna headquarters, Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei said there was still a window of opportunity for negotiations to continue. Voicing "serious concern," the Board adopted a <"http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2005/gov2005-64.pdf">resolution urging Iran to re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related activities and to permit the Director General to re-instate the seals that have been removed at the Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) in Isfahan. Iran voluntarily suspended these activities last year while negotiating with three European Union (EU) nations, France, Germany and Britain (the so-called EU-3) on its programme, which it insists is for peaceful energy production but which some countries, including the United States, say is part of an effort to produce nuclear weapons. Enriched uranium can be used for peaceful purposes, such as generating energy or for making nuclear weapons, and the EU-3 have said a resumption of activities in Isfahan would mean the end of the negotiations. The seals and surveillance at the UCF are part of IAEA safeguards to ensure that nuclear materials are not diverted to weapons production in conformity with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Iran has signed. With the installation of agency cameras earlier this week, Iran's resumption would not breach the treaty, but the Board today reaffirmed its earlier assertion that Iran's suspension is "a further voluntary, non-legally binding confidence-building measure…essential to addressing outstanding issues." Convening at its Vienna headquarters at the request of the EU-3, the Board asked Mr. ElBaradei to continue monitoring the situation closely, inform it of any further developments and provide a comprehensive report on the implementation of Iran's NPT Safeguards Agreement and the new resolution by 3 September. The Board has the power to refer the matter to the UN Security Council, which in turn could impose political and economic sanctions. The resolution noted that while Mr. ElBaradei has concluded that all declared nuclear material has been accounted for and has not been diverted to prohibited activities, the Agency is not yet in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran. 2005-08-11 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 3 [NYTr] Iran 'risks relationship' w/West by breaking nuclear Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:42:55 -0500 (CDT) autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Simon Mcguinness The Independent - 11 August 2005 http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article305135.ece Iran risks relationship with West by breaking nuclear seals By Anne Penketh, Diplomatic Editor Iran has risked jeopardising its relationship with the West by breaking United Nations seals at a uranium-processing plant to reopen sensitive areas that could be used to develop a nuclear weapon. A Foreign Office spokesman said the move at Isfahan violated an agreement reached with Britain, France and Germany in November last year, when Iran suspended all activities related to uranium enrichment. "The removal of seals has been completed. The plant is fully operational now," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, said. The Foreign Office spokesman said the nuclear watchdog, meeting in emergency session in Vienna, was discussing a resolution urging Iran to resume voluntary suspension. Western diplomats said there was no appetite among some non-nuclear states to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for sanctions. Countries such as India and Brazil "don't see why they should be referred for something they are legally entitled to do", one diplomat said, referring to Iran's right under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to develop peaceful nuclear energy. Iran's chief delegate to the IAEA, Sirus Nasseri, said: "There is no legal base whatsoever to go to the Security Council - if it is, it is by political choosing and it will be big big mistake. There is so much that we and the UK and Europe have in common ... there is so much happening in our region, in the world, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Lebanon." * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 4 [NYTr] S.Africa Offers Solution to Nuke Retart by Iran Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:41:48 -0500 (CDT) autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Simon McGuinness The Irish Times, Thu, Aug 11, 05 http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2005/0811/221833862FR11IRAN.html SA offers solution to nuclear restart by Iran by Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran and Guy Dinmore in Washington SOUTH AFRICA: South Africa has proposed a compromise to break the diplomatic deadlock over Iran's nuclear programme after Tehran yesterday removed UN seals from an uranium-enrichment facility to resume work on producing nuclear fuel. Pretoria's intervention came as an emergency board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) adjourned without agreement on a resolution which would call on the Islamic republic to freeze its nuclear work. Opposition from developing countries derailed the resolution, which was being promoted by western nations. Diplomats said South African president Thabo Mbeki was personally involved in pushing the interim compromise. Mr Mbeki met Hassan Rowhani, who was then Iran's chief negotiator, two weeks ago to discuss a proposal which would involve shipping South African uranium yellowcake to Iran for conversion into uranium hexa- fluoride gas. This would then be returned to South Africa to be enriched into nuclear fuel. The proposal is designed to allay fears that Iran could use its facilities to develop nuclear weapons. Iran sees the proposal as an interim confidence-building measure, but says it wants to develop the whole fuel cycle for its own civilian use later. "For further confidence-building we are ready to sell the output to a third country in co-operation with the EU and under the IAEA supervision," said Ali Aghamohammadi, spokesman for the Supreme National Security Council. "The Europeans seem to be agreeing with this issue quietly, without actually saying it," said an Iranian official. However, European officials played down such suggestions, and public statements showed that positions were hardening again in response to Iran's decision to restart its Isfahan uranium-conversion facility. The lead negotiators for the EU3 group of France, Germany and the UK accused Iran of violating its November 2004 agreement to suspend voluntarily its nuclear fuel cycle development. A UK official said there would be no further talks until Iran resumed that suspension. The western powers struggled yesterday at IAEA headquarters in Vienna to persuade the non-aligned bloc on its 35-member board to back a resolution urging Iran to go back to its suspension so talks could resume. Additional Reporting : Financial Times ) The Irish Times * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Resumes Full Conversion Operations From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday August 11, 2005 2:46 AM AP Photo VAH102 By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer ISFAHAN, Iran (AP) - A defiant Iran resumed full operations at its uranium conversion plant Wednesday, as Europe and the United States struggled to find a way to stop the Islamic republic from pushing ahead with a nuclear program they fear will lead to weapons of mass destruction. With United Nations inspectors watching, Iranian officials removed U.N. seals that had been placed voluntarily on equipment at the facility eight months ago when Tehran agreed to freeze most of its nuclear program. Technicians then immediately resumed work on the process that turns raw uranium into gas for enrichment. The breaking of the seals at the facility in the mountains outside the southern city of Isfahan was the latest move of Iranian brinkmanship over its nuclear ambitions. The hard-line government's determination to move ahead left Europe and the United States scrambling over what to do next. Iran has rejected European proposals to limit its program in return for economic incentives and shrugged off threats of U.N. sanctions. Any attempt to impose sanctions could face a veto in the U.N. Security Council from Russia and China, which have close ties with Iran. Tehran's delegate to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Sirus Nasseri warned Europe and the United States that referring Iran to the Security Council over the resumption of operations at its uranium conversaion plant, would be a step toward ``the path of confrontation.'' Europe and the United States were left appealing to Iran to reconsider the proposals and waiting for Tehran to make its own offer in negotiations, while diplomats at the U.N. nuclear watchdog - the International Atomic Energy Agency - debated how strongly to rebuke Iran. The 35-nation board of governors of the IAEA canceled a session tentatively planned for Wednesday, and instead diplomats were holding private on how best to persuade Iran to suspend its latest nuclear activities. A resolution was introduced Wednesday evening and will be discussed at a board meeting Thursday, said IAEA spokesman Peter Rickwood. He had no details on the resolution. Matthew Boland, a spokesman for the U.S. mission to the IAEA, described the breaking of the seals as ``yet another sign of Iran's disregard for international concerns.'' ``We strongly support (Germany, Britain and France's) efforts to convince Iran to stop its dangerous activities,'' he said. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's office said it ``hopes Iran will still take the sensible path and look seriously and constructively at the offer from the (Europeans).'' The French Foreign Ministry urged Tehran to stop work at the plant ``to restore confidence.'' Europe has hoped to persuade Iran to accept fuel from abroad for a nuclear energy program. But Iran's reopening of the Isfahan plant underlined its insistence on developing the entire fuel cycle on its own. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful, aiming only to produce electricity. On Tuesday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he was willing to continue negotiations and would put forward his own proposals. However, Iran has said it won't restart uranium enrichment without a negotiated deal with Europe. Enrichment can produce nuclear fuel for a reactor or material for a bomb. The Isfahan facility carries out an earlier step in the process, converting yellowcake - raw uranium - into uranium hexaflouride gas, UF-6, the feedstock that in the next stage is fed into centrifuges for enrichment. The facility covers an area of over 150 acres, spread along a range of mountains outside the city, separated from the main road by metal fences and trees and surrounded by radar stations and anti-aircraft batteries. On Wednesday, security was tight around the complex, with plainclothes security agents shooing journalists away from the front gates. Parts of the facility were built in tunnels in the mountains as protection from airstrikes. Tehran learned a lesson from the 1981 Israeli airstrike against Iraq's main nuclear reactor. Iran has spread its facilities over several locations, each with underground installations. Work at some parts of the Isfahan plant began Monday, but other, more sensitive units - including the one that ultimately produces UF-6 - had remained under U.N. seal. Iran notified the IAEA on Tuesday that it wanted the seals removed - saying the IAEA could either do so itself or authorize Iranian officials to break them under IAEA supervision. ``The IAEA said in a letter to us today that it gives (the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran) permission to remove the seals and fully restart activities at the facility,'' Mohammad Saeedi, Iran's deputy nuclear chief, told state-run television Wednesday. Before the November suspension, the Isfahan facility converted some 37 tons of yellowcake into UF-4, a preliminary stage. Experts say that amount could yield 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium, enough to make five crude nuclear weapons. The removal of the seals Wednesday means the facility can start converting that UF-4 to UF-6, as well as convert more yellowcake from scratch. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 6 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Agency Debates Iran Nuclear Issue From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday August 11, 2005 12:46 PM AP Photo VAH102 By ANDREA DUDIKOVA Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Diplomats at the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency debated a draft resolution Thursday that expressed ``serious concern'' over Iran's resumption of uranium conversion but left open the possibility of further negotiations. The resolution, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press, said the agency cannot confirm that Tehran has declared all its nuclear materials and activities. But it made no mention of reporting the regime to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose crippling sanctions. The text, which was to be reviewed later Thursday by the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors, expressed ``serious concern'' over Iran's resumption of uranium conversion this week at its nuclear facility at Isfahan, saying the move ``underlines the importance of rectifying the situation ... and of allowing for the possibility of further discussions in relation to that situation.'' The measure requested IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei provide the board with a comprehensive report on Iran's compliance with an agency safeguards agreement by Sept. 3. Iran's official Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Mohammad Saeedi, an Iranian negotiator in Vienna, as saying Tehran rejected the draft text as unacceptable because it is allowed to convert uranium under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. ``Iran would not accept a resolution based on the draft since it has included illegal points which violate the NPT,'' Saeedi was quoted as saying. Two diplomats from countries in the Nonaligned Movement - a bloc of 116 mainly developing nations - told the AP that the draft resolution did not have unanimous support by midday Thursday. The board usually passes resolutions by consensus, though it can put them to a vote in which a simple majority is required. Some developing countries worry that a measure banning Iran from producing its own nuclear power plant fuel by converting and enriching uranium could be applied to their nuclear programs, too. Negotiations on how to rebuke Iran started Tuesday, when the board met for an emergency session. A meeting tentatively planned for Wednesday was postponed to give delegates more time for informal talks. Although the IAEA board has the power to report Tehran to the Security Council, which can impose economic and political sanctions on the regime, diplomats made clear they were not considering that step - widely seen as a last resort - and instead were holding out hope for a negotiated end to the standoff. Uranium enrichment was a sticking point at the IAEA talks, with some member states arguing that no countries should be barred from doing it for peaceful purposes. Highly enriched uranium can be used to make weapons. Uranium enriched to a lower level is used to produce energy. On Wednesday, agency inspectors watched as Iranian workers removed IAEA seals at a uranium conversion plant in Isfahan. Workers were set to resume the final steps of conversion, a process that precedes enrichment. Some conversion activities were resumed Monday. In the past, the IAEA board has said the suspension was a voluntary but necessary confidence-building measure to alleviate concerns about Iran's nuclear program. ``This sho the agency to keep track of nuclear material at the plant was installed, she said. Iran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful. But the United States and others fear Iran could use its program to build bombs - concerns fueled by past revelations that Iran concealed 18 years of nuclear activities, including uranium enrichment. Matthew Boland, a spokesman for the U.S. mission to the IAEA, called the breaking of the seals ``yet another sign of Iran's disregard for international concerns.'' ``We strongly support (Germany's, Britain's and France's) efforts to convince Iran to stop its dangerous activities,'' he said. The European Union said in a statement it does ``not believe that Iran has any operational need to engage in fissile material production activities ... if the intentions of its nuclear program are exclusively peaceful.'' But Iran's chief IAEA delegate, Sirus Nasseri, argued earlier that all countries should be permitted to produce their own nuclear power plant fuel to prevent being ``dependent on an exclusive cartel of nuclear fuel suppliers - a cartel that has a manifest record of denials and restrictions for political and commercial reasons.'' U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called on the Iranians to continue discussions with the three European Union nations and urged all parties not to take any actions that would further escalate the situation. ``I think it is essential that we break this current impasse. And I believe the best way to break the impasse is to continue the discussions, the EU-three with the Iranians,'' he told reporters Wednesday. Iran had suspended uranium conversion and enrichment under an agreement with the three EU countries. Enrichment remained suspended. On Saturday, Tehran rejected the latest EU offer of economic and political incentives but has said it still wanted to continue with the talks, expected to continue later this month. --- On the Net: IAEA: www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 7 Reuters: ANALYSIS-Iran nuclear restart reflects deep confidence Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:05 AM ET By Paul Hughes TEHRAN, Aug 11 (Reuters) - Iran's bold move to restart atomic fuel work underlines a deep conviction in its right to nuclear technology and confidence that the West is reluctant to abandon talks and haul it before the U.N. Security Council. Analysts and diplomats who follow the issue closely and spoke on condition of anonymity in Tehran say Iran draws its confidence from record-high oil prices, U.S. difficulties in Iraq and support from non-Western nations. But they say the Islamic state, which denies atomic arms ambitions, is playing a dangerous game by upping the ante in its three-year nuclear standoff with the West which could backfire if it does not resume negotiations with the European Union soon. "There's no doubt they are confident right now," said an Asian diplomat in Tehran. "They calculated correctly that this move would not land them straight in the U.N. Security Council." A draft resolution being discussed by the International Atomic Energy Agency board on Thursday made no mention of Security Council referral and merely called on Iran to resume its suspension of all nuclear fuel work. A senior European diplomat agreed that despite Western suspicions that Iran's programme is a covert bid to gain nuclear weapons capability, Tehran had grounds to expect it could get away in the short run with restarting uranium conversion at its nuclear facility near the central city of Isfahan. NO URGENCY "Contrary to popular wisdom there's no real sense of urgency, even in Washington, to take this case to the Security Council," he said, noting recent comments by U.S. President George W. Bush backing the process of Iran-EU negotiations. "There's also an awareness, particularly in Washington and London, that after the experience with Iraq any case referred to the Security Council should be as watertight as possible." U.S. difficulties subduing the insurgency in Iraq and the already sizzling price of oil could explain the preference for keeping Iran's case on the back burner for now, said one political analyst. "America has its hands full with Iraq and sending Iran to the Security Council could add another $5 or more to the price of oil," he said. There was also a recognition in Western capitals that gaining consensus in the Security Council for any punitive action against Iran would be difficult. "Even if they do send Iran's case to the Security Council, then what? Russia and China won't back sanctions against Iran, so what's the point right now?" the analyst said. Sending Iran's case to the Security Council would require a bigger justification that its reversal of a suspension which was voluntary and not legally binding. "We have not broken any rules ... They cannot say that we violated the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty," Gholamreza Aghazadeh, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, said this week. SYMPATHY Iran enjoys the sympathy of many Non-Aligned Movement countries who have plans or aspirations to develop nuclear energy as an alternative energy source. Henry Sokolski, head of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, said he was concerned about what he saw as an assumption that states like Iran have an inherent right to develop enriched-uranium fuel. "There is no per se prohibition, but there is no per se right to enrich uranium either," Sokolski, a former U.S. Pentagon official, told Reuters. The U.N. nuclear watchdog has called for a global moratorium on the enrichment of uranium, but Iran and the United States, along with France, Japan, Canada, Australia and other countries have all rejected the idea. Iran's rejection last week of an EU package of political and economic incentives designed to persuade it to scrap nuclear fuel work for good has generated sympathy in some quarters. "The EU proposal contained nothing really. It was an empty offer," said the Asian diplomat. Iran has called the proposal an insult, arguing it contained vaguely worded promises of cooperation in fields which Europe and Iran already are or should be cooperating on. But Iran has been careful not to close the door on the negotiating process or to rush ahead into resuming the most sensitive part of the fuel cycle -- uranium enrichment -- which can be used to make bomb-grade material. "They probably think that by doing this they can persuade the world to accept its operation of Isfahan and bit by bit the rest of its facilities," said the EU diplomat. "But they may have miscalculated the resolve to prevent them from doing this." He said the next IAEA board meeting in September would be tougher on Iran if it had not returned to the negotiating table with the EU or reinstated the suspension of uranium conversion. (Additional reporting by Louis Charbonneau in Vienna) © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Agency Concerned Over Iran Nukes From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday August 11, 2005 9:46 PM By SUSANNA LOOF Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog expressed ``serious concern'' Thursday over Iran's resumption of activities that could lead to an atomic bomb, and diplomats said Tehran has a Sept. 3 deadline to stop or face another possible referral to the Security Council. Iran, showing the defiance it has increasingly displayed since its new president was inaugurated last weekend, responded with indignation. Tehran's chief delegate here vowed that Iran would become a nuclear fuel producer and supplier within a decade. ``This resolution is political,'' said Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi, according to the state-run news agency. ``It comes from American pressure. ... It lacks any legal or logical basis and is unacceptable.'' The topic of the International Atomic Energy Agency resolution, adopted by consensus by its 35-nation board, was Iran's move Wednesday to reopen its uranium conversion plant in the mountains outside the southern city of Isfahan. With the plant now working at full force, Iran's hard-liners are pushing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to ignore European warnings and resume uranium enrichment. Mohammad Javad Larijani, a member of Iran's powerful Expediency Council, said the transfer of power to Ahmadinejad has given the country an opportunity to change the rules of the game. He called France, Germany and Britain - the countries negotiating with Iran - ``three international savages'' and said any debate over enrichment is ``shameful.'' Starting up the enrichment facility, a plant built mainly underground outside the city of Natanz to protect it from airstrikes, would heighten tensions with Europe and the United States. Enrichment is the final step in uranium development, producing either fuel for a nuclear reactor for electricity or material for a nuclear bomb. Iran denies it seeks to develop nuclear weapons and says its program is only for peaceful purposes. But Tehran insists it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to develop the full fuel cycle, including enrichment. ``Any government in Iran that gives up nuclear technology will collapse since the issue has turned into a matter of national pride. There is no doubt that Natanz will resume work sooner rather than later,'' said Ahmad Tavakoli, a lawmaker allied with Ahmadinejad. President Bush, meeting at his Texas ranch with his foreign policy team, welcomed the nuclear agency's warning to Tehran. He also indicated Ahmadinejad will receive a U.S. visa to attend an annual United Nations gathering next month in New York. Britain's Foreign Office said the IAEA resolution ``sends a clear message to Iran of what it must do. We still believe there is a non-confrontational way forward if Iran wants to take it.'' In Vienna, the nuclear agency asked IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei to deliver a report on Iran's implementation of nuclear safeguards by Sept. 3. Diplomats made clear that insufficient progress by that date could mean the board would consider referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions. The diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized by their governments to discuss the issue. Thursday's resolution did not mention the Security Council, given concerns such a move could backfire by hardening Iran's position. Iran had said it would rather endure sanctions than back down. Security Council diplomats in New York say the IAEA may also be wary of referring Iran to the council because there is a real risk the body would not agree to sanctions. China, for example, has said it opposes bringing the issue before the council, and could use its veto power to block a resolution punishing Iran. The board's next scheduled meeting is Sept. 19, but members can call emergency meetings at any time. This week's meetings were called by France, Germany and Britain after Iran announced it planned to resume uranium conversion. Iran had suspended that process and the subsequent enrichment process under an agreement with the three European Union countries. Tehran saw the text adopted Thursday as unacceptable because it would bar it from enrichment and other related activities that are allowed under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or NPT, said Sirus Nasseri, the country's chief IAEA delegate. ``All Iran wants to do is to enjoy the right under the NPT, the right which has been denied to it for more than two decades,'' he said. He said his country would be a ``nuclear fuel producer and supplier within a decade'' and dismissed the resolution as an attempt ``to apply pressure.'' But he also told reporters the Iranians did ``not leave the door closed to (the Europeans)'' and would, for now, keep the enrichment process suspended ``to give a chance for negotiations.'' ``If they wish to negotiate on the enrichment facility in Natanz and how we would put it into operation through an agreed arrangement, we would consider (it),'' he said. ElBaradei said he was ``very encouraged'' by statements from the EU and Iran that the talks would continue. EU envoys said the burden was now on Iran to keep talks alive. ``A breakdown will be a matter of regret to the EU, because the EU hoped that it could persuade Iran to take measures that might lead to a restoration of international confidence in Iran's nuclear intentions,'' the statement said. ``But the EU is confident that another way of making possible the necessary restoration of confidence in Iran's nuclear intentions can be found. --- Associated Press writer Ali Akbar Dareini contributed to this report from Natanz, Iran. --- On the Net: IAEA: www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 9 Reuters: IAEA board urges Iran to resume nuclear freeze Thu Aug 11, 2005 5:38 PM ET By Louis Charbonneau and Francois Murphy VIENNA, Aug 11 (Reuters) - The governing board of the U.N. nuclear watchdog unanimously called on Iran on Thursday to halt sensitive atomic work it resumed this week in defiance of the West, a demand Tehran rejected as unacceptable and illegal. The resolution adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) board of governors said Iran must resume full suspension of all nuclear fuel related activities and asked the agency to verify Tehran's compliance. Iran, which has denied Western accusations that its atomic programme is a front for covert bomb-making, resumed work at its uranium conversion plant in Isfahan on Monday. "The resolution on Iran was just adopted without a vote by consensus, full consensus. All 35 members of the board agreed the language of the resolution text," IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told reporters. President George W. Bush said the decision of the U.N. nuclear watchdog was "a positive first step." "The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) today issued a report that expressed serious concerns about Iranian decisions and that's a positive first step," Bush told reporters at his Texas ranch. He said the U.S. strategy was to work with the EU3, "so that the Iranians hear a common voice speaking to them about their nuclear weapons ambitions, and I appreciate the IAEA's positive first step." The IAEA board began meeting on Tuesday but adjourned to allow the EU time to negotiate the resolution with board members. It reconvened on Thursday to approve the draft after days of backroom haggling over the text. The resolution, drafted by Britain, Germany and France -- dubbed the EU3 for their long-standing negotiations with Tehran -- requests IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei "to provide a comprehensive report on the implementation of Iran's NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement and this resolution by 3 September 2005". SECURITY COUNCIL The text did not say Iran should be referred to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he would use September's U.N. General Assembly to bring Iran's new leader face-to-face with his Western critics if no deal on Tehran's nuclear program is reached by then. Top officials of Britain, France and Germany are supposed to next meet Iranian officials at the end of August. But if there is no session, "We will use the General Assembly to bring them together. It will be a way for all of us collectively to talk to them," Annan told Reuters in a brief interview. The United Nations intends to hold a summit, which Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is expected to attend, in mid-September followed by a foreign ministers' session. In spite of calls from the EU and the United States not to resume work at the Isfahan plant, Tehran on Wednesday broke U.N. seals there and made the facility fully operational. Iran says it needs to develop nuclear power as an alternative energy source to meet booming electricity demand and keep its oil and gas reserves for export. The resolution "urges Iran to re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related activities ... and to permit the Director General to reinstate the seals that have been removed at (Isfahan)." EU diplomats said if Iran did not comply they would ask the board to refer the matter to the Security Council in September. Iran rejected the resolution as unacceptable. "We do not accept this resolution and will not execute it. There are serious legal problems with this resolution and ... we are not obligated to implement it," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, told state television. "There is no doubt that the uranium conversion facility in Isfahan will continue operating, and we will continue relations with the agency and we will welcome inspections." The text of the resolution said there was still a "possibility of further discussions" between Iran and the EU trio aimed at resolving the nuclear impasse between Islamic Republic and the West. ELBARADEI OPTIMISTIC ElBaradei came away from the meeting optimistic the EU and Iran would continue negotiating. "I was very encouraged in fact by the statements both by Iran and by the three Europeans that they are ready to continue negotiations," ElBaradei told reporters. "I come from this board optimistic that we will continue on the path of dialogue." Iran voluntarily suspended all sensitive atomic work in November 2004 after reaching a deal with the EU trio called the Paris Agreement, under which Tehran froze work related to atomic fuel production while negotiating a permanent deal with the EU. Earlier this week, Iran rejected the EU's offer of political and economic incentives if it permanently abandoned enriched uranium fuel production, calling it "an insult to the Iranian nation for which the EU3 must apologise". Under the NPT, which Iran has signed, Tehran may process and enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. However, the EU trio says the only way to prove peaceful intentions is to renounce all technology that could be used to make atom bombs. Uranium conversion is the first step in process of creating enriched uranium, which can fuel nuclear power plants or, when very highly enriched, nuclear weapons. (Additional reporting by Parisa Hafezi in Tehran, Madeline Chambers in London, and Evelyn Leopold at the United Nations) © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 Reuters: EU, allies demand Iran resume nuclear freeze Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:19 AM ET By Louis Charbonneau and Francois Murphy VIENNA (Reuters) - The European Union and its allies will ask the U.N. nuclear watchdog on Thursday to urge Iran to halt sensitive atomic work it resumed this week but Tehran rejected the demand as unacceptable and illegal. A draft resolution submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says Iran must resume a full suspension of all nuclear fuel related activities and asks the agency to verify Tehran's compliance. The draft, drawn up by Britain, Germany and France, requests IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei "to provide a comprehensive report on the implementation of Iran's NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement and this resolution by 3 September 2005." Iran resumed activities at the Isfahan uranium conversion plant on Monday. Despite U.S. and EU calls that it not resume work there, Tehran on Wednesday broke all the U.N. seals and made the facility fully operational. The text did not say Iran should be referred to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions. The EU's three biggest powers are sponsoring the resolution which will be voted on later on Thursday at an emergency session of the IAEA's board of governors. Iran angrily rejected the draft resolution, saying it violated the NPT, the global pact against nuclear arms. "The European Union's resolution is unacceptable and we reject it," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation and a senior member of its delegation to the IAEA meeting, told Reuters. "Iran considers the Paris Agreement as broken if the EU resolution is approved.... Iran does not accept the resolution as it is not legal and also it is against the NPT," he said. Iran voluntarily suspended all sensitive atomic work in November 2004 after reaching a deal with the EU trio called the Paris Agreement, under which Tehran froze work related to atomic fuel production while negotiating a permanent deal with the EU. Earlier this week, Iran rejected the EU's offer of political and economic incentives if it permanently abandoned enriched uranium fuel production, calling it "an insult to the Iranian nation for which the EU3 must apologise." SECURITY COUNCIL IN SEPTEMBER? The resolution, obtained in full by Reuters, "urges Iran to re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related activities ... and to permit the Director General to reinstate the seals that have been removed at (Isfahan)." EU diplomats said that if Iran does not comply with the resolution, they will ask the board to refer the matter to the Security Council in September. Under the NPT, which Iran has signed, Tehran may process and enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. But the EU trio say the only way to prove peaceful intentions is to renounce all sensitive technologies. Uranium conversion is the first step in process of creating enriched uranium, which can fuel nuclear power plants or, when very highly enriched, atomic weapons. Iran denies Western accusations that its atomic programme is a front for covert bomb-making. It says it needs to develop nuclear power as an alternative energy source to meet booming electricity demand and keep its oil and gas reserves for export. IRAN MAY STILL BE HIDING THINGS The draft also implied that the Europeans believe Tehran may still have some nuclear secrets. It said "outstanding issues relating to Iran's nuclear programme have yet to be resolved and ... the Agency is not yet in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared activities in Iran." However, it also left open "the possibility of further discussions" between Iran and the EU trio aimed at resolving the nuclear impasse between Islamic republic and the West. One European diplomat described the draft as "harsh enough to satisfy the Americans but something the developing countries can live with." He said it was possible the IAEA's 35-nation board would vote on the resolution rather than adopting it without a vote by consensus, as the agency's governors prefer to make decisions. "We can win the vote but we'd prefer consensus," he said. While Western countries, Russia and China backed the text, some developing states such as India, Indonesia and Brazil oppose it. EU diplomats said they would negotiate up to when the board meets at 1300 GMT in the hope of reaching consensus. Some developing countries fear the attempt to force Iran to give up sensitive nuclear activities could one day be used against their own nuclear programmes and therefore object to it. To allay their fears, the EU trio included a clause "recognising the right of states to the development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful purposes." States opposing the text were, however, in a clear minority and the EU's wish to have its text passed outweighed any concern that failing to win unanimous support would undermine the resolution's authority, diplomats said. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 Reuters: Bush calls IAEA Iran demand 'positive first step" Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:30 PM ET CRAWFORD, Texas, Aug 11 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Thursday the decision of the U.N. nuclear watchdog to call on Iran to halt sensitive atomic work was "a positive first step." "The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) today issued a report that expressed serious concerns about Iranian decisions and that's a positive first step," Bush told reporters at his Texas ranch. He said the U.S. strategy was to work with the EU-3, "so that the Iranians hear a common voice speaking to them about their nuclear weapons ambitions, and I appreciate the IAEA's positive first step." "The world is coalescing around the notion that the Iranians should not have the means and the wherewithal to be able to develop a nuclear weapon," Bush said. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 12 Reuters: IAEA draft demands Iran resume nuclear freeze Thu Aug 11, 2005 5:32 AM ET VIENNA, Aug 11 (Reuters) - A draft resolution submitted to the U.N. nuclear watchdog says Iran must resume a full suspension of all nuclear fuel related activities and asks the U.N. nuclear watchdog to verify Tehran's compliance. The draft, drawn up by Britain, Germany and France, also asks IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei "to provide a comprehensive report on the implementation of Iran's NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement and this resolution by 3 September 2005." The draft did not say Iran should be referred to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions. The European Union is sponsoring the resolution which will be voted on later on Thursday at an emergency session of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) board of governors. The resolution "urges Iran to re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related activities ... and to permit the Director General to reinstate the seals that have been removed at (Isfahan)." EU diplomats said that if Iran does not comply with the resolution, they will ask the board to refer the matter to the Security Council in September. Iran resumed activities at the Isfahan uranium processing plant on Monday. Despite U.S. and EU calls that Iran not resume work there, Tehran on Wednesday broke all the U.N. seals and made the facility fully operational. The draft, obtained in full by Reuters, said "outstanding issues relating to Iran's nuclear programme have yet to be resolved and ... the Agency is not yet in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared activities in Iran." One European diplomat described the draft as "harsh enough to satisfy the Americans but something the developing countries can live with." He said it was possible the IAEA's 35-nation board would vote on the resolution rather than adopting it without a vote by consensus, as the agency's governors prefer to make decisions. "We can win the vote but we'd prefer consensus," he said. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 Reuters: S.Africa proposal on Iran nuclear exports unlikely - official Thu Aug 11, 2005 7:31 AM ET TEHRAN (Reuters) - A senior Iranian official said on Thursday a South African proposal to ease a diplomatic crisis over Iran's nuclear activities was unlikely to be adopted. The Financial Times newspaper reported that the proposal would involve exporting output from Iran's recently restarted uranium conversion plant. But a senior Iranian official involved in talks with the European Union said the idea was unlikely to be implemented. "This is not going to happen. Iran wants to have nuclear fuel cycle," the official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. Iran resumed activities at the Isfahan uranium conversion plant on Monday. Despite U.S. and EU calls that it not resume work there, Tehran on Wednesday broke all the U.N. seals and made the facility fully operational. The Financial Times said the proposal would involve shipping South African uranium yellowcake to Iran for conversion into uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) which would then be shipped back to South Africa for enriching into nuclear fuel. The newspaper said the proposal was designed to allay fears that Tehran could use its facilities to develop nuclear weapons. Ali Aghamohammadi, spokesman for Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said the idea, previously suggested by Russia, was part of Iran's proposals package to France, Britain and Germany to break the country's nuclear impasse. "The EU welcomed the proposal which was suggested by Iran as a confidence-building measure," Aghamohammadi told Reuters. But Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, said the proposal was "one among many ideas that have not been discussed yet". A senior European diplomat in Tehran said the idea was unlikely to get off the ground. "I think it's a non-starter. It doesn't sound viable in a practical sense and I'm sure it cannot make any economic sense." "It would allow Iran to master a key part of the fuel cycle (UF6 production), which is precisely what we do not want." Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons but agreed to freeze sensitive atomic work, including uranium enrichment, in November to avoid referral to the United Nations Security Council where it may have faced economic sanctions. A draft resolution, sponsored by the European Union, was submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Thursday, calling on Iran to resume full suspension of its uranium enrichment-related activities. The most sensitive part of Iran's nuclear fuel programme -- the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz -- remains suspended and under U.N. seals. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 Reuters: Export of Iran's nuclear plant output unlikely- official Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:31 AM ET TEHRAN (Reuters) - A senior Iranian official said on Thursday a South African proposal to ease a diplomatic crisis over Iran's nuclear activities was unlikely to be adopted. The Financial Times newspaper reported that the proposal would involve exporting output from Iran's recently restarted uranium conversion plant. But a senior Iranian official involved in talks with the European Union said the idea was unlikely to be implemented. "This is not going to happen. Iran wants to have nuclear fuel cycle," the official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. Iran resumed activities at the Isfahan uranium conversion plant on Monday. Despite U.S. and EU calls that it not resume work there, Tehran on Wednesday broke all the U.N. seals and made the facility fully operational. The Financial Times said the proposal would involve shipping South African uranium yellowcake to Iran for conversion into uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) which would then be shipped back to South Africa for enriching into nuclear fuel. The newspaper said the proposal was designed to allay fears that Tehran could use its facilities to develop nuclear weapons. Ali Aghamohammadi, spokesman for Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said the idea, previously suggested by Russia, was part of Iran's proposals package to France, Britain and Germany to break the country's nuclear impasse. "The EU welcomed the proposal which was suggested by Iran as a confidence-building measure," Aghamohammadi told Reuters. But Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, said the proposal was "one among many ideas that have not been discussed yet". A senior European diplomat in Tehran said the idea was unlikely to get off the ground. "I think it's a non-starter. It doesn't sound viable in a practical sense and I'm sure it cannot make any economic sense." "It would allow Iran to master a key part of the fuel cycle (UF6 production), which is precisely what we do not want." Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons but agreed to freeze sensitive atomic work, including uranium enrichment, in November to avoid referral to the United Nations Security Council where it may have faced economic sanctions. A draft resolution, sponsored by the European Union, was submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Thursday, calling on Iran to resume full suspension of its uranium enrichment-related activities. The most sensitive part of Iran's nuclear fuel programme -- the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz -- remains suspended and under U.N. seals. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 Guardian Unlimited S. Korea: Peaceful Nukes in North Are OK From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday August 11, 2005 3:31 PM By JI-SOO KIM Associated Press Writer SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - A senior South Korean official said Thursday that North Korea has the right to a peaceful nuclear program, a view conflicting with Washington in its disagreement with the hard-line Pyongyang regime that has snagged disarmament talks. ``Our position is that North Korea has a general right to peaceful use of nuclear energy, for agricultural, medical and power-generating purposes,'' South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young said in an interview Thursday with the online news service Media Daum. ``Building a light-water nuclear reactor is a general right of North Korea,'' Chung said. ``In this, our position differs from that of Washington.'' There was no immediate reaction from the Bush administration. But on Wednesday, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill reiterated U.S. opposition to allowing North Korea to retain a nuclear capability for civilian use. Hill, the chief U.S. envoy at six-nation talks aimed at persuading the North to renounce its nuclear weapons program, said previously that negotiations stalled Sunday over Pyongyang's demand for a light-water reactor, which Washington has ruled out. Light water reactors are more difficult to use for manufacturing of nuclear weapons. Chung's ministry sought to play down any conflict with Washington. ``Seoul and Washington understand each other's position, and are working closely toward the goal of resolving the nuclear issue,'' ministry spokesman Kim Hong-jae said. Later Thursday, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said the North should be allowed to explore peaceful uses of nuclear energy if it rejoins the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and allows inspections by the U.N. nuclear watchdog, South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported. Ban made the comments upon arriving in Beijing, where he was to meet with Chinese officials to discuss the recesses disarmament talks. He is expected to visit the United States next week. Envoys at the talks, which involve the United States, China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and North Korea, decided on a three-week recess after failing to reach an agreement during 13 days of negotiations. The talks are to reconvene the week of Aug. 29 in Beijing. North Korea's envoy to the talks insisted on his country's right to ``peaceful'' nuclear activities. But the main U.S. envoy said Pyongyang's past record ruled out such an option, and he said the other countries at the talks besides North Korea agreed with Washington. The latest nuclear standoff was sparked in late 2002 after U.S. officials said North Korea admitted to launching a secret uranium enrichment program. A light-water reactor had been promised to the North in a 1994 deal as part of a U.S. aid package, but the United States has said that reactor ``is simply not on the table'' anymore. The U.S. has cited the North's conversion of a reactor at Yongbyon that supposedly was built for research into one that Washington says can make material for atomic bombs. South Korea's main nuclear envoy, Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon, said in an interview Wednesday that Seoul would work with other countries in the six-nation talks ``to lay the foundation for North Korea to exercise its rights as a sovereign nation'' and use peaceful nuclear technology after it dismantles its weapons program. Song told the SBS television channel that Pyongyang did not specifically demand at the talks that it be given a light-water reactor, but asked for the right to peaceful nuclear energy, including the use of such a reactor. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 16 Reuters: U.S. says no need for N.Korea civil nuclear program Wed Aug 10, 2005 2:20 PM ET WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea's nuclear track record undermines its demand to have a peaceful atomic program, the top U.S. negotiator in six-party nuclear disarmament talks with Pyongyang said on Wednesday. North Korea's insistence that it be allowed to pursue a peaceful nuclear program was a major stumbling block in 13 days of talks in Beijing this month among the United States, North and South Korea, Japan, China and Russia. The six are due to resume negotiations the week of August 29. Christopher Hill, the U.S. envoy to the talks, told reporters Washington wants all of North Korea's nuclear facilities dismantled, not just the program believed to have produced enough material for several nuclear bombs. "This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," he said. Recounting the North's earlier conversion of a Soviet-supplied research reactor for bomb-making and escalation of a nuclear crisis since 2002, he added: "There's a track record there that needs to be dealt with." Earlier in Seoul, Hill's South Korean counterpart said he would try to persuade the other members of the six-party process to let the North have a peaceful nuclear program. "Our position is that North Korea should abandon its nuclear program and then we will adjust differences (with other countries) to pave the way for them to pursue a peaceful nuclear program as a sovereign state," Seoul's Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon told SBS television network. Energy-starved North Korea, which appears nearly all black in satellite photos, says it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power to meet its electricity needs. Hill said a South Korean proposal to provide electricity for North Korea, which the United States has endorsed, made Pyongyang's quest for nuclear technology unnecessary and would provide significant power to the North relatively soon. "To be talking about retaining the right of peaceful use at this point seems like the wrong subject." he said. "They should be focusing on what they need to do get out of this weapons business (and) get into the business of providing electricity for their citizens," Hill told a news conference. The United States has proposed giving North Korea economic and diplomatic incentives and security guarantees in exchange for its dismantlement of nuclear program. South Korean officials have previously said they could support a peaceful program for North Korea only after it abandons its pursuit of nuclear weapons and agrees to abide by the terms of the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the International Atomic Energy Agency. In late 2002 and early 2003, North Korea expelled IAEA inspectors who were monitoring a bomb-making facility at Yongbyon and withdrew from the NPT. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 17 An Ominous Report: High Treason Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 12:31:30 -0500 (CDT) autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Forwarded with Compliments of Free Voice of America (FVOA): Accurate News and Interesting Commentary for Amerika's Huddled Masses Yearning to Breathe Free. NOTE: Thanks to Jeff Strahl for the second of these. -- kl, pp From: Leland Lehrman Date: August 11, 2005 11:02:00 AM GMT+07:00 Subject: Nuclear Terror Drill to Go Live? Let's Hope Not Reply-To: leland@33o.com Ladies and Gentlemen - I have just posted a new article regarding the nuclear terror drill at Fort Monroe, Virginia, slated to begin in "a couple of days" on our website at http://www.physics911.net/nuclearterror.htm . Important corroborating evidence is linked within the article. It is included in its entirety below, please review and comment. Feel free to link to or use in any way you please. Thank you, Leland Nuclear Terror Drill to Go Live? Let's Hope Not. by R. Leland Lehrman, 505.982.3609 August 10, 2005 12:56PM Santa Fe, New Mexico (Mother Media) - On June 29th, the United States Northern Command (NORTHCOM) posted news of a nuclear terrorism drill on its website: "Heres the scenarioA seafaring vessel transporting a 10-kiloton nuclear warhead makes its way into a port off the coast of Charleston, S.C. Terrorists aboard the ship attempt to smuggle the warhead off the ship to detonate it." It went on to say that "Sudden Response 05 will take place this August on Fort Monroe and will be carried out as an internal command post exercise. The exercise is intended to train the JTF-CS staff to plan and execute Consequence Management operations in support of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IVs response to a nuclear detonation." http://www.northcom.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.showstory&storyid=C9BFBBAC-F3CA-BD2E-008C7B34AFE33114 As Alex Jones of infowars.com and others have pointed out, terror "drills" are now known to be the favorite "cover story" for New World Order terrorist operations, as evidenced by the eerily synchronous terrorism drills happening on both 9/11 and 7/7. http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/090705bombingexercises.htm Recently, former CIA/DIA analyst Philip Giraldi has informed us that "Vice-President Cheney has tasked STRATCOM with "drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11- type terrorist attack on the United States" http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=38408 and that "the plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons." Investigators and counter-intelligence specialists are concerned that this upcoming August nuclear terror scenario might go live to create the pretext for tactical nuclear war against Iran. Mother Media contacted NORTHCOM Public Affairs this morning and learned that the Fort Monroe drill will begin in a "couple of days." We are waiting on the press release which should also be posted at the Joint Strike Force Civilian Support (JSF-CS) website. Fort Monroe internal communications indicate that antiterrorism exercises are slated for August 17th, but there is no mention of a anything nuclear. http://tradoc.monroe.army.mil/casemate/stack/080505exercise.htm Concerned parties can contact JTF-CS Public Affairs Officer Michael Eck at 757.788.6259 or Michael Kucharek of Northcom Public Affairs at 719.554.6889 ext. 2. Mother Media hopes that mass awareness of New World Order methods could prevent additional false flag attacks, whether tomorrow, next week or next year. Separately, Mother Media also learned that CNN recently launched their military operations news special "Situation Room" from inside the NORTHCOM situation room in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Wolf Blitzer, New World Order mouthpiece, is the show's hawkish host. Imagine that - a new CNN "Situation Room" military focus news program debuts in NORTHCOM headquarters days prior to a nuclear terror drill. They're not even bothering to pretend there's separation between the press and the government anymore. CNN here makes it obvious that they are now the New World Order's propaganda mouthpiece. Adding to the drama, the four-star commander of the Army's Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) at the Fort Monroe base where the nuclear terror drill is to occur, Kevin P. Byrnes was just relieved of his command amidst allegations of sexual misconduct. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080900515_pf.html Veteran investigator Greg Szymanski has uncovered another plausible motive: "Sources close to the military who remain anonymous said Byrnes was part of a U.S. military faction discontented with the Bush administration war policies in Iraq and the potential for a nuclear disaster in Iran. http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/31291.htm In an effort to stop the Bush administration in its tracks, sources say Byrnes was about to lead a coup against the hawks in the military and executive branch determined to lead America into a global conflict, leading to devastating ramifications for the country, as well as financial and social chaos. Rumors inside the military say that a growing faction of discontented high-ranking officers are attempting internally to try and stop the Bush administrations imminent plans for war with Iran in an effort to avert global war. Although the exact number of high-ranking military involved is undetermined, sources have disclosed it appears to be evenly split between pro Bush and anti Bush factions. Even though speculation abounds about an attempted coup relating to the Byrnes firing, no one would question the strange rumblings of war against Iran and warnings of terrorist threats on the homeland that are beginning to circulate from administration officials and media talking heads almost on a daily basis. Further, ominous reports are even coming from the Washington Post this week that the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the United States, plans justifying and making necessary preparations for martial law in case of a homeland terrorist attack." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/07/AR2005080700843_pf.html If you look at NORTHCOM's website, you will find a discussion of the situations under which Posse Comitatus, the restriction against military policing in America, can legally be suspended. One of those conditions is an attack by a nuclear or other weapon of mass destruction. Another is "insurrection." http://www.northcom.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.factsheets&factsheet=5#pca Diabolically standing over all of these scenarios is Global Cleanse 2000 http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/binladen_bros_tip_off_nasa_sept_11,htm.htm or just Global 2000, http://www.schillerinstitute.org/food_for_peace/kiss_nssm_jb_1995.html a population control methodology developed by the New World Order which includes triggered natural disasters, wars and diseases designed to reduce the world population by two thirds. Rene Welch, who had access to the Global Cleanse 2000 database in the late eighties, recently appeared on Mother Media's radio program to discuss her findings. In response to this author's article, Israel, Iran and a Nuclear False Flag Attack, http://www.physics911.net/nuclearfalseflag.htm reports have been flowing into Mother Media's office confirming and buttressing this story. One former Air Force member writes that all military leaves have been cancelled after September 7th and that Homeland Security is beefing up security at local Draft Board Offices. Writing as TeaParty2Come, this source paints an ominous picture: "About 3 weeks ago I was surfing some of the sites I enjoy posting on, when someone posted in all caps that they had just heard from an officer friend in the military that all leaves had been cancelled for the month of September. Obviously aware of the false flags our government is famous for, this person sounded desperate, asking for help in confirming or denying this "rumor" from anyone who had connections in the military. I happened to ask a co-worker friend of mine whose son in-law is in the Army (82nd) about checking out the "rumor". Well guess what, they've had to move up their leave to this coming week to come home because his unit has to be back by September 7th where upon all leaves are cancelled! They have seen a steady build up of heavy materials just sitting in storage facilities. He also commented that they were rushed through a training course on new weapons systems they just rolled out. He thought this very odd and a first. This sent shivers all through me. Not to push any panic buttons I spoke with a dear woman with whom I work whose son is in the Army in an artillery unit. She is a former Captain, her husband is a former Colonel and Vietnam vet and successful attorney here in our area who also happens to be dying from the effects of Agent Orange. Lo and behold their son was told all leaves are cancelled for September and in December they may get leave, but can travel no further than 17 kilometers from their base. My niece is married to a young man in the Army stationed on the East Coast he is also 82nd, his leave has also been cancelled. Their first baby is due in December. I'm not prone to fits of paranoia but I have to tell you, I have begun stocking water and canned goods. I am ex Air Force, I was on three ring standby most of my enlistment and was in a constant training mode. I know how this works and it doesn't sound good. The draft board offices are in place with staff waiting for the word to go. I read an article from a guy who works in one of those offices, he said Homeland Security came in there early last month and put up bullet proof glass on the windows and iron bars, they installed blast proof glass on the doors, and removed the mail drop box slots on the outside of the building. When he asked what was going on they identified themselves as Homeland Security and said don't worry about the rest and left. It's coming no doubt about it. Sorry I can't be more positive, but this is what I have heard with my own ears from three independent military member sources in different parts of the country." A source in New Mexico passed this on to Mother Media a couple weeks ago: "A friend came by today. His relative is fairly high-level in regional counter-terrorism. My friend says his relative told him they are preparing for the strong possibility that there will be 7 U.S. cities attacked with small, backpack-held nuclear devices by 'al-Qaida types.' It sounds like the propaganda -- the cover stories for PNAC or whomever these bad guys are -- has begun." The sheer number of warnings and events, subtle hints and overt threats is now too much to ignore. More background and warning signs, especially as regards Israel and Iran can be found in my article at physics911.net entitled Israel, Iran, Mossad and a Nuclear False Flag Attack. http://www.physics911.net/nuclearfalseflag.htm Americans should alert friends and family members and active citizens should inform their neighbors and local authorities. Mother Media has contacted FBI counterintelligence director David Szady, who is in charge of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee spying investigation, http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=6890 with some this information and plans to distribute it widely throughout the local, national and international media. An FBI investigation directed by Szady caught AIPAC using Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin to spy on America's Iran policy and more. http://www.physics911.net/franklinindictment.htm Given that AIPAC is committed to war with Iran, we can imagine why they were interested in official American policy on Iran. It is still possible to stop this insanity, but it will require serious citizen initiative. Good Luck, Fellow Citizens, and God Bless You. Please email leland.lehrman@gmail.com or call 24/7 at 505.982.3609 with corroborating evidence or additional stories. ***************************************************************** 18 Bellona: Climate blind squandering of energy continues in US Comment on new US energy policy WASHINGTON D.C—The US Senate and House of Representatives have approved an energy law that promises something for everyone, especially to fossil and nuclear energy, granting these sectors approximately $12.5 billion in tax relief and exemptions. The new US energy law strongly favours nuclear and fossil fuel energy. Nils Břhmer/Bellona Svend Sřyland, 2005-08-11 10:33 Translated by Charles Digges The energy law will forward what President George Bush calls “The American Dream” which implies mobility and abundant access to cheap energy. Bush’s “dream” is based on free will and the development of new technology. Few among democrats or republicans think that the law will meantime reduce energy use or lower the country’s dependence on foreign oil and gas. Law fails to connect energy use and greenhouse gasses One of the law’s most apparent flaws is that it fails to connect energy use directly to greenhouse gas emission, and that it does not set demands for energy effectiveness in transport. This was approved despite hushed White House-commissioned reports acknowledging that man-made emissions were causing global warming. The republicans themselves imply now that a nationwide initiative to curb emissions could be necessary. Today, American policy is premiering low-emissions vehicles, but is forgoing the creation of restrictions or extra taxes on high energy use vehicles, and it is well known that American drivers are fond of large gas-guzzling SUVs. The average American car consumes more energy today than those made at the end of the 1980s, and American cars use a combined 8.5 million tanks of gas per day. American vehicles have in the past 20 years become heavier, stronger and faster and consume 40 percent of all energy used in the United States per day. Vehicles’ weights have increased as a result of security and comfort demands, the quantity of horsepower has doubled and the average acceleration from zero to 80 kilometers per hour is on average eight seconds. Equating nuclear energy with renewable energy President Bush is known as a warm proponent of increasing the use of nuclear energy, and the nuclear lobby is naturally satisfied with the new law: The nuclear industry gets a 20 year extension of the so-called Price-Andersen Act. This Act went into force in 1957 to encourage the development of the nuclear power industry as a taxpayer-backed insurance scheme. This law limits the amount of insurance nuclear power plant owners must carry and caps their liability in the event of a catastrophic accident or attack at dollar amounts that fall far short of the actual financial consequences that could be incurred. The nuclear industry will therefore receive a simplified system for the approval of new plants. The industry will also be placed on equal footing with renewable energy, despite the fact that use implies emissions hazardous to the climate as a result of extracting and processing of fuel, coupled with the transport of waste. The US Department of Energy (DOE) will also fully finance a new reactor for hydrogen production at an estimated cost of $1.25 billion in the US state of Idaho, and will secure 80 percent of loans for building advanced reactors. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as been instructed to downgrade exiting safety regulations. Among other things, the demand educational demands for nuclear industry employees have been simplified. An employee who warns of irregularities will in the future be able to make a case only a year after conditions are reported to American labour inspection authorities. “Incentives for fossil fuel and nuclear energy are prolonged and give businesses the opportunity to think long term. The support arrangements for, as an example, wind and solar energy are on the other hand last two or three years,” said Fred Beck of the Environment and Energy Studies Institute in an interview with Bellona Web. He underscored that those who wish to concentrate on renewable energy aren’t even able to publish papers before the orders are liquidated. Concentration on emissions-free coal power Increased concentration on technology directed toward emissions-free coal plants are probably the most important measure in the new energy law. Energy prices in the United States can no longer justify the renewal of existing coal plants, even though the plants today are considered more a source of far-reaching air and mercury pollution than they are as a climate problem. Because the Americans succeed in their new alliances with Australia, India, and China this can produce large climate profits, provided India and China put into use the best available technology. The new US energy bill give tax breaks to hydrogen cars. Picture above is a GM Opel hydrogen car. GM Opel Tax relief for zero-emission vehicles On a positive note, it is worth noting that the new US energy law will entail tax relief for the development of clean coal technology, renewable energy sources, and hydrogen automobiles. Owners of electric cars, hybrid vehicles and fuel cell cars can also expect tax advantages. Naturally based ethanol as an additive to engine fuel will continue to be subsidized, and oil companies will not be shielded from suits over emissions of the carcinogenic fuel additive MTBE, a fuel oxygenate. Buildings and products will be included in standards for energy effectiveness as it is done in the European Union (EU). Homeowners will among other things get coverage up to $500 for installing energy conserving windows and thermostats. Those who chose solar energy will receive up to $2000 in support. Summer will also be extended by five weeks as some will reduce household energy use by a percent. The dreadful increase in oil-field construction in Alaska’s National Nature Preserve is in this round averted, but could be approved in a budget rider in September. The energy law opens the area in the meantime for test drilling and geological surveys of the exterior continental shelf of the state of Florida’s coastal shores and in the Gulf of Mexico. Many environmental groups will raise protest against the extreme oil extraction. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 19 Deseret News: New era of uncertainty in N-age dawns [deseretnews.com] Wednesday, August 10, 2005 By John Hughes Deseret Morning News Sixty years ago, Miyoko Watanabe walked out of her house in Hiroshima and saw a flash of light and felt fire rolling toward her. It was the explosion of the atomic bomb dropped by the U.S. Air Force plane Enola Gay. Her father perished, along with some 140,000 citizens of Hiroshima, and another 80,000 citizens of Nagasaki three days later. She survived, and as a 75-year-old recounted her story in Sunday's New York Times. In a moving plea, along with thousands of other Japanese, she called for the elimination of nuclear weapons by 2020. While that goal may seem fanciful, "we have to keep trying, one step at a time," she said. Whose heart cannot be tugged by such a cry from the only nation to have experienced the horrors of atomic warfare? But the fact is, that with the weekend stalling of attempts to defuse nuclear weapons development by North Korea and Iran, we are entering a new era of uncertainty in the nuclear age. Since the fiery destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 60 years ago, nuclear weaponry has proliferated. The blessed upside is that these weapons have been kept sheathed and not used in any of the wars that have sadly continued to roil our planet. The agony of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was too awesome for a reprise to be contemplated. Though the weapons remained poised in their silos, or ready in their guarded armories, the world's leaders were tacitly bonded in a compact for their non-use. The weapons proved an effective deterrent against use by others, a constant lethal reminder of the price to be paid by any suicide-prone leader unleashing them offensively. A string of American presidents, with the means of controlling these weapons a few feet away from their Oval Office desk, have pondered their destructive force and mused how to control, even eliminate, them. President Dwight D. Eisenhower launched the Atoms for Peace Program at the United Nations in 1953. When I served in the Reagan administration, Secretary of State George P. Shultz returned from one of his one-on-one meetings with the president to tell several of us aides that Reagan had a vision for the ultimate elimination of nuclear weapons. "He can't do that," protested one of my colleagues. "Doesn't he know that conventional defense weaponry is immensely more expensive than the nuclear deterrent?" "You guys," responded Secretary Shultz, "had better get onboard. This president is serious." Though the nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia have been sharply reduced in recent years, nuclear missiles still threaten. While they remain in responsible hands, the world has been relatively safe from their use. But with the acquisition, or pending acquisition, of nuclear weapons technology by such rogue nations as North Korea and Iran, the world faces new uncertainty. The problem is rendered more acute by the freelance trading of nuclear weapons technology by such private entrepreneurs as Pakistan's A.Q. Khan, and the interest of terrorist groups like al-Qaida and others in acquiring a nuclear bomb. If the actual elimination of nuclear weapons proves impossible, surely we must join with the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in their prayers and pleas that the weapons "never again" be used. This weekend, attempts to halt probable nuclear weapons development by two nations that consort with terrorists — Iran and North Korea — were dealt setbacks. Iran rejected a proposal by Britain, France and Germany, acting on behalf of the European Union, offering major economic and political and security incentives in return for Iranian cooperation in ensuring that its nuclear program would not be used for military purposes. The proposal was supported by the United States. Iran deemed it "unacceptable" and vowed to continue uranium enrichment, which can be used for both peaceful and military purposes. European officials promptly warned that the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna would likely take up the matter. Six-party talks that have been going on in Beijing in an attempt to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program fared little better. China, Russia, Japan, the United States and South Korea were unsuccessful in getting North Korea to join in a statement of broad shared principles. As in the case of Iran, the North Koreans demand the right to continue peaceful nuclear development. The United States is leery of this, arguing that the North Koreans have consistently used their nuclear energy plants for clandestine production of nuclear weaponry. The exhausted participants in the six-party talks ended their discussions in impasse but have agreed to reconvene later. John Hughes is editor and chief operating officer of the Deseret Morning News. He is a former editor of the Christian Science Monitor, which syndicates this column. E-mail: hughes@desnews.com © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 20 RIA Novosti: Russia to supply 15 million tons of oil to China 11/ 08/ 2005 MOSCOW, August 11 (RIA Novosti) - Russia plans to deliver 15 million metric tons of hydrocarbons to China in 2006, Russia's new ambassador to China said in a newspaper interview published Thursday. In an interview with Vremya Novostei, Sergei Razov said Russian crude oil exports to China by rail had tripled in the last few years. A pipeline between Taishet (Eastern Siberia) and Skovorodino (the Amur region on the border with China) with a capacity of 30 million tons a year will be completed in 2008, he said. "Transneft, a Russian oil major, and China National Petroleum Corporation are holding consultations on building a branch from Skovorodino to China and are to submit their proposals to the two countries' authorities," Razov said. The ambassador continued that Russia was also interested in providing civilian technological equipment, apart from metal and forest resources, to China. In particular, Russia wanted to export high capacity thermopower units (800-1,000 MW), he said. Razov said Russia, with its unique experience in peaceful nuclear developments, was ready to help build nuclear power plants in China. In particular, he said the equipment used to build two units of the Tianwan nuclear power plant was the most technologically advanced in China. He said Russian products were competitive on the Chinese market, in such sectors as civilian aircraft, and oil and mining equipment. Razov said Russia-China trade hit a record of $21 billion last year, and was up by more than 20% this year. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 21 BBC: Bid to speed up nuclear run-down Last Updated: Thursday, 11 August 2005 [Chapelcross power station] Chapelcross began production in 1959 Scotland's oldest nuclear power station could be decommissioned almost a century earlier than planned. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) has published its draft strategy for all the UK's plants. Under the current timescale Chapelcross - which opened in 1959 - should be cleared by 2128, while work should be completed at Hunterston A by 2090. But NDA chairman Sir Anthony Cleaver said the two Magnox stations could be decommissioned within 25 years. Chapelcross, near Annan in Dumfries and Galloway, only ceased production in June last year. Site clearance The current plans would see the site return to brown field status in 2128, but Sir Anthony said there was now thought to be a "better approach". In its strategy, the authority said: "The NDA believes there is a strong case to abandon this approach in favour of defuelling, decommissioning and release of the site for alternative uses within 25 years or less. "This could mean site clearance could be achieved before 2030." We want to achie decommissioning and clean up more quickly, more cost effectively, more safely and in a more environmentally-friendly manner Sir Anthony Cleaver NDA chairman A similar timescale is forecast for Hunterston A, which is currently due to return to green field status by 2090. The decommissioning process is already well under way at the Ayrshire plant, which ceased operation in 1989. The NDA said the approach for the Magnox sites - which was based on work carried out in France - had found support in the local communities. Further consultation will be carried out on the plans as work continues to establish the costs of such an approach. There are no plans to speed up the decommissioning of Dounreay, which is the biggest employer in Caithness and northern Sutherland. Spent fuel The clean-up is due to be completed in just over 30 years' time, and Sir Anthony said that was a "realistic" timescale. The NDA acknowledged that dealing with the intermediate level waste held at the plant would be "a considerable challenge". The authority said it would evaluate alternative approaches for storing the spent fuel and material. [Dounreay Nuclear Power Plant] The Dounreay nuclear plant poses a "considerable challenge" The NDA strategy sets out a national plan for the decommissioning and clean-up of the 20 civil nuclear sites in the UK. The public consultation period will run until 11 November, with the final proposals due to be submitted to ministers by the end of the year. Sir Anthony said: "We believe this first draft strategy is ambitious and challenging but we are also confident it is deliverable if we can gain regulator, government and stakeholder support. "Put simply, we want to achieve decommissioning and clean up more quickly, more cost effectively, more safely and in a more environmentally-friendly manner." Rising cost However, Lorraine Mann, an anti-nuclear campaigner, was unconvinced by the earlier deadlines. She said: "If this is a benchmark that is being set, I think we have to query if they are possibly being a little gung-ho about things." Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National Party, hit out at the rising costs of nuclear clean-up operations. He quoted a report which showed an Ł8bn increase to Ł56bn in estimated costs of cleaning up Britain's decommissioned nuclear power stations. He said: "The sooner Scotland has control of its own energy future the better, so we can kick nuclear into touch for good and invest in the sort of clean, green energy sources where Scotland has huge natural advantages. "The authorities are struggling to deal with current sites, never mind burdening future generations with even more deadly waste." ***************************************************************** 22 Pakistan News: Britain to ease nuclear sanctions against Pak, India PakTribune.Com Rajab 6, 1426 Hijri August 12, 2005 Thursday August 11, 2005 (1541 PST) LONDON: United Kingdom has decided to ease sanction against Pakistan and India relating to civilian nuclear energy. Under the relaxed rules, applications for items under the dual-use list of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) will now be allowed to Pakistan and India, on a 'case-by-case basis' and only when their end-use will be in an IAEA-safeguarded civilian nuclear facility. PTI quoted British foreign office spokesman that the government has notified Parliament about the significant changes in its laws regarding the export of dual-use nuclear technologies to India. "We will be again opening the doors to Indian nuclear scientists and research organisations, academics and nuclear industry officials to come to the UK," the spokesman said. Applications for other licensable items, even those under Weapons of Mass Destruction end-use controls, will also be opened on a case-by-case basis. Pakistan News Service © PakTribune.com Pvt Ltd 2003-2004 ***************************************************************** 23 [du-list] Dr Frank Barnaby on nuclear electricity and nuclear Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:56:50 -0700 autolearn=unavailable version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com "[Barnaby] said that if a dirty bomb contained a piece of plutonium the size of a $1 [Australian] coin, it could radioactively contaminate an area of about five square kilometres to such an extent it would have to be evacuated and decontaminated." That's a "Western Nations" cleanup, mind you. ======================================================== Expert warns of nuclear terror targets Melbourne Age August 6, 2005 - 6:29AM Increased risk of nuclear weapons proliferation is one of the major arguments against moving to a new generation of nuclear reactors, a visiting nuclear physicist and defence analyst says. A new generation of nuclear reactors would be based on plutonium of a type ideal for the fabrication of the most effective nuclear weapons, Dr Frank Barnaby said. Dr Barnaby, a nuclear physicist by training, is now a freelance defence analyst and a prolific author on military technology. He is the nuclear issues consultant to the Oxford Research Group in the UK and was director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute from 1971-81. Dr Barnaby will give the keynote speech at the Medical Association for Prevention of War conference in Melbourne on Sunday. He argues there are too many negatives to electing to move to nuclear power as an alternative to greenhouse gas-producing fossil fuel technology. A renewable energy future, such as with solar power, was a viable and safe alternative, he said. Dr Barnaby said the use of nuclear power significantly increased the risk of nuclear terrorist attacks. "Nuclear power reactors inevitably produce plutonium as a by-product as they burn their uranium fuel to generate electricity," he said. "If spent reactor fuel elements are reprocessed to chemically remove the plutonium, some of it could be illegally acquired by terrorists and used in a dirty bomb or used to fabricate a crude nuclear explosive." He said that if a dirty bomb contained a piece of plutonium the size of a $1 coin, it could radioactively contaminate an area of about five square kilometres to such an extent it would have to be evacuated and decontaminated. Dr Barnaby also said that, although nuclear power was often said to be clean - meaning that it does not emit greenhouse gases - it actually produced large amounts of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. "Every stage of the nuclear-fuel cycle ... uses electricity generated by fossil fuel (oil or gas)," he said. "If there is to be a nuclear renaissance worldwide, the question of the net carbon production is a major issue that must be fully addressed." Dr Barnaby said the nuclear industry wanted to move soon to generation III reactors and looked forward to the time when generation IV reactors would be built. "The nuclear fuel used in generation III and IV reactors will be based on plutonium of a type ideal for the fabrication of the most effective nuclear weapons," he said. "The increased risk of the proliferation of nuclear weapons to states and terrorists is one of the major arguments against moving to a new generation of nuclear reactors." © 2005 AAP Copyright © 2005. The Age Company Ltd. [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/ ***************************************************************** 24 [epa-impact] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Joseph M. Farley Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:58:18 -0400 (EDT) autolearn=unavailable version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com http://epa.gov/EPA-IMPACT/2005/August/Day-11/ ======================================================================= [Federal Register: August 11, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 154)] [Notices] [Page 46892-46894] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr11au05-115] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Appendix R, ``Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power [[Page 46893]] Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,'' Section III.G.2.c, for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8, issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC or the licensee), for operation of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Power Plant (FNP), Units 1 and 2, located in Houston County, Alabama. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action: On December 29, 1986, the NRC staff granted Exemption Request 1-3, ``Service Water Intake Structure--Fire Area 72,'' from certain requirements of Appendix R, Section III.G.2.c, that require fire detection and fire suppression capabilities and the enclosure of cables, equipment, and associated non-safety circuits of one redundant train of safe shutdown equipment in a one-hour rated fire barrier. Exemption Request 1-3, issued on December 29, 1986, listed a total of ten items specific to Fire Area 72 for the Service Water Intake Structure (SWIS), which is common to FNP, Units 1 and 2. By letters dated August 28, 2003, December 28, 2004, and June 9, 2005, SNC submitted proposed revisions to Exemption Request 1-3. SNC stated that the proposed revisions to Exemption Request 1-3 would clarify FNP's fire protection licensing basis, delete unnecessary attributes of the prior approved exemption, and revise the remaining exemption attributes to remove references to the Kaowool one-hour fire barrier material. SNC also stated that the proposed revision to Exemption Request 1-3 is part of SNC's comprehensive plan to respond to concerns about Kaowool fire barrier material. SNC's August 28, 2003, letter provided the disposition for the original ten items plus one additional item related to Exemption Request 1-3. For two of these items, no change in the basis for their inclusion as exemption items was proposed and they were not considered further. For two of the items related to the service water swing pump cables, the principal basis for their inclusion as exemption items was not changed, however an improvement in defense-in-depth due the upgrading of certain walls within the SWIS to 3-hour rated fire barriers was recognized. For two of the items related to the service water header strainer motor operated inlet valves and swing pump motor operated discharge valves, the basis for the exemption is revised to delete reliance on Kaowool and to reflect the re-analysis that shows that damage to cables in the strainer pit cannot result in spurious operation of the valves. For the discharge-to-wet pit and discharge to storage pond flume valves, SNC showed that, based on deterministic and fire modeling results, that fire effects will not result in the mis-positioning of the valves. For the item related to service water pump cables in Fire Area 72 A, an integrated risk assessment shows that safe shutdown can be achieved even if no credit is taken for the Kaowool raceway enclosures. A previously existing Exemption Request 1-3 item relating to the coordination between safe shutdown and non-safe shutdown circuits was found to have been resolved by modifications to the plant and, accordingly, is deleted from Exemption Request 1-3. For the item related to the redundant Train A and Train B service water and related power cables that enter the SWIS near the ceiling in the northeast corner, an integrated risk assessment shows that fire damage would not occur to these cables even if no credit were taken for Kaowool. The proposed action, would allow SNC to re-establish the basis for Exemption Request 1-3 based on programmatic and plant design modifications, a deterministic re-analyses of fire protection considerations, a risk-informed plant change evaluation specifically applicable to the SWIS, enhanced controls on transient combustibles, the existing fire detection and automatic fire suppression capability to maintain defense-in-depth, and the availability of manual fire fighting and associated fire fighting equipment. The Need for the Proposed Action: The proposed changes to Exemption Request 1-3 from 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2.c is needed to enable SNC to re-establish the bases for the exemption that do not rely on the use of the Kaowool fire barrier material for the enclosure of certain redundant cable trays in the SWIS Fire Area 72. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the proposed changes to Exemption Request 1-3 will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety. The details of the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation will be provided in the revised Exemption Request 1-3 that will be issued in a letter to the licensee approving the changes to Exemption Request 1-3. The action relates to revising the bases for the adequacy of the fire protection program at FNP. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action: As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources: The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of the FNP, Units 1 and 2, dated December 1974, and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (NUREG-1437, Supplement 18), dated March, 2005. Agencies and Persons Consulted: In accordance with its stated policy, on August 4, 2005, the NRC staff consulted with the Alabama State official, David Walters, of the Office of Radiation Control, Alabama Department of Public Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letters dated August 28, 2003, December 28, 2004, and June 9, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint [[Page 46894]] North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of August 2005. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-4351 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ------------------------------------------ http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/index.html Comments: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/comments.htm Search: http://epa.gov/fedreg/search.htm EPA's Federal Register: http://epa.gov/fedreg/ ------------------------------------------ You are currently subscribed to epa-impact as: NEWS@energy-net.org To unsubscribe, send a blank email to leave-epa-impact-46782Y@lists.epa.gov OR: Use the listserver's web interface at https://lists.epa.gov/read/all_forums/ to manage your subscription. For problems with this list, contact epa-impact-Owner@lists.epa.gov ------------------------------------------ ***************************************************************** 25 [epa-impact] Southern California Edison; Notice of Availability Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:58:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com http://epa.gov/EPA-IMPACT/2005/August/Day-11/ ======================================================================= [Federal Register: August 11, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 154)] [Notices] [Page 46835-46836] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr11au05-70] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2174-012-California] Southern California Edison; Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Assessment August 4, 2005. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission or FERC) regulations (18 CFR part 380), Commission staff has reviewed the application for license for the Portal Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2174-012) and has prepared a draft environmental assessment (DEA). The project is located on Camp 61 Creek and Rancheria Creek in Fresno County, California. The DEA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental effects of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Copies of the DEA are available for review in Public Reference Room 2-A of the Commission's offices at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC. The DEA also may be viewed on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the ``eLibrary'' link. Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (202) 502-6088, or on the Commission's Web site using the eLibrary link. Any comments on the DEA should be filed within 30 days of the date of this notice and should be addressed to Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please reference ``Portal Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2174-012'' on all comments. Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the [[Page 46836]] Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link. Linda Mitry, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4345 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ------------------------------------------ http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/index.html Comments: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/comments.htm Search: http://epa.gov/fedreg/search.htm EPA's Federal Register: http://epa.gov/fedreg/ ------------------------------------------ You are currently subscribed to epa-impact as: NEWS@energy-net.org To unsubscribe, send a blank email to leave-epa-impact-46782Y@lists.epa.gov OR: Use the listserver's web interface at https://lists.epa.gov/read/all_forums/ to manage your subscription. For problems with this list, contact epa-impact-Owner@lists.epa.gov ------------------------------------------ ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: Energy Bill Provides for Enhanced Security at Commercial Nuclear Facilities News Release - 2005-10 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 05-109 August 8, 2005 The energy bill signed today by President Bush contains provisions long sought by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to enhance security at nuclear power plants and other facilities, including authorization for licensee security guards to use more powerful weaponry and more extensive background checks for personnel with access to nuclear materials or safeguards information. “This wide-ranging legislation enhances our ability to ensure the protection of public health, safety and the common defense,” said NRC Chairman Nils J. Diaz. “These provisions will make an industry that is already well protected even safer from the threats of terrorism and radiological sabotage.” Under this legislation, the NRC will for the first time have regulatory authority over additional radioactive materials, including certain sources of radium-226 and materials produced in accelerators rather than in reactors. The energy bill also contains specific security-related requirements that in large degree address measures already initiated by the NRC. These include revisions to the agency’s design basis threat through rulemaking and establishment of a national tracking system for radioactive sources in the United States. The act also expands criminal penalties for anyone bringing in unauthorized weapons or explosives or committing sabotage at nuclear power plants and other licensee facilities designated by the NRC. Other provisions in the bill will facilitate NRC’s recruitment of engineers, scientists, security experts and other professionals at a time when the agency anticipates a greatly increased workload due to potential applications for new commercial power reactors and the proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository. The NRC is now authorized to support university programs for academic fields critical to the agency’s regulatory activities and to establish partnership programs with minority institutions of higher learning. NRC may also award financial assistance to undergraduate and graduate students in return for subsequent employment with the NRC. Last revised Tuesday, August 09, 2005 ***************************************************************** 27 Guardian Unlimited: Ł8bn added to nuclear shutdown bill Mark Oliver and agencies Thursday August 11, 2005 [Sellafield nuclear processing plant] Sellafield nuclear processing plant. Photograph: PA Decommissioning Britain's 20 ageing nuclear power stations will cost at least Ł8bn more than originally estimated, according to research published today. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) said it thought the cost of decommissioning would be Ł56bn, compared to the Ł48bn previously anticipated. If the decision is taken to reclassify plutonium as waste, rather than an asset, another Ł10bn could be added to the total cost, according to the NDA, which also said it hoped to speed up the decommissioning process. Article continues The NDA, which has a budget of around Ł2bn a year, is a quango that was set up by the government in April this year under the Energy Act 2004 to take on the responsibility of the UK's nuclear legacy. Its job is to oversee the clean-up and decommissioning of the country's nuclear power stations as safely and cost-effectively as possible. News of the escalating cost of decommissioning comes after confidential Whitehall documents were leaked to the media earlier this year in which the case for a new generation of nuclear power stations was touted. The disclosure of a higher prediction on the cost of decommissioning comes in NDA's first report, a draft strategy on what approach it should take. A final strategy report will be submitted to the government by the end of March next year after a huge public consultation process that was launched today and will last until November 11. Clean-up costs 'to rise' The NDA's chairman, Sir Anthony Cleaver, said today that the costs of clean-up and decommissioning, were "already substantial and if other countries' experiences are a guide, projected costs will almost certainly rise". Currently there are 12 nuclear power stations in operation but only one - Sellafield, in Cumbria - will not be decommissioned between now and 2023. Sir Anthony said the NDA hoped decommissioning could be accelerated, a move which he says would boost safety. However, it could also impact on jobs at sites such as Dounreay, in Caithness, northern Scotland. One in five workers in the area is employed at the site, the decommissioning of which was due to be completed in 30 years' time. Sir Anthony said the NDA also wanted to speed up the decommissioning of the ageing Magnox nuclear plants, from 125 years to 25 years. Sir Anthony highlighted the four operating Magnox plants: Dungeness, Kent; Olbury, Gloucestershire; Sizewell, Suffolk, and Wylfa, North Wales. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We think based on experience elsewhere in the world it should be possible to accelerate that process significantly and there are major benefits we believe in doing that. First of all you obviously don't have that long period where you have the problem of security and safety in the storage of that material on the site." Some argue that new nuclear power stations could help cut the level of carbon emissions, which have risen recently and are linked to climate change. However another view, including that of former environment minister Michael Meacher, is that it is ridiculous to contemplate new stations when the problem of what to do with nuclear waste has yet to be convincingly resolved. Mr Meacher told Today that the report had underlined the case for bringing an end to the nuclear power industry, rather than building new stations. "Do we actually, with an industry that is the most non-cost effective, uneconomic in history, want to have a new round of nuclear build?" he said. "The fact is, nuclear is neither necessary nor desirable to meet our climate change targets. It would entail huge economic, military and environmental risks which should be avoided." But John Mills, a member of the Nuclear Industry Association, told the programme: "The liabilities that are being dealt with are the legacy of a nuclear programme which had a large variety of reactor types and processes, and which had from time to time to meet various strategic imperatives. "A future programme of nuclear build can be characterised as a relatively small programme of smaller, simpler plants." Dr Mills acknowledged, however, that there was as yet no settled view on how to deal with waste. Sir Anthony said he believed that underground storage of waste was the best option. "I think at the moment our view would be that an underground repository is the best solution, that seems to be the one that combines most of the aspects of safety and security in the most effective way." Intermediate and high-level nuclear waste needs to be isolated from human contact for up to 200,000 years. Low-level waste, of which there is by far the greatest volume, includes everything from gloves and overalls to large pieces of equipment and concrete. The only place to store this in Britain is in Drigg, Cumbria, which will be full by 2050. There are also fears that this site could be flooded between 500 and 5,000 years after it is closed. In May this year, a leak the size of an Olympic swimming pool of radioactive nuclear fuel dissolved in concentrated nitric acid forced the closure of Sellafield's Thorp reprocessing plant. The leak was not dangerous to the public but was expensive to repair and an investigation found "significant deficiencies" at the plant. [UP] Guardian Unlimited ż Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 28 Detroit News: Groups fight new license for Palisades nuclear site - 08/11/05 detnews.com] Environmentalists cite waste and age concerns; a company official says plant issues overblown. Associated Press SOUTH HAVEN -- Some environmental organizations hope to persuade the Nuclear Regulatory Commission not to issue another 20-year operating license for the Palisades Nuclear Plant. The environmentalists say the plant's nuclear reactor is brittle and could rupture, releasing radioactive material. They also said nuclear waste being stored onsite could end up in nearby Lake Michigan if there is an earthquake. "We have major safety concerns about this proposal," said Kevin Kamps of Washington-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service. "The Palisades plant is already 38 years old." Palisades spokesman Mark Savage said Jackson-based Consumers Energy, the plant's owner, and plant manager Nuclear Management Co. of Hudson, Wis., are dedicated to safety. The environmentalists' concerns are exaggerated, he said. "The safety of the plant is never compromised," Savage told the Herald-Palladium of St. Joseph. The license for the power plant, which is 35 miles west of Kalamazoo in Van Buren County's Covert Township, will expire in 2011. Consumers Energy and Nuclear Management have formally asked the NRC to extend the license through 2031. The commission's review of the application for a license extension started in the spring and is expected to take about two years to complete. "Palisades is living on borrowed time," said Alice Hirt of a local group, Don't Waste Michigan. "We can't allow this dinosaur to be re-licensed for another 20 years. We've been pretty lucky nothing has happened so far." The groups said they plan to submit a packet of information to the NRC containing letters and testimony from concerned southwestern Michigan residents and even some former NRC employees, urging the commission not to extend the Palisades license. Savage said many major pieces of equipment, including the steam generators, have been replaced since the plant began generating electricity in 1971. During routine, periodic refueling and maintenance outages, hundreds of small maintenance and repair jobs are done to ensure the plant stays in top operating condition, he said. Copyright © 2005 The Detroit News. ***************************************************************** 29 Bizchina: Promotion of clean energy stressed (China Daily) Updated: 2005-08-11 08:50 China is gearing up to develop clean energy by using nuclear, wind and solar sources to generate power in order to cut reliance on coal and oil, said a senior official from the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC). "The government is vigorously making efforts to tap clean energies to optimize the current power generation mix, which relies on coal for some 80 per cent of its power output and is blamed for severe environmental pollution and congested transportation," Zhang Guobao, vice-chairman of the country's top policy regulator NDRC, told the China Power 2005 conference yesterday in Beijing. According to Zhang, coal-fired plants account for 73.9 per cent of the country's total 440 megawatts installed capacity in 2004. Hydro-plants make up 24.5 per cent in the aggregate installed capacity by last year, and nuclear approximately 1.6 per cent. Renewable energies such as wind, biomass and solar only take up a very small proportion, which can be ignored in light of the country's huge power demand, said Zhang Guobao. Coal-fuelled power plants produce almost half of the country's air pollutants such as sulfur dioxide, said Zhang Lijun, deputy-director of the State Environmental Protection Administration of China (SEPA), who also attended yesterday's power industry conference. SEPA's Zhang said the country's coal-fired plants emitted more than 13 million tonnes of sulfur dioxide, and the figure is expected to rise to 16 million tonnes for this year. Zhang Guobao said China should greatly encourage the development of hydro-plants, although some environmentalists argue building hydro-plants may threaten the local ecological system in areas. Liao Xiaoyi, president of the Global Village of Beijing, a non-governmental organization in promoting environmental protection, earlier told China Daily that hydro resources should not be viewed as one of the clean energies to generate power, since building dams will threaten the lives of local plants and animals by changing the existing ecological conditions. NDRC's Zhang Guobao yesterday said the experts' sentiment is somewhat "overstated," and hydro resources are very important and abundant reserves for a power generation alternative in cutting its reliance on coal and oil. But since the country is believed to still depend on coal for most of its energy needs for the future, and problems still exist in land use as well as resident relocation for hydro-plant construction, the top policy planning body only sets a reserved target to develop the hydro resources in producing electricity. According to Zhang Guobao, most of the power plants to be approved by the NDRC are coal-fired, so the proportion of hydro-plants in the country's total installed capacity is projected to drop to 22.6 per cent from last year's 24.5 per cent. The vice-minister estimated the installed capacity of hydro-plants in China will rise from the 108 megawatts last year to 160 megawatts by 2010, or 23.9 per cent of the total capacity. And the hydro-plant capacity is set to reach 246 megawatts by 2020, or 25.9 per cent of the total. As for the renewable energies such as wind and solar, Zhang Guobai said the target is 40 megawatts by 2020, or 4.3 per cent of the country's total installed capacity. In order to tap into the wind resources across the country in generating power, which are believed to have the most potential renewable energy for commercialisation, the country has invested some 30 million tonnes (US$3.7 million) a year in assessing the wind resources in different regions to locate the wind mills since 2003. And the preliminary work is to be completed by next year, Zhang Guobao said. www.chinadaily.com.cn ***************************************************************** 30 Ireland Examiner: Letter: We have already said no to nuclear power - Des Long 11/08/05 We have already said no to nuclear power A NEW way of introducing the nuclear industry to Ireland is being floated by some economists who have close links to the Government. The reason now being used to advance nuclear power is the high price of oil. This idea has been put forward by economist Moore McDowell, who is a brother to the president of the PDs. While he may consider high oil prices an adequate reason for nuclear power, the fact is the Irish people have already rejected the nuclear industry. In the 1970s the founder of the PDs, Des O’Malley, also advocated a nuclear power site at Carnsore Point in Co Wexford, but considerable public opposition knocked that proposal. Now the idea has been resurrected with a leading economist pushing the need for a nuclear industry in Ireland. This comes at a time when the British are trying to scale down their nuclear capacity and other European countries and turning to non-nuclear power sources. This country should be to the forefront of alternative energy instead of pushing dangerous and unsafe nuclear plants. Des Long 52 Shannon Banks Corbally Limerick [Back] 12:15:42 AM 2:31:08 AM 7:48:08 PM 10:13:36 PM 7:02:36 PM SECTIONS ARENA All the latest sport FARMING The latest agriculture news and views FOOD Let Darina Allen and co tickle your palate PROPERTY We'll help you make the move © Irish Examiner, 2005, Thomas Crosbie Media, TCH Ireland | World | Sport | Business | Opinion | | Week In Ink | Week In News Arena | Farming | Food | GAA | Outdoors | Property | Travel Privacy Policy | Copyright Information c Terms and Conditions | Subscriptions Feedback | Contact Us | Advertising Information ignoreignore ignore ignore ignore | Site Map | Helpdmm ignore ignoreignore ignoreignore ignore ignore ignore ignore ***************************************************************** 31 NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear FR Doc E5-4351 [Federal Register: August 11, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 154)] [Notices] [Page 46892-46894] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr11au05-115] Power Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Appendix R, ``Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power [[Page 46893]] Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,'' Section III.G.2.c, for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8, issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC or the licensee), for operation of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Power Plant (FNP), Units 1 and 2, located in Houston County, Alabama. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action: On December 29, 1986, the NRC staff granted Exemption Request 1-3, ``Service Water Intake Structure--Fire Area 72,'' from certain requirements of Appendix R, Section III.G.2.c, that require fire detection and fire suppression capabilities and the enclosure of cables, equipment, and associated non-safety circuits of one redundant train of safe shutdown equipment in a one-hour rated fire barrier. Exemption Request 1-3, issued on December 29, 1986, listed a total of ten items specific to Fire Area 72 for the Service Water Intake Structure (SWIS), which is common to FNP, Units 1 and 2. By letters dated August 28, 2003, December 28, 2004, and June 9, 2005, SNC submitted proposed revisions to Exemption Request 1-3. SNC stated that the proposed revisions to Exemption Request 1-3 would clarify FNP's fire protection licensing basis, delete unnecessary attributes of the prior approved exemption, and revise the remaining exemption attributes to remove references to the Kaowool one-hour fire barrier material. SNC also stated that the proposed revision to Exemption Request 1-3 is part of SNC's comprehensive plan to respond to concerns about Kaowool fire barrier material. SNC's August 28, 2003, letter provided the disposition for the original ten items plus one additional item related to Exemption Request 1-3. For two of these items, no change in the basis for their inclusion as exemption items was proposed and they were not considered further. For two of the items related to the service water swing pump cables, the principal basis for their inclusion as exemption items was not changed, however an improvement in defense-in-depth due the upgrading of certain walls within the SWIS to 3-hour rated fire barriers was recognized. For two of the items related to the service water header strainer motor operated inlet valves and swing pump motor operated discharge valves, the basis for the exemption is revised to delete reliance on Kaowool and to reflect the re-analysis that shows that damage to cables in the strainer pit cannot result in spurious operation of the valves. For the discharge-to-wet pit and discharge to storage pond flume valves, SNC showed that, based on deterministic and fire modeling results, that fire effects will not result in the mis-positioning of the valves. For the item related to service water pump cables in Fire Area 72 A, an integrated risk assessment shows that safe shutdown can be achieved even if no credit is taken for the Kaowool raceway enclosures. A previously existing Exemption Request 1-3 item relating to the coordination between safe shutdown and non-safe shutdown circuits was found to have been resolved by modifications to the plant and, accordingly, is deleted from Exemption Request 1-3. For the item related to the redundant Train A and Train B service water and related power cables that enter the SWIS near the ceiling in the northeast corner, an integrated risk assessment shows that fire damage would not occur to these cables even if no credit were taken for Kaowool. The proposed action, would allow SNC to re-establish the basis for Exemption Request 1-3 based on programmatic and plant design modifications, a deterministic re-analyses of fire protection considerations, a risk-informed plant change evaluation specifically applicable to the SWIS, enhanced controls on transient combustibles, the existing fire detection and automatic fire suppression capability to maintain defense-in-depth, and the availability of manual fire fighting and associated fire fighting equipment. The Need for the Proposed Action: The proposed changes to Exemption Request 1-3 from 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2.c is needed to enable SNC to re-establish the bases for the exemption that do not rely on the use of the Kaowool fire barrier material for the enclosure of certain redundant cable trays in the SWIS Fire Area 72. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the proposed changes to Exemption Request 1-3 will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety. The details of the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation will be provided in the revised Exemption Request 1-3 that will be issued in a letter to the licensee approving the changes to Exemption Request 1-3. The action relates to revising the bases for the adequacy of the fire protection program at FNP. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action: As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources: The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of the FNP, Units 1 and 2, dated December 1974, and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (NUREG-1437, Supplement 18), dated March, 2005. Agencies and Persons Consulted: In accordance with its stated policy, on August 4, 2005, the NRC staff consulted with the Alabama State official, David Walters, of the Office of Radiation Control, Alabama Department of Public Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letters dated August 28, 2003, December 28, 2004, and June 9, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint [[Page 46894]] North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of August 2005. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-4351 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 32 Japan Times: More nuclear plant mishaps spur Tokai reactor shutdown Thursday, August 11, 2005 The Associated Press A nuclear power plant in the village of Tokai, Ibaraki Prefecture, shut down a reactor Wednesday for the second time this week after a valve in one of its pumps malfunctioned, the operator said. The mechanical trouble posed no danger of a radiation leak, Japan Atomic Power Company spokesman Masayuki Taguchi claimed. The reactor at the Tokai No. 2 Power Station had just been restarted after a shutdown Sunday due to radioactive water leaks caused by problems with another set of valves. The reactor had resumed a test run last week after more than three months of inspections that began in April. Wednesday's mishap involved a valve in the feed-water pump failing to send enough water from the condenser back into the reactor. In the earlier problem, workers found two radioactive water leaks -- one at the entrance to a chamber linking the reactor to a turbine, and the other in a steam pipe in the chamber. The Japan Times: Aug. 11, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 33 The Advocate: Haddam seeks federal funds to for nuclear plant security Associated Press Published August 10 2005 HADDAM, Conn. -- Officials want $50,000 in federal homeland security money to buy night-vision goggles and an all-terrain vehicle that could be used in case of a terrorist attack at the Connecticut Yankee nuclear power plant. They also want monitors to gauge radioactivity near the closed plant, where more than 1,000 uranium-laden fuel rods are stored. "It would definitely help the first responders enormously," said Resident State Trooper Jim Connelly. The plant is surrounded by woods, and Connelly said an all-terrain vehicle would help emergency workers get to the area where spent fuel is stored. Haddam First Selectman Anthony Bondi said he's uncomfortable with Connecticut Yankee's spent nuclear fuel remaining in town. Bondi said he fears it will be 20 or 30 years before the federal government allows the radioactive fuel rods to be moved to a permanent storage area such as Yucca Mountain in Nevada. "It would be nice if it left tomorrow," he said. The uranium pellets and reactor metals stored on-site provided 110 billion kilowatt hours of electricity over 28 years at Connecticut Yankee. The plant shut down in 1996. The uranium and highly radioactive metals are stored in 43 steel-reinforced concrete casks, each weighing 126 tons. The casks are stored about a mile from the plant on a thick concrete pad. A private armed force now provides 24-hour security at the outdoor complex. Connelly and Connecticut Yankee spokeswoman Kelley Smith said there have been no security problems at the fuel storage site. Smith said the town's application for federal homeland security funds is a good idea. "It's a sensible use of funds that will help the state police assist in responding to an incident at Connecticut Yankee, if necessary," she said. Information from: The Hartford Courant, http://www.courant.com Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press © 2005, Southern Connecticut Newspapers, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without ***************************************************************** 34 RedNova News: Ukraine Reconnects Two Reactors to Power Grid Posted on: Thursday, 11 August 2005, 06:00 CDT Excerpt from report by Interfax-Ukraine news agency Kiev, 11 March: Power unit No 2 of the Khmelnytskyy nuclear power station was reconnected to the power grid after faults were fixed in it at 2118 [local time] yesterday, the Enerhoatom national nuclear power company's department for liaison with the mass media reported today. As reported earlier, this power unit was switched off at 1249 [local time] yesterday. Power unit No 3 of the South-Ukrainian nuclear power station was reconnected to the power grid at 0634 [local time] today after regular maintenance. During maintenance, the power unit's reactor was partly loaded with fuel made by Westinghouse (USA). [Passage omitted: background on cooperation with Westinghouse, information on other generation facilities] Source: BBC Monitoring Former Soviet Union © 2002-2005 RedNova.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 Reuters: China may delay nuclear contract decision- sources Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:19 AM ET BEIJING, Aug 11 (Reuters) - China may put off a decision on a $8 billion contract to build four nuclear reactors and is considering only making part-by-part purchases because the technology is so expensive, industry officials said on Thursday. The three foreign companies vying for the contract to build the first third-generation reactors in China are Pittsburgh-based Westinghouse Electric Co., France's Areva and Russia's Atomstroiexport. The government's original plan was to complete a technical evaluation and recommendation by October and make a final decision by the end of this year. But Tian Jiashu, deputy director of the Nuclear Power Department of the China National Nuclear Corp., speaking on the sidelines of an industry conference, told journalists that talks with the vendors were running into trouble. "(The negotiation) is not progressing very smoothly," he said. He declined to elaborate but said both Westinghouse's AP 1000 and Areva's EPR technology were competitive. "They are two representatives of third generation technology, each has its own advantages. We can't say which one is better," Tian said. PRICE PROBLEMS A senior official of the Chinese Nuclear Society told Reuters that the main stumbling block was the high price tag on the foreign reactors and that Beijing was considering importing only those parts of the plants that cannot be produced domestically. "The Chinese side started talks with Westinghouse and Areva from early August to buy the technology on a part-by-part basis," said the official who declined to be named. But he said the government was reluctant to delay its decision, because it was keen to push ahead with expansion of China's nuclear capacity. The energy-guzzling nation plans to invest some 400 billion yuan ($49.3 billion) in building around 30 new nuclear reactors by 2020, bringing its total installed nuclear capacity to 40 gigawatts. It currently has nine working reactors that supply around 2.3 percent of its electricity but aims to boost the amount of power it gets from nuclear plants to 4 percent within 15 years. It has also been trying to build up its domestic manufacturing capacity with an eye on eventual exports. "Introducing third generation technology will swiftly promote our own technology. It could even create conditions for us to export nuclear technology in the future," He Yu, general manager of the Guangdong Nuclear Group, told the industry conference. But some officials are worried that the wide variety of nuclear technology used in China -- including equipment imported from France, Russia and Canada -- could hinder development. "Diversified technology may be conducive to our technological development, but a standard technology is obviously more suitable for a safe and stable development of the nuclear sector," Tian said. The government, busy dealing with the new technology, may also delay approval of other new nuclear power plants until the second half of next year. Many inland provinces are applying to build reactors, but Beijing is likely to prioritise the booming but resource-poor coastal areas, officials said. "Based on the government blueprint and China's ability to build nuclear plants, we should first guarantee construction in the coastal areas," the nuclear society official said. ($1=8.109 yuan) © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 36 Reuters: Dominion Va. North Anna 2 nuke back at full power Thu Aug 11, 2005 7:19 AM ET NEW YORK, Aug 11 (Reuters) - Dominion Resources Inc.'s (D.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 917-megawatt North Anna 2 nuclear unit in Virginia returned to full power by early Thursday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. On Wednesday, the unit was operating at 74 percent of capacity after exiting a shutdown over the weekend. On Aug. 5, the unit automatically tripped due to a lightning strike. The 1,842 MW North Anna station is located in Mineral in Louisa County about 50 miles northwest of Richmond, Virginia. There are two units at the station including the 925 MW unit 1 and the 917 MW unit 2. Unit 1, meanwhile, continued to operate at full power. One MW powers about 800 homes, according to the North American average. Dominion operates the station for its owners, Dominion (88.4 percent) and Old Dominion Electric Co-op (11.6 percent). Dominion's subsidiaries own and operate more than 28,000 MW of generating capacity, market energy commodities, and transmit and distribute electricity and natural gas to more than five million customers in eight states. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 37 TomPaine.com: Nukes Aren't Green [A Project of the Institute for America's Future] Mark Hertsgaard August 11, 2005 Mark Hertsgaard's books include Nuclear Inc.: The Men and Money Behind Nuclear Energy and Earth Odyssey: Around the World in Search of Our Environmental Future. A fellow of The Nation Institute, he can be reached at www.markhertsgaard.com. This article first appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle. During a public lecture in San Francisco last month, Jared Diamond, the mega-selling author of Guns, Germs and Steel, became the latest and most prominent environmental intellectual to endorse nuclear power as a necessary response to global warming. Addressing an overflow crowd at the Cowell Theater about why some societies fail and others don't (the theme of his most recent book, Collapse), Diamond three times cited global warming as a threat that could ruin modern civilization. During the question period, he was asked if he agreed with Stewart Brand, whose Long Now Foundation was sponsoring the lecture, that global warming posed such a grave threat that humanity had to embrace nuclear power. It was a delicate moment, for Brand, the former editor of The Whole Earth Catalogue , was on stage with Diamond. "I did not know that Stewart Brand said that," Diamond replied. "But yes, to deal with our energy problems we need everything available to us, including nuclear power." Nuclear, he added, should simply be "done carefully, like they do in France, where there have been no accidents." "I did not expect that answer," Brand said. Neither, it seemed, did much of the audience. Overwhelmingly white and affluent, they had nodded reverentially at everything Diamond had said thus farabout the self-destructiveness of ancient civilizations that leveled forests (Easter Island) or eroded soils (the Mayans) in pursuit of short-term gain, about the need for America to rethink its "core value" of consumerism if it hopes to survive. They had clapped when Diamond mocked President Bush's see-no-evil approach to environmental protection. Yet now here was Diamond urging an expansion of nuclear power, a technology most environmentalists regard as irredeemably evil. "Deal with it," crowed Brand as the crowd sat in stunned silence. It was smug but useful advice, for this debate is bound to intensify. The Bush administration and much of Congress are pushing hard to revive the nuclear industry, which provides 20 percent of America's electricity but has not had a new reactor order since 1974. In June, Bush became the first president in 26 years to visit a nuclear power plant, the Calvert Cliffs facility near Washington, D.C., where he endorsed nuclear as an "environmentally friendly" energy source. His administration's 2006 budget increased nuclear power funding by 5 percent, even as it cut overall energy funding. Congress followed suit in its recent energy bill. Besides giving the nuclear industry $7 billion in R&D subsidies and $7.3 billion in tax breaks, the bill contains unlimited taxpayer-backed loan guarantees and insurance protection for new reactors. Jared Diamond may not agree with Bush about much, but their shared support for nuclear power hints at the other factor that will drive the future debate. As the United States experiences more of the killer heat waves and out-of season hurricanes that have struck the Midwest and Florida recently, more and more Americans will at last recognize what the rest of the world has long accepted: Global warming is here, it will get worse before it gets better, and the economic and human costs will be enormous. As we cast about for alternatives to the carbon-based fuelscoal, oil and natural gasthat are cooking our planet, nuclear power seems an obvious answer. After all, as vice president Dick Cheney observed in 2001 when defending the administration's energy plan, which urged constructing hundreds of new nuclear plants, fission produces no greenhouse gases. But the truth is that nuclear power is a global warming weakling. Investing in a nuclear revival would make our global warming predicament worse, not better. The reasons why have little to do with nuclear safety, which may be why environmentalists tend to overlook them. Environmentalists center their critique on safety concerns: Nuclear reactors can suffer meltdowns from malfunctions or terrorist attacks; radioactivity is released in all phases of the nuclear production cycle from uranium mining through fission; the problem of waste disposal still hasn't been solved; civilian nuclear programs can spur weapons proliferation. But absent a new Chernobyl-scale disaster, such arguments may not prove decisive. In an atmosphere of desperation over how to keep our TVs, computers and refrigerators humming in a globally warmed world, economic considerations will dominate. This is especially so when dissident greens like Diamond and Brand are saying that nuclear safety is a solvable problem. And the dissidents have an arguable case. Diamond is correct that France has generated most of its electricity from nuclear power for decades without a major mishap. Likewise, it's unfair to tar western companies with the brush of Chernobyl. Incredibly, the Soviet-designed Chernobyl reactor lacked a containment vessel, a flaw that would never be allowed in the West. Dissident greens concede there are risks to nuclear power, as with any technology. But those risks, they say, are less than the alternatives. Coal, the world's major electricity source, kills thousands of people a year right now through air pollution and mining accidents. Coal is also the main driver of climate change, which is on track to kill millions of people in the 21st centurynot in the sudden bang of radioactive explosions but the gradual whimper of environmental collapse as soaring temperatures and rising seas submerge cities, parch farmlands, crash ecosystems and spread disease and chaos worldwide. Fear of such an apocalypse led the British scientist James Lovelock to become the first prominent environmentalist to endorse nuclear as a global warming remedy, in 2003. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace (who left the group a decade ago), soon echoed Lovelock's apostasy, as did Hugh Montefiore, a board member of Friends of the Earth, U.K. All three were criticized by fellow greens. Likewise, in the United States, the movement's major organizations remain adamantly anti-nuclear. But environmentalists on both sides of this argument are overlooking the strongest objection to nuclear power, even as the nuclear industry is hoping no one notices it. The objection is rooted in energy economics, hence the oversight. As energy economist Joseph Romm argued in a blog exchange with Brand, "It is too often the case that experts on the environment think they know a lot about energy, but they don't." The case against nuclear power as a global warming remedy begins with the fact that nuclear-generated electricity is very expensive. Despite more than $150 billion in federal subsides over the past 60 years (roughly 30 times more than solar, wind and other renewable energy sources have received), nuclear power costs substantially more than electricity made from wind, coal, oil or natural gas. This is mainly due to the cost of borrowing money for the decade or more it usually takes to get a nuclear plant up and running. Remarkably, this inconvenient fact does not deter industry officials from boasting that nuclear is the cheapest power available. Their trick is to count only the cost of operating the plants, not of constructing them. By that logic, a Rolls Royce is cheap to drive because the gasoline but not the sticker price matters. The marketplace, however, sees through such blarney. As Amory Lovins, the soft energy guru who directs the Rocky Mountain Institute, a Colorado think tank that advises corporations and governments on energy use, points out, "Nowhere [in the world] do market-driven utilities buy, or private investors finance, new nuclear plants." Only massive government intervention keeps the nuclear option alive. A second strike against nuclear is that it produces only electricity, but electricity amounts to only one third of America's total energy use (and less of the world's). Nuclear power thus addresses only a small fraction of the global warming problem, and has no effect whatsoever on two of the largest sources of carbon emissions, driving vehicles and heating buildings. The upshot is that nuclear power is seven times less cost-effective at displacing carbon than the cheapest, fastest alternativeenergy efficiency, according to studies by the Rocky Mountain Institute. For example, a nuclear power plant typically costs at least $2 billion (up to $5 billion with overruns). If that $2 billion were instead spent to insulate drafty buildings, purchase hybrid cars or install super-efficient light bulbs and clothes dryers, it would make unnecessary seven times more carbon consumption than the nuclear power plant would. In short, energy efficiency offers a much bigger bang for the buck. In a world of limited capital, investing in nuclear power would divert money away from cheaper and faster responses to global warming, thus slowing the world's withdrawal from carbon fuels at a time when speed is essential. Mainstream environmentalists do argue that energy efficiency, solar, wind and other renewable fuels are better weapons against global warming than nuclear is. But they will fare better if they go a step further and point out that embracing nuclear is not just unnecessary but a step backwards. Even so, a tough fight lies ahead. As the energy bill illustrates, the nuclear industry has many friends in high places. And the case for nuclear power will strengthen if its economics improve. The key to lower nuclear costs is to reduce construction times, which could happen if the industry at last adopts standardized reactors and the Bush or a future administration streamlines the plant approval process. On a more fundamental level, any defeat of nuclear power is likely to be short-lived if America does not confront what Jared Diamond calls its core value of consumerism. After all, there is only so much waste to wring out of any given economy. Eventually, if human population and appetites keep growingand some growth is inevitable, given the ambitions of China and other newly industrializing nationsnew sources of energy must be exploited. At that point, nuclear power and other undesirable alternatives like shale oil will be waiting. Environmentalists have been afraid to talk honestly about America's consumerism for decades, ever since a cardigan-wearing Jimmy Carter was ridiculed for urging people to turn down their thermostats during the 1979 oil crisis. But now that we as a species have managed through our carbon-fueled pursuit of the good life to turn up the planet's thermostat to ominous levels, it's time to break the silence. We don't have to freeze in the darkfar from itbut neither can we keep consuming as if there's no tomorrow. Copyright © 2005 Mark Hertsgaard ***************************************************************** 38 Newsday: Haddam seeks federal funds to for nuclear plant security New York City - AP Connecticut Newsday.com August 10, 2005, 11:58 PM EDT HADDAM, Conn. -- Officials want $50,000 in federal homeland security money to buy night-vision goggles and an all-terrain vehicle that could be used in case of a terrorist attack at the Connecticut Yankee nuclear power plant. They also want monitors to gauge radioactivity near the closed plant, where more than 1,000 uranium-laden fuel rods are stored. "It would definitely help the first responders enormously," said Resident State Trooper Jim Connelly. The plant is surrounded by woods, and Connelly said an all-terrain vehicle would help emergency workers get to the area where spent fuel is stored. Haddam First Selectman Anthony Bondi said he's uncomfortable with Connecticut Yankee's spent nuclear fuel remaining in town. Bondi said he fears it will be 20 or 30 years before the federal government allows the radioactive fuel rods to be moved to a permanent storage area such as Yucca Mountain in Nevada. "It would be nice if it left tomorrow," he said. The uranium pellets and reactor metals stored on-site provided 110 billion kilowatt hours of electricity over 28 years at Connecticut Yankee. The plant shut down in 1996. The uranium and highly radioactive metals are stored in 43 steel-reinforced concrete casks, each weighing 126 tons. The casks are stored about a mile from the plant on a thick concrete pad. A private armed force now provides 24-hour security at the outdoor complex. Connelly and Connecticut Yankee spokeswoman Kelley Smith said there have been no security problems at the fuel storage site. Smith said the town's application for federal homeland security funds is a good idea. "It's a sensible use of funds that will help the state police assist in responding to an incident at Connecticut Yankee, if necessary," she said. ___ Information from: The Hartford Courant, http://www.courant.com Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 39 CBC Toronto: NDP leader slams nuclear deal Last updated Aug 11 2005 02:06 PM EDT NDP leader Howard Hampton says the McGuinty government must let the public know about what he calls a secret deal on nuclear power. As part of its strategy to eliminate coal generated power, the Liberals have inked a $2-billion tentative deal to restart remaining reactors at the Bruce Nuclear Station. Hampton told reporters on Thursday that past experiences with nuclear power show that it's too costly, unreliable and potentially dangerous to the environment. He said inaction by the Liberals in areas like energy conservation and efficiency has led to a return to nuclear power. "There's no doubt the McGuinty government has, really for the last two years, done nothing  and I believe they've done nothing in order to try to create a scenario where they say, 'Oh, we're really in deep doo-doo now, and I guess by default, we, the McGuinty government, want to go nuclear.' But there are things that could have been done." "Ordinary families across Ontario deserve to know what's in the Bruce deal that Dalton McGuinty has been negotiating in the backroom," Hampton said, for reasons of "cost reliability, accountability and the environment." Copyright © CBC 2005 ***************************************************************** 40 Santa Fe New Mexican: LANL workers urged to report injuries Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:25 pm By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican Los Alamos National Laboratory managers are again stressing the need to report work-related injuries, a recently obtained lab report shows. Two employees were overexposed to hydrochloric- and nitric-acid fumes June 16, according to the report, which was released by the watchdog Project on Government Oversight on Wednesday. Neither worker reported to occupational medicine on that day, the report reads. A lab spokeswoman confirmed the reports credibility . Top lab managers did not learn of the incident until Aug. 3. According to the report: One worker experienced symptoms that persisted with physical exertion. That worker was hospitalized with pneumonialike symptoms July 23 and returned home July 29. And that worker notified the labs medical director Aug. 3. On Aug. 5, the medical director completed a review of the case and concluded the chemical exposure contributed to the workers hospitalization . The other worker had immediate symptoms of exposure, which quickly subsided . Investigators from the federal Department of Energy will look into this matter and another contamination incident that occurred in July. Both of these incidents are serious, said Bernie Pleau, external-affairs manager for the National Nuclear Security Administration , Los Alamos office. And what weve been trying to do is improve the safety posture at the lab. And you hope that people will do the right things, but then were all human, and people make mistakes, Pleau said. And you cant force people to change. Its an attitude that people have to take on, and the training is supposed to have helped. The report also noted the exposed workers properly disposed of the mixture June 16. Line management is currently re-emphasizing safety and security requirements (including the need to properly report occupational injuries) with chemistry division personnel , the report reads. A third employee has been placed on paid leave in connection with the incident, the lab has reported. ***************************************************************** 41 Bellona: Loose strontium discovered in Murmansk Region village In a series of recurring thefts and acts of vandalism of nuclear installations in the Murmansk Region of Russia, a box containing strontium was found outside the Rezets factory in the regional village of Tri Ruchya, the Barents Observer newspaper reported. The strontium source found is used to calibrate dosimeters like this one. Nils Břhmer/Bellona Charles Digges, 2005-08-11 11:48 The box, marked “radioactive,” was discovered on Monday, said the paper, and specialists from the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations were summoned. Inside, they found several metal plates imprinted with the inscription “strontium.” The officials removed the box to safe storage. According to the Russian news web site, Murmannews.ru, the Emergency Ministry’s further tests indicated that the strontium plates were of low radioactivity and used for control material to test the effectiveness of radioactivity testing dosimeters. It is as yet unclear how the box of strontium came to be discarded outside the Rezets factory or how long it had been there, local law enforcement officials in Murmansk told Bellona Web in a telephone interview. A criminal case has been opened to determine how the material got into the loose, a spokesman for the Murmansk police said Thursday, but indicated there were few leads. The spokesman also confirmed that the recovered strontium was of low radioactivity, but nonetheless expressed concern about the security of nuclear materials in the region, especially strontium. RTG strontium theft in Murmansk Indeed, over the past two years, two strontium powered radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs)—which are used primarily to power maritime navigation equipment along Russia’s arctic coast—were heavily damaged by scavengers in search of metal to trade on Russia’s grey market metal trade. In both cases, which occurred in November 2003, the highly active strontium-90 elements were recovered on open beaches nearby. The elements were returned to the manufacturer of the already dilapidated RTG units. RTGs and their strontium continue to be a nuclear security headache in Russia largely because the units themselves are well past their engineered life-spans and many are simply unaccounted for due to poor accounting practices by Russian nuclear authorities. The local government of the Finmark Region of Northeastern Norway has over the past several years done much to help replace strontium powered RTGs in Northwest Russia with units powered by solar energy. The United States Department of Energy has also pledged several million dollars to help locate and clean up RTGs along Russia’s Pacific Coast. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 42 RIA Novosti: No radiation threat from Russian sub being towed from Kamchatka to Maritime Territory 11/ 08/ 2005 MOSCOW, August 11 (RIA Novosti) - There is no radiation threat from the nuclear submarine being towed from Kamchatka to the Maritime Territory in the Far East for maintenance work, a Russian Navy official said. Captain 1st Class Igor Dygalo, an aide to the Navy Commander, commented on the Japanese media's concerns over the status of the nuclear submarine being transported near Japan's border. Dygalo said two sea tugs were transporting the Pacific Fleet's non-strategic nuclear sub. "All necessary nuclear security measures are being observed," he said. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 43 South Florida Sun-Sentinel: Suit blames illnesses on utility [Sun-Sentinel.com] Nuclear waste from the St. Lucie plant caused 2 boys' brain cancer, a lawyer says. By Jill Barton The Associated Press Posted August 11 2005 WEST PALM BEACH -- Thousands of gallons of radioactive sludge were shipped daily from the St. Lucie nuclear plant to undocumented locations in the late 1970s, creating a cancer risk for the community, an attorney who's suing the plant operator contends. Attorney Nancy La Vista said she can prove that errors in handling nuclear waste by Florida Power & Light caused the brain cancer of at least two children. She represents the parents of 11-year-old Zachary Finestone, who was diagnosed with brain cancer in March 2000, and Ashton Lowe, who had brain cancer when he died at age 13 in May 2001. The trials in the civil lawsuits could begin early next year. State health officials previously reviewed a potential cluster of childhood cancers in St. Lucie County, where both boys had lived, after discovering 29 cases of brain and central nervous system cancer from 1981 to 1997. Health Department officials tested soil, air and water for 500 chemicals at the homes of the affected children and their pregnant mothers, but they found no pattern. But La Vista points to other tests that showed unusually high levels of radioactive strontium in the boys' baby teeth, and blames Florida Power & Light releases from 1977 to 1982. FPL said it mistakenly shipped radioactive wastes to farmland about 10 miles west of the St. Lucie nuclear plant on two occasions. Those incidents were reported when FPL discovered the problem in 1982, a decade before the boys were born, said FPL spokeswoman Rachel Scott. The utility immediately cleaned up the site at Glades Cutoff Road, removing six inches of soil from a contaminated 20-foot-by-30-foot area. The radioactive material was shipped to a nuclear waste depository in Barnwell, S.C., according to court documents. Scott said tests by state and federal authorities show no health threat at the site or in the surrounding air, soil or water. "It's a very sad situation when families are dealing with cancer, but there's absolutely no validity to the claim that it has anything to do with the plant," Scott said. The farmland is in the northwest corner of St. Lucie County, about 125 miles north of Miami and a few miles north of Port St. Lucie, which in recent years has become one of the fastest-growing cities in the nation. La Vista said the problems at the farm can be traced back to 1977 and were discovered in 1982 when workers learned of a plumbing mix-up. Workers thought a sink at the plant drained to a tank designated for radioactive waste, and used it to clean highly radioactive items. But it instead went into the nuclear plant's sewage-disposal system. The potentially radioactive sewage went into a septic tank, where it was pumped out at least daily and taken to the Fort Pierce Sewage Treatment from 1977 to 1980, according to documents. The error was attributed to "essentially 100 percent turnover" in staff, according to documents obtained in the lawsuit. JUAN DALE BROWN /The FOrt Pierce Tribune Suit blames illnesses on utilityNuclear waste from the St. Lucie plant caused 2 boys' brain cancer, a lawyer says. --> Sun-Sentinel Copyright © 2005, Orlando Sentinel ***************************************************************** 44 RGJ: New standards don’t solve dump woes } [Reno Gazette-Journal] [Reno Gazette-Journal] 775-788-6200 EditorialRENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL Posted: 8/10/2005 08:25 pm When a judge threw out the EPA’s proposed radiation standard for the Yucca Mountain waste repository, it was clear that it would be just a temporary setback for the controversial plan. Despite a promise to let science rule in the decision to open the repository, President George W. Bush has made Yucca Mountain a top priority of his administration. It’s become even more important with the approval of a federal energy bill that includes a proposal to jump-start the faltering nuclear power industry in the next 10 years. The government’s inability to find a good way to deal with the waste is the biggest roadblock. The EPA tried to get Yucca Mountain back on track this week by offering new standards — 15 millirems per years for the first 10,000 years; 350 millirems per year for the next 990,000 years. But all it really accomplished was to provide additional fodder for the numerous lawsuits that are sure to keep the plan in limbo for many years to come. The proposed new standard was roundly criticized by Nevada officials and every member of the congressional district. The rest of us were left scratching our heads: It’s hard enough to understand what 350 millirems means, but who can get his or her hands around the concept of 990,000 years? What is understood, however, is that most Nevadans don’t want their state being used as a dumping ground for wastes that other states don’t want to be bothered with. Nevada doesn’t produce any nuclear power, its use of nuclear power is negligible, and it doesn’t want to be the final resting place of everyone else’s waste. What’s also well understood is that, if the government succeeds at forcing the dump on Nevada, it will be too little too late by the time it comes on line. When all the issues finally are resolved, Yucca Mountain will be outdated. So, if the feds really want nuclear power to play an important role in the nation’s quest for energy independence, they need to quit wasting money on Yucca Mountain and start a serious search for an effective, legally defensible solution to the waste problem. Nevada isn’t backing down from this fight. Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. ***************************************************************** 45 RGJ: Mine clean up moving along [Reno Gazette-Journal] Posted: 8/11/2005 11:02 am Community input as well as input to the community were key reasons for a public meeting regarding the old Anaconda Mine site held Wednesday, Aug. 3. Several representatives from those involved with the ongoing mine cleanup attended the meeting where several issues were discussed, including monitoring well progress, fugitive dust monitoring/mitigation and Scanner Van survey interpretations. + Monitoring wells Jim Sickles, remedial project manager for EPA Region 9, said work continues in acquiring property rights allowing monitoring wells north of the mine. About four wells south and east of the site have been installed with some located along the river. Currently, Sickles estimates wells to be in by September and first sampling results to be compiled by December or within the first quarter of 2006. The primary purpose of the 15 planned monitoring wells is to determine if contaminated water has left the site and leaked into surrounding areas. This was first questioned in December 2003 when uranium was found at levels above the national drinking water standard in several domestic wells north of the site. Sickles said Wednesday it is known contaminated water resulting from the mine’s presence has occurred beneath the site. The question is: Has it migrated offsite to affect other areas unrelated to the mine. With the monitoring wells, plans are to drill until bedrock is reached. Sampling will occur every so many feet. Yerington Community Action Group contact Peggy Pauly questioned as to why the projected date for monitoring well sampling results has been pushed back following an initial projection of earlier than December-first quarter 2006. Sickles noted it took longer than expected on already installed wells when the drill rig hit hard rock. This slowed the drilling, thereby slowing the well installation and sampling. Also, it was noted there are 15 wells to be drilled and only one rig to do the work. As for continued domestic well sampling, some questioned why Campbell Lane has been designated the cutoff point for tests associated with the mine as some northern wells, on the Yerington Paiute Reservation have tested high for uranium. Sickles said this cutoff point was determined based on proximity and the fact those doing the research are not aware of background, or naturally occurring, contaminant levels throughout the valley. Also, regarding water, some questioned potential contamination of the Walker River, though it was noted the river has shown to be a “losing stream” and does not receive water from the mine’s direction. + Fugitive dust Many voiced ongoing concerns the six air monitoring stations located around the mine’s perimeter are neither sufficient placement nor active often enough to accurately outline wind and dust behavior in the area. Some believe the monitors should run every third day instead of every sixth day, as they currently do. When running, the station runs 24 hours straight collecting dust on filters. Concerns are the monitors are running on days of low wind and are not active during large windstorms where large dust plumes are blowing from the mine site. Sickles reiterated the monitors are on a national protocol and are run in accordance with every other air monitor in the U.S. The every third day idea is in relation to another national protocol, it has also been noted. Also, he said the monitors, though scheduled to run every sixth day for one year, might see more than a year in use when the 12-month point is reached. Other questions asked why monitors are not within the community as well as around the site. Sickles said monitors were originally planned near Penrose Estates northeast of the site; however, further consideration showed dust from agricultural activity between the site and the subdivision could skew the results. Concerns also arose over the fact the dust monitoring program only added additional constituents of interest in June. Pauly questioned results from previously collected filters if all constituents were not tested. However, Dan Ferriter, environmental manager for ARCO (former owner of the site), assured those filters were saved and tests would be performed on them for said additional constituents. Overall, residents would rather have the dust capped than simply analyzed. Sickles said this is definitely in the cards, though he is uncertain as to when it would be done. Basically, he said they want to be sure appropriate cover is placed on the dust so it does not become someone else’s problem down the road. Also, he fears, without further study, it might be a waste of time and resources to cover the dust and later find a use for the dust prone substance thereby having to remove it anyway. Also, it was noted many of the tailings have been capped already and only a small portion is currently producing dust in windstorms. + EPA Scanner Van Following the EPA Scanner Van survey conducted in mid to late April, several have questioned the validity of gathered information based on some of its equipment’s limiting factors. Results in April indicated no harmful gamma radiation was coming from mine tailings used as base aggregate for several local buildings, including the Lyon County Library. This was illustrated Wednesday in several printouts displayed for the public. Many have questioned whether this could be considered accurate, as Sickles has noted the van could not see radiation more than two feet off the ground or more than 100 feet out. Also, materials such as dirt or concrete could block areas from being detected. Sickles reiterated the van was not an end all, be all for possible outlying community effects, but is a first step; however, showing the results from a different angle, he indicated van surveys on the mine could help answer concerns. During onsite surveying, he said areas anticipated to be high in radioactivity (especially in the process areas) did not disappoint when the van passed by. In onsite surveying, the van passed by an area where tailings were extracted for base aggregate and found no unusual radioactivity. In illustrating this portion of the survey, Sickles pointed out elevated readings found at a small portion of the area in question were from the van’s passing near to a cliff wall. He said the proximity of the wall to the van made the spike in radiation levels an anticipated result and do not indicated tailings uses as base aggregate pose a radiological harm. As for future studies, part of a unilateral order given to site managers Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) from the EPA is to have ARCO conduct assessments both on- and offsite for radiological contamination. Some questioned the status of an aerial radiation survey that has not yet taken place. Sickles said the survey has not been cancelled, though recent considerations have shown it might not be as easy as sweeping the valley. In any case, it has been previously noted the survey will not be cancelled without informing the public and without good reason. + Other concerns Pauly expressed a concern based on information showing the Anaconda Mine’s substances might not be transportable and might have to remain onsite in a kind of repository. Her concern was of other materials from other areas being stored locally, turning Yerington into a small “Yucca Mountain;” however, Sickles assured this site would be a repository only for its own substances and not those of anywhere else. Yerington Paiute Tribal Manager Bob Boyce noted it might behoove EPA and ARCO to research old maps and photos of the site to assure all items are accounted for. In other words, make sure items and buildings, which might have been moved over the years, are properly cataloged and appropriate properties examined. Also, work on the Wabuska Drain, though not currently underway, is not out of the picture. It was noted metals were found in sediment on the drain some years back, though radiological constituents were not part of the testing at that time. In the future, the Drain will be reexamined, though to what distance from the mine is not known. Also, the Drain might not connect with groundwater, it was added. Overall, regarding the Drain, it was noted a large difference exists between the Wabuska Drain and monitoring/domestic well research. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a ***************************************************************** 46 Bradenton Herald: Lawsuit: Nuclear waste hurt kids | 08/11/2005 | JILL BARTON Associated Press WEST PALM BEACH - Thousands of gallons of radioactive sludge were shipped daily from the St. Lucie nuclear plant to undocumented locations in the late 1970s, creating a cancer risk for the community, according to an attorney who's suing the plant operator. Attorney Nancy La Vista said she can prove that errors in handling nuclear waste by Florida Power & Light Co. caused the brain cancer of at least two children. She represents the parents of 11-year-old Zachary Finestone, who was diagnosed with brain cancer in March 2000, and Ashton Lowe, who had brain cancer when he died at age 13 in May 2001. The trials in the civil lawsuits could begin early next year. State health officials previously reviewed a potential cluster of childhood cancers in St. Lucie County, where both boys had lived, after discovering 29 cases of brain and central nervous system cancer from 1981 to 1997. Health Department officials tested soil, air and water for 500 chemicals at the homes of the affected children and their pregnant mothers, but they found no pattern. But La Vista points to other tests that showed unusually high levels of radioactive strontium in the boys' baby teeth, and blames Florida Power & Light releases from 1977 to 1982. FPL said it mistakenly shipped radioactive wastes to farmland about 10 miles west of the St. Lucie nuclear plant on two occasions. Those incidents were reported when FPL discovered the problem in 1982, a decade before the boys were born, said FPL spokeswoman Rachel Scott. The utility immediately cleaned up the site at Glades Cutoff Road, removing six inches of soil from a contaminated 20-foot by 30-foot area. The radioactive material was shipped to a nuclear waste depository in Barnwell, S.C, according to court documents. Scott said tests by state and federal authorities show no health threat at the site or in the surrounding air, soil or water. "It's a very sad situation when families are dealing with cancer, but there's absolutely no validity to the claim that it has anything to do with the plant," Scott said. The farmland is in the northwest corner of St. Lucie County, about 125 miles north of Miami and a few miles north of Port St. Lucie, which in recent years has become one of the fastest growing cities in the nation. La Vista said the problems at the farm can be traced back to 1977 and were discovered in 1982 when workers learned of a plumbing mix up. Workers believed a sink at the plant drained to a tank designated for radioactive waste and used it to clean highly radioactive items. But it instead went into the nuclear plant's sewage disposal system. The potentially radioactive sewage went into a septic tank, where it was pumped out daily and taken to the Fort Pierce Sewage Treatment from 1977 to 1980, according to documents. The misunderstanding was attributed to "essentially 100 percent turnover" in staff, according to documents obtained in the lawsuit. La Vista said no records exist detailing the handling or monitoring of the nuclear waste hauled to the municipal facility. She says the frequent shipments likely sent radioactive material into the air, water and ground. But Scott said that tests conducted after 1980 would have revealed contamination that had built up in previous years and showed no health risks. "There would have been no radioactive material in the liquid itself," she said. "If there had been any problems whatsoever at any time during the operation of the plant, it would have been detected by the Florida Department of Health Bureau of Radiation Control." La Vista said she expects to prove to a jury that FPL exceeded the allowable releases of nuclear waste and contaminated parts of St. Lucie County. "We believe the cancer cluster is partially related to the nuclear waste. Our cancer experts say these children were exposed to radiation," she said. "The community needs to be concerned." ***************************************************************** 47 AU ABC: NT may walk away from uranium framework 07:00 (ACST)Friday, 12 August 2005. 08:00 (AEDT)Friday, 12 The Northern Territory Government could refuse to take part in the development of a framework that will shape the future of Australia's uranium industry. Federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane unveiled the plan yesterday, saying it would pave the way for Australia to take its rightful place as a major uranium exporter. He admits taking control of the approvals process for new NT mines last week was part of the process of removing obstacles to the nuclear industry. Mr Macfarlane says he expects the Martin Government will eventually help create the framework, once tensions from last week's stoush over the approval of new uranium mines in Territory subside. "I think that last week's issues will settle," he said. NT Mines Minister Kon Vatskalis says he has reserved his judgment on the Government's plans to expand the uranium industry. Mr Vatskalis says has reservations about the nuclear industry as a whole. "I didn't say I'm happy to participate - what I said was, I want to see the details before any decision by our Government is made," he said. "It's very interesting to see how is it going to happen when we've got states and territories that oppose uranium mining or any new mines in their areas - let's wait for the details before we make any comments on it. " ***************************************************************** 48 Deseret News: Keep fighting nuclear waste dump [deseretnews.com] Thursday, August 11, 2005 Deseret Morning News editorial This is nail-biting time for Utahns. Any day now, the federal nuclear Regulatory Commission will issue a decision on whether to approve a license for a private consortium to begin storing highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel rods on the Goshute reservation just west of Salt Lake City. Frankly, the prognosis isn't good. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has recommended that the NRC grant the license. But Utah's leaders are doing all they can to fire stones at the nuclear monster that seems to be marching its way here whether people want it or not. Late last month, Sen. Bob Bennett got some wording changed in a bill that would have funded a government battle against Utah's efforts to keep the waste away. Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. called this "public policy at its worst." Indeed. If Congress had decided to pay the legal bills of a private company trying to contaminate Utah's deserts, it might have made voters here wonder what good it is to be the most Republican state at a time when Republicans are in power. Now, Sen. Orrin Hatch and the governor have succeeded in getting the Department of Homeland Security to come here to study just how smart it would be for the government to allow a concentration of deadly radiation near a military training range and a major metropolitan area. The answer to that one ought to be obvious. But, just to be safe, we will quote Hatch, who said, "It's difficult for me to understand how anybody in their right mind in this day of suicide bombers would place 4,000 casks of nuclear waste above ground" in such a location. For Utahns, the maddening thing about this decade-long march has been their own lack of political clout. While the state's leaders have tried everything from buying up roadways around the site to declaring the area a protected wilderness, the consortium, Private Fuel Storage, has quietly gone about dotting its "i's" and crossing its "t's." The rest of the nation, apparently, sees little wrong with sending its nuclear waste to Utah's desert. Even a group of Hollywood celebrities who rallied against the dump last month in Washington seemed to have little effect. Our hope is that reason ultimately will prevail. The power plants that create nuclear waste ought to continue storing the spent fuel rods on site, as they have for decades now. Then, the federal government needs to get serious about recycling those rods to minimize the waste. Until that day, Utah's leaders need to keep up the good fight. © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 49 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: EPA logic on radiation questioned Thursday, August 11, 2005 State official says 10 million cancer deaths would be acceptable under safety standard By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL Nevada's Nuclear Projects Agency took issue Wednesday with the Environmental Protection Agency's logic for recommending a new radiation safety standard for the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. In an interview from Carson City, state Nuclear Projects Agency chief Bob Loux said based on the EPA's estimates there will be 10 million cancer deaths over 1 million years that result from storing highly radioactive spent fuel in the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. While that appears to be a worst case affecting 25,000 generations, Loux said that means nonetheless that 10 million deaths from the repository's operation is acceptable under the EPA's new rule. To satisfy a court ruling, the EPA on Tuesday issued a two-tiered standard, with one set of limits for the first 10,000 years of repository operation and a second set for the succeeding years, out to a million years. The radiation dose limits were set at 15 millirem and 350 millirem per year, respectively, above natural background. A millirem is a small amount of energy that produces the same biological effect as a similar unit of absorbed dose from ordinary X-rays. For comparison, a chest X-ray exposes a patient to 10 millirem while a mammogram results in a 30 millirem exposure. A person living in the United States receives an annual average 300-millirem dose of radiation from natural and man-made sources. Radon accounts for 55 percent of background radiation components. Loux also expressed concern that the EPA, in his view, has backpedaled from its previous stance that a 150 millirem is unacceptable. He cited a June 2001 written response from the EPA in which the agency stated, "No regulatory body would consider doses of 150 millirem to be acceptable." Four years later, the EPA has ignored its own stated position and instead proposed a standard for the Yucca Mountain project that's more than twice that, Loux noted. An EPA spokesman said the EPA's technical staff will consider the state's concerns in the course of hearings on the revised standard. "EPA welcomes the chance to review and consider comments and criticisms during the upcoming 60-day public comment period and during the three planned hearings -- two in Nevada and one in Washington, D.C.," the spokesman, John Millet, said in an e-mail. Per F. Peterson, nuclear engineering professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said the recommended EPA standard goes beyond what is required for disposal of non-radioactive materials. "Basically, there are no standards that specify performance limits past 10,000 years, so anything that the EPA would require for Yucca Mountain past 10,000 years would be more protective than what we currently require for the disposal of toxic chemicals and mining wastes," Peterson wrote in an e-mail. Meanwhile, a couple of environmental watchdog groups and a local industrial hygienist who is an outspoken critic of the government's plans for Yucca Mountain asserted that the EPA's proposed standard fails to protect the public's long-term health and safety. "I think it's a scam," said Peggy Maze Johnson, executive director of Citizen Alert, a statewide environmental group. "We've been worried about a two-tiered standard. ... I would imagine we'll be weighing in on a lawsuit with the state like we did in the original one." Wenonah Hauter, director of the energy program for Public Citizen, a national organization, said in a statement setting two standards "is an arbitrary decision designed to facilitate the licensing of the project rather than make it safe for those who live near the site." Jacob Paz, a former industrial hygienist for a Nevada Test Site contractor, said in a letter to Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., that the EPA's proposal fails to consider the so-called "bystander effect," in which radiation produces changes in cells that were not directly hit by it but are in the vicinity of those that were. "Even exposure to background radiation causes some cancers," Paz wrote. Stephens Washington Bureau chief Steve Tetreault contributed to this report. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 50 Interfax: Large beryllium consignment flown from Lithuania to Russia Interfax.com Text version Site map Aug 11 2005 3:24PM VILNIUS. Aug 11 (Interfax) - About 4 tonnes of strategic beryllium which can be used to manufacture nuclear fuel, has been transported from Lithuania to Russia, Lithuanian State Security Department spokesman Vytautas Makauskas told Interfax on Thursday. "The State Security Department has received assurances from Russian special services that the beryllium's recipient is a real company which does exit in Russia, so there were no reasons to stop the shipment," Makauskas said. "The State Security Department checks all attempts to take beryllium out of Lithuania. Whenever the slightest suspicions arise about the recipients' reliability or about the submitted documents, transactions of this kind are vetoed," he said. The beryllium was loaded on Wednesday into a plane at Vilnius airport and flown to Russia. The recipients have not been named. © 1991-2005 Interfax All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 51 BBC: Nuclear clean-up cost up to Ł56bn Last Updated: Thursday, 11 August 2005 [Sellafield] Sellafield's age and lack of records will make decommissioning difficult Decommissioning the UK's ageing nuclear power stations will cost billions of pounds more than originally expected. In its first report, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority estimates that Ł56bn will have to be spent cleaning up 20 sites. NDA wants to speed up the clean-up, including that of the ageing Magnox plants, from 125 years to 25 years. It has published consultation plans which will be open until 11 November, with a proposal finalised in December. Nuclear legacy NDA chairman Sir Anthony Cleaver said the Ł56bn estimate was higher than the Ł48bn figure the four-month-old agency had inherited. We believe it ought to possible to complete the decommissioning of these stations over a 25-year period Sir Anthony Cleaver, Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Hard decisions of clean-up The higher estimate is based on the costs over the whole lifetime of the sites, calculated by the UK Atomic Energy Authority and British Nuclear Fuels. "It's important to recognise that we're talking about a programme that's running just over a century, so those changes in estimates don't seem very surprising," Sir Anthony said. He said the consultation document was the "first time anyone has had the opportunity to put together a coherent programme for all 20 of the sites". High hazards The decommissioning of the Sellafield and Dounreay sites was described as "our number one decommissioning priority" by the NDA. A leak was discovered in April at the Sellafield, in Cumbria, but it could have occurred as long ago as August 2004. NDA'S 20 NUCLEAR SITES Berkeley Gloucestershire Bradwell, Essex Calder Hall, Cumbria Capenhurst, Cheshire Chapelcross, Dumfries and Galloway Culham, Oxfordshire Dounreay, Caithness Drigg, Cumbria Dungeness, Kent Harwell, Oxfordshire Hinkley, Somerset Hunterston, Ayrshire Oldbury, Gloucestershire Sellafield, Cumbria Sizewell, Suffolk Springfields, Lancashire Trawsfynydd, north Wales Windscale, Cumbria Winfrith, Dorset Wylfa, north Wales Click here for a map 'Lethal legacy' for Cumbria An investigation in June found "significant deficiencies", and ordered improvements to be introduced by October. Inadequate historic records mean that the precise contents of Sellafield and Dounreay are unknown. "Consequently, we have yet to choose the best way to retrieve the materials safely and without endangering the environment," NDA said. Sir Anthony, speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, highlighted the four operating Magnox stations - Dungeness in Kent, Oldbury in Gloucestershire, Sizewell in Suffolk and Wylfa in north Wales - which will all be closed by 2010. Future generations Current plans assume that after initial work for 10 or 15 years, the "more difficult pieces" are dealt with some 70 years later. "That's leaving the problem for future generations and throughout that period you've got the problem of storage, safety, security," Sir Anthony said. "We believe it ought to be possible to complete the decommissioning of these stations over a 25-year period." During the consultation period, NDA staff will host and attend meetings to explain the document and answer questions, the NDA said. A final strategy is expected to be published next spring. Among issues that the authority is looking at is the need for an alternative for Drigg in Cumbria, which is the only place in the country where low-level nuclear waste can be stored in perpetuity. Drigg is about 1km from a shoreline that is eroding at the rate of 1 metre a year. 'Huge risks' There is a risk it could flood between 500 and 5,000 years after it is closed. Former environment minister Michael Meacher expressed concern at the cost of the decommissioning and questioned plans for future nuclear builds. "Nuclear is neither necessary nor desirable to meet our climate change targets. "It involves huge economic, military and environmental risks that should be avoided. The risks are the long-term risks of storage. "Despite strenuous efforts over the last 30 years no government has yet solved the problem of safe long-term storage." New reactors? The NDA was set up in April this year under the Energy Act 2004 to take responsibility for the UK's nuclear legacy. Environmental group Greenpeace said NDA's timeline was shorter than that given as feasible for building a repository for waste. "The NDA claims a speedier clean-up of sites would lead to cost reductions," nuclear campaigner Jean McSorley said. "But we're worried that one of the real motives behind the NDA's move for quicker clean-up is to make way for new reactors. "In our view it would be madness to push for cleaning up sites only to make way for new plants which will create even more waste for decades to come." THE NDA'S 20 NUCLEAR SITES Source: Nuclea Decommissioning Authority ***************************************************************** 52 BBC NEWS: Faster nuclear clean-up urged Last Updated: Thursday, 11 August, 2005, 12:26 GMT 13:26 [Trawsfynydd power station] Hard decisions of nuclear clean-up The body responsible for cleaning up ageing nuclear power stations wants a faster clean-up of sites in Wales. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) wants Trawsfynydd turned back to a "green field" site within 25 years, instead of more than a century. The NDA also wants to speed up site restoration at Wylfa on Anglesey, which is due to stop production in 2010. The current timetable sees the site returned to "brown field" status in 2125. But the NDA believes there is a strong case to release the site for development within 25 years - possibly as early as 2035. The authority's intentions were laid out in its first report, published on Thursday. In it, it said the cost of dealing with Britain's ageing power stations would cost Ł8bn more than first thought. It estimated that Ł56bn would have to be spent cleaning up 20 sites across the UK. It has published consultation plans which will be open until 11 November, with a proposal finalised in December. Trawsfyndd - which is licensed to Magnox Electric Limited - operated from 1965 to 1991. Decommissioning is already underway. [Wylfa power station, Anglesey] Wylfa will stop generating power in 2010 It was the only power station to be built inland, adjacent to a lake, which provided cooling water when the station was operation. Under the existing plans it is assumed the site would be returned to green field status. Final site clearance and closure would be in 2096. Wylfa - also a Magnox plant - was the last and largest power station of its type to be built. Although the end of production is planned for 2010, the closure date for the site is subject to change by the government. The NDA will continue to run the plant until it closes, unless there are any technical problems or economic grounds to force early closure. Under the current proposals, the site would be returned to brown field status in 2125. NDA chairman Sir Anthony Cleaver said the Ł56bn estimate of the final clear-up was based on the costs over the whole lifetime of the sites, calculated by the UK Atomic Energy Authority and British Nuclear Fuels. "It's important to recognise that we're talking about a programme that's running just over a century, so those changes in estimates don't seem very surprising," Sir Anthony said. He said the consultation document was the first time anyone had had the opportunity to put together a coherent programme for all 20 sites. ***************************************************************** 53 BBC: Hard decisions of nuclear clean-up Last Updated: Thursday, 11 August, 2005 By Richard Black BBC News environment correspondent [Sellafield] Britain was a pioneer at the start of the nuclear age It is the issue which just about every politician would like to wish away; but there is no sign yet of any magic wand which can make 10,000 tonnes of radioactive waste simply disappear. Without one, the government will at some stage, however reluctantly, have to take hard decisions on what to do with the toxic detritus of a 60-year nuclear programme. Without establishing firm plans for disposing of Britain's nuclear waste and decommissioning the facilities which remain, it is difficult to conceive how the government can open a meaningful debate about any future role of nuclear power. With signs of an "energy deficit" looming, there is clearly an urgent need for such debate. 'Urgent need' Britain was a pioneer in the nuclear age, building experimental reactors and other facilities whose waste output was unknown and unknowable at the time of construction. Accordingly, its piles of waste are significantly higher than those of many other members of the nuclear club; but it has been anything but a pioneer in the process of dealing with its waste. "Almost 30 years after the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution first drew attention to the urgent need to find a long-term solution to the problem of storing radioactive waste, there is still no strategy for dealing with the United Kingdom's high and intermediate level radioactive waste," thundered the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee in December 2004. We hope that the governme will take a decision fairly rapidly once they've reported, because we do need to have a decision on which way to handle the waste Sir Anthony Cleaver Within the last five years the government has shown signs of trying to get to grips with the issue, establishing two bodies with subtly different responsibilities and remits. One is the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CORWM), charged with recommending an overall strategy on waste disposal to the government. It published a shortlist of 'disposal options' in April, and will release its final report next summer. The other is the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which will direct and manage the closing down and cleaning up of 20 sites around the UK, including Sellafield, Dounreay and the eleven Magnox power stations. It describes its draft strategy, published today, as "ambitious and challenging" - and it is difficult to disagree. Its key recommendations are: + Speeding up drastically the decommissioning of Magnox stations - though the reactors will all have closed by 2010, currently the sites would not be cleared for 125 years. The NDA says that is too long and wants it done in just 25 + For low-level waste, finding an alternative to the existing facility at Drigg in Cumbria; though the shallow hole at Drigg is far from full, it is anything but far from the coast, and there is a distinct risk of flooding in the coming centuries + Finding solutions - as yet unspecified - to the many issues at Sellafield, including the troubled Thorp re-processing plant which is currently closed following a serious leak of radioactive liquid + Putting operations at some sites out to competitive tender by 2008 Constrained options? Over the next three months the NDA will gather reactions from around the country and compile its final document, which should be available before the end of the year. [Sellafield] The ultimate question is of where the toxic waste will be kept Some of its options may be constrained by what CORWM recommends, and then by what the government chooses to do with its recommendations. "We hope that the government will take a decision fairly rapidly once they've reported, because we do need to have a decision on which way to handle the waste," the NDA's Chairman Sir Anthony Cleaver told BBC News. "I think at the moment our view would be that an underground repository is the best solution - that seems to be the one that combines most of the aspects of safety and security in the most effective way." Skills shortage Though many in the industry will appreciate the NDA's can-do attitude, there are reservations. Prospect, the union which represents workers in the nuclear industry, fears that putting management of decommissioning at half of the 20 sites out to competitive tender by end of 2008 could impact on safety. Prospect also draws attention to a shortage of the skills and expertise needed to decommission these various sites, which the NDA intends to address by establishing a 'nuclear skills academy', probably to be sited in Cumbria. Ultimately, the key question for the public is likely to be the one which comes after "how should we dispose of the stuff?" - namely, "where should we dispose of the stuff?" It is a question which politicians would prefer not to exist, but like the waste itself, it can't be wished away. As one nuclear scientist told me earlier this year: "The issue isn't whether burying waste is an ideal solution, but whether it is more or less dangerous than leaving it where it is" - generally, in temporary storage at the sites where it has been created. But the location issue is very, very difficult; in 1997 a planning application to build an underground laboratory near Sellafield to research deep disposal was turned down because of local objections. It is entirely likely that any future proposal would meet with similar objections, preventing a long-term resolution of the issue, and therefore the 'rational debate' on future nuclear power which some voices in the Labour and Conservative parties are calling for. ***************************************************************** 54 BBC: Cumbria left with 'lethal Last Updated: Thursday, 11 August 2005 By Phil Mawson BBC News, Cumbria [Nuclear fuel] Sellafield stores tonnes of high-level nuclear waste The decommissioning of Sellafield will leave Cumbria with as many issues as the nuclear complex has created over the past 50 years. More than 8,000 of the site's workforce of 12,000 will lose their jobs by 2011 as the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority's (NDA) work kicks in. The government says it will help the area survive economically. But even when Sellafield is gone, thousands of tonnes of lethal nuclear waste will remain. Sellafield holds 98% of the country's most deadly nuclear waste and more than 50% of intermediate level waste - enough to fill more than 1,000 double decker buses. We have a world-class workfor in this sector that must be retained and enhanced Northwest Development Agency spokesman Drigg, some 6km south of Sellafield, contains tonnes more low-level waste from nuclear facilities, universities and hospitals. A decision on what will happen to waste at both sites has yet to be made by the government's Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM). But Drigg is filling up fast, leaving Sellafield as the prime site to store the UK's nuclear waste underground - even when Sellafield is decommissioned. The management of nuclear waste will help to secure some jobs in west Cumbria. But the government admits that securing the economic future of the area will be tough. Millions of pounds has been set aside to alleviate the impact of the demise of Sellafield. [Drigg nuclear waste site] The Drigg site is more than 40 years old Among the projects under consideration is the creation by the NDA of a Nuclear Skills Academy and a Nuclear Institute - both likely to be sited in Cumbria. It is a move welcomed by the Learning and Skills Council, which said: "Clearly these would have major implications in terms of investment and the development of high added value jobs. "They would also provide an opportunity for local people to gain the skills needed for decommissioning work, as well as any work which would develop should there be any new nuclear build in the future." In November 2004, Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia Hewitt said she was determined that a post-Sellafield Cumbria would get "high quality jobs". The NDA says it plans to help establish charitable trusts to foster community-based projects and entrepreneurship. But it also admits that its funds are "limited" and that its role is not job creation. [Sellafield complex in Cumbria] Decommissioning at Sellafield has begun A spokesman added: "It is not NDA's role to directly replace jobs lost as a result of our activities, nor is it our responsibility to lead socio-economic regeneration programmes - other agencies are best placed to do this. "We fully accept, however, our responsibility to work to maximise the opportunities for local people and businesses arising through decommissioning and clean up." A range of government bodies are considering how best to tackle the problems Cumbria will face over the next 25 years. Recent figures showed Cumbria's economic output had fallen from 92% of the national average in 1995, to 77% in 2001. A spokesman for the Northwest Regional Development Agency said: "We recognise west Cumbria as a regional and national priority for economic regeneration. "Although the industry is facing a period of major transition, there are significant economic and commercial opportunities which must be exploited. "We have a world-class workforce in this sector that must be retained and enhanced. "We must build on this reputation, providing the focus required to move the industry forward." ***************************************************************** 55 Las Vegas SUN: Nevada officials, scientists continue to spar over Yucca radiation standard Today: August 11, 2005 at 11:19:18 PDT By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Health physicists and radiation experts say the new proposed radiation standard for Yucca Mountain poses no significant health threats. But Nevada officials say the government would unfairly put future residents living near Yucca at higher risk for cancer and other radiation-related illnesses than residents of other states. The Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday renewed a debate -- and sparked a controversy that likely will land in court -- about just how much radiation could acceptably leak from the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The EPA announced that it had set a radiation-release standard designed to protect Nevadans for 1 million years -- an unprecedented scientific effort for the agency. The EPA proposed a "two-tiered" rule. One tier sets a standard for up to 10,000 years at 15 millirem, roughly equivalent to a chest X-ray. That means the repository would be required to contain radiation for 10,000 years so that people living near Yucca would not receive a higher dose than 15 millirem in one year from the waste stored inside Yucca's underground tunnels. The second tier would set a standard for 10,000 years to 1 million years at 350 millirem. That's unacceptably high, Nevada officials say. "This is 350 millirem of involuntary exposure equal to about 35 chest X-rays a year," said attorney Joe Egan, who handles Yucca issues for the state. "Pregnant women aren't supposed to get any. This is a departure from all principles of radiation science." Egan argues that the current regular allowable "public dose" from a nuclear power plant or other facility using radioactive materials is 100 millirem per year, based on recommendations by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and rules adopted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This alone makes the EPA's standard three times higher than what is deemed acceptable now, Egan said. He said a low-level radioactive waste dump has a 25 millirem limit out to peak dose -- the time the radiation levels would be at their highest. Low-level waste is "far less dangerous" than what would be stored in Yucca, and it has a stricter standard, he said. "This is increasing the level of risk to Nevadans," Egan said. The exposure may not be enough to kill someone outright, but it could lead to serious illnesses over time, he said. A person receiving 350 millirem in additional radiation exposure is put at higher risk than others, Egan said. "It is a very significant increase in risk," he said. Rod McCullum, senior project manager for waste at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry's interest group, agreed that the agency standard is higher than what would be allowed from a nuclear power plant, but he said it is not a fair comparison. "It's comparing apples to oranges over time," McCullum said. "Everything is known with a nuclear power plant. There is a known quantity. There is nothing else in the world that is regulated for 1 million years. It is not a legitimate analogy." And while the proposed standard of 350 millirem for Yucca is more than three times the 100 millirem standard for nuclear power plants, the difference does not automatically translate into severe health problems, experts said. Controversy exists over what level of radiation exposure would cause cancer. Some scientists argue that no level of radiation is safe, while others say small doses are good for you, said Richard Morin, chairman of the American College of Radiology Medical Physics Commission. "Three-hundred-fifty millirem falls into an area with no conclusive scientific data that it would cause health problems," said Morin, who is the Brooks-Hollern professor at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla. "That level is certainly consistent with natural background radiation." Americans on average receive "background" radiation from a number of sources, including the cosmic rays from outer space, the earth, rock and radon gas often found in homes. Several radiation experts, as well as EPA officials, point to the average 700 millirem of background radiation that people receive in the high-elevation city of Denver. That's about the same level as what the EPA has said would be acceptable near Yucca after 10,000 years -- roughly 350 millirem in normal background radiation and 350 millirem from Yucca. Phillip Patton, a UNLV assistant professor of health physics, noted there is no abnormal rate of cancer in Denver. "By increasing our background radiation, we would be no different than if we all moved to Denver," Patton said. "It seems 350 millirem would cause no problems." Ralph Andersen, NEI's Chief Health Physicist, said he has worked around radiation most of his life and would not be concerned about a 350 millirem exposure. He would not consider the level unsafe for his family either. He said he might try to avoid it, but he also would not pick up and move out of Colorado or other places with a high background level of radiation just because of exposure. "I don't think people look at that as a dangerous level of radiation," he said. Nuclear power plants or radioactive medical facilities no longer in use have a public exposure range of up to 500 millirem per year for up to 1,000 years, Andersen said. That rule has already been approved and is used by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission so the proposed Yucca limit could not be harmful, he said. Andersen said exposure to 350 millirem could add incremental risk for people living around the repository but that no studies have shown cancer caused at that level. It is usually only seen at higher levels, he said. The long-term effects of radiation are harder to argue and harder to measure, Patton said. It is unethical to purposely expose someone to radiation to measure the risks, so there is a limited amount of data, experts said. Experts say the more exposure people have to radiation, the more likely it is to cause cancer, but the exact level at which radiation triggers cancer is not known, Morin said. Peter Caracappa, a radiation safety officer and a research associate at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in New York, said there is a debate over the true effect of radiation at certain levels. "This is not a line between safe and not safe," Caracappa said. "It is a continuous risk exposure." Although there is no threshold, Caracappa said, the level is much higher than the 350 millirem the EPA would allow at Yucca. "You are not talking about high levels of radiation," said Carol Kornmehl, a radiation oncologist, speaking of the 350-millirem level. "This is not a high exposure, it is not likely to cause health problems." Kornmehl said a CAT scan to the chest can expose a patient to 760 millirem. The same test to the abdomen and pelvis has 2,760 millirem. Kornmehl, author of "The Best News About Radiation Therapy," said the standard proposed for Yucca is "probably acceptable," but that the government needs to explain to the public what the 350-millirem radiation level means. Morin said a 100,000 millirem single exposure to the eyes could cause cataracts and 200,000 millirem single exposure would redden skin and make a person ill. Morin said international flight crews can receive more than 350 millirem in a year and some patients are exposed to that amount for certain procedures. "A radiation worker in a plant can get 5,000 millirem per year," Morin said. Nevada's Egan counters that a plant worker is there voluntarily, knows the risks and is compensated well for his or her work associated with that risk, while the EPA standard puts people involuntarily at risk. Egan points out that in finalizing the initial radiation standard, which a court threw out last year, EPA acknowledged that the National Academy of Sciences recommended a 2 to 20 millirem limit per year for an unspecified amount of time. "How is 350 'based upon and consistent with' this recommendation?" Egan asked. The court required EPA to make a new standard based on the National Academy of Sciences recommendation, as Congress stated in the Energy Policy Act of 1992. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 56 FT.com: UK - Nuclear clean-up cost may top ÂŁ60bn By Rebecca Bream and Chris Adams Published: August 11 2005 21:54 | Last updated: August 11 2005 21:54 [uk nuclear] The bill for cleaning up the UK's ageing nuclear power plants is likely to top ÂŁ60bn and the process could take the best part of a century, the body responsible for the task warned on Thursday. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, formed in April after a shake-up of the government's nuclear bodies, yesterday launched a public consultation on how best to handle the closure of the UK's 20 remaining sites. Sir Anthony Cleaver, chairman of the NDA, said reducing the risks posed by old waste storage facilities at the Sellafield nuclear complex in Cumbria was his top priority, followed by speeding up the decommissioning of the 11 Magnox power stations built in the 1960s and 1970s. This would be expensive, he warned. A previous government estimate of ÂŁ48bn had been raised to ÂŁ56bn and this was likely to increase, Sir Anthony said, as new clean-up problems were discovered. For instance, it could cost an extra ÂŁ5bn-ÂŁ10bn to dispose of stock piles of plutonium, now classed as an asset. The consultation comes as the government examines whether new nuclear power plants are needed. Downing Street officials are believed to want to use the findings of a climate change review by Margaret Beckett, environment secretary, due later this year, to commission an independent study on the nuclear issue. There is a view in Whitehall that Tony Blair could use the findings of the reviews to propose an expansion of nuclear capacity, arguing that this would be needed to meet targets to cut greenhouse gases. But such a significant shift in policy could lead to cabinet disagreement and even a parliamentary revolt. [ height=] © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. ***************************************************************** 57 Congressman Jon Porter: PORTER RESPONDS TO PROPOSED EPA RADIATION STANDARD FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 9, 2005 WASHINGTON, D.C. - Third District Congressman Jon Porter issued the following statement in response to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed radiation standard: “The EPA's so-called 'health standard' projections for determining what is a safe level of radiation exposure for Nevadans are irrational and misguided. Where’s the proof that an additional 350 millirem per year of radiation won’t have a negative impact on a human being? That contravenes 50 years of radiation science. The only real way to protect the health and safety of Nevadans is to make sure Yucca Mountain never becomes a repository for the nation's nuclear waste.” # # # ***************************************************************** 58 Independent Online: Taxpayers face Ł56bn bill for clean-up of nuclear sites By Saeed Shah Published: 12 August 2005 The cost of dismantling and cleaning up Britain's civil nuclear power stations and infrastructure has escalated by Ł8bn to at least Ł56bn, the organisation given the task reported yesterday. The increase in costs announced by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) for the 20 nuclear sites that comes under its remit, was immediately seized upon by critics of nuclear energy, who said the figures demonstrated that the power source was not economically viable. Tony Juniper, executive director of Friends of the Earth, said: "Nuclear power is an expensive liability with a long track record of huge cost overruns." Supporters of the nuclear industry claimed, however, that the NDA study showed that costs involved were quantifiable and manageable. The Nuclear Industry Association said that nuclear power was needed in order to have a balanced mix of energy sources. The Government has yet to make the politi-cally charged decision on whether to replace Britain's ageing nuclear power stations with a new generation of plants. Andrew Stunell MP, the energy spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, said: said: "This [NDA report] is the first dose of official realism there has been over the fantastic costs of the nuclear industry. It blows away the argument for repeating the mistake of relying on nuclear power as the way ahead to tackle climate change." Nuclear power currently generates more than a fifth of Britain's electricity. The NDA is in charge of the clean-up of the 11 "Magnox" power stations that were the earliest built in Britain - only four of these are still operational. It is also responsible for a range of other nuclear facilities involved in nuclear research and processing of fuel. British Energy also has nuclear power stations that do not fall under the NDA's authority. The NDA was only set up in April. Its chairman, Sir Anthony Cleaver, said that the rise in the estimated cost of the clean-up operations, from a previous estimate of Ł48bn to Ł56bn, was due to greater understanding of the task and to common standards being adopted across all the sites, for the first time, to calculate costs. Sir Anthony warned that even the Ł56bn figure could go up by a further Ł5bn to Ł10bn if stockpiles of plutonium were reclassified as liabilities, rather than their current status as assets. The nuclear body also recommended that the time scale for the decommissioning of the Magnox stations be drastically shortened. Within 25 years, it aims to have cleared all of these for alternative uses. Previously, it had been planned to make the sites safe over 10 to 15 years and then to leave them for 60 or 70 years, before returning to finish the job. Even under the new plan, the clean-up of the huge Sellafield site would take 75 years, at a cost of Ł31.5bn, rather than over a century as was originally envisaged. Sir Anthony said that taking a large gap between starting and completing the decommissioning process would mean leaving the problem to future generations. "First of all, you obviously don't have that long period where you have the problem of security and safety in the storage of that material on the site. A major advantage in addition is the impact on employment. The current plan assumes after the initial period the level of employment on those sites goes down almost to zero, then suddenly 60 years later you have to re-emerge with the appropriate skills to finish the job," he said. Next year, the NDA said it would invite bids from companies to begin the decommissioning process. Sir Anthony said that there were three current contractors in the sector but he wanted more competition to emerge. © 2005 Independent News & Media (UK) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 59 The Telegraph Online: EPA goes real l-o-n-g on Yucca Dale McFeatters Published: Thursday, Aug. 11, 2005 It is tempting to say that by the time the Yucca Mountain controversy, now in its 18th year, is resolved, the nuclear waste it is supposed to house will have decayed into harmlessness. Heres the latest chapter. According to an Environmental Protection Agency press release this week, “EPA is proposing public health standards for the planned high-level radioactive waste disposal facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, that will protect public health for 1 million years.” One million. Thats a number that jumps out and grabs you. The EPA was responding to a court ruling that found an earlier standard, for a relatively brisk 10,000 years, didnt go far enough. So the agency tacked on a regulation limiting radiation exposure for another 990,000 years, providing protection, it said, for the next 25,000 generations of people living near the site. Human beings in their recognizable modern form have only been around for 150,000 years or so some say as long as 195,000 and only spread out of Africa and into the rest of the world 28,000 years ago. Talk about hubris. Not only does the standard assume that well still be around, but that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will be around to enforce it. Then again, maybe the EPA knows something the rest of us dont. Maybe by then radioactivity will be good for you. Dale McFeatters is a Scripps Howard News Service writer. The Telegraph. PO Box 1008, Nashua, NH 03061 (603) 594-6440 Privacy Policy and User Agreement The Telegraph Online Ver. 2.0 © 2005, Telegraph Publishing Company All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 60 Gainesville Sun: Decades-old nuclear sludge said to pose S. Florida health risk Gainesville.com | The | Gainesville, Fla. The Associated Press August 11. 2005 6:01AM WEST PALM BEACH - Thousands of gallons of radioactive sludge was shipped daily from the St. Lucie nuclear plant to undocumented locations in the late 1970s, creating a cancer risk for the community, according to an attorney who's suing the plant operator. Attorney Nancy La Vista said errors in handling nuclear waste by Florida Power &Light caused the brain cancer of at least two children. She represents the parents of 11-year-old Zachary Finestone, who was diagnosed with brain cancer in March 2000, and Ashton Lowe, who had brain cancer when he died at age 13 in May 2001. The trials in the civil lawsuits could begin early next year. State health officials previously reviewed a potential cluster of childhood cancers in St. Lucie County, where both boys had lived, after discovering 29 cases of brain and central nervous system cancer from 1981 to 1997. Health Department officials tested soil, air and water for 500 chemicals at the homes of the affected children and their pregnant mothers, but they found no pattern. But La Vista points to other tests that showed unusually high levels of radioactive strontium in the boys' baby teeth, and blames Florida Power &Light releases from 1977 to 1982. FPL said it mistakenly shipped radioactive wastes to farmland about 10 miles west of the St. Lucie nuclear plant on two occasions. Those incidents were reported when FPL discovered the problem in 1982, a decade before the boys were born, said FPL spokeswoman Rachel Scott. The utility immediately cleaned up the site at Glades Cutoff Road, removing six inches of soil from a contaminated 20-foot by 30-foot area. The radioactive material was shipped to a nuclear waste depository in Barnwell, S.C, according to court documents. Scott said tests by state and federal authorities show no health threat at the site or in the surrounding air, soil or water. ''It's a very sad situation when families are dealing with cancer, but there's absolutely no validity to the claim that it has anything to do with the plant,'' Scott said. The farmland is in the northwest corner of St. Lucie County, about 125 miles north of Miami and a few miles north of Port St. Lucie, which in recent years has become one of the fastest growing cities in the nation. La Vista said the problems at the farm can be traced back to 1977 and were discovered in 1982 when workers learned of a plumbing mix up. Workers believed a sink at the plant drained to a tank designated for radioactive waste and used it to clean highly radioactive items. But it instead went into the nuclear plant's sewage disposal system. The potentially radioactive sewage went into a septic tank, where it was pumped out at least daily and taken to the Fort Pierce Sewage Treatment from 1977 to 1980, according to documents. The misunderstanding was attributed to ''essentially 100 percent turnover'' in staff, according to documents obtained in the lawsuit. La Vista said no records exist detailing the handling or monitoring of the nuclear waste hauled to the municipal facility. She says the frequent shipments likely sent radioactive material into the air, water and ground. But Scott said that tests conducted after 1980 would have revealed contamination that had built up in previous years and showed no health risks. ''There would have been no radioactive material in the liquid itself,'' she said. ''If there had been any problems whatsoever at any time during the operation of the plant, it would have been detected by the Florida Department of Health Bureau of Radiation Control.'' La Vista said she expects to prove to a jury that FPL exceeded the allowable releases of nuclear waste and contaminated parts of St. Lucie County. ''We believe the cancer cluster is partially related to the nuclear waste. Our cancer experts say these children were exposed to radiation,'' she said. ''The community needs to be concerned.'' © Copyright 2004, The Gainesville Sun ***************************************************************** 61 Herald Sun: All power to uranium [11aug05] EDITORIAL THE Howard Government's renewed focus on uranium as a national money-spinner is welcome to all but those who still regard nuclear power generation as a kind of sorcery. They ignore that the 21st century is the age of safe nuclear power generation. As debate rages over the Kyoto agreement and nations seek alternatives to fossil fuel, attention is increasingly turning to nuclear power. Today, 16 per cent of the world's electricity is nuclear-generated, and there are 30 reactors being built worldwide. United States President George W. Bush this week underlined the importance of this source of energy by urging the building of more nuclear power plants as one measure to lessen US dependence on fossil fuel. Similarly, the Howard Government has overridden Northern Territory objections to uranium mining and has taken control of the territory's rich uranium resources. Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer now reveals that Australia will negotiate direct uranium exports to China -- dependent on a Chinese promise that they will be used for peaceful purposes. One estimate is that China will need 8000 tonnes of yellowcake a year by 2020 to fuel its expanding nuclear power generation. The potential earnings are staggering. We have 40 per cent of the world's uranium. Those who balk at the thought of a deal with China ignore the economic reality of life in the 21st century. Petrol's high price AS motorists fume at the pumps, the Federal Government continues to reap the benefit of soaring petrol prices. Canberra's tax on a tax is an increasingly iniquitous impost on motorists. Though oil prices are soaring, the RACV points out that the industry has been bumping up the pump price before supplies of the dearer fuel have reached service stations. But the real rip-off is by the Federal Government, which continues to levy GST on the petrol excise. The Herald Sun noted yesterday that on petrol sold at $1.20 a litre, excise is 37.7 cents and GST 10.9c. After the 65c production cost the margin to oil company, distributor and retailer is only 6.4c. If the Howard Government continues to ignore motorists' anger and keeps its sticky fingers in their wallets, it will not only be drivers who pay a high price. The Government should remember they are also voters. Star performers AUSTRALIAN Andy Thomas had reason to smile broadly as he stepped from the space shuttle Discovery on Tuesday. The 53-year-old astronaut and his six courageous crewmates had dared and survived, and in doing so they have put the West back into space. They went knowing that 2 1/2 years ago the shuttle Columbia disintegrated because of damaged tiles. They also knew that in 1986 shuttle Challenger had blown apart on takeoff. Yet they put their faith in Discovery and, despite a repair job in space, thankfully their trust was not misplaced. All seven of her crew proved they were of the right stuff. But Andy Thomas deserves a hero's welcome back home. © Herald and Weekly Times ***************************************************************** 62 Ensign: ENSIGN: NEW EPA STANDARD APPALLING : 08/09/2005 United States Senator John Ensign Washington, D.C. – Senator John Ensign issued this statement regarding the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed radiation standard: “I am appalled at the complete arrogance of the EPA in announcing these standards. We’ve been down this road before. The federal appeals court already determined that the 10,000 year standard violated the law. This new standard is no better, and the EPA has provided no scientific basis for the 350 millirem figure. The EPA has also refused to take the public’s right to be informed on this issue into consideration. A 60-day comment period is absolutely unacceptable given the serious ramifications for the public’s health. I will continue to fight this blatant disregard for science, the law and the health of Nevadans.” ***************************************************************** 63 Reid: Reid statement on EPA's proposed standards Tuesday, August 9, 2005 Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Harry Reid released the following statement on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed radiation standards: “I am astounded that the EPA actually put those recommendations on paper. What the agency released today is nothing more than voodoo science and arbitrary numbers. At the time when the public faces the highest risk of radiation exposure, EPA proposes easing the overall public health standard, including throwing out the groundwater standard. “In addition to risking the health of the public, EPA is also trying to silence voices of opposition by limiting the comment period. It took EPA more than a year to put together this proposal, but the agency is giving the public less than two months to review hundreds of pages of documents and put their concerns on record. “This is the latest attempt by the Bush Administration to ignore sound science and disregard the health and safety of Nevadans, and I vow to continue fighting on behalf of Nevadans against this ill-conceived project.” ### ***************************************************************** 64 Public Citizen: Lax Radiation Standards for Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository Will Leave Future Generations Vulnerable Aug. 10, 2005 Statement of Wenonah Hauter, Director of Public Citizens Energy Program The U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys new proposal to allow two different radiation standards for the high-level radioactive waste dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada will fail to protect the long-term health and safety of the people living in the region. The setting of two standards  15 millirems per year for the first 10,000 years and 350 millirems per year thereafter  is an arbitrary decision designed to facilitate the licensing of the project rather than make it safe for those who live near the site. If a 15 mrem/yr standard has been determined necessary to protect health in todays environment, such a standard should continue at least through the time of predicted peak dose from the dump site, as the National Academy of Sciences has recommended. Several studies have determined that the peak radiation dose will occur several hundred thousand years from now. This latest development in the Yucca Mountain saga clearly demonstrates how the rules are being written for one specific site, rather than ensuring that this site adheres to a set of stringent standards that protect public health and safety. It is evident that the government cannot meet an adequate standard and is therefore deviating from scientific benchmarks to advance its agenda to open the countrys first nuclear dump. Just three years ago, the EPA said it did not approve of a two-tier radiation standard. The EPA has also dismissed the use of even a 25 mrem/yr standard in the past because of the increased cancer incidence that would result. But now, the second standard EPA has proposed for Yucca Mountain is 14 times this unacceptable value. Thanks to the energy legislation recently signed by President Bush, nuclear energy companies are now enticed by taxpayer subsidies to build the first new nuclear reactors in this country in 30 years. It is now more important than ever that we monitor nuclear power  and its lethal leftovers  from cradle to grave to ensure that the American public and future generations are not harmed along the way. Pressure from the Bush administration to open Yucca Mountain should not deter the EPA from setting strict guidelines that are logical, sound and consistent with its mission of protecting public health and safety. One strict standard should be set for radiation at Yucca Mountain, not a temporary strict standard for one time period, followed by a weak standard for the rest of time. The problem of disposing of the growing piles of nuclear waste around the country remains the Achilles heel of the industry. The rules have been bent too often to promote Yucca Mountain. The EPA needs a reality check; protecting public health and safety shouldnt have an expiration date. Public Citizen ***************************************************************** 65 ABC News Online: Higher uranium prices lift Honeymoon mine hopes. 11/08/2005. Soaring uranium prices have made the Honeymoon mine, west of Broken Hill in north-eastern South Australia, viable and mining could start in the area in the next two years. The price of uranium has risen to nearly $30 a pound, up from $8 four-and-a-half years ago. Mark Wheatley, the chief executive officer and chairman of Southern Cross Resources, says it is a significant development. "We would hope to have production out of Honeymoon in the middle of '07 to late '07," he said. "We don't want to have a fly in, fly out operation, our closeness to Broken Hill, our plan is to secure most of the employment we need from Broken Hill and our plan at this stage is to have the operation needing 50 people." ***************************************************************** 66 ABC News Online: Uranium group to chart industry progress. 11/08/2005. The Federal Government has moved to create a three-year plan for the development of Australia's uranium industry. The Uranium Industry Framework aims to devise a way forward for the industry, working with state and territory governments, miners and Indigenous landowners. The steering group met for the first time in Canberra today. Australia is now the world's second largest producer of uranium, behind Canada. But the Federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says, with 40 per cent of the world's uranium resources, it can do better. "What we need to do is identify the opportunities and remove the impediments," he said. Mr Macfarlane says taking control of approving new uranium mines in the Northern Territory last week was part of the process of removing those impediments. He says he expects the Northern Territory will warm to the idea of a uranium industry once the dust settles on last week's tussle for control of the approval of new mines. He hopes the Northern Territory Mines Minister Kon Vatskalis will eventually take a role in that process. "Well I'm hopeful that Kon will. He was originally agreeing to be part of this overall framework, not so much the steering committee," he said. "But I imagine that once we get down the track a little that Kon will be back inside the process." ***************************************************************** 67 ABC News Online: Canadian uranium giant backs federal regulation. 11/08/05 The world's largest uranium producer, CAMECO, says it wants uranium mining regulated at the federal level in Australia. The Canadian-based company has exploration interests in Australia and has been called as the first witness at a federal parliamentary inquiry examining the importance of Australia's uranium resources. CAMECO chief executive Jerry Grandey says global demand for the mineral is outstripping supply and Australia's reserves are vital to the world market. He says producers need a clear uranium policy from the Government. "It is a mineral of strategic importance from an energy perspective and from an international atomic energy perspective," he said. "So having federal oversight is something that ought to be considered, making it a federally managed and regulated mineral." ***************************************************************** 68 London Times: Cost of nuclear clean-up soars to Ł66bn - The new figures were published by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) as it launched its draft plan for the decommissioning and clean-up of 20 civil nuclear sites in the UK, including Windscale, Sellafield and Dounreay. The National Audit Office, the public spending watchdog, said that it would monitor the situation at the new organisation, which was set up in April. The extent of the final bill will depend largely on decisions taken by the Trade and Industry Secretary. The cost of a recent leak of nuclear material at Sellafield’s Thorp unit, which has temporarily closed the facility, has not been included in this assessment. The Thorp unit is expected to generate Ł5.1 billion of revenue for the NDA, which will be lost if the Government decides not to reopen the reprocessor. “The industry has to have time to give an answer on these costs. There is no best practice and a lot of controversy on what is most suitable,” Dr Ian Roxburgh, chief executive of the NDA, said. The NDA is proposing to accelerate significantly the decommissioning of the 11 oldest nuclear power stations, its Magnox reactors, which it believes will lower the final bill and will also maintain a significant flow of work for the nuclear industry. The NDA said that competitions for the first contracts to clean up Drigg and Dounreay would begin next April and be awarded the same year. By 2008, competitions to operate and manage the clean-up of 13 out of 20 sites will have been launched. Kevin Beeston, chief executive at Serco, the services company, said that companies were preparing to compete for contracts worth Ł4 billion over the next five years. thetimes.co.uk and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 69 RGJ: EPA releases Yucca radiation standards [Reno Gazette-Journal] [Reno Doug Abrahms Gannett News Service Posted: 8/10/2005 01:15 am WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency released a new radiation standard Tuesday for Yucca Mountain in hopes of restarting the stalled project to build a nuclear waste dump in Nevada. The new rules are in response to a federal appeals court ruling last year that the EPA must come up with a radiation standard to protect Nevadans for more than 10,000 years from exposure to radiation can leak from the buried nuclear waste. The new preliminary regulation would limit the amount of radiation that could seep out of Yucca Mountain to 15 millirems a year for the next 10,000 years — about the equivalent of a chest X-ray, officials said. After that, the limit would rise to 350 millirems annually for the next 990,000 years. “We are quite confident ... that (the new radiation standard) will be upheld by the courts,” said Jeffrey Holmstead, an EPA assistant administrator. “It is an unprecedented scientific challenge to develop proposed standards today that will protect the next 25,000 generations of Americans.” The court decision pushed back until at least 2012 the date when Yucca Mountain is expected to start receiving 77,000 tons of nuclear waste from atomic power plants nationwide. The project also has been slowed by turnover at the Energy Department and investigations into whether scientific documents generated for Yucca Mountain were falsified. Nevada officials intend to challenge the EPA’s new standard in court once it becomes final. The legal maneuver is expected to further delay and possibly halt the project. The standard of 350 millirems per year is more than 10 times higher than what the Nuclear Regulatory Commission allows to be emitted from atomic power plants, said Bob Loux, who heads the state’s Agency for Nuclear Projects, which opposes Yucca Mountain. People living close to Yucca Mountain, which lies about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, would be exposed to an unsafe amount of radiation, especially since the contamination would leach into the water supplies, he said. “There’s no scientific basis for this whatsoever,” Loux said. ”Once again, it’s the triumph of politics over science. I have no doubt this will get thrown out (of court) as well.“ Joe Egan, a nuclear physicist and a lawyer hired by the state to fight the project, questioned how the EPA could set one health standard for 10,000 years and then a far higher standard starting the next year. He expects scientific groups to challenge the standard as unsafe before the EPA finalizes it. ”Its just so patently irrational,“ he said. ”I am very confident that this will not fly with the court of appeals, and it might be insulting to the court.“ Egan said the EPA set a low standard to make it easy for the Energy Department to get its operating license for Yucca Mountain approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The EPA plans public hearings in Las Vegas, Amargosa Valley and Washington later this summer on its new radiation standard. The agency’s new standard would allow the Energy Department to move forward with its plans to build Yucca Mountain, said spokesman Craig Stevens. “That’s a standard that I think we can certainly meet,” Stevens said. Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. ***************************************************************** 70 Star-Gazette.COM: Don't expand nuclear weapons capability Letter to the editor August 11, 2005 These past few days, earthlings have been anxiously watching as the space shuttle Discovery finished its mission. All are hopeful that in the course of these few days much is learned about making space exploration safe and productive. Meanwhile, here on Earth, another discovery awaits. A full 60 years after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we have yet to learn that playing with fire is dangerous. I speak here of nuclear weapons whose power to destroy was witnessed by the world on Aug. 6 and 9, 1945. Incredibly, the current administration is proposing, and the Senate is set to fund, a new nuclear weapon, the "bunker buster," that has 70 times the explosive power of the Hiroshima bomb. This determined pursuit of new nuclear weapons signals that these weapons are not only acceptable to possess, but also to use. This is the wrong message for the U.S. to send to the rest of the world, especially to the survivors of the first atomic blast. Concerned citizens cannot allow these policies to be implemented. Our senators need to hear that 60 years after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world does not need new nuclear weapons. Let us rather honor our commitment to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and advance with the other 188 signers toward nuclear disarmament. PATRICIA LADLEY Elmira [Star-Gazette.COM] Copyright © 2005 Star-Gazette. Use of this site signifies ***************************************************************** 71 Japan Times: 60 YEARS ON A-bomb gene 'shadow' may be fading Thursday, August 11, 2005 By ROWAN HOOPER One of the strongest memories I have of a trip to Hiroshima that I made a few years ago is of the shadow on the steps of the Sumitomo Bank. Someone had been sitting on those steps, probably waiting for the bank to open, when at 8.15 a.m. on Aug. 6, 1945, a bomb went off. The bank was 250 meters from the epicenter of the atomic explosion and the person was instantly incinerated, leaving behind only a shadow. The steps of the bank are now in the Peace Memorial Museum, as the shadow was gradually fading in the sun and the rain. Sixty years on from that day, is the shadow that the bomb cast on the survivors fading too? According to Dale Preston, of the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) in Hiroshima, the radiation changed the DNA of the surviving hibakusha (atomic bomb victims), and its effects linger to this day. Preston and his colleagues used information from tumor registries, medical records and death certificates to identify benign and malignant tumors of the primary nervous system and pituitary gland that were diagnosed between 1958 and 1997 in more than 86,000 Japanese atomic bomb survivors from both Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The authors found that radiation exposure was associated with an increased risk of all nervous-system tumors. This risk was particularly high for schwannomas, a benign tumor of the nervous system. Men had a higher risk of nervous-system tumors than women, and people exposed to radiation as children had a higher risk than those exposed as adults. Preston said the findings "demonstrate that radiation exposure can increase the risk of nervous-system tumors, and suggest that these increased risks persist throughout lifetime, regardless of the age at exposure." The Hiroshima bomb was a uranium device, while the Nagasaki bomb was plutonium. The researchers found no significant difference between the cities in terms of cancer risk. The effect of being exposed is similar to what happens when children with leukaemia undergo irradiation treatment before a blood stem-cell transplant. The aim is to destroy the cancerous cells in the bone marrow, and use the transplant to "re-seed" the marrow with new cells. Of course, when people were exposed when the bombs went off, there was no transplant available. It meant that the blood-producing cells in their bone marrow, and thus their immune-systems too, were devastated. Many died from infectious diseases they would normally have been able to fight off. Preston and colleagues at RERF also looked at the effects of different doses of radiation. Even a small dose (0.005 sieverts of radiation) has had a lasting effect. Of survivors about 2.5 km from the hypocenter of each bomb, 203 have since died of leukaemia. Half of those deaths are attributed to radiation. However, although the effect is a lingering one, it is small. Among 52,000 hibakusha who received a 0.005 sievert dose, 7,600 cancer deaths among them have been attributed to a cause other than radiation. Of the approximately 280,000 people who survived the initial dose, some 45 per cent are still alive today. What about the children of the hibakusha? A study by Nori Nakamura, head of genetics at RERF, found no evidence for inherited changes in the first generation of A-bomb children. The average age of hibakusha children is still young, at 48. Some effects might still appear as they grow older, but it seems as if the shadow of the bombs are fading. The survey looked at 22,000 children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, and found that even parts of their DNA thought to be particularly vulnerable were not affected. With all the human suffering, it is quite understandable that the effects of the bombs on other organisms have been overlooked. We can get a clue by looking at what happened at Chernobyl. In 1986, a reactor at the nuclear power plant exploded, and radioactive isotopes were scattered over Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. Plutonium, strontium and cesium fallout has changed the way animals live and grow in the affected areas. And the radiation has had heritable effects. Timothy Mousseau, of the Laboratoire de Parasitologie Evolutive in France, studied swallows nesting in the Chernobyl region. He found that reproductive success was significantly reduced compared to birds nesting outside the affected area. Survival rates, the number of eggs laid and overall body condition was lower. In Chernobyl-area birds, mutations in eggs and sperm are double that of other birds. No one knows exactly what the radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki did to the people and animals exposed to it. Indeed, we are still finding out what exactly were the radiation types that the two cities were exposed to. But it does seem that the shadow of genetic damage, like that on the steps of the Sumitomo Bank, is fading. A book of Natural Selections columns translated into Japanese, "Nou to sekkusu no seibutsugaku (Evolution, Sex and the Brain)," is published by Shinchosha. Rowan Hooper is a biologist at Trinity College, Dublin. He welcomes readers' comments at The Japan Times: Aug. 11, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 72 Japan Times: No rationalization for Nagasaki attack Wednesday, August 10, 2005 By BRAHMA CHELLANEY NEW DELHI -- History is written by victors and thus abounds in well-cultivated rationalizations for the winners' actions, however unjustifiable or gory they might be. Vanquishers are rarely burdened by guilt. Sometimes the rationalization stops with their first major slaughter in a war, as if their willful repeat of similar blood baths were automatically defensible. This is best illustrated by the United States' atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If the incineration of Hiroshima was justifiable as a means to end the war and save American lives -- a thesis that even most liberal Americans accept -- what was the justification for the destruction of Nagasaki three days later before Japan had a chance to grasp the message from the first nuclear attack? The U.S. actions arose not from any rage but from cool, calculated thinking. The intent was to deliver a crippling psychological blow to Japan by obliterating two of its important cities. No warning was given to the residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki before unleashing the nuclear holocaust. When a U.S. Air Force B-29 bomber dropped an untested uranium bomb, code-named "Little Boy," on a sweltering morning and reduced Hiroshima to ashes, the mass death and destruction set off celebrations in some American cities. The revelers were celebrating America's newborn technological prowess. U.S. President Harry Truman, applauding the bomb as "the greatest achievement of organized science in history," ordered a second surprise atomic attack on a Japanese city three days later. "Fat Boy," based on the design of an implosion-type plutonium bomb which had been secretly tested in the New Mexico desert more than three weeks earlier, was dropped on Nagasaki. Picturesque Nagasaki became the second victim of nuclear holocaust by an accident of weather: Kokura, the city chosen for the attack, was under a heavy cloud blanket, so the bomber was diverted to Nagasaki. To U.S. officials, the dropping of the plutonium bomb mattered more than which Japanese city it vaporized. The political use of a technological discovery to incinerate Hiroshima and Nagasaki was made possible by a political-military culture in industrial societies that approved civilian massacre as a legitimate tool of warfare. Before the nuclear genie was let loose, mass killings had already become a feature of the war for all sides. On a single night, for example, nearly 200,000 citizens burned to death when U.S. bombers doused Tokyo with jellied petroleum in March 1945. Indeed, in the months before the nuclear bombings, half a million Japanese had already died and 14 million rendered homeless in U.S. firebombing raids on cities. The Anglo-American firebombing of Dresden in February 1945 left some 39,000 Germans dead in an air campaign Churchill acknowledged amounted to "terror bombing." Hitler's massacres of Jews, and Japanese atrocities in China, reflected a similar disdain for civilian life. By the time Hiroshima and Nagasaki were reduced to smoldering ruins, 50 million people in the world had already been killed in conflict since 1939. The culture that made those blood baths possible remains embedded in the strategic doctrines of a number of powerful states today. Nuclear deterrence, for example, relies on targeting civilian and industrial centers. Conventional military strategies still seek to destroy an adversary's civilian infrastructure. The world can never be safe as long as Armageddon-ready nations armed with weapons of mass murder pursue military strategies pivoted on first use and on intentional civilian targeting, even if it ended up destroying civilization. Just as the nuclear problem has persisted, the questions arising from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings still call for answers. Despite the large-scale bloodletting during World War II, couldn't the U.S. have demonstrated its new technological might by dropping an atomic bomb on an uninhabited island? Or why were nuclear bombs dropped in a way to maximize civilian casualties? Before Hiroshima was flattened, Hitler had committed suicide in April and a battered Japan was on the brink of defeat, with its military searching for an honorable surrender. More than half of Tokyo and Kobe, a third of Nagoya and a quarter of Osaka had been destroyed. The military logic of the two nuclear bombings was to establish U.S. primacy in the postwar order. The bombings helped put the stamp of Pax Americana on the globe. Yet, questions relating to the Nagasaki bombing continue to haunt today. Before dropping the second bomb, shouldn't the U.S. have given Japan a reasonable and firm deadline to surrender? In rushing into a second nuclear attack before Japan could grasp the strategic significance of the first bombing, Truman achieved little more than showing that a tested implosion-type bomb worked. The U.S. establishment has shied away from an objective examination of the past use of nuclear weapons primarily because it still remains wedded to nuclear first use. Any reevaluation of the past use would bring into question the present nuclear posture The past, however, will continue to be a heavy burden on the American conscience -- Hiroshima because it was the first atomic attack, and Nagasaki because it was a wanton act, militarily and politically. Even those who still justify Hiroshima offer no rationalization for Nagasaki. Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the privately funded Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, is a regular contributor to The Japan Times. The Japan Times: Aug. 10, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 73 Las Vegas SUN: DOE reviewing Test Site contract bids Today: August 11, 2005 at 11:19:18 PDT By Mary Manning LAS VEGAS SUN The Energy Department is still reviewing bids for a contract that expires Sept. 30 to manage and operate the Nevada Test Site, an official said Wednesday. Early this year 16 companies expressed an interest in landing the five-year contract worth roughly $3 billion, said Darwin Morgan, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Agency. The Energy Department was still reviewing the offers on Wednesday, he said. The Test Site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is important to national security, especially for ensuring the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile through experiments on weapons components, Morgan said. The site's chief mission is remaining ready to resume underground nuclear weapons testing if the president orders renewed nuclear experiments, Morgan said. There are no plans by the Bush administration for renewing nuclear tests, stopped in September 1992 by the president's father. In the past year the Test Site received the Atlas Pulsed Power generator from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. The 650-ton Atlas generator will help the U.S. certify the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile. The Test Site also trains emergency responders, conducts environmental management and restoration of contaminated sites and buries low-level radioactive waste. Bechtel Nevada assumed managing and operating the Test Site in 1995. Its original five-year contract was scheduled to expire on Dec. 31, 2000, but the Energy Department exercised an option to extend the contract through Sept. 30, 2005. Bechtel Nevada is a consortium of Bechtel Nevada Corp., Johnson Controls Nevada and Lockheed Martin Nevada Technologies. The successful bidder will manage an annual budget of roughly $300 million with around 3,000 employees. Among the companies bidding is Bechtel. Other bidders include a subsidiary of Halliburton called Kellogg, Brown and Root Services Inc., which has military contracts in Iraq. Vice President Cheney once served as Halliburton chairman and has drawn criticism from political opponents who say the company benefitted from an Iraq invasion that he advocated. Kellogg was involved in putting out oil well fires after the Gulf War. Two years ago, Kellogg raised the ire of several Congressional Democrats who alleged the firm was over-charging the government for services in Iraq, which a Pentagon audit confirmed. The company said it had acted within its contractual obligations and delivered services at a reasonable cost given a war-time environment. An NNSA spokeswoman in Washington this morning said she could not offer more details about the bid process and referred calls to Morgan. A Bechtel spokesman was unavailable for comment this morning. The 16 companies that expressed interest in bidding on the Test Site contract are BWX Technologies, Inc.; Teledyne Brown Engineering Inc.; Washington Group International; Lockheed Martin Information &Technology Services; Kellogg, Brown &Root Services Inc.; Bechtel National Inc.; Computer Sciences Corp.; Parsons Infrastructure and Technology Group; Shaw Environmental &Infrastructure Inc.; Fluor Government Group; MELE Associates Inc.; Tetra Tech FW Inc.; Weston Solutions, Inc.; Technical Business Services; AECOM Government Services Inc.; and Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade &Douglas Inc. Morgan said he could not comment on how many companies remained in the running for the Test Site contract. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 74 Daily Californian: Radioactive Blunder Fuels Criticism of Los Alamos By SASHA VASILYUK Contributing Writer Thursday, August 11, 2005 A mishandling of radioactive material by a Los Alamos National Laboratory employee spurred criticism of UC’s management this week. According to a lab report released on Monday, an employee’s mishandling of a radioactive substance, americium 241, resulted in contamination of his home in New Mexico, houses of his relatives in Colorado and Kansas, and the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory in Pennsylvania, which received a contaminated shipment from the employee. The employee, whose identity has not been released, received radiological contamination to his skin and clothing after he handled the material on July 14. However, the contamination was not discovered for 11 days, lab officials said. During the ensuing investigation, a decontamination team at the Los Alamos lab discovered trace amounts of the hazardous substance in the employee’s workspace, home and car. Investigators removed items from his relatives’ homes and found that no members of his family were contaminated, lab officials said. Los Alamos officials informed Bettis lab of the contaminated package two days after the investigation began. They also discovered that the package had been by FedEx as a “non-hazardous, domestic unclassified shipment.” “The university is very concerned about the safety of our employees and the general public, but in this case, there is no reason for the general public to be concerned,” said UC spokesperson Chris Harrington. Lab officials insisted that citizens are safe from contamination and said that the substance is widely used in smoke detectors across the country. “The amount carried off site was a fraction of the radioactivity contained in a typical smoke detector,” said lab spokesperson Kathy Delucas. However, representatives from the Project On Government Oversight, a government watchdog organization, said lab officials are downplaying the danger to the public resulting from the contaminant. “The lab activities themselves demonstrate that it’s a dangerous substance—they have gone to people’s houses and took their furniture away,” said project spokesperson Beth Daley. “We know that the public is in danger.” Officials from the organization are also concerned that the lab is not conducting a thorough investigation. “This guy walked around for 11 days with this stuff, going to other states and who knows where else,” Daley said. “Anything that he touched may be contaminated. They are spending $1 million on the investigation, but it’s unclear what exactly they are doing to discover what other sites have been contaminated.” Lab officials maintain that they are doing all they can. After surveying all employees in the facility, they have begun to monitor the health of the contaminated employee and five of his coworkers, Harrington said. Doctors are measuring the levels of the substance in the urine and lungs of the patients and have not found anything alarming, he said. But representatives from the organization said that even with no symptoms, the substance may stay in the body of the contaminated person for many years and cause cancer later on. “It takes one speck of americium inhaled for you to get cancer,” Daley said. “I’m alarmed by the way the lab is trying to spin control on this. I find this a bit Orwellian.” In addition to the incident, lab officials reported another hazardous mishap yesterday. According to the report, two lab employees were exposed to hazardous fumes, causing one of them to be hospitalized for six days. The reports come two weeks after UC submitted its bid for continued management of the lab to the U.S. Department of Energy. Then-Energy Director Spencer Abraham decided to put it up for competition in 2003 after a series of safety and security lapses, including a temporary shutdown following the disappearance of two security discs. “When the lab was shut down, we wanted to address wide-scale safety and security issues and make sure they would not happen in the future,” Harrington said. “However, this is not a systemic issue but isolated incidents.” Contact Sasha Vasilyuk at svasilyuk@dailycal.org. (c) 2005 Berkeley, California dailycal@dailycal.org ***************************************************************** 75 SF Chronicle: Los Alamos lab incident sends worker to hospital / Report hints at problems with ventilation system Thursday, August 11, 2005 In the second reported major incident in recent days of mishandled hazardous materials at University of California-run Los Alamos National Laboratory, a lab employee was hospitalized for six days with "pneumonia-like symptoms" after inhaling dangerous fumes. Another employee suffered temporary shortness of breath after exposure to what an in-house investigative report at Los Alamos called "hazardous chemical vapors," but was not seriously hurt. The incident, which occurred June 16 but was not investigated by the New Mexico lab until Aug. 3, is still under scrutiny by lab officials. One employee has been placed on leave pending its resolution, lab officials said. The investigative report hinted that something was wrong with the lab's ventilation system, which it called "degraded," but no further details were available Wednesday. Both employees were post-doctoral researchers who were exposed to the fumes generated by the mixture of hydrochloric acid and nitric acid, according to the investigative report. A copy of the report by lab investigator Matthew Hardy was leaked to news media Wednesday by a Washington-based activist group, the Project on Government Oversight, which is a frequent critic of the national laboratories. Hardy's report notes that by Aug. 5, the medical director of Los Alamos "completed a review of all available information as well as relevant medical records" involving the hospitalized patient, whom the report identifies only by the code name "W1." According to Hardy's report, the medical director "concluded that the chemical exposure which occurred June 16 contributed to W1's hospitalization." The incident follows the lab's admission July 27 that a lab employee had apparently unintentionally leaked radioactive material, americium-241, via a FedEx package and other means to sites and private homes in four states. On Wednesday, lab officials declined comment on either the hazardous- fumes or the americium-241 cases, pending further investigation. Lab officials have also refused to name the employees involved in the incidents on privacy grounds, or to explain why one employee was placed on leave in the hazardous- fumes case. Accidents at the lab became a heated issue last year when the then- director blasted employees for carelessness in a case that included a woman whose eyes were temporarily damaged by a laser beam and a separate instance when an employee risked being electrocuted. The cases disturbed lab officials partly because they feared the adverse publicity would end up costing UC its contract to run the lab, which UC has managed under contract to the federal government for six decades. In July 2004, then-director George "Pete" Nanos warned that employees' "almost suicidal denial" of safety and security problems meant they were risking losing business to other national labs. "The tolerance of the country is at an end," he said. Nanos later quit for a job in Washington. He was replaced by Robert Kuckuck, an interim director whose main job is to keep the lab going while UC struggles -- in collaboration with Bechtel National and other industrial partners -- to retain its contract for running the lab as part of a competition with an outside consortium led by Lockheed Martin and the University of Texas. UC currently runs Los Alamos under contract to the U.S. Energy Department. The department plans to announce the winner of the competition by Dec. 1. In a statement, Los Alamos publicists said Kuckuck had "reminded laboratory employees that they have the right and responsibility to stop work if they feel that working conditions are, in any way, unsafe." The statement also quotes Kuckuck as saying: "The safety of individuals at this laboratory is paramount." E-mail Keay Davidson at . Page A - 3 The San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************