***************************************************************** 09/06/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.206 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Opposes Referring Iran Over Nukes 2 RIA Novosti: UPDATE: Moscow sees no reason to transfer Iranian nucle 3 RIA Novosti: Iran will not back down on developing its own nuclear p 4 BBC: Iran nuclear weapons 'years away' 5 Xinhua: Iranian parliament threatens to take strong reaction on nucl 6 Xinhua: Russia: No need to refer Irania's nuke issue to UN 7 Asia Times: Iran knocks Europe out 8 Reuters: U.S. warns China on energy ties to Iran 9 csmonitor.com: Iran changes tack in nuclear standoff | 10 Guardian Unlimited: UK changes tack in nuclear talks 11 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea May Resume Nuke Talks Sept. 13 12 Korea Herald: Six-party talks likely to resume next Tuesday 13 Xinhua: China calls for reopening six-party talks next week 14 Reuters: North Korea wants talks to resume Sept. 13 - Yonhap 15 US: NRC: 73, 75, 95, 140, and 170 16 US: NRC: Robert H. Leyse; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking 17 Deutsche Welle: Ambitious Energy Project in the Pipeline 18 Times of India: India has no nuclear strategy 19 RIA Novosti: Moscow court upholds decision to prolong Adamov's arres 20 RIA Novosti: Adamov fears attempts to "pump" him for state secrets 21 FT.com: UK - Energy minister gets ready to feel the heat 22 Asia Times: The EU-China relationship: Looking ahead 23 Portal da Cidadania: New program calls for increase in nuclear energ 24 Reuters: UN in crisis talks as world summit date looms 25 Reuters: FACTBOX-Main divisive issues before world U.N. summit 26 Reuters: Iran's nuclear negotiator delays Pakistan trip NUCLEAR REACTORS 27 Chernobyl impacts wrongly downplayed 28 NIRS Statement on UN Chernobyl Report 29 Poverty, Mental Health Greatest Stumbling Blocks For Chernobyl Survi 30 [du-list] " Chernobyl in 1986 will kill 4000 people" - UN 31 US: NRC: NRC to Conduct Special Inspection at Oconee Nuclear Power P 32 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl Death Toll May Be Less Than Feared 33 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl death toll under 50 34 London Times: Chernobyl fallout not as bad as first feared - 35 US: AP Wire: Entergy prepares to restart nuclear plant 36 Bellona: China to build 10 nuclear reactors in East 37 RIA Novosti: Routine anti-emergency exercise begins at Kolsk NPP 38 BBC: Letters show: Oldbury Power Station is set to close by 2008 39 US: Platts: NRC plans to hire 350 new workers next year 40 CNW Group: Greenpeace call for phase out of nuclear power Shut Down 41 Kyiv Post: Ukrainian officials, NGO warn Chornobyl is still a proble 42 US: Reuters: Constellation N.Y. Ginna nuke back at full power 43 US: Reuters: PSEG N.J. Hope Creek nuke exits outage, up to 40 pct 44 India: Rediff: 'Energy is our most crucial need' 45 US: Reuters: CMS Michigan Palisades nuke back at full power 46 US: Business Week: Maybe In My Backyard - 47 AFP: UN experts present low death toll from Chernobyl but Greenpeace NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 48 [du-list] Planned survey of DU polluted areas. 49 [du-list] DU & Gamma Radiation 50 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Sub Collides With Cargo Ship in Gulf 51 Vermont Guardian: Tests point to health damage of DU in Iraq NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 52 US: AU: Sunday Morning Herald: Nuclear exports an option: Costello 53 US: AU ABC: MPs urge inclusive uranium debate 54 US: Deseret news: Envirocare plan is bad news 55 Bellona: Spent nuclear fuel from liquid metal cooled reactor unloade 56 Bellona: Conscripts to get $1.7 extra for handling radioactive waste 57 US: Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Nuclear waste is inviting target 58 US: ICT: Navajos receive award for banning uranium mining 59 Portal da Cidadania: Uranium enrichment factory to open in 2006 60 US: AU ABC: Growing demand prompts call for more uranium exploration 61 US: AU ABCL: States urged to get behind uranium mining - PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 62 bizjournals.com: Mound clean-up firm laying off 115 - ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Opposes Referring Iran Over Nukes From the Associated Press [UP] Monday September 5, 2005 11:16 PM MOSCOW (AP) - Russia opposes referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council over its nuclear program, the Foreign Ministry said Monday. Moscow ``does not see any basis for transferring the question, which the IAEA is dealing with actively and productively, to the Security Council,'' the ministry said in a statement. Britain, Germany and France, negotiating on behalf of the 25-nation European Union, have said they may get involved in drafting the language of a resolution demanding Iran be referred to the Security Council if Tehran does not soon stop uranium conversion. The EU powers have set a deadline of Sept. 19, the date of a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. China, also a Security Council member, also opposes bringing Iran before the council and could use its veto power to block any resolution to punish Iran. Iranian officials said over the weekend the country will continue uranium reprocessing despite Europe's threat. The United States claims Iran's nuclear program is aimed at building nuclear weapons, which Tehran denies. International attention has focused on the Uranium Conversion Facility in Isfahan in central Iran, where Tehran last month resumed activities related to the conversion of uranium concentrate ore - known as yellowcake - into hexaflouride gas, the feedstock for enrichment. Enriched to a low level, uranium can be used to produce nuclear fuel used to generate electricity. Further enrichment makes it suitable for use in nuclear weapons. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 2 RIA Novosti: UPDATE: Moscow sees no reason to transfer Iranian nuclear file to UN 05/ 09/ 2005 MOSCOW, September 5 (RIA Novosti) - Moscow sees no reason to transfer the Iranian nuclear file to the UN Security Council, a senior Russian diplomat said Monday. Alexander Yakovenko, deputy foreign minister of Russia, was commenting on a September 2 report by Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on the agency's guarantees in Iran. According to Yakovenko, the IAEA Board of Governors will meet to discuss the report on mapping out measures to solve the remaining issues on September 19. The report by the UN's nuclear watchdog on Friday "creates a solid foundation for a future professional and non-political IAEA approach to the resolution of Iran's nuclear problem," foreign ministry officials said. "It would certainly be possible only if Iran wanted to cooperate fully and showed initiative while observing resolutions adopted by the IAEA Board of Governors," the officials added. "We are willing...to join efforts with all interested parties to help this process," they said. ElBaradei's report on IAEA guarantees in Iran was disseminated on September 2. The document was prepared in accordance with the August 11 resolution adopted by the IAEA Board of Governors after a discussion of Iran's partial lifting of its voluntary moratorium on uranium conversion. The report said the resumed uranium conversion activities had been conducted under close monitoring by IAEA experts, and Iran had made steady progress in answering outstanding IAEA questions and correcting violations of the IAEA safeguards agreement. According to Russian diplomats, the report does not mention any new violations. "At the same time, there are still questions about Iran's past nuclear activity that have to be investigated by IAEA experts in cooperation with Iranian authorities," the ministry officials said. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 3 RIA Novosti: Iran will not back down on developing its own nuclear program 06/ 09/ 2005 MOSCOW, September 6 (RIA Novosti) - Iran will not back down on developing its own nuclear program, Vladimir Orlov, director of the Russian Political Research Center, said Tuesday. "We should accept the fact that Iran has unambiguously stated its aim to develop its own full-scale peaceful nuclear program," Orlov said at a RIA Novosti press conference Tuesday. Despite external pressure, Iran will not change its stance, he said. "A carrot and stick policy will merely adjust or speed up this program." The Iranian leadership and public are united in defending the country's nuclear right, he said. "There is a consensus among the public and a consensus among the elite that in the 21st century, Iran will become the regional superpower, partly based on a technological push toward developing nuclear technology." Iran is not interested in creating its own nuclear bomb, Orlov said. "Iran is now less interested in having a nuclear bomb than it was 20 years ago," and it will be "one step away from building nuclear weapons, but this step will not be taken if it is not forced to take it... We must accept this reality," he said. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 4 BBC: Iran nuclear weapons 'years away' Last Updated: Tuesday, 6 September 2005 [Isfahan plant] Iran says its nuclear programme is only for peaceful purposes Iran is still several years away from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability, according to a study published by an influential London-based think tank. The International Institute for Strategic Studies has assessed Iran's nuclear, chemical, biological and long-range missile activities. It says a diplomatic showdown with the European Union and the United States could be inevitable. Iran's political restraint thus far may not last, the report's authors say. One of them, Dr Gary Samore, told the BBC that it might take five years for Iran to overcome all the technical difficulties to produce a nuclear weapon. But given Tehran's cautious behaviour so far, a decision on whether to build such a capability may be much further away. "They're trying to avoid international reaction and I think it's perhaps more likely that they would try to develop their nuclear capabilities over a much longer period of time, a decade or 15 years," he said. Arms control The assessment from the IISS comes two weeks before a meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran's nuclear ambitions. NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE Mined urani ore is purified and reconstituted into solid form known as yellowcake Yellowcake is converted into a gas by heating it to about 64C (147F) Gas is fed through centrifuges, where its isotopes separate and process is repeated until uranium is enriched Low-level enriched uranium is used for nuclear fuel Highly enriched uranium can be used in nuclear weapons No clear end to crisis In depth: Nuclear fuel cycle "Iran's Strategic Weapons Programmes - A Net Assessment" charts the political history and progress of Iran's nuclear programmes since its origins under the Shah in the late 1950s. BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says what matters to arms control experts is how far advanced Iran is in its quest to be able to produce and enrich uranium. Iran says it wants this capability to provide fuel for power-generating reactors - but the same technology could also provide the fissile material for a bomb. The report says Iran faces two great technical hurdles before it can have a nuclear weapons capability: + producing sufficient fissile material + building a functioning warhead. But it does not attempt to provide an assessment of the crucial issue of Iran's political intentions. Technical advances The report sheds little light on Iran's potential chemical and biological weapons programmes. But it does give considerable detail on its long-range missile programme, where it says there have been considerable technical advances in recent years. Iran seems to be focusing on fielding more of its Shahab-3 systems, a variant of a North Korean missile, capable of hitting targets in Israel, much of Turkey and southern Russia. Tehran has acknowledged a long history of undeclared nuclear work. So the report's authors are not optimistic that Iran's acceptance of temporary restrictions on its nuclear activities will continue, our correspondent says. ***************************************************************** 5 Xinhua: Iranian parliament threatens to take strong reaction on nuclear issue www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-06 06:12:17 TEHRAN, Sept. 5 (Xinhuanet) -- The conservative-dominated Majlis (parliament) threatened on Monday to "take strong reaction" to mounting pressure from the European Union (EU) and the UN nuclear watchdog to stop sensitive nuclear activities. "Parliament members are too sensitive toward the nuclear issue and want to strongly respond to the threats and illegal approaches toward Iran's nuclear program," Alaedin Borujerdi, chairman of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, was quoted by the semi-official Mehr news agency as saying. Borujerdi, commenting after an emergency session on the nuclear issue, said Iran will not tolerate "illogical political pressure and will proceed its own way," referring to the EU's demand that Tehran re-suspend its uranium conversion activities within two weeks. The EU on Saturday pressed Iran to halt the resumed conversion activities before Sept. 19, the date when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will hold its Board of Governors' meeting.Europe's ultimatum came soon after IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei submitted a comprehensive report on Tehran's nuclear program, which criticized Iran for failing to keep suspension on uranium enrichment activities as it had promised and defined Tehran's cooperation with the agency on its nuclear issue as "overdue."Borujerdi slammed ElBaradei's report as a result of the US political pressure. He stressed that the EU demand had no legal basis and was only "a political pressure meant to push ahead with the aims of the United States." Meanwhile, Kazem Jalali, spokesman of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, hinted that Iran stop implementing the Additional Protocol of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.Iran signed the Additional Protocol in Dec. 2003 to allow IAEA inspectors to impose strict supervision upon its nuclear facilities, but the Majlis has not approved the document. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Xinhua: Russia: No need to refer Irania's nuke issue to UN www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-06 01:54:14 MOSCOW, Sept. 5 (Xinhuanet) -- Russia does not think that a UN Security Council debate on the Iranian nuclear program is necessary, Russian Foreign Ministry stated on Monday. "Moscow sees no reason to submit the question of the Iranian nuclear program to the UN Security Council," Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Yakovenko said, following the issue of a reportby the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on the application of IAEA safeguards in Iran. Russia expects that the session of the IAEA Board of Governors scheduled on Sept. 19 will discuss the report and work out furthersteps aimed at settling the remaining issues, Yakovenko said. The Foreign Ministry Monday said in a press release that the IAEA report had been compiled in keeping with an Aug. 11 resolution of the Board of Governors that discussed the Iranian nuclear program following Iran's partial withdrawal from the voluntary moratorium on enriching uranium. The report "stresses steady progress in clarifying the agency'sremaining questions to Iran and in taking measures to correct Iran's past mistakes in implementing the agreement on safeguards," says the release. "No new violations of nonproliferation commitments by Iran werediscovered," the Russian ministry underlined in the release. However, "there remain several questions to Iran concerning itspast nuclear activities that require additional IAEA investigationin cooperation with Iran," the ministry release noted. Iran announced that it is ready to break UN seals at a uranium processing plant in August, and refused to accept the plan suggested by the European Union (EU) on settlement of the nuclear issue. Recently, the EU and the United States have threatened to submit the Iranian nuclear issue to the UN Security Council, if Iran refuses to return to the negotiating table. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 Asia Times: Iran knocks Europe out THE ROVING EYE By Pepe Escobar TEHRAN - In the high-stakes nuclear poker game between Iran and the EU-3 (Britain, France and Germany), Tehran has decided to call the EU's bluff and turn the game around. On top of it Ali Larijani, the new head of the Supreme National Security Council - appointed by President Mahmud Ahmadinejad - and now Iran's top nuclear negotiator, stressed on Iranian TV that the criticism expressed in Saturday's report by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Mohammad ElBaradei was "neither legal nor technical" and distorted by political motives. ("The nuclear issue is a national issue. They [a reference to the EU-3, not the IAEA] should not talk to Iranian people with bullying language.") Larijani once again stressed that as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran had the right to develop the nuclear fuel cycle for civilian purposes. Right on cue, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi added that "access to peaceful nuclear technology is our inalienable right and we will not forsake such a right. The Isfahan issue is irrevocable." This a reference to uranium conversion being resumed at the Isfahan plant. According to Larijani, "If the IAEA was seeking to resolve Iran's nuclear issue, it could have already done so by now." Putin to the rescue? The European view appears to be that Iran now is trying to split the international community by talking to other players like Italy, as well as members of the Non-Aligned Movement , such as India, Malaysia and South Africa. The fact is the international community is already split on the issue between the US and the EU-3 on one side, and most of the developing world on the other. As much as the EU-3 is accusing Iran of playing the 35 member countries of the IAEA Board of Governors against each other, the US is exercising tremendous pressure over these same countries to refer Iran to the Security Council for possible sanctions. Former Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, currently a key advisor on foreign affairs to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is quoted as saying that Iran now has the upper hand - and that's the consensus in Tehran. Velayati is a realist. If Iran is referred to the Security Council, "They will obviously set a deadline for Iran, and in the worst circumstances we would have to expect sanctions." Velayati thinks that both Russia and China may not veto the move for sanctions, "but they will try to moderate the Security Council's stances". There are insistent rumors in diplomatic circles in Tehran that Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has asked his close friend, Russian President Vladimir Putin, to intervene as the new broker of last resort - since the failure of the EU-3 strategy is now being widely acknowledged. Italy from the start wanted to be part of the negotiating team. Berlusconi believes that only Putin can bridge the gap between Western Europe and Iran as he is - relatively - trusted by both sides. Russia said on Monday that it opposed sending Iran's case to the Security Council. The showdown is when the 35-member IAEA board meets on September 19 in its headquarters in Vienna. The US and the EU-3 know that both Russia and China - with multiple billion-dollar deals with Iran - would be inclined to block any eventual Security Council sanctions. Diplomats in Brussels realistically realize that sanctions would not be considered at first: the council instead would try hard to come up with a long-term "constructive" solution. Deal? What deal? The story of the EU-3's mediation is a chronicle of a debacle foretold. In a nutshell, Iran voluntarily agreed under the Paris Agreement of November 2004 to suspend uranium enrichment at Isfahan as part of negotiations with the EU-3. The IAEA itself recognized the move as "a voluntary, non-legally binding, confidence-building measure". Five months ago, Iran actually proposed to freeze uranium enrichment but to keep a few centrifuges (under severe IAEA inspections). The EU-3 rejected the offer. Why? Because of Washington. From the Bush administration's point of view, Iran has the right to nothing - much less to master parts of the fuel cycle. Iranian negotiators saw through the EU-3 strategy from the start. They accused the EU-3 of trying to maintain the suspension of uranium enrichment "indefinitely" and at the same time obstructing any significant development in the negotiations. That was exactly the case, because Washington had blocked any possibility of a compromise. Iran has the right to work on a nuclear fuel cycle according to the NPT, and it has the right to keep at least a pilot enrichment program. In Tehran's view, the EU-3, pressured by Washington, was in fact trying to impose no uranium enrichment and no reprocessing. The EU-3 had nothing to offer except a heavily spun "nuclear, commercial and political package", as it was advertised in Brussels. An iron rule in the package was for Tehran to definitively renounce uranium enrichment. For Tehran, conversion is not enrichment, thus the restart of Isfahan's plant. The EU-3 package was in fact a very limited - and conditional - one. It offered a guaranteed supply of fuel for Iran's civilian reactors, as long as they were fully supervised by the IAEA; an agreement (but only in principle) for European companies to build a nuclear power station besides the Russian-made Bushehr reactor, but as long as Tehran allowed extremely intrusive IAEA inspections (and even this wouldn't fly if Washington actively blocked it); more trade (including conditional access to the World Trade Organization) and economic cooperation; sales of Airbus planes; and vague support in terms of "security cooperation" on energy matters, Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the fight against terrorism and drug trafficking. Last month in Brussels, some European diplomats, off the record, admitted to Asia Times Online that the package was "an empty box of chocolates". But "there is nothing else we can offer", a diplomat said. "The Americans simply wouldn't let us." The diplomats also confirmed that both France and Germany were absolutely ready for a deal, considering they want to invest heavily in Iran, and want to close oil and gas agreements. The problem was Britain. "We know," said officials in Tehran, barely disguising their smiles. Tehran was incensed not only by the terms of the package but by the way it was presented - a bureaucratic letter with no official signature by any of the EU-3 foreign ministers. The conditional offers were only on Europe's name, and did not implicate the US. That was the last straw. Iran called the EU-3's bluff and resumed uranium conversion at Isfahan. That led to last Saturday's IAEA report. The report says many important things. Crucially, ElBaradei acknowledges that Iran is cooperating with the IAEA. And he admits that results of extensive analysis tend to support Iran's official statement about the foreign origin (from Pakistan) of uranium contamination. ElBaradei also says that Iran has been asked to provide more information regarding its P-2 centrifuge program. He says a final assessment of Iran's plutonium research activities must await the results of more analysis. He says that Iran is building a heavy water research reactor at Arak (planned to start in 2014) and a heavy water production plant at Arak as well. He says Iran's heavy water reactor program will be monitored by the IAEA. But ElBaradei also criticizes Iran for not reporting to the IAEA all its experiments in uranium enrichment, uranium conversion and plutonium research. He adds, however, that Iran has agreed to provide further supporting information and documentation. He says that after two-and-a-half years of intensive inspections and investigations the IAEA is not yet in a position to clarify some important outstanding issues; and he calls for Iran's "full transparency". In essence: the tone is "let's keep talking", not "let's shut the door". Courting India Larijani insists that "we did not stop the talks, they [the EU-3] did. We consider negotiations with every country as useful. We have not hidden anything. They must know that threats would not have any effect on our national will." Tehran's new global diplomatic thrust is now evident. The strategy insists on Iran's inalienable nuclear rights according to the IAEA charter; stresses a close, respectful cooperation with IAEA inspectors; and actively courts support from non-aligned countries like India, Malaysia and South Africa (that's the spirit of Larijani's high profile visit to India last week). As far as Tehran is concerned, the EU-3 are now history. Unless they table a realistic proposal. Tehran stresses that both Israel and Pakistan totally ignored the NPT and built their own nuclear weapons, without giving any explanation to the "international community". So why should Iran be punished when it is actually complying with the NPT? The Isfahan plant will keep working on uranium conversion. And Tehran plans to resume uranium enrichment at Natanz as well. There's nothing the EU-3 can do about it. According to an Iranian diplomat, "The IAEA of course can talk about their 'serious concern' about nuclear activities in Isfahan and Natanz, but they cannot use this legally as a means to refer Iran to the UN Security Council." Or can they? (Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110 ***************************************************************** 8 Reuters: U.S. warns China on energy ties to Iran Tue Sep 6, 2005 8:28 PM ET By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent WASHINGTON, Sept 6 (Reuters) - China will be increasingly in conflict with the United States if it continues to pursue energy deals with countries like Iran and is unlikely to gain the energy security it seeks, a senior U.S. official said on Tuesday. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick said he was not sure how much of Beijing's energy drive was propelled by new Chinese oil companies or by a government "strategic plan." But he told a group of reporters it was unlikely that Beijing could guarantee its own energy security through contracts with countries which Washington and other states consider troublesome "because you can't lock up energy resources" in a global marketplace. Instead, the Bush administration was encouraging China to adopt a broader definition of energy that included cooperative efforts with Washington and others to develop energy sources beyond oil and gas, expanding sources of oil and gas and improving energy efficiency, he said. Zoellick, in charge of what Washington calls a new U.S. strategic dialogue with Beijing, discussed key issues facing the two powers ahead of Chinese President Hu Jintao's attendance at the United Nations summit in New York next week. Hu had been due to make his first official visit to the White House on Wednesday but it was canceled so President George W. Bush could focus on the Hurricane Katrina aftermath. The two are still expected to meet on the fringes of the U.N. summit. Cooperation on trying to end the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs will be on the U.S. agenda. Zoellick launched the strategic dialogue on a trip to Beijing last month amid rising U.S. concern over China's growing economic and military clout. Washington aims to foster greater cooperation and avoid dangerous miscalculation by examining Sino-American relations in a larger framework. Zoellick acknowledged "there are questions that are being asked not only in the U.S. but other parts of Asia and Europe about how China will use this growing power." CHINA AS WORLD POWER China became the world's third largest importer of oil in 2003. It sought energy and mineral deals with Iran, whom the United States and Europe accuse of pursuing nuclear weapons, with Sudan, accused of genocide in the Darfur region, and Venezuela, where the president has allied with Cuba, a U.S. adversary. Zoellick said he told Chinese officials that from a U.S. perspective "it looked like Chinese companies had been unleashed to try to lock up energy resources." This is an elusive goal because even when governments think they "own" the resources of another country, that country could nationalize the assets, he said. He said Beijing's ties to what the United States considered troublesome states -- the list also included Burma and Zimbabwe -- were "going to have repercussions elsewhere" and the Chinese would have to decide if they wanted to pay the price. China must choose whether to work with the United States to ameliorate problems posed by these states -- while still protecting Beijing's energy interests -- or whether it "want(ed) to be against us and perhaps others in the international system as well," Zoellick said. The State Department's former chief China official, Randall Schriver, told Reuters last week he feared the two powers were on a "collision course" over the ties Beijing is forging in its search for energy to feed its growing economy. Some U.S. experts worry Beijing is gobbling up energy assets to secure control over vital resources that would allow it eventually to supplant the United States as the world's dominant power. China this year made a bid for a U.S.-owned oil giant but withdrew after a torrent of criticism from the U.S. Congress. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 csmonitor.com: Iran changes tack in nuclear standoff | from the September 06, 2005 edition NETWORKING: Iran nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani (r.), met with Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh, last week to seek support in Iran's nuclear dispute with Western nations. AJIT KUMAR/AP A report on Iran's nuclear program found a 'lack of transparency' as well as 'good progress' on certain issues. By Scott Peterson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor ISTANBUL, TURKEY  Iran's first fear about its controversial nuclear program has long been that it could provoke a US or Israeli military strike. And a close second, until now, has been concern in Tehran that Iran could be referred to the United Nations Security Council for violations of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). But even as Western diplomats begin to step up efforts to go after Iran at the UN - canvassing began in Vienna Monday, in the wake of the latest Iran report by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) - Iran appears to be changing tack. Tehran is minimizing the risk of Security Council sanction, which in turn is undermining the carrot-and-stick approach used by the EU and Washington in recent years to convince Iran to end all nuclear efforts. "To a certain extent, [Iranian officials] have lost their fear of the Security Council," says Davoud Hermidas Bavand, a professor of international law at Alameh University in Tehran. "Some even say that Iran should take the issue to the Security Council, against the IAEA," he says, because a technical issue has become "politicized." Shortly after the hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was sworn in as president a month ago, Iran took a long-anticipated step of breaking IAEA seals at its Isfahan plant, ending a unilateral suspension of uranium-conversion activities. The US says those activities - which the IAEA reports have converted seven tons of raw uranium into gas that can be enriched - are aimed at producing nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge, saying it needs nuclear power, and that its right to master nuclear fuel technology is enshrined in the NPT. The suspension was part of an earlier deal between Iran and Britain, France, and Germany, which sought to make it permanent in August by offering modest incentives. Iran rejected the proposal, which included no guarantees from the US of safety or waiving of current sanctions, prompting the Europeans to cancel meetings set for late August. The confidential report, released Friday, found that 2-1/2 years of "intensive inspections and investigation" have not clarified outstanding issues, and that "Iran's full transparency is indispensable and overdue." Still, the IAEA reported "good progress" in resolving a string of issues since 2003, and confirmed that traces of weapons-grade uranium found on centrifuge parts - held up by some US officials as evidence of a clandestine bomb effort - originated in Pakistan, as Iran has claimed. Iran's new nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, said IAEA criticism was politically motivated, and that violations were "neither legal or technical." "The tide of opinion in Tehran seems to have shifted," says Gary Samore, a nonproliferation official during the Clinton administration and vice president of the MacArthur Foundation in Chicago. "Over the last two years, Iran's policy has been dominated by the desire to avoid referral to the Security Council, and Iran has been prepared to accept limits on its nuclear program in order to achieve that," says Mr. Samore, who is releasing an Iran dossier Tuesday under the auspices of the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London. "It does appear that Iran feels it's in a much stronger position." High oil prices may give Tehran confidence that the council would not jeopardize the flow of Iran's petroleum into the market, says Samore. Other factors include American preoccupation with Iraq, and the decisive victory of Mr. Ahmadinejad at the polls last June. Likely allies of Iran on the council include China and Russia, which is building a nuclear-power plant at Bushehr. Over the weekend, Russian officials made clear they saw "no reason" to send Iran to the council. Mr. Larijani is due to arrive in Pakistan Wednesday, after visits to China and India to galvanize non-Western support. "The belief that [the US and EU] can weaken the will of this great nation with the baton of the Security Council is mistaken logic, and they are only losing their dignity," Larijani told Iranian state TV. "Gone is the time when they could deny Iran its rights by threatening it," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi, said on Sunday. "It is our legitimate right to have peaceful nuclear technology, and we will not give that up." Europeans hope for a shift during talks between Ahmadinejad and other world leaders, including Russia, at the UN General Assembly in New York next week. The IAEA board of governors meets on Sept. 19 to consider the case. "Ahmadinejad, and [Iran] in general, feels less threatened by the possibility of sanctions - they perceive they are stronger, and much more in control," says Hadi Semati, a political scientist from Tehran University, who is currently at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington. "Domestically in Iran, it's going to be very hard for anyone to come out and say: 'OK, we're going to get rid of our [nuclear] fuel cycle' to get a few promises. That is political suicide. "They know the Europeans are terrified to take Iran to the Security Council, because then the question is: 'What next?' '' says Mr. Semati. And "down the line, [they feel] the US is bent on regime change anyway, even if it's not declared policy - so why bother?" But such conclusions in Tehran are a high-stakes gamble, as is likely to be any Security Council response. Numerous safeguard violations over the past 20 years means that "until Iran restores confidence in its nuclear program, it should accept limits on activities that are dual use, and have military applications," says Samore. "There is a very strong legal case, [but] Council members are going to be very reluctant to impose significant sanctions on Iran." A tough stance could prompt Iran to relaunch uranium enrichment, kick out inspectors, or - as some hard-liners have demanded - pull Iran out of the NPT. "I think the council will react very cautiously, very incrementally," adds Samore. "It will take time, but there is no urgency. Iran is still a couple of years from having a nuclear-weapons capability, and there are some pretty significant technical problems." www.csmonitor.com | Copyright © 2005 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 Guardian Unlimited: UK changes tack in nuclear talks Ewen MacAskill, diplomatic editor Tuesday September 6, 2005 The British government softened its stance on the Iranian nuclear issue yesterday as it tries to win over countries wavering about referral to the UN security council. Britain, France and Germany have for the past year been threatening Iran with the prospect of sanctions if it resumed the uranium enrichment process, which it did last month. But a British official yesterday toned down that language for the first time, shifting the emphasis away from sanctions. Britain, along with the US, France, Germany and Israel, suspects that Iran is covertly engaged in trying to secure a nuclear weapon capability. Iran claims that it is only interested in a civilian nuclear programme. Britain, backed by the US, claims it has "a modest majority" on the 35-member board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog scheduled to meet in Vienna on September 19, for referral to the security council. Many developing countries on the board are opposed, seeing it as an attempt by western powers to dictate to a member of the developing world. The government's problems were compounded yesterday when Russia, a member of the IAEA board, said publicly, for the first time, it opposes such a referral. The Russian foreign ministry said that it "does not see any basis for transferring the question, which the IAEA is dealing with actively and productively, to the security council". The unity of Britain, France and Germany on the issue could also be undermined. Wolfgang Gerhardt, foreign affairs spokesman for Germany's liberal democrats, said yesterday: "The Iran negotiations are not yet a topic for the security council: rather, the negotiations should be revived." The senior British official said that if the Iran issue was referred to the security council, it would be to enable the security council to add its weight to the work of the IAEA rather than to embark on "punitive actions". [UP] About this site Guardian Unlimited ¿ Guardian Newspapers Limited ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea May Resume Nuke Talks Sept. 13 From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday September 6, 2005 11:31 AM SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea has proposed to China that six-nation talks on the elimination of its nuclear weapons program resume Sept. 13, according to news reports Tuesday. But the communist North appeared to be sticking with its demand for a peaceful nuclear program, a key stumbling block in the international disarmament talks that broke off for a recess last month. ``Our nuclear power facilities have been built on decades of belt-tightening of our people. Our people's sweat and blood is in those facilities. It is unimaginable for us to give this up without an alternative,'' said a commentary in the Rodong Sinmun, the newspaper of North Korea's ruling Workers' Party, according to the North's official Korean Central News Agency. The commentary urged the United States ``to admit our right to a peaceful nuclear program, and take a fair stance to resolve the nuclear crisis.'' The North has already said it would return to talks the week of Sept. 12, after delaying the meeting by two weeks in anger over U.S.-South Korean military exercises and Washington's appointment of a special envoy on North Korea's human rights. South Korea's Yonhap news agency and the Kukmin Daily reported Tuesday that the North told China it wants to resume the talks Sept. 13, and Beijing relayed this position to South Korea. Unidentified South Korean officials were cited in the reports. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang declined Tuesday to confirm the report. Seoul's Foreign Ministry also declined to confirm the reports. But Cho Tae-yong, deputy chief of the country's negotiating team to the nuclear talks, said he ``does not see any big problem'' in resuming the talks during the week of Sept. 12 as scheduled. The latest session of the six-party talks was the fourth round of nuclear talks including China, Japan, Russia, the United States and the two Koreas. The latest nuclear crisis with the North broke out in late 2002 after U.S. officials said Pyongyang admitted to running a secret nuclear program in violation of an earlier deal to abandon its weapons ambitions. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 12 Korea Herald: Six-party talks likely to resume next Tuesday The Nation's No.1 English Newspaper It is most likely the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear standoff will resume on Tuesday next week, following North Korea's reported proposal of the date to the host country China. The resumption also depends on the availability of flight schedules for delegates. The South Korean government remained mostly silent with regard to any specific date but suggested the disarmament negotiations will likely resume sometime next week as scheduled. The talks involving the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia went into a recess on Aug. 7 after two weeks of intense bilateral negotiations. The break that was initially scheduled to last three weeks was extended into another week when North Korea took issue with joint South Korea-U.S. military exercises earlier this month and Washington's appointment of a special envoy on the communist state's human rights issues. It is said the other governments were partially aware that Pyongyang would make such a move that would delay the resumption of the talks. Once the talks resume, the parties are likely to tackle once again the core issues of setting the boundary of North Korea's nuclear dismantlement, and Pyongyang's demand for the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy. The Kukmin Ilbo reported yesterday that North Korea proposed to the host country China that the talks resume on Sept. 13. China relayed the suggestion to South Korea, the daily newspaper said. China is likely to announce the date of the talk's resumption in the near future. The six-party talks, entering the second phase of its fourth round, is unilaterally aimed at drawing up and signing a statement of principles that will set the course for ensuing negotiations on how North Korea will abandon its nuclear ambition and what is to be gained in return. In the summer negotiations, little was achieved because the United States and North Korea failed to agree on the boundary of North Korea's nuclear dismantlement and the two nation's deadlock over the hermit state's demand to the right of peacefully using nuclear energy. The two issues dominate the main agenda of the six-party talks and are said to take up the first couple of articles that will start the statement of principles when completed. Other key issues include normalizing relations between the North and other countries as well as agreeing on compensatory economic aid and others. The North is alleged to have demanded its right to build a light water reactor as a source of its energy, but it remains unclear as to whether the North is genuinely seeking a peaceful use of nuclear energy or for something beyond. South Korea view is that North Korea is entitled to the right to peacefully use nuclear energy but only after rejoining the Nonproliferation Treaty and fulfilling the International Atomic Energy Agency's obligations. The United States, which has reportedly started to show more flexibility recently, is hesitant to acknowledge North Korea's right for peaceful nuclear use in the six-party talks' statement of principle. Both South Korea and the United States are strictly against North Korea making any kind of demand regarding the suspended construction of a light water reactor in Shinpo, which was the source of the 2001 nuclear crisis when Washington claimed that Pyongyang breached their 1994 agreement by proceeding with an uranium enrichment program. North Korea to this day denies the allegation but declared in May this year that it has finished removing 8,000 spent fuel rods, from which nuclear materials can be extracted. (angiely@heraldm.com) By Lee Joo-hee 2005.09.07 ***************************************************************** 13 Xinhua: China calls for reopening six-party talks next week www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-06 19:49:15 BEIJING, Sept. 6 (Xinhuanet) -- The fourth round of six-party talks should resume next week and, as for the specific date, the Chinese side still needs to coordinate with the relevant parties, Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said Tuesday. Qin told a regular news conference that all concerned parties would continue consultation and discussion on the related issues during the upcoming second phase of the fourth round of six-party talks. The fourth round of the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue talks, starting from July 26 and recessing from Aug. 7, failed to resume as scheduled in the week of Aug. 29. But the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) said it agreed to rejoin the talks in the week beginning Sept. 12. Qin said the parties concerned have conducted intense and frequent consultations and dialogues during the recess of talks, which proved that the six-party talks was all along going on. "Now all the relevant parties are working to specify the starting date of the second phase of talks," Qin said, hoping that during the talks, all parties would proceed the overall situation of realizing denuclearization and safeguarding peace and stabilityof the Korean Peninsula, show flexibility and narrow their differences, in a bid to attain positive progress in the six-party talks. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 Reuters: North Korea wants talks to resume Sept. 13 - Yonhap Mon Sep 5, 2005 7:15 PM ET SEOUL, Sept 6 (Reuters) - North Korea has told China it wants to resume six-way talks on an international standoff over its nuclear development programmes on Sept. 13, Seoul's Yonhap news agency reported on Tuesday. China, host of the talks which also involve the South Korea, the United States, Japan and Russia, is expected to announce the official date after discussion with all parties, Yonhap reported. North Korea has said the talks could resume next week, but has not set a date. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 NRC: 73, 75, 95, 140, and 170 FR Doc 05-17494 [Federal Register: September 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 171)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 52942] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06se05-20] RIN 3150--AG24 Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Availability of draft proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is making available the draft wording of a proposed amendment of its regulations. The proposal would amend Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 52, ``Early Site Permits; Standard Design Certifications; and Combined Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants,'' and associated regulations based on experience gained from early site permit (ESP) and design certification reviews and discussions with stakeholders on the ESP and combined license (COL) processes. The changes should improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the licensing processes for future applicants. The availability of the draft rule language is intended to inform stakeholders of the current status of the NRC staff's activities to amend 10 CFR part 52. Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents can be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov . Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nanette V. Gilles, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-1180, e-mail nvg@nrc.gov; or Jerry N. Wilson, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001; telephone (301) 415-3145; e-mail jnw@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 3, 2003, the NRC published a proposed rulemaking (68 FR 40026) to (1) clarify and/or correct 10 CFR parts 2, 20, 21, 50, 51, 52 (including Appendices A, B, and C), 72, 73, 140, and 170; (2) update 10 CFR part 52; and (3) incorporate stakeholder comments. Upon further consideration by the NRC staff, the staff intends to recommend that the Commission re-propose amendments to part 52 and other parts of 10 CFR with associated changes that would supersede the July 2003 proposed rule. The NRC has developed draft wording for the changes to its regulations and has made them available on the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. This draft rule language is preliminary and may be incomplete in one or more respects. This draft rule language is being released to inform our stakeholders of the current status of the part 52 update rulemaking. In order to facilitate stakeholder review, the draft rule language is posted in three separate files: part 52, part 50, and all of the remaining parts of 10 CFR that have proposed changes. The NRC is not requesting comments on this draft rule language. Rather, comments will be requested when the re-proposed rule is published in the Federal Register. Following the close of the public comment period on the July 2003 rule, a number of factors led the staff to question whether the proposed rule would meet the Commission's objective of improving the effectiveness of NRC's regulatory processes for future nuclear power facilities. First, several public comments identified concerns regarding whether the proposed rule adequately addressed the relationship between part 50 and part 52 and clearly specified the applicable regulatory requirements for each of the regulatory processes in part 52. In addition, during the period of public comment and thereafter, the staff gained additional insights about ESPs as a result of the review of the first three ESP applications. The staff also had the benefit of public meetings with external stakeholders on developing NRC staff guidance on ESPs and COLs. As a result of these factors, the staff decided that a substantial rewrite and expansion of the original rulemaking would be necessary to ensure that the entire body of NRC regulations is able to support the agency's licensing and regulation of future nuclear power facilities under part 52. The proposed rule is intended to ensure that all regulatory processes in part 52 are addressed in that part and throughout the Commission's regulations and that there is no ambiguity with respect to the applicability of various requirements to each if the regulatory processes in part 52 (i.e., early site permit, standard design approval, standard design certification, combinded license and manufacturing license). Accordingly, the staff has developed this draft re-proposed rule and intends to recommend that it supersede the July 2003 proposed rule. The draft re-proposed rule contains a rewrite of part 52, as well as changes throughout 10 CFR to ensure that all regulatory processes in part 52 are addressed and to remove ambiguity with respect to the applicability of various requirements to each of the regulatory processes in part 52. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of August, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. William D. Beckner, Director, New, Research, and Test Reactors Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear Regulator Regulation. [FR Doc. 05-17494 Filed 9-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 16 NRC: Robert H. Leyse; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking FR Doc 05-17589 [Federal Register: September 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 171)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 52893-52899] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06se05-1] Rules and Regulations Federal Register This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week. [[Page 52893]] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 50 [Docket No. PRM-50-76] AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; denial. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying a petition for rulemaking submitted by Mr. Robert H. Leyse (PRM-50-76). The petitioner requests that the NRC's regulations concerning the specified evaluation models for emergency core cooling systems (ECCS) and associated guidance documents be amended. The petitioner asserts that amendments are necessary to correct technical deficiencies in the correlations and data used for calculation of metal-water oxidation. The petitioner states that the correlations and data do not consider the complex thermal-hydraulic conditions present during a loss-of- coolant accident (LOCA), including the potential for very high fluid temperature. The Commission is denying Mr. Leyse's petition for rulemaking (PRM-50-76). None of the specific technical issues raised by the petitioner have shown safety-significant deficiencies in the research, calculation methods, or data used to support ECCS performance evaluations. NRC's technical safety analysis demonstrates that current procedures for evaluating ECCS performance are based on sound science and that no amendments to the NRC's regulations and guidance documents are necessary. ADDRESSES: The NRC is making the documents identified in the table below available to interested persons through several means. Publicly available documents related to this petition, including the petition for rulemaking, public comments received, and the NRC's letter of denial to the petitioner, may be viewed electronically on public computers in the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O-1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents, including comments, may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov . Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are also available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, the public can gain access into the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if you have problems in accessing the documents in ADAMS, contact the PDR reference staff at (800) 387-4209 or (301) 415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Document PDR Web ADAMS Federal Register Notice-- X X ML022800472 Receipt of Petition for Rulemaking (67 FR 51783; Aug. 9, 2002). Letter of Denial to the X X ML052220454 Petitioner. Penn State/US NRC ``Rod Bundle ML023040657 Test Facility and Reflood Heat Transfer Program''. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-50- X X ML022240009 76). Public Comments for PRM-50-76.. X X ML042740105 US NRC Office of Nuclear X X ML041210109 Research (RES) ``Technical Safety Analysis of PRM-50-76, A Petition for Rulemaking to Amend Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 and Regulatory Guide 1.157''. US NRC, ``Updated Program Plan ....... ....... ML031810103 for High-Burnup Light-Water Reactor Fuel''. Studies of Metal Water ....... ....... ML050550198 Reactions at High Temperatures, III. Experimental and Theoretical Studies of the Zirconium-Water Reaction,'' L. Baker and L.C. Just, ANL-6548 (May 1962). PWR FLECHT (Full Length ....... ....... ML052230221 Emergency Cooling Heat Transfer) Final Report,'' April 1971. Zirconium Metal-Water Oxidation ....... ....... ML052230079 Kinetics IV. Reaction Rate Studies,'' ORNL/NUREG-17, August 1977.. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy A. Reed, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-1462, e-mail TAR@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The petition for rulemaking designated PRM-50-76 was received by the NRC on May 1, 2002. A notice of receipt of the petition and request for public comment was published in the Federal Register (FR) on August 9, 2002 (67 FR 51783). The notice of receipt requested comment on two questions: (1) Are the petitioner's three concerns about ECCS cooling valid, and if so, do these concerns constitute a significant safety concern? (2) Are there actions available to the Commission other than rulemaking that would effectively address the concerns raised by the petitioner? The Petition The petition, PRM-50-76, covers three broad issues: (1) Amending Appendix K to Part 50 of the Commission's regulations, (2) amending Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.157, and (3) the need for further analysis of the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, backup data. Issue 1: Amending Appendix K to Part 50 The petitioner describes at length alleged technical deficiencies in Appendix K Section I.A.5, ``Metal-Water Reaction Rate.'' The petitioner claims that Section I.A.5 does not accurately describe the extent of zirconium-water reactions that may occur during a LOCA. The petitioner states that the [[Page 52894]] Baker-Just equation, which is used to calculate the metal-water reaction in assessing ECCS performance, does not include any allowance for the complex thermal-hydraulic conditions during a LOCA, including the potential for very high bulk fluid temperatures within the cooling channels of the zirconium-clad fuel elements. The petitioner cites the abstract of an Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) report (ANL-6548 ``Studies of Metal Water Reactions at High Temperatures, III. Experimental and Theoretical Studies of the Zirconium-Water Reaction,'' L. Baker and L.C. Just, May 1962) and disputes the conclusions based on the petitioner's opinion that the tests discussed in ANL-6548 do not accurately reflect the conditions present during a LOCA. The petitioner makes the following points to support his views: The bulk water temperature was no greater than 315 [deg]C (599 [deg]F). The volume of water within the test apparatus was substantially greater than the volume of zirconium specimens, creating a vastly greater capacity to cool the heated zirconium particles of the Baker and Just experiment than would exist under LOCA conditions. Zirconium specimens were exposed to water only, while LOCA conditions include steam and nonequilibrium water-steam mixtures that reached higher bulk fluid temperatures. A footnote in ANL-6548 states: ``This discussion is of a preliminary nature: work in this area is continuing.'' Based on this footnote, the petitioner concludes that it is not appropriate to apply the Baker-Just equation as prescribed in Appendix K Section I.A.5 for the calculation of energy release rates, hydrogen generation, and cladding oxidation from the metal-water reaction. Issue 2: Amending Regulatory Guide 1.157 The petitioner states that RG 1.157, which allows use of data from NUREG-17 (ORNL/NUREG-17, ``Zirconium Metal-Water Oxidation Kinetics IV, Reaction Rate Studies,'' by Cathcart et al., August 1977) for calculating energy release rates, hydrogen generation, and cladding oxidation for cladding temperatures greater than 1900 [deg]F, results in flawed ECCS performance evaluations. The petitioner claims the NUREG-17 data is based on very limited test conditions and consequently the results should not be used for evaluating LOCA conditions. In support of this contention, the petitioner describes the following test conditions: Zircaloy-4 specimens exposed only to steam, rather than fluid conditions as present in a LOCA. No documented heat transfer from the Zircaloy surface to the slow-flowing steam. Small-scale laboratory testing without conditions typical of the complex thermal-hydraulic conditions that prevail during a LOCA. An unexplained shift from the MaxiZWOK (testing apparatus for investigations in the temperature range 1652 [deg]F to 1832 [deg]F) to the MiniZWOK (a different testing apparatus for investigations in the temperature range 1832 [deg]F to 2734 [deg]F). The petitioner believes that the investigators' conclusions include a statement that ``overlooks the very substantially greater mass transfer coefficients that accompany the so-called appropriate heat transfer coefficients.'' The petitioner concludes that ``it is those very substantially greater mass transfer coefficients that led to the temperature overshoot of the MaxiZWOK test at 1832 [deg]F, and that would have led to very substantially greater temperature overshoots and likely destruction of the Zircaloy tubing if MaxiZWOK had been operated over the temperature range of the MiniZWOK runs.'' The petitioner contends that the NUREG-17 investigators do not warrant their work, and specifically assume no responsibility for the accuracy of their work, and therefore, that NUREG-17 is not applicable to the regulation of nuclear power reactors in the United States of America. To support this contention, the petitioner cites the following statement on the introductory page of NUREG-17: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the Energy Research and Development Administration/United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.'' Issue 3: Need for Further Analysis of Appendix K Backup Data The petitioner states that the results of Zircaloy bundle test no. 9573, which was a test done for the Full Length Emergency Cooling Heat Transfer (FLECHT) tests and documented in WCAP-7665 (``PWR FLECHT (Full Length Emergency Cooling Heat Transfer) Final Report, Westinghouse Report WCAP-7665, April 1971''), are applicable to the calculation of the metal-water reaction and shows that the Baker-Just equation (referenced in Section I.A.5 of Appendix K for calculating the metal- water reaction) is not conservative. The petitioner states that the data in WCAP-7665, which includes test run 9573, includes the complex thermal-hydraulic conditions and Zircaloy-water reactions that characterize the reflood portion of the LOCA transient. The petitioner states that these conditions are not found in the narrow test procedures of ANL-6548 or NUREG-17. The petitioner states that a pertinent description of the complexities of thermal-hydraulic conditions during reflood, including negative heat transfer coefficients, is included in Section 3.2.3 of WCAP-7665 and that this description applies to data collected with FLECHT bundles with stainless steel cladding. The petitioner feels that another FLECHT Zircaloy bundle test, run 8874, is also pertinent to issues raised in this petition. The petitioner cites Section 5.6 of WCAP-7665 and finds statements comparing Zircaloy to stainless steel to be misleading because they imply that stainless steel heat transfer coefficients may be used as a conservative representation of Zircaloy behavior. The petitioner believes that the differences in behavior for various test runs are explained by the differences in the thermal-hydraulic conditions leading to a different combination of heat transfer and mass transfer factors, and are not due to inconsistency of the data, as implied by the report. The petitioner also finds WCAP-7665, Section 5.11, ``Materials Evaluation,'' to be misleading in view of the total experience with FLECHT run 9573. Finally, the petitioner notes that the same warning language used in NUREG-17 is on the cover page of WCAP-7665. The petitioner further identifies several aspects of the data supporting the document entitled ``Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Reactors-Opinion of the Commission,'' (Docket No. RM50-1, December 28, 1973) and notes the Commission concluded: ``It is apparent, however, that more experiments with Zircaloy cladding are needed to overcome the impression left from run 9573.'' The petitioner finds that there has been a lack of appropriate response to the Commission's expressed wish for more [[Page 52895]] experiments, and believes that at the very least, run 9573 should have been repeated. The petitioner emphasizes that although at least $1 billion had been expended on other analytical efforts, there has been no reported analysis of FLECHT run 9573. The petitioner states that the test programs discussed in the petition were funded by Government agencies. He believes that most of the programs were firmly controlled by those ``who were indoctrinated in the methods of the tightly regimented Naval Reactors Program.'' The petitioner finds that the ``biased reporting of WCAP-7665 may be traced to these controls'' and believes that ``the lack of application of the MaxiZWOK apparatus beyond 1832 [deg]F in NUREG-17 may likely be traced to rigid restrictions by management at the NRC.'' The petitioner further contends that while the Argonne work in ANL-6548 was likely less impacted by these controls, the controls likely did inhibit further analysis or reporting of FLECHT run 9573. The petitioner notes that he has made several requests to the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory for report KAPL-1534 and that his requests have been ignored. Public Comments on the Petition Six letters of public comment were received on the petition in response to the request for public comment. Three of these letters were from the petitioner. These letters are summarized below. By letter dated September 11, 2002, the petitioner provided comments that did not raise new issues. The petitioner stated that the Baker-Just equation and the Cathcart-Pawel equation in NUREG-17 have been grossly misapplied by the NRC. According to him, it is fundamentally important that the determinations of LOCA transient chemical kinetics include the geometry of the stationary Zircaloy reactant in combination with the thermal-hydraulic conditions of the flowing water/steam reactant. In addition, he repeated in his letter that there are deficiencies in RG 1.157, since it references documents such as NUREG-17 that do not consider the complex thermal-hydraulic conditions during LOCAs, including the potential for very high fluid temperatures. The petitioner also stated that the Commission should provide a rational basis for regulation of ECCS performance and perform additional experiments with Zircaloy cladding due to the cladding failure reported in Westinghouse report WCAP-7665. By letter dated October 23, 2002, Westinghouse Electric Company submitted comments that opposed the proposed changes. Westinghouse commented that runaway oxidation is prevented by the 2200 [deg]F peak cladding temperature limit. Additionally, Westinghouse commented that the Baker-Just correlation is known to be conservative, over-predicting the zirconium-water reaction by as much as 30 percent at the limiting temperature (2200 [deg]F). Westinghouse stated that the conditions of FLECHT run 9573 (high power and high initial temperatures) were extremely severe, intentionally beyond design basis for ECCS performance. Westinghouse stated that the Cathcart-Pawel tests had adequate steam flow so that the zirconium-water reaction rate was not limited by the availability of steam, and as a result, the tests were valid. Westinghouse commented that differences between ECCS test conditions and reactor core fluid conditions during postulated LOCAs do not prevent the current zirconium-water reaction database from being applicable to ECCS analysis. By letter dated October 25, 2002, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted comments supporting the Westinghouse comments, stating that extensive testing and analysis by the nuclear industry and national laboratories indicate that the Cathcart-Pawel correlation test is conservative. The NRC notes that the Cathcart-Pawel correlation is intended to be a best estimate, and is not intended to conservatively bound metal-water reaction rates. NEI commented that the test run, FLECHT 9573, was intentionally performed under very severe, beyond design-basis conditions, that post-test evaluations showed oxidation was within the expected range, and that runaway oxidation did not occur until the cladding temperature was well beyond 2300 [deg]F. NEI further commented that the petitioner's concerns do not constitute a significant safety concern and thus, there is no need to revise Appendix K to Part 50 or RG 1.157. By letter dated November 6, 2002, Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing (STARS), a group of six utilities, submitted comments opposing the petition. These comments stated that within the range of test parameters applicable to ECCS evaluation models, as specified in Appendix K and RG 1.157, the regulations and guidance are valid and conservative. STARS notes that all of the data referenced in the petition was either available to the Commission and industry when the regulations and guidance were created or was assessed later when the test information became available. On November 22, 2002, the petitioner submitted a reply to STARS but raised no new issues. On December 14, 2002, the petitioner responded to Westinghouse and NEI comments by discussing runaway oxidation in the WCAP-12610 report and severe fouling of fuel cladding during a LOCA. The petitioner stated that no allowance for higher temperatures due to fouling was made in run 9573, and repeated his request for more experiments with Zircaloy cladding. NRC Requirements for ECCS Evaluations Section 50.46 specifies the performance criteria against which the ECCS must be evaluated. The criteria include the maximum peak cladding temperature, the maximum cladding oxidation thickness, the maximum total hydrogen generation, and requirements to assure a coolable core geometry and abundant long-term cooling. This regulation also states that the ECCS cooling performance following postulated LOCAs must be calculated in accordance with either a realistic (also called a best- estimate) evaluation model that accounts for uncertainty or a conservative evaluation model that conforms with the required features of appendix K to 10 CFR part 50. If a licensee elects to calculate ECCS performance using an Appendix K evaluation model, then one important feature of that model is the way the metal-water reaction is calculated. For this calculation, Appendix K prescribes the use of the Baker-Just equation from ANL report ANL-6548 (L. Baker, L.C. Just, ``Studies of Metal Water Reactions at High Temperatures, III. Experimental and Theoretical Studies of the Zirconium-Water Reaction'' May 1962). The metal-water reaction, which is predicted to occur during the LOCA and which is calculated using the Baker-Just equation, is the subject of much of this petition. The Baker-Just equation calculates a conservative rate of hydrogen generation and fuel cladding oxidation during the LOCA transient. Additionally, for licensees electing to use best-estimate calculations to evaluate ECCS performance, NRC RG 1.157 provides guidance for such evaluations. RG 1.157 allows the use of data from NUREG-17 for the calculation of the metal-water reaction. NRC Technical Evaluation The NRC reviewed the petitioner's request and concluded that none of the issues raised by the petitioner justified the initiation of rulemaking. The NRC's response to the technical issues raised in PRM- 50-76 is based largely on a technical study by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) ``Technical [[Page 52896]] Safety Analysis of PRM-50-76, A Petition for Rulemaking To Amend appendix K to 10 CFR part 50 and Regulatory Guide 1.157.'' The NRC's responses to the petitioner's issues are as follows: Issue 1: Amending Appendix K to Part 50 The petitioner claims that the requirement to use the Baker-Just equation in Section I.A.5 of Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50, does not accurately describe the extent of zirconium-water reaction that may occur during a LOCA. He states that the Baker-Just equation does not include any allowance for the complex thermal-hydraulic conditions during a LOCA. The NRC disagrees with the petitioner's assertions. In Section 3.1 of the petition, the petitioner discusses the inapplicability of the Baker-Just equation for calculating zirconium- water reaction rates during a LOCA. The NRC notes that it is important to distinguish between the experiments performed by Baker and Just, and the equation developed by them and adopted in Appendix K to Part 50. Experiments run with 40-60 mil wires at temperatures at, or near, the zirconium melting point (3400 [deg]F) for one or two seconds are not typical of fuel rod cladding at temperatures in the range of 1800 [deg]F-2200 [deg]F for 50 to 400 seconds that are postulated to occur in a design basis LOCA. In the Baker-Just report, only one data point from their experiments (at 3366 [deg]F) is used in developing the Baker-Just equation. This one data point was used to anchor the Baker- Just equation at the melting point of zirconium. The remaining data from Bostrum (``The High Temperature Oxidation of Zircaloy in Water,'' W. A. Bostrum, WAPD-104 March 1954) and Lemmon (``Studies Relating to the Reaction Between Zirconium and Water at High Temperatures,'' A. W. Lemmon, Jr., BMI-1154, January 1957), at more relevant zirconium cladding conditions, were used by Baker and Just in the derivation of their equation. The use of the single data point at the melting temperature makes the Baker-Just equation very conservative. At the time of the promulgation of Sec. 50.46, the Commission expected the NRC staff to obtain new and better zirconium-water reaction data. The petitioner also expressed concerns about the need for additional data. The substantial work of Cathcart and Pawel was performed for the NRC in response to the Commission's expectation. The NRC compares the Baker-Just correlation to other correlations in a technical study (ADAMS accession ML041210109). The comparisons show the conservatism of the Baker-Just correlation in the temperature range important for clad oxidation calculations for LOCAs. In the discussion of Issue 3, comparisons of the Baker-Just correlation to relevant data demonstrate the substantial conservatism of the Baker- Just correlation. The petitioner expresses concern about the low water temperature (no greater than 599 [deg]F) in the Baker-Just experiments. This temperature corresponds to the saturation temperature at 1530 psia, which was the pressure for that particular experiment. While a few degrees of liquid superheat may be possible under LOCA/ECCS conditions, the degree of nonequilibrium required for higher liquid or ``bulk'' temperatures postulated by the petitioner is not possible. The petitioner is also concerned about the large water volume compared to the zirconium sample size with respect to the quench capability of zirconium-clad fuel rods. As noted, these experiments were atypical in that respect, but barely used in the formulation of the Baker-Just correlation. Further, it should be noted that the Baker- Just report was not intended to be a heat transfer study, but rather an investigation of zirconium-water reaction kinetics at very high temperatures. One interesting feature of the Baker-Just report is the heat and mass transfer analysis of an example case analyzed to examine the processes limiting the reaction rate. In this severe case, a 0.21 cm zirconium sphere at its melting point was dropped into water. Baker andJust were concerned that the reaction could be limited by gas phase diffusion of steam through a film of steam and hydrogen. This appears to be similar to the petitioner's concern. As explained in the Baker- Just report, water cannot stay in contact with the hot metal and a vapor film immediately forms around the sphere. Figure 15 in that report shows that vapor phase diffusion is the limiting steam transport process for less than 0.2 seconds, during which a slight film of oxide is forming on the surface of the sphere. After that, the parabolic rate equation, (e.g., the Baker-Just equation) becomes limiting. The figure also shows that the gas phase diffusion is far less temperature- sensitive than the parabolic rate law. Certainly at lower temperatures more typical of a LOCA, the parabolic law is even more limiting than gas phase diffusion as long as the reaction is not steam starved. Comparison of the Baker-Just equation to numerous data sets has shown the equation to be conservative. A significant example of this conservatism is discussed under Issue 3. In summary, the NRC found no technical basis in the petition or in NRC records for the assertion that the NRC requirement to use the Baker-Just equation, along with other requirements of Appendix K, is flawed and is a significant safety concern. Issue 2: Amending Regulatory Guide 1.157 The petitioner stated that RG 1.157, which allows use of the data and the Cathcart-Pawel equation presented in NUREG-17, results in flawed evaluations of ECCS performance. The NRC disagrees with the petitioner's assertions on this issue. In Section 3.2 of the petition, the petitioner states that the limited test conditions described in NUREG-17 preclude the use of the results for LOCA calculations. He further states that Zircaloy-4 specimens were not exposed to LOCA fluid conditions and that only steam was applied at very low velocities for the main test series. The petitioner states that there was no documented heat transfer from the Zircaloy surface to the slow-flowing steam and that as a result the conditions of the small-scale laboratory tests were not typical of the complex thermal-hydraulic conditions that prevail during a LOCA. The petitioner suggests that without liquid water, the tests are invalid. The NRC disagrees. The presence of liquid water would invalidate the tests. Accurate steady-flow measurement would be extremely difficult. The droplets or liquid film would make it difficult to achieve the relatively constant sample temperatures that are necessary in these reaction kinetics tests. However, adequate steam flow is a concern. If the flow is too low, the reaction becomes steam starved. Otherwise, it is unnecessary to have steam flow typical of LOCA/ECCS conditions. These are not heat transfer tests. Once a reaction rate model is developed using data from experiments like these, the model should be validated against transient tests under LOCA conditions, as in the four Zircaloy tests described in WCAP-7665 and the transient tests described in the Cathcart-Pawel report. Calculations were performed to assure that there was adequate steam flow for the MiniZWOK experiments used to derive the Cathcart-Pawel correlation in NUREG-17. These calculations are described in the RES technical study. An important argument for the absence of steam starvation is how the isothermal Cathcart-Pawel experiments [[Page 52897]] described in NUREG-17 give consistent results that support the parabolic/Arrhenius behavior. This is also discussed in the RES technical study. Much of the petitioner's criticism of the Cathcart-Pawel work is related to a comparison of MiniZWOK and MaxiZWOK experimental conditions. MiniZWOK was used to develop a consistent set of data for correlation development. Controlling sample temperature by adjusting heater power (MiniZWOK) was much more successful than adjusting steam flow (MaxiZWOK). As the petitioner notes, temperature overshoot was a problem with MaxiZWOK and at high temperatures could have led to temperature runaway. As noted previously, temperature control is absolutely necessary in reaction kinetics experiments such as these. The petitioner implies that the experimenters abandoned MaxiZWOK in favor of MiniZWOK. Actually, the isothermal MiniZWOK experiments were essentially complete before the MaxiZWOK experiments were begun. Results from MaxiZWOK between 1652 [deg]F and 1832 [deg]F agreed well with MiniZWOK data at the same temperatures. Cathcart and Pawel state that: The very good agreement between these two data sets is regarded as evidence that steam flow rate and steam insertion temperature do not affect significantly the kinetics of the steam oxidation of Zircaloy, at least in this temperature range. Certainly, with steam velocities at least an order of magnitude greater in MaxiZWOK than MiniZWOK, the potential for more rapid gas phase diffusion of steam to the sample surface ``mass transfer'' is greater for MaxiZWOK. But clearly this is not the limiting phenomenon. This was demonstrated by the good agreement between MiniZWOK and MaxiZWOK data and the good agreement of MiniZWOK data to parabolic/ Arrhenius behavior. There is no evidence to suggest that high ``mass transfer coefficients'' in MaxiZWOK caused temperature overshoot in MaxiZWOK at 1832[deg]F, as the petitioner proposes. It is true, as the petitioner suggests, that ``[i]t is not possible to achieve an isothermal rate of oxidation of Zircaloy-4 if the Zircaloy-4 is exposed to LOCA fluid conditions at elevated conditions,'' but not for the reasons postulated by the petitioner. Rather, large-break LOCA reflood conditions are characterized by constantly decreasing power (decay heat) and increasing heat transfer coefficients after a few seconds. Under these conditions, isothermal conditions are impossible. WCAP-7665 showed that this kind of heat transfer and power behavior was universal for all tests done under design basis conditions, and as a result, these heat transfer tests did not exhibit isothermal cladding temperature behavior. The petitioner implies that Cathcart and Pawel's statement, that scoping tests on the effect of steam pressure were in progress, is an admission of inapplicability of their work. On the contrary, the scoping work was completed and subsequent work by others has been undertaken to examine pressure effects. The petitioner's notion that the authors' statement about ongoing work applies to very low steam velocities is also unsupported. Work in this area did not end in 1977. The NRC, foreign partners, and the industry have continued to conduct and evaluate experimental and analytical programs on fuel cladding behavior. As in the case with many other research activities and their link to the agency's regulatory framework, an important objective of this work is the confirmation of current Sec. 50.46 criteria and models and the development of more realistic, performance-based, and contemporary criteria and models. An important link to the current work is the extensive research reported by Cathcart and Pawel. The NRC disagrees with the petitioner's assertion that the disclaimer in the introduction to NUREG-17 causes the technical work to be inapplicable to reactor regulation. The disclaimer protects the United States Government from potential litigation. It is not intended to discredit the technical validity of the work documented in NUREG-17. As such, the disclaimer is irrelevant to whether the NUREG-17 work is an adequate basis for reactor regulation. That is a question that should be decided solely on the technical merits of the work. The NRC found no technical basis in the petition nor in NRC records to support the assertion that the Regulatory Guide 1.157 conditions for acceptance of the use of ORNL/NUREG-17 information result in flawed evaluation of ECCS performance. Issue 3: Need for Further Analysis of Appendix K Backup Data In Section 3.4 of his petition, the petitioner quotes from the AEC decision on the ECCS rulemaking [See Rulemaking Hearing, Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors, RM-50-1, CLI-73-39, 6AEC1085, at 1124]: ``It is apparent, however, that more experiments with Zircaloy cladding are needed to overcome the impression left from run 9573.'' The petitioner claims that such experiments have not been performed and are necessary. The NRC disagrees. Run 9573 refers to one of four Zircaloy clad FLECHT experiments performed in 1969 and reported in WCAP-7665. The ``impression'' referred to by the AEC Commissioners in 1973 appears to be the fact that run 9573 indicates lower ``measured'' heat transfer coefficients than the other three Zircaloy clad tests reported in WCAP-7665 when compared to the equivalent stainless steel tests. This is not a concern about the zirconium-water reaction models. The AEC Commissioners believed that this anomaly could be cleared up with more experiments on Zircaloy cladding. Some of the anomaly can probably be explained by a deficiency in the data reduction process. As will be discussed later, additional Zircaloy clad tests were performed in the 1980s. Regarding the data reduction process, heat transfer coefficients are not directly measurable quantities. They must be calculated from measured temperatures, known heat sources, and known thermal properties. WCAP-7665 describes the heat transfer data reduction process using the DATAR code. For these experiments, the decay heat simulation was well known, as was the time of heater failure. However, the heat source, due to the zirconium-water reaction, had to be estimated in some way. The Baker-Just correlation was used for that purpose. Because of its conservatism, the Baker-Just correlation overestimates the amount of reaction and the associated heat generation rate. At 21 locations on 19 rods among the four Zircaloy tests, post- test oxide thickness measurements were made. Westinghouse applied the Baker-Just correlation to each temperature transient measured at or very near to each oxide thickness measurement. The comparison between predicted and measured oxide thickness was presented in Figure B-12 of WCAP-7665. The Baker-Just calculated oxide thickness is about 1.6 times the measured value. Thus for this data set, the Baker-Just correlation overpredicts the data by about 60 percent, which is quite conservative. The NRC obtained tabular time/temperature data from Westinghouse for 19 of the 21 locations analyzed by Westinghouse for the four Zircaloy FLECHT tests. The Baker-Just correlation was applied to these 19 data sets as a check on the analysis in WCAP-7665. The RES technical study clearly demonstrates that the analysis in WCAP-7665 is correct and that the [[Page 52898]] Baker-Just correlation is conservative even under the severe conditions of run 9573. The petitioner asserts that a detailed thermal-hydraulic analysis of run 9573, including evaluation of the heating from Zircaloy-water reactions, was never performed. Contrary to that assertion, not only was an evaluation of the heating from Zircaloy-water reaction performed for run 9573, it was done for all four Zircaloy tests. Unfortunately, using the conservative Baker-Just correlation to estimate the zirconium-water heat release results is an overestimation of the derived heat transfer coefficients. Thirty-five years later, it would be difficult to replicate the DATAR code, substitute a better metal- water model, and re-derive the heat transfer coefficients. The difficulty would be in addition to the significant monetary expense of conducting high-temperature Zircaloy tests and would have marginal benefit in terms of increased understanding of large-break LOCA heat transfer and metal-water reaction kinetics. The current programs being conducted at Pennsylvania State University and Argonne National Laboratory are far more cost-effective. High-temperature tests similar to run 9573 would require rod bundle powers well outside the range of operation of any current or proposed pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and would produce very little useful heat transfer information. Therefore, the NRC does not believe that such tests are necessary. The petitioner states that more experiments with Zircaloy cladding have not been conducted on the scale necessary to overcome the impression left from run 9573. The NRC disagrees. In fact additional Zircaloy tests have been performed. In the early 1980s, the NRC contracted with National Research Universal (NRU) at Chalk River, Ontario, Canada to run a series of LOCA tests in the NRU reactor. More than 50 tests were conducted to evaluate the thermal-hydraulic and mechanical deformation behavior of a full-length 32-rod nuclear bundle during the heatup, reflood, and quench phases of a large-break LOCA. The NRC is reviewing the data from this program to determine its value for assessing the current generation of codes such as TRAC-M (now renamed TRACE). In assessing the need for further experiments like the Zircaloy- clad FLECHT tests, it is important to understand the past and current role of rod bundle reflood heat transfer tests. In the late 1960s, a mechanistic understanding of reflood heat transfer did not exist. To develop heat transfer models as expeditiously as possible, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), Westinghouse, and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), cooperatively developed the PWR FLECHT program. The principal objective was to determine reflood heat transfer coefficients as a function of key initial and boundary conditions, rod elevation, and time after the beginning of reflood and to develop empirical correlations based on that dependency. As long as a sufficiently large matrix of tests was performed with full-scale rod bundles, there was no great need for a comprehensive mechanistic understanding. The key parameters were: A. Pressure B. Peak power C. Decay power D. Flooding rate E. Inlet subcooling F. Initial temperature G. Bundle size H. Cladding material I. Housing temperature When nuclear plant behavior and design conditions are outside the envelope defined by these test parameters or the design of the experimental system, there is no basis for extrapolation, since the derived heat transfer models are not necessarily based on the physical models governing the reflood heat transfer processes. For the very empirical process used in the early FLECHT experiments, limited effort was expended obtaining data needed for development of mechanistic physical models. It would have been impractical to obtain sufficient Zircaloy heat transfer coefficient data for the empirical process used with the early FLECHT experiments. As the FLECHT program and other rod bundle reflood heat transfer programs have progressed over the last 30 years, more information appropriate for mechanistic model development has been obtained. As better mechanistic models are developed, careful extrapolation has a better chance of success, and the role of experiments like FLECHT has shifted from model development to developmental assessment. In fact, many of the FLECHT-SEASET experiments are used to assess the new code models. As mentioned previously, the NRC is reviewing the NRU Zircaloy- clad nuclear fuel bundle test results to establish their value for further code assessment. Conclusions The NRC investigated each of the petitioner's key concerns. The NRC concludes that Appendix K of 10 CFR Part 50 and the existing guidance on best-estimate ECCS evaluation models are adequate to assess ECCS performance for U.S. light water reactors (LWRs) using Zircaloy-clad UO2 at burnup levels currently permitted by regulations. This general conclusion is based on the following considerations: The Baker-Just correlation using the current range of parameter inputs is conservative and adequate to assess Appendix K ECCS performance. Virtually every data set published since the Baker-Just correlation was developed has clearly demonstrated the conservatism of the correlation for the temperature range important to clad oxidation calculations for LOCAs. The parabolic/Arrhenius behavior of the Cathcart-Pawel isothermal experiments confirmed that there was adequate availability of steam. An NRC analysis confirms the ORNL/ANL assessment that the Cathcart-Pawel isothermal experiments were not steam starved by at least two orders of magnitude. Therefore, the experimental data is valid. NRC has continued to study complex thermal hydraulic effects on ECCS heat transfer processes during LOCA accident conditions consistent with Commission direction. As part of that initiative, the NRC funded more than 50 Zircaloy-clad nuclear fueled bundle reflood experiments at the NRU reactor. These experiments evaluated fuel rod and heat transfer behavior but did not include metallurgical examination to evaluate oxidation behavior. The NRC is continuing to conduct and evaluate experimental and analytical programs on fuel cladding behavior. The petitioner did not take into account Westinghouse's metallurgical analyses performed on the cladding for all four FLECHT Zircaloy-clad experiments reported in WCAP-7665. The petitioner also ignored the Westinghouse application of the Baker-Just correlation to these experiments, which had the ``complex thermal hydraulic phenomena'' deemed important by the petitioner. This application of the correlation to the metallurgical data clearly demonstrates the conservatism of the Baker-Just correlation for 21 typical temperature transients. The NRC also applied the Baker-Just correlation to the FLECHT Zircaloy experiments with nearly identical results, confirming the WCAP-7665 results. For the development of oxidation correlations, limited by oxygen diffusion into the metal, well-characterized isothermal tests are more important than the complex thermal hydraulics suggested by the petitioner. [[Page 52899]] The petitioner's suggested use of complex thermal-hydraulic conditions would be counter-productive in reaction kinetics tests because temperature control is required to develop a consistent set of data for correlation development. Isothermal tests allow this needed temperature control. It is more appropriate to apply the developed correlations to more prototypic transients (including complex thermal hydraulic conditions) to verify that the proposed phenomena embodied in the correlations are indeed limiting. This is what was done by Westinghouse in WCAP-7665, by Cathcart and Pawel in NUREG-17 and by the NRC in its technical safety analysis of PRM-50-76. The NRC applied the Cathcart-Pawel oxygen uptake and ZrO2 thickness equations to the four FLECHT Zircaloy experiments, confirming the best-estimate behavior of the Cathcart- Pawel equations for large-break LOCA reflood transients. Cathcart and Pawel applied their oxide thickness equation, using the BILD5 program, to 15 of their transient temperature experiments as described in ORNL/NUREG-17. The results showed that the correlation, based on numerous isothermal experiments, was conservative or best- estimate when applied to this transient data set. Petitioner's Public Comments The petitioner submitted two public comment letters in which he again asserted that the Baker-Just and Cathcart-Pawel equations are grossly misapplied by the NRC. The first comment letter basically repeated the arguments in the petition. No new technical information was supplied. The second comment letter introduced the issue of severe fouling, which was the subject of PRM-50-78 and addressed by the staff's evaluation of that petition for rulemaking. Other issues addressed in the second letter are related to the issues already discussed in this document, and therefore, no further response is necessary. Reasons for Denial For the reasons cited in this document, the Commission is denying the petition for rulemaking (PRM-50-76) submitted by Mr. Robert Leyse. The NRC believes that the requested rulemaking would not make a significant contribution to maintaining safety because current regulations and regulatory guidance already adequately address the evaluation of performance of the ECCS. No data or evidence was provided by the petitioner or found in NRC records to suggest that the research, calculation methods, or data used to support ECCS performance evaluations were sufficiently flawed so as to create significant safety problems. NRC's technical safety analysis demonstrates that current procedures for evaluating performance of ECCS are based on sound science and that no amendments to the NRC's regulations and guidance documents are necessary. Additionally, the petitioner has not shown, nor has the NRC found, the existence of any safety issues regarding calculation methods or data used to support ECCS performance evaluations that would compromise the secure use of licensed radioactive material. The proposed revisions would not improve efficiency, effectiveness, and realism because licensees and the NRC would be required to generate additional information (as part of the evaluation of ECCS performance) that has no safety value and does not significantly improve realism. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of August, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 05-17589 Filed 9-2-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P b ***************************************************************** 17 Deutsche Welle: Ambitious Energy Project in the Pipeline 06.09.2005 [Natural gas could travel from Russia to Germany -- underwater] A joint German and Russian project is en-route to build one of the most ambitious pipelines ever. It could make natural gas an attractive alternative to oil and its fluctuating prices. Hurricane Katrina not only was a disaster to millions of Americans and their property, but has created calamity for oil-dependent countries around the world. Oil markets reacted with immediate violence to news that US oil platforms and refineries had suffered major damage. Futures, already up thanks to speculators and rising demand, broke all-time highs in the aftermath of Katrina. In an article with the Berliner Zeitung, Germany's Klaus Töpfer, who heads the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) said "there will not be a significant drop in oil prices in the future." [A clean but dangerous source of electrcity -- nuclear power plants are scheduled to be closed in Germany] Germany's economy, the largest in Europe, with its large automobile and chemical industries, however, is dependent on oil. Nuclear energy, a clean but dangerous source of power, is being phased out by the center-left coalition which has made much of promoting alternative energies such as solar and wind power. Even conservative chancellor candidate Angela Merkel said in the recent televised debate that the country must not rely too much on one energy source. And in keeping with such statements, a new and unusual natural gas pipeline project is the making as a measure to help reduce Germany's dependence on oil from abroad. Almost 1,200 kilometers under water The Yuzhno-Russkoye field lies in western Siberia and is estimated to hold 1 trillion cubic meters of natural gas. The easiest, most direct way to connect the virgin field with Central and Western Europe would be to extend current pipelines that run over ground, but the pipeline operators, BASF Wintershall (a BASF subsidiary), E.on Ruhrgas and Gazprom, have decided to construct an underwater pipeline in the Baltic Sea. It will measure nearly 1,200 kilometer (744 miles) and stretch from the Russian port of Wyborg to Greifswald in northeastern Germany. [Hurrican Katrina laid waste to or dismantled hundreds of oil platforms from their moorings in the Gulf of Mexico, sending oil prices skyrocketing] "The reasons for building an underwater pipeline are to avoid having a line go through third countries," said Roland Götz, Russian expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) in Berlin. "They don't want to go through Belarus and Poland or Ukraine and Slovakia. They want to make a direct connection between producer and recipient, Russian and Germany, so that they can save transit fees and to avoid the theoretical possibility that a third country could cut off service." The total cost of the venture is estimated at 2.4 billion euros ($3 bill.), which is twice as much as if current pipelines were extended, but that is not enough to put the involved parties off. "The companies involved are hoping to gain some kind of advantage out of the deal that isn't so obvious," noted Götz. "The German companies would like to do business with Gazprom. Gazprom might be trying to use this as a threat against countries like Belarus and Ukraine." Warsaw unhappy but project moving on One of the odd men out in the pipeline deal, Poland, feels as if it is being given the runaround. Based on the sensitive past between Poland, Russia and Germany, Warsaw is angry but Götz believes this anger is not based on fact, pointing out that the pipeline won't change the current energy business between Russia and Europe. [Here, Schröder (l) and Putin meet in Hanover in April. This week's visit by Putin could possibly be the last while Schröder is German chancellor] On two separate occassions, German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, Russian President Vladimir Putin and the companies involved have joined in presenting the pipeline plans to the public. A third meeting has been moved forward to September 8 so that Putin can visit Schröder for what might be the last time during his leadership. It's a bit of campaign stop but with constrction schedule for completion in 2010, Angela Merkel and Germany also stand to benefit from the plans. Johannes Beck (jdk) [de:mehr] [Info] Renewable Sector Wary of CDU Promises Should the conservatives win September's election, the renewable energy sector, which boomed under the Green party's influence, will be hit by changes. Opinions are clashing over what's best for Germany's economy. (Aug. 10, 2005) Schröder Wants Oil Price Stemmed Continuing his tour of the region, German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder on Monday called on the Persian Gulf countries to stop oil price increases by pumping more. (March 1, 2005) Energy Firms Seek New German Sources The winter in Germany has been cold and the demand for heating oil and gas has risen sharply. To meet them, German oil and gas companies have had to increase production -- abroad. (Feb. 25, 2005) [Feedback] What do you think of the plans to build a Baltic Sea pipeline? Let us know and include your name and countr of residence. ***************************************************************** 18 Times of India: India has no nuclear strategy indiatimes.com K SUBRAHMANYAM [ TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 06, 2005 12:00:00 AM Our nuclear doctrine and command structure were announced in January 2003. The first strategic force comman-der was also appointed at that time. In the last 32 months, the country has had three strategic force commanders with an average tenure of less than 16 months. The same generalist culture that dominates our administration appears to have invaded our nuclear strategy as well. Appointments and tenures of strategic force commanders are treated as casually as those of secretary (statistics) or secretary (official languages). The state of drift in our strategic thinking is all too evident. The views on the Indo-US joint statement of those in charge of nuclear policy in the NDA government indicate a political response more than anything else. Given our difficult uranium ore availability situation, there should have been vigorous attempts at maximising production of weapons grade plutonium. In the absence of a minimum credible deterrent strategy, questions have been raised over non-availability of weapons-grade plutonium. The NDA talks of flexibility in respect of minimum credible deterrent policy, without backing it up with any strategic understanding. This was not the NDA's fault, but goes back to a long political and bureaucratic tradition of neglect of national security. In spite of some efforts of NDA government to reform the system in conventional areas, the culture of knowledge deficit, excessive secrecy and centralisation and casualness in approach continued through the NDA period and perhaps still pervades the nuclear force management and strategy. Engaging India, a book by Strobe Talbott, also reveals the inadequacies of the Indian side in dealing coherently and effectively with the arguments of a nuclear ayatollah such as he. When other countries became nuclear weapon powers, it was accompanied by an explosion of strategic thought in those countries. Though there has been marginal increase in India in writings on strategic issues, one cannot claim any significant rise in interest levels on security issues among our political class. The nuclear doctrine or setting up of a nuclear command authority was not discussed in Parliament. The government has made no efforts to educate our legislators on national security in the nuclear age. The proposal to set up a national defence university is still to be implemented. The country's ruling elite has no strategic tradition or machinery to carry out long-term threat assessments. Without such assessments it does not make sense for NDA to talk of having flexibility in respect of our nuclear arsenal. The NDA does not appear to have initiated any steps to develop adequate capacities to produce weapons-grade plutonium, which will give the country flexibility. When the country is short of uranium, the sensible strategy would have been to expedite production of weapons-grade plutonium and not increase power reactors. Strangely enough, countries like North Korea, Pakistan and Iran have succeeded in developing uranium centrifuge technology. Though India initiated efforts in the mid-80s, there does not appear to have been significant progress. Our progress in missile development, now nearly 20 years old, is far from spectacular. The successful sustenance of a no-first use minimum credible deterrent policy requires inputs from thousands of people drawn from the Services, DRDO and DAE and robust institutionalisation. But implementation is essentially the task of the Services. The involvement of top-level officers in the implementation plan has been minimal. There was very little consciousness at top political levels about the need to develop institutionalised responses. We have a nuclear arsenal including some delivery systems; they together generate deterrence. The implementation of a credible minimum deterrent strategy can only begin when there is a clear division between civil and strategic reactors and weapons-grade plutonium production is maximised with indigenous uranium. To this end, some of the existing power reactors would have to be converted, while others are fuelled with imported ura-nium under international safeguards. Copyright © 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 19 RIA Novosti: Moscow court upholds decision to prolong Adamov's arrest 05/ 09/ 2005 MOSCOW, September 5 (RIA Novosti) - A Moscow court has upheld a decision to prolong the arrest of former nuclear power minister Yevgeny Adamov, now held in a Swiss prison, until October 8. The court turned down the appeal filed by Adamov's lawyer, Timofei Gridnev, who had insisted the arrest was illegal. On August 1, Moscow's Basmanny Court made the decision, at a meeting not attended by the defendant, to prolong his confinement until October 8. "Extending confinement in the defendant's absence is illegal," Gridnev said, adding that it was only allowable if documents verifying that the defendent could not attend were presented to the court. However, Gridnev said, prosecutors did not provide such documents from the Swiss Federal Department of Justice. Basmanny Court issued an arrest warrant on May 14 for Adamov who had been arrested in Switzerland on U.S. charges of misappropriating $9 million allocated to Russia for nuclear safety projects. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 20 RIA Novosti: Adamov fears attempts to "pump" him for state secrets 06/ 09/ 2005 MOSCOW, September 6 (RIA Novosti) - Former Russian Atomic Energy Minister Yevgeni Adamov fears that U.S. security-related services could attempt to pump him for state secrets, using torture and drugs, if he is extradited to the United States. According to Adamov, his fears are based on the fact that "U.S. authorities have not used the opportunity to hear [him] in court as a free person." "[The Americans] do not need me in court," he said in an interview with Echo Moscow radio station. "As a matter of fact, they do not need a trial at all." "They need a bearer of state secrets forcibly brought to the United States with his hands tied," he added. "You have to figure out the reason why on your own." Adamov also said the main reason U.S. authorities were seeking his extradition was "to prove that the power elite in Russia is deeply corrupted, and it is unthinkable to leave such a country with large nuclear potential without control." The Americans are pursuing the same goal with the scandal surrounding the corruption of Russian diplomats involved in the Oil for Food program, the ex-minister added. Adamov said his fears about extradition to the United States "should concern those people in Switzerland who will be making the decision." Adamov reiterated his intent to return to Russia and explained why he had refused a simplified extradition to his native country before. "I still believe my arrest was illegal, and I, as a free person, have the right to return to Russia," the ex-minister said. However, after a Swiss court upheld the decision to arrest him, Adamov said, "The extradition to either country [Russia or the U.S.] was [his] only option." He denied rumors about the alleged pressure applied on him by Russian authorities at the time of his decision to agree to extradition to Russia. The former Russian minister also said he intended to bring the issue of his arrest in Switzerland to the European Court of Human Rights. Adamov, who headed the Russian Atomic Energy Ministry in 1998-2001, was arrested on May 2 in Bern on an official extradition request sent to Switzerland by the U.S. Department of Justice on June 24. U.S. authorities accused Adamov and his business partner Mark Kaushansky, a U.S. citizen, of embezzling $9 million allocated by the U.S. government for implementation of nuclear security projects in Russia. Russia sent an extradition request to Switzerland on May 17. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has accused Adamov of fraud and abuse of office. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 21 FT.com: UK - Energy minister gets ready to feel the heat By Thomas Catan Published: September 5 2005 03:00 | Last updated: September 5 2005 03:00 Malcolm Wicks has just taken delivery of his new Toyota Prius, the energy-saving hybrid car much favoured by Hollywood celebrities. "It's only a small thing but in terms of cleaner energy or energy efficiency, we do need to engage public institutions in more of a debate about how they can use energy efficiently," the energy minister says in his Westminster office. So will John Prescott, the deputy prime minister known as Two Jags also be making the change? "I'll certainly take him for a ride in mine," laughs Mr Wicks. He has spent nearly six months in what is shaping up as one of the most challenging jobs in government. Before starting in May, he was minister for pensions so he should be familiar with matters that induce strong feelings. But with energy costs reaching records on an almost daily basis and some tough decisions looming, he could be forgiven for thinking he had jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire. "With energy costs, oil prices and with some pretty serious issues facing us in terms of future energy supply - and, of course, the issue that's not going to go away, namely climate change - I do get the impression I've got an interesting job, yeah," he says. There will be plenty of contentious issues landing on his desk in coming years. Domestic oil and gas supplies are dwindling, making the UK increasingly dependent on imports. By 2020, the government expects the UK to import three-quarters of its primary energy needs. This week Mr Wicks will announce that the government is awarding the largest number of exploration licences since 1964 - the first year they were handed out. But even the renewed activity can only slow the rate at which production wanes. "It is in decline," Mr Wicks says. "We know the story about coal, the longer-term decline there. We know that we've just become a net importer of gas. We know that in a few years we'll become a net importer of oil. So there's a national picture about security of supply which we're very aware of. And it raises some quite challenging questions." The uncertain outlook for oil and gas supply is just one element of a complex and interlocking set of energy problems faced by the country. The UK is also committed to slashing emissions of the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming. Its ageing nuclear power stations, which produce 23 per cent of the country's power without significant carbon emissions, are fast reaching the end of their lives. The government has so far moved quite tentatively to address the issues, and critics have accused it of burying its head in the sand. In a report last year, the House of Lords science and technology committee said: "We could not avoid the conclusion that the government are not taking energy problems sufficiently seriously." Critics say the government has favoured the option that appears least contentious - to encourage renewable energy sources - in a way that has done nothing to tackle the underlying problems. Renewables alone could not compensate for nuclear generating capacity. Even on its own terms, that strategy appears to be failing. The government is committed to ensuring that 10 per cent of Britain's electricity comes from renewable sources, such as wind or waves, by 2010. But almost no one outside government thinks that target will be achieved. Mr Wicks does not appear to think so either. "It's going to be difficult. The public likes the idea of wind turbines but some don't want them in their backyard, understandably. So to hit 10 per cent won't be easy," he says. The obvious solution - to build a new generation of nuclear power stations - is fraught with controversy. Proponents say new reactor designs are cheaper, safer and produce less nuclear waste. But the public still distrusts nuclear power and the government has yet to settle on a plan to deal with existing nuclear waste. Mr Wicks says a decision on whether to build new nuclear power stations will be taken during this parliament and insists he is "genuinely open-minded" on the issue. But some of his scheduled trips and interests seem to hint at which way the government is leaning. This month Mr Wicks will visit the US radioactive waste disposal facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada desert, and he is also looking elsewhere for other lessons. "We can learn from the French," he says. "I'm also interested in Finland; they seem to have engaged public opinion in a very grown-up way that I want to explore." France generates three-quarters of its electricity from nuclear, while Finland is due to start construction of the first European reactor in nearly 15 years. ***************************************************************** 22 Asia Times: The EU-China relationship: Looking ahead By Julio Arias Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing. BEIJING - During the Cold War, relations between Europe and mainland China were either nonexistent, or subordinated to the wider framework of US-Soviet relations. Sixteen years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, however, ties between Brussels and Beijing are blossoming. Indeed, analysts such as David Shambaugh are touting the emergence of a "strategic triangle" between the EU, China and the US. This budding relationship is significant - as well as unusual - not only because the EU and China are emerging powers to be reckoned with, but also because both have embarked on a path of institutional and economic transformation without historic precedent, partly in order to cope more effectively with the challenge of globalization. Already, both have changed beyond recognition since they came into being more than 50 years ago: China, from the wreckage created by years of war and civil strife; Europe, from a budding six-member coal and steel community in a continent struggling to find its place in a postwar, post-colonial world. At the strategic-military level, many doubt the EU's ability to act as a single agent, particularly in the aftermath of the "no" referenda over the proposed EU Constitutional Treaty. They also doubt China's ability to flex its muscles beyond its immediate vicinity. Neither entity is anywhere near challenging the US' level of "hard" (military) power. Yet power is not merely defined by military strength: it is also exercised in the economic and "transnational" - that is, at the non-governmental - levels, the second and third dimensions in a "three-dimensional chessboard", as Harvard Professor Joseph Nye puts it. It is in these two areas that both the EU and China are most visibly rising. China's rise is driven in large part by the rapid growth of its economy and its greater self-confidence in international affairs. The EU's emergence is a result of the greater coherence in its economic - and foreign - policy and institutional structures, as well as the quiet, but effective flexing of its "soft power". At the same time, however, the rise of the EU and China is hampered by internal shortcomings: the EU's common and foreign security policy (CFSP) is still in many ways a paper tiger, encumbered by complicated voting procedures; China is held back by the nature of its political system and its relative lack of experience in international affairs. Unable to match their economic might in the strategic and military realms, both the EU and China are "limping giants". Perhaps this explains why, unlike the US, the EU and China share a worldview that emphasizes the necessity to regulate globalization through international rules and institutions. Powerful trade dynamics Today, after years of estrangement and mutual ignorance, China and Europe are eager to catch up and develop bilateral ties. Nowhere is this trend more evident than in the field of trade. Trade between the EU and China has grown more than 30-fold since the beginning of China's open-door policy in 1978. In 2004, bilateral trade reached the 175 billion euro (US$218 billion) mark. China is now the EU's second largest trade partner after the US, and the EU is, according to Chinese statistics, China's largest trading partner. Trade relations between the world's largest and third largest trading powers are at the heart of a blooming partnership between Brussels and Beijing. China offers EU companies a low-cost manufacturing base and a rapidly growing domestic market. For its part, the EU offers access to its lucrative single market, in addition to advanced technology and foreign direct investment. This is the lifeblood of bilateral trade, which is, generally speaking, complementary. The flip side, however, is that China's rapid integration into the world economy has created dislocations in the EU - as well among its close partners, such as Turkey, Tunisia and Morocco. Even if the final balance is positive, European industries - particularly manufacturers - need to manage the change and adjust to it. The recent imbroglio over the imposition of textile quotas is a painful reminder that protectionism is no alternative to serious restructuring. Yet on the whole - and in spite of protectionist pressure from trade lobbies and populist politicians - the EU's response to China's challenge has been more measured than that of the US. Bilaterally, removing remaining trade barriers to ensure the widest possible access to each other's markets and ensuring that potential trade frictions are resolved through dialogue and negotiation have become the main priorities in the trade policy agenda. Today, institutionalized policy dialogues establish a direct line between Brussels and Beijing, covering a variety of sectors (civil aviation, textiles, metallurgy and automotive industry) and "horizontal issues" (regulatory policy, competition policy, IPR). These dialogues enable both parties to build trust and deepen their understanding of each other's systems. Additionally, they provide a mechanism to deal with potentially contentious issues in a timely manner. At the multilateral level, the EU is committed to supporting China's full integration into the WTO. Beyond scrutinizing the implementation of its accession commitments, the EU is also keen to ensure that China becomes a more proactive participant in the multilateral system. Both sides, for instance, now share an interest in ensuring that the current round of WTO negotiations (the "Doha" round) is successfully completed. The benefits of bringing China in line with the multilateral trading system, however, go beyond boosting trade and improving market access opportunities. Most importantly, membership of the WTO has allowed Chinese reformists to tie in the domestic reform process to an international rules-based institution, whose members have the right to scrutinize the implementation of China's accession commitments. China's yearning to become a WTO member is reminiscent of the strong pull that Brussels had on the former socialist states of Central and Eastern Europe. Like China, they aspired to become members of a powerful external organization, partly in order to neutralize criticism from domestic interest groups and partly to justify an extensive, and often painful, reform program. The EU has been steadily helping China meet these challenges by building capacity on the ground. The latest China Country Strategy Paper, covering the period from 2002 to 2006, has earmarked 250 million euros for "capacity-building" projects focused on supporting three key areas: the social and economic reform process, environmental protection and sustainable development, good governance and the rule of law. Beyond providing financial resources, the EU also has a lot of useful advice to offer, particularly given Brussels' track record in supporting former socialist states as they make the transition to a market-based economic system. Improving China's governance, moreover, is consistent with the EU's wider goal of encouraging the development of an open society based on the rule of law. This objective stems from the premise that engaging China through dialogue and participation in international institutions is the best way to ensure that its rise does not create disruption in the international system. It also reflects the realization that, as China's role in the world increases, it needs to take up new responsibilities, and indeed start to show "leadership". Quietly, but effectively, therefore, the EU has deployed its soft power and financial resources into engaging China. After all, spreading European standards and providing technical assistance is arguably the EU's forte when it comes to external action, after trade. This is helping the EU attract China into its sphere of influence. China's participation in the European Galileo Satellite navigation program - with 200 million euros pledged toward it - is a fitting example. In the area of technical standards, which is becoming an increasingly important aspect of international trade, the EU's regulatory approach to standards is more appealing to China, with its strong statist tradition, than the US' market-driven approach. Witness China's preference for Europe's GSM standard over the American CDMA standard. What's in it for China? Besides the obvious benefits of trading with the EU - China's trade surplus with Europe last year reached around 78.5 billion euros, and is growing - and being the beneficiary of numerous substantial cooperation projects, China finds in the EU a potential counterbalance to the US. The EU does not have any territorial disputes or - unlike America - competition over spheres of influence with China. This allows for greater scope for cooperation on a variety of issues of global significance without treading on each other's toes. This is particularly evident in China and the EU's stated commitment to strengthening multilateral institutions as a way to deal more effectively with global challenges - such as international terrorism and nuclear proliferation. Particularly in the aftermath of September 11, China finds the EU and its member states' "soft" liberal internationalism less threatening than the Bush administration's more unilateralist impulses (although the EU and China do not necessarily share the latter's unswerving adherence to the doctrine of non-interference in other states' internal affairs). This means that China is more ready to engage the EU in international institutions. Bilaterally, China also finds in some quarters of the EU resonance to its predominantly "realist" view of the world: one where US power is balanced through the creation of a "multipolar" world, with Europe and China as two of the poles. Challenges ahead Stronger links between the EU and China on a number of key issues, however, pose a number of questions. First, as Brussels begins to forge closer links with Beijing, independently from its relations with Washington, the scope for clashes with the US will widen. To be sure, the EU and the US share a basic interest in "socializing" China into the international established order. But a difference in focus exists: US perceptions of China often dwell on its strategic and military dimension; Europe tends to treat China as a "giant" in transition. Inevitably, as the relationship between the EU and China becomes more complex and multifaceted - including not just trade but other areas such as security - transatlantic divergences on policy toward China will arise. Transatlantic disputes over China may be avoided by greater efforts to coordinate EU-US positions on China at senior levels, particularly on sensitive issues. Taiwan may not arouse passions in Europe, yet it matters a great deal to America. Moreover, greater coordination on China issues is clearly in the EU's interest. After all, the US remains the main provider of the public goods that underpin trade and investment links between China and the EU. Both clearly benefit from the existing security architecture in East Asia. Second, and most importantly, the policies of EU member states toward China need to be more coherent. Currently some countries define their China policies in the light of their own national interests. Lack of coordination, however, will not only undermine China's confidence in the EU as a partner, but also dilute the policy objectives of individual member states, as short-term goals get mixed up with long-term ones. The infelicitous manner in which the putative lifting of the arms embargo has been handled underscores the need for a more harmonized approach. Yet this problem is difficult to resolve, as cooperation in the EU's CFSP is an intergovernmental arrangement and in most cases decisions must be taken unanimously. Third, even in the field of trade, all that glitters is not gold. Although mechanisms to resolve trade disputes through negotiation exist, China's growing trade surplus with the EU is likely to inflame more protectionist sentiments in Europe. How the EU and its member states deal with protectionist pressures will be a test of Europe's commitment to free and open trade. The recent handling of the textiles dispute does not bode well. For weak or unpopular European leaders dare not advocate the benefits of China's integration into the world economy. Using China as a scapegoat, rather than facing the real causes of popular discontent, may be all too tempting. Yet such political escapism may eventually backfire and derail the development of EU-China relations. China as a catalyst for the EU? The relationship between the EU and China underscores the need to engage China strategically in order to promote geopolitical stability, as well as the benefits of dealing with China with a single voice. China is no longer a passive player in the international system. Over the last five years, we have seen China deploy its power more confidently and handle its diplomacy more deftly. The EU, therefore, increasingly needs to engage China because, as a significant player in world politics, it has a say in issues that touch upon European economic and political interests. Whether the relationship will deepen in the future will depend on internal developments in the EU and China. To be a more influential player in China, the EU will need to create a common strategy toward it, following the example of Russia, the Ukraine and the Mediterranean. China, for its part, will need to show concrete results in contentious areas, such as IPR or human rights, to show that political dialogues are paying off. As the European integration process loses momentum, the rise of China may prove to be the spark that gets Europe working together again. This historic phenomenon poses challenges and opportunities that can only be met by working closely, if not by pooling decision-making powers, at least by coordinating policies between EU institutions and the member states. Julio Arias is a trade policy consultant with the EU-China Trade Project, a policy support unit facilitating China's integration into the world trading system based in Beijing. He has written on China for Foreign Policy Edicion Espanola and Foreign Affairs en Espanol. (Copyright (c) 2005 Julio Arias) permission. © Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. Head Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110 ***************************************************************** 23 Portal da Cidadania: New program calls for increase in nuclear energy Nielmar de Oliveira Reporter Agência Brasil Rio – A copy of the proposed revised Nuclear Program (Programa Nuclear Brasileiro) is on president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's desk. It covers a 17-year period, running to 2022, involves investments totalling US$13 billion and calls for an increase in the percentage of energy used in Brazil from nuclear power plants to rise from 3.7% to 5%. According to the president of the Nuclear Energy Commission, Oldair Gonçalves, the first step in the revised program is the completion of the Angra 3 power plant. Translator: Allen Bennett 06/09/2005 © Agencia Brasil - All material may be reproduced as ***************************************************************** 24 Reuters: UN in crisis talks as world summit date looms Mon Sep 5, 2005 1:27 AM ET By Evelyn Leopold UNITED NATIONS, Sept 5 (Reuters) - Days before the largest gathering of world leaders in history, U.N. ambassadors struggled to overcome deep divisions on how to tackle extreme poverty, enhance human rights and approach global security in the 21st century. U.S. Ambassador John Bolton was somewhat optimistic that a document could be agreed for world leaders, including U.S. President George W. Bush, to approve at the Sept. 14-16 U.N. summit. "I think we are still making progress. I think it is slow but it is steady," Bolton said during marathon negotiations. "That is why we are here on a Sunday and that's why we will be here Monday," the U.S. Labor Day holiday, he said. Another draft document, the fourth, is expected to be produced late on Monday but with "brackets" -- paragraphs where disagreements persist. No one doubts a document will eventually emerge. Whether it would cut new ground is another question. Secretary-General Kofi Annan had hoped the summit of 175 world leaders would map out new approaches to the international system and revitalize the world body. Rich nations were to agree on a development agenda in exchange for support for Western demands on human rights, terrorism, intervention in case of genocide and war crimes and U.N. management reforms. But the issues brought out deep disagreements on every key subject, even between the United States and the European Union as well as among developing nations. The EU is among the few groups that backs the 39-page draft document prepared by General Assembly President Jean Ping. The United States has put forth more than 500 amendments to it. Dutch Ambassador Dirk Jan van den Berg said the draft document was supported by 125 members from all regions. COMPROMISE Those who agree with the draft "should speak up," said Ellen Margrethe Loj, Denmark's U.N. ambassador. "The EU position was that the revised document from President Ping was a very good basis and we would hate to see that being watered down too much," Loj said. "But on the other hand we know there are issues where we have to find the political agreement among the delegations." Several negotiators told Reuters that John Dauth, the Australian ambassador leading the group on the dangers of proliferation of nuclear and other unconventional weapons, reported there was "no prospect of making progress." Developing nations are hesitant in agreeing to Western demands without strong anti-poverty commitments. On development, the United States is demanding that all mention of the words "Millennium Development Goals" be deleted. The phrase described eight objectives on poverty, hunger, primary education, AIDS and others, with specific goals to be achieved by 2015. In a letter to fellow ambassadors last month, Bolton said Washington supported the goals enunciated at a 2000 Millennium U.N. summit that the Clinton administration approved, but not targets and indicators circulated later. He proposed substituting the words "internationally agreed development goals." "You go to the working groups, you find the desk officers, repeating the national positions," Egyptian Ambassador Abdelfattah Abdelaziz said on Sunday of the negotiating process among 32 nations, which then broke into smaller groups. Pakistan's U.N. envoy, Munir Akram, agreed. "One of the definitions of madness is you keep doing the same thing but you expect different results," he said. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 25 Reuters: FACTBOX-Main divisive issues before world U.N. summit Mon Sep 5, 2005 1:30 AM Sept 5 (Reuters) - The largest gathering of world leaders in history begins on Sept. 14 with 191 U.N. member nations still divided on the following key issues. The summit is aimed at new approaches to poverty, global security and human rights in the 21st century. -- DEVELOPMENT - The draft document sets timetables to halve poverty for the poorest of the poor, provide elementary education to all, cut maternal deaths and halve the spread of AIDS by 2015, among others. The United States objects to any commitment to raising foreign aid. -- HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL - A smaller group of nations to sit year-round on human rights to replace the current Human Rights Commission, a key demand by Western nations, who want a two-thirds General Assembly vote on members. Several developing nations object to criteria for membership and the two-thirds vote. -- NON-PROLIFERATION: The draft says proliferation and risk that terrorists might obtain unconventional weapons are the greatest threats to peace. the United States and others wants to remove references to nuclear disarmament for big powers. -- TERRORISM: The draft says attacks on civilians and noncombatants "cannot be justified." Islamic nations fear this could restrict the right to resist foreign occupation. -- PEACE-BUILDING COMMISSION - This is aimed at helping nations emerging from conflict. Key Western nations want Security Council control. Developing countries want the commission to report to the General Assembly where they have a majority, arguing they need a voice in deciding priorities. -- RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT: The concept, promoted by Canada, other Western nations and human rights groups, calls for various kinds of intervention in a nation in case of genocide and war crimes. African nations such as South Africa support the concept but other developing countries say it would provide an excuse for big powers to intervene. -- U.N. MANAGEMENT REFORM - Western nations, including the United States, want to give the U.N. secretary-general more power to manage, expand monitoring bodies and hire more independent auditors. Developing nations fear they will lose control in General Assembly as well as U.N. jobs. (Writing by Evelyn Leopold in the United Nations) © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 26 Reuters: Iran's nuclear negotiator delays Pakistan trip Mon Sep 5, 2005 8:23 AM ET (Updates with foreign ministry spokesman's comments) ISLAMABAD, Sept 5 (Reuters) - Iran's top nuclear negotiator has put off a planned visit to Pakistan until Wednesday, after a U.N. nuclear watchdog report confirmed that Tehran has resumed sensitive atomic work. Ali Larijani, who has been seeking support from non-Western nations for Iran's determination to continue what it says is a programme designed for power generation and not atomic weapons, had been expected in Islamabad by Monday. Pakistani and Iranian officials gave no reason for the delay, which comes as Iran faces mounting diplomatic pressure after the findings of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report issued on Friday. The IAEA report said Tehran had resumed uranium conversion, one of several activities previously suspended under a deal with France, Britain and Germany. That raised the prospect that the European Union would support the United States in pushing for Iran's case to be referred to the U.N. Security Council for punitive action. Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Sunday that such threats would not persuade it to abandon a nuclear programme that Washington suspects is a smokescreen for building atomic bombs. Larijani said on Friday that the IAEA report contained positive and negative points and Tehran would continue to cooperate with the agency. Pakistan, the only Islamic country with nuclear weapons, is opposed to the use of force against its western neighbour. "Pakistan is basically for the peaceful resolution of the Iran nuclear issue and we are against (use of) coercive measures," Foreign Ministry spokesman Muhammad Naeem Khan told a news conference. Pakistan's government said last March that a now disgraced scientist regarded as the father of Pakistan's atomic bomb, Abdul Qadeer Khan, had supplied Iran with centrifuges that can be used to produce enriched uranium for nuclear power plants or weapons. Khan is under house arrest after admitting in early 2004 to his role at the centre of an international black market in nuclear parts. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 27 Chernobyl impacts wrongly downplayed Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 13:43:38 -0400 WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com

Statement of by Michael Mariotte, executive director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) on UN Chernobyl Report

September 6, 2005

Contact: 202-328-0002

nirsnet@nirs.org

 

 

“A press release issued today by the International Atomic Energy Agency about a United Nation’s Chernobyl Forum report on the health consequences of the 1986 Chernobyl accident demonstrates once again how habitually and dramatically the nuclear industry understates the impacts of a reactor accident. Although the report itself remains unavailable to the public, the press release states that 4,000 people are likely to die as a result of the Chernobyl accident. This is in stark contrast to industry propaganda that insists the deaths of only about 32 to 36 emergency responders can be directly attributable to the accident.

 

However, the press reports to date indicate that, despite these findings, the UN is downplaying the accident’s impacts. To dismiss the loss of 4,000 lives, not to mention the non-fatal cancers and other effects, hundreds of billions of dollars in damages and permanent loss of land use, as the report appears to do, is an obscene disregard for human life and wellbeing. And the real consequences, when considering the entire affected population, are likely to be much higher.

 

Furthermore, the 4,000 fatality estimate appears to be based on a population of only 600,000 exposed individuals. Given that tens of millions of people were exposed to Chernobyl radiation, a study using the standard method of accounting for radiation damage (the “linear no-threshold” method) among the entire affected population would be expected to find far greater casualties.

 

This is especially significant considering that the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in June 2005 2005 (in a report entitled “Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation, VII”) reaffirmed the “linear no-threshold” model and concluded that there is no safe exposure level to radiation.

 

NIRS urges full disclosure of the report to the public. Until this happens, the scant information made available to date clearly is insufficient to provide knowledgeable analysis on the report, nor does it allow for peer review of the report’s findings and conclusions.”

 

 

 

Linda Gunter is Director of Development and Media Relations at NIRS. She can be reached at: 202-328-0002 ext. 23.

 

 ***************************************************************** 28 NIRS Statement on UN Chernobyl Report Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 14:59:01 -0700 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com image00112.jpgStatement of Michael Mariotte, executive director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), on UN Chernobyl Report September 6, 2005 A press release issued yesterday by the International Atomic Energy Agency about a United Nations Chernobyl Forum report on the health consequences of the 1986 Chernobyl accident demonstrates once again how habitually and dramatically the nuclear industry understates the impacts of a reactor accident. Although the report itself remains unavailable to the public, the press release states that 4,000 people are likely to die as a result of the Chernobyl accident. This is in stark contrast to industry propaganda that insists the deaths of only about 32 to 36 emergency responders can be directly attributable to the accident. However, the press reports to date indicate that, despite these findings, the UN is downplaying the accidents impacts. To downplay the loss of 4,000 lives, not to mention the non-fatal cancers and other health effects, hundreds of billions of dollars in damages and permanent loss of land-use demonstrates an obscene disregard for human life and wellbeing. Such consequences are entirely unacceptable for an industrial accident of any sort. And the real consequences, when considering the entire affected population, are likely to be much higher: the 4,000-fatality estimate appears to be based on a population of only 600,000 exposed individuals. Given that tens of millions of people were exposed to Chernobyl radiation, a study using the standard method of accounting for radiation damage (the linear no-thresholdmethod) among the entire affected population would be expected to find far greater casualties. This is especially significant considering that the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in June 2005 (in a report entitled Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation, VII) reaffirmed the linear no-thresholdmodel and concluded that there is no safe exposure level to radiation. NIRS urges full disclosure of the report to the public. Until this happens, the scant information made available to date clearly is insufficient to provide knowledgeable analysis on the report, nor does it allow for peer review of the reports findings and conclusions. Contact: 202-328-0002; nirsnet@nirs.org; www.nirs.org Attachment Converted: image001122.jpg: 00000001,198edb03,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 29 Poverty, Mental Health Greatest Stumbling Blocks For Chernobyl Survivors, Un Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 12:00:25 -0400 POVERTY, MENTAL HEALTH GREATEST STUMBLING BLOCKS FOR CHERNOBYL SURVIVORS, UN New York, Sep 6 2005 12:00PM Among the hundreds of thousands who were exposed to radiation during the Chernobyl disaster 20 years ago, only about 4,000 people will die from acute radiation and cancer, but many more suffer from the lingering effects of poverty, and lack of information on how to live in the contaminated areas and on how to regain their livelihoods, according to a new United Nations report. Resources should be refocused on highly contaminated areas and government programmes should be redesigned to “help those genuinely in need,” said the report, “Chernobyl: The True Scale of the Accident,” conducted by the Chernobyl Forum which includes eight specialized UN agencies and the governments of Belarus, Russia and the Ukraine. Although the disaster had terrible consequences for people living in the region, “We have not found profound negative health impacts to the rest of the population in surrounding areas, nor have we found widespread contamination that would continue to pose a substantial threat to human health,” Burton Bennett, chairman of the Chernobyl Forum said. Instead, poverty, lifestyle diseases related to alcohol, smoking, stress and poor diets now rampant in the former Soviet Union, and mental health problems pose a far greater threat to local communities than do radiation exposure, the report said. The mental health impact was far larger than the physical health problems, attributable to the damaging impact of lack of information, negative self-assessments, belief in short life expectancy, and “lack of initiative, and dependency on assistance from the state,” it added. Relocation of 116,000 people at the time of the accident also proved to be “highly traumatic,” it said. Consisting of 100 scientists, the panel recommended that the Chernobyl assistance programmes that had been set up after the disaster to help mend the lives of residents should be more targeted, eliminate benefits to people in outlying areas, improve primary health care, support safe food production, and encourage small and medium sized business enterprises. Among those people considered most in need are an estimated 4,000 out of 600,000 emergency workers, evacuees and residents who may die from acute radiation syndrome (ARS) or radiation-induced cancer and leukemia. Since the 1986 disaster, 50 emergency workers died of ARS, and 4,000 children have contracted thyroid cancer. Despite its sometimes physically debilitating effects, thyroid cancer is treatable and only nine children have died from the disease. Stressing the need to scale back large subsidy programmes for residents, better information needs to be provided by the governments of Belarus, Russia, and the Ukraine, “not only about how to live safely in regions of low-level contamination, but also about leading healthy lifestyles and creating new livelihoods,” said Louisa Vinton, Chernobyl focal point at the UN Development Programme, (UNDP). Attention should also be paid to the environmental problems brewing on the horizon, such as how to get rid of the tons of highly radioactive contaminants at and around the Chernobyl site, and the slow disintegration of the sarcophagus built to contain the damaged reactor which has degraded, and poses a risk of collapse and the release of radioactive dust, the report added. The Chernobyl Forum is composed of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UNDP, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), and the World Bank. 2005-09-06 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 ***************************************************************** 30 [du-list] " Chernobyl in 1986 will kill 4000 people" - UN Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 14:58:00 -0700 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com NewScientist.com - NEWSFLASH ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Major UN report counts human cost of Chernobyl The huge cloud of radiation that spewed from the broken reactor at Chernobyl in 1986 will kill 4000 people, says the most authoritative report yet on the nuclear disaster. And the radiation has already caused 4000 thyroid cancers amongst young people, contaminated more than 200,000 square kilometres of Europe, and triggered widespread mental health problems amongst the populations of the worst-hit countries. Read the full story here: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7951 ---------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/05 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 31 NRC: NRC to Conduct Special Inspection at Oconee Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region II - 2005-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-05-038 September 2, 2005 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: unplanned shutdown of Duke Energys Oconee Unit 3 nuclear power plant, located near Seneca, S.C. The two-person NRC team will look into the circumstances surrounding the event, including the design of some equipment and systems involved, the response of plant employees and the adequacy of plant procedures. During the shutdown, all safety systems performed as required including the start of both Keowee hydro units, and plant operators stabilized the plant quickly. However, the NRC staff determined that the shutdown should be examined more closely with a small team dedicated to that task. The NRCs resident inspectors at Oconee responded to the shutdown and are continuing to review the event prior to the arrival of the special inspection team. There were no public health and safety impacts, but we want to make sure we completely understand the sequence of events and whether there are lessons to be learned, said NRC Region II Administrator William Travers. The NRC teams findings and conclusions will be documented in a report within 30 days after the special inspection is completed. That report will be available from the NRC Region II Office of Public Affairs or by accessing the NRC web-based document system at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Last revised Tuesday, September 06, 2005 ***************************************************************** 32 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl Death Toll May Be Less Than Feared From the Associated Press [UP] Monday September 5, 2005 3:16 PM AP Photo VIE107 By SUSANNA LOOF Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Fewer than 50 deaths have been directly attributed to radiation released in the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident, and the final toll could be thousands fewer than originally feared, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said Monday. However, anxiety caused by fear of death and illness from radiation poisoning is causing major mental health problems among the affected population and such worries ``show no signs of diminishing and may even be spreading,'' the agency said, citing a new report compiled by 100 scientists. The report said the final death toll attributed to radiation could reach 4,000, an estimate supported by all the agencies and affected governments, said Dr. Fred Mettler, a scientist who helped compile the report on behalf of the Chernobyl Forum, a group that includes the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, seven other U.N. agencies and the governments of Ukraine - where Chernobyl is located - Belarus and Russia. Ukraine has previously said it had already registered 4,400 deaths related to the accident, and early speculation following the radiation release predicted tens of thousands would die. The 600-page report says a lack of accurate information about the accident's consequences has made the mental health impact ``the largest public health problem created by the accident.'' ``These problems manifest as negative self-assessments of health, belief in a shortened life expectancy, lack of initiative and dependency on assistance from the state,'' the agency said in a statement. Community leaders and health care workers ought to receive better information about the accident's effects so that they can help counter false fears, it said. ``Persistent myths and misperceptions about the threat of radiation have resulted in 'paralyzing fatalism' among residents of affected areas,'' it added. The report also says there is no evidence of decreased fertility following the accident, nor of any increase in congenital malformations. The survival rate of the about 4,000 cases of thyroid cancer caused by the accident has been almost 99 percent, the report said. Thyroid cancer patients and thousands of workers exposed to high levels of radiation in the days following the accident suffered ``major health consequences,'' Chernobyl Forum Chairman Dr. Burton Bennett said. ``By and large, however, we have not found profound negative health impacts to the rest of the population in surrounding areas, nor have we found widespread contamination that would continue to pose a substantial threat to human health, with a few exceptional, restricted areas,'' he said. Among other findings was that poverty, ``lifestyle diseases'' such as heart disease and mental health problems ``pose a far greater threat to local communities than does radiation exposure,'' the statement said. The study also found that radiation levels have returned to ``acceptable levels'' except for a closed, highly contaminated 20-mile area around the plant and some closed forests and lakes. The report also warned that the enclosure built around the damaged reactor was deteriorating, ``posing a risk of collapse and the release of radioactive dust.'' Mettler told The Associated Press in a telephone interview that the report offered lessons for any future cases - including any potential radiation release by terrorists - by emphasizing issues such as the need for early and accurate information. ``It's a timely document for learning lessons to apply to other areas,'' he said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 33 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl death toll under 50 Tim Radford, science editor Tuesday September 6, 2005 The Guardian The nuclear disaster at Chernobyl almost 20 years ago has so far claimed fewer than 50 lives, according to a study by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN Development Programme and the World Health Organisation. But about 4,000 people could eventually die from exposure to radiation released when a reactor caught fire in the Ukrainian forest and showered Europe with a plume of radioactive particles. Scientists have released a three-volume, 600-page report on the accident and the death, disease and economic ruin that became its legacy in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. "This was a very serious accident with major health consequences, especially for thousands of workers exposed in the early days, who received very high radiation doses, and for thousands more stricken with thyroid cancer," said Burton Bennett, chairman of the Chernobyl Forum, which released the study. "By and large, however, we have not found profound negative health impacts to the rest of the population in surrounding areas, nor widespread contamination." More than 1,000 workers on the site were heavily exposed on the first day. About 200,000 emergency and recovery workers were exposed in the next year, and of these, 2,200 could die prematurely. An estimated 5 million people live in areas contaminated by the fire and about 100,000 still live in regions classified as areas of "strict control". There were 4,000 cases of thyroid cancer in children and adolescents, and at least nine children died. The report found no evidence of decreased fertility among the affected population, nor an increase in congenital malformations. But the sarcophagus built to contain the damaged reactor was at risk of collapse, the report warned. And the mental health of people in the region poses the biggest problem. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 34 London Times: Chernobyl fallout not as bad as first feared - September 07, 2005 Foreign Editor's Briefing By Bronwen Maddox ONLY 56 people have so far died directly as a result of the explosion at Chernobyl in 1986, including 9 children with thyroid cancer. In the end, perhaps up to 4,000 people will die from radiation-caused illness. Those figures are much lower than many would guess, if they were asked. After the accident, some predicted that tens of thousands would die. But the new United Nations report this week, discussed at a Vienna conference ending today, blows what you might call a breath of fresh air on to nearly two decades of fears about the world’s worst nuclear accident. The report comes as Britain and the US are considering a revival of nuclear power, driven by a new sense of urgency in combating global warming. For those prepared to hear reassurance about the risks of nuclear power, this report offers plenty. Its most sober warning is about the threat to health from the mere fact of living within the former Soviet Union. For that misfortune, it offers no comfort at all. It is compiled from the work of 100 scientists on behalf of the Chernobyl Forum: a collaboration of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN watchdog, the World Health Organisation, six other UN agencies, and the governments of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine. It does the best job so far of sifting out the real impact of Chernobyl from the cloud of claims — a task that was difficult, controversial, and highly political from the start. In 1993, I went with a group of European Union scientists to Chernobyl and the most contaminated areas near by, on one of the first missions to try to judge the impact on health. In the Belarus hospitals to the north, the rooms were full of thin, white-skinned children with pale brown hair, many suffering from thyroid problems from contaminated milk. But the senior EU doctors, while deeply sympathetic to the patients, said that blaming all manifest illness on radiation would be wrong. The underlying level of health and nutrition was abominable; there was every interest in exaggerating the impact to get aid money; the Soviet culture had never been shy of using science for political ends. One doctor also noted that people in Western countries also often underestimated the normal level of abnormalities and illness in newborn children, because they were so quickly and privately “fixed”. The UN report notes these difficulties. But it has finally concluded this: + 28 emergency workers died within four months from radiation and thermal burns + 19 more died by 2004 + 9 children have died of thyroid cancer. There have been about 4,000 cases, mainly children and teenagers, but all the rest have recovered. # Many children were made ill by drinking milk contaminated with radioactive iodine. Better warnings in the first week could have averted this. But the Government's desire at first to cover up the explosion meant that it delayed warning people or moving them to safety. # Among the 200,000-plus workers exposed in the first year, an estimated 2,200 radiation-related deaths can be expected in their lifetime. # Total eventual deaths due to radiation could reach 4,000, including those of evacuees, a statistical prediction based on estimated doses they received. But, "as about a quarter of people die from spontaneous cancer not caused by Chernobyl radiation, the radiation-induced increase of only about 3 per cent will be difficult to observe". Kalman Mizsei, a UN Development Programme director, said "the impact was much smaller than anybody could have predicted", adding: "The danger of radiation has largely passed." Environmental groups have condemned the report, saying that it whitewashes the impact and will encourage people to move back into dangerous areas. But the report is not insensitive: quite the opposite. Mental health has suffered most, it concludes - largely because people have been too fearful of the contamination. It says that people in the afflicted areas have suffered paralysing fatalism, attributing all illness to radiation and convinced that their lives will end soon. It also says that a culture of dependency on aid has grown up, and that this is holding back their development. The most serious threats to health in the region remain smoking, drinking and lack of basic healthcare, it notes. The report argues that "it is crucial to note that adult mortality has been rising alarmingly across the former Soviet Union for several decades. Life expectancy has declined precipitously, particularly for men." It adds that "the main causes of death in the Chernobyl-affected region are the same as those nationwide - cardiovascular diseases, injuries and poisoning - rather than radiation-related illnesses". Those deaths, like the poor safety standards and ageing equipement at Chernobyl itself, are a symptom of a greater problem: a second-world government, and its secrecy, incompetence and lack of accountability. The proper conclusion is less of that kind of government - not necessarily less nuclear power. ***************************************************************** 35 AP Wire: Entergy prepares to restart nuclear plant | 09/06/2005 | Associated Press CHICAGO - Entergy Corp. is preparing its 1,100-megawatt Waterford nuclear plant near New Orleans for restart after it shut before Hurricane Katrina hit last week, a company executive said Tuesday. Leo Denault, Entergy's chief financial officer, didn't say when the plant is expected online but said it will be ready when needed. Entergy is steadily reducing the number of post-storm outages in its territory, which means the need for power is increasing. As of Tuesday morning, Entergy had restored power to about 631,000 of 1.1 million customers who lost service after Katrina, and was seeing its power load at 77 percent of normal, Denault said on a conference call with analysts. Entergy usually has a 3,000-megawatt power supply shortfall, but a monthslong loss of customers in and around New Orleans will shrink that gap. Both the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Federal Emergency Management Agency have to authorize a Waterford restart after ensuring certain functions are in working order. The NRC said late Friday that the agencies were likely to visit early this week. A spokesman wasn't available for immediate comment Tuesday. Entergy said it's seeking "new and creative" ways to handle the financial impact of Katrina, one of the worst storms in the United States in more than a century. Entergy sustained four times the number of outages it had ever recorded before - at its worst, 1.1 million customers lost service. Among the near-term solutions being explored are securing low-cost financing, extending the depreciable life of assets and redirecting power contracts from New Orleans. C. Dale Sittig, one of five commissioners on the Louisiana Public Service Commission, said regulators will work with Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco to help find some federal government relief. Entergy hasn't released any estimates of what it will cost to restore power. Complicating the recovery of restoration and repair costs and the collection of lost revenue is the displacement for what may be several months of 350,000 customers Entergy serves in and around New Orleans. Sittig has estimated Entergy could lose 100,000 customers due to Katrina. Entergy's financial reserves for storm damage have been depleted by previous storms and are currently at a deficit of $80 million, Denault said. Owing to the hurricane, Entergy said it's unable to reaffirm previously issued 2005 earnings estimates. Entergy shares rose 11 cents to close at $75.66 Tuesday on the New York Stock Exchange. ***************************************************************** 36 Bellona: China to build 10 nuclear reactors in East China Power Investment Corp., one of the country's major electricity firms, plans to build 10 1,000-megawatt nuclear reactors in the provinces of Shandong and Liaoning to ease reliance on coal, reported Reuters. 2005-09-05 19:27 It did not say which nuclear technology would be used or when the project's construction was scheduled to begin and end. "We will build six 1,000-megawatt reactors at Haiyang in East China's Shandong province, as well as four similar ones at Hongyanhe, Dalian in Liaoning province," the China Daily quoted a senior director of the firm as saying. China relies on coal for 70 percent of its booming energy demand. It has the biggest coal mining industry in the world, but also the most dangerous: last year, more than 6,000 people were killed in mining accidents nationwide. Coal burning has also contributed to China's environmental woes, and the country is the world's second-largest producer of greenhouse gasses. Liu Changqing, the senior director with the China Power Investment Corp., told the newspaper the central government had already given preliminary project approvals, including the environmental protection and safety assessments. Further "procedures" needed to be examined by the National Development and Reform Commission before infrastructure construction could start, it said. China is investing some 400 billion yuan ($48 billion) in building 30 nuclear reactors by 2020, according to the China National Nuclear Corporation. The Russian Atomstroyexport is constructing two 1,000-megawatt units at Tianwan NPP. At the moment the preparation for the fuel loading in the first reactor is in progress and should took place this month. The Atomstroyexport is also taking part in the tender for construction of the four reactor units in China. China now has nine reactors, generating around 2.3 percent of its electricity, Reuters reported. 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 ***************************************************************** 37 RIA Novosti: Routine anti-emergency exercise begins at Kolsk NPP 06/ 09/ 2005 MOSCOW, September 6 (RIA Novosti) - A routine anti-emergency exercise began Tuesday at the Kolsk nuclear power plant (NPP) in the Russian northwest with the participation of the group for emergency situations at the NPP (OPAS), a source in the Rosenergoatom said. The exercise is seeking to improve the operative interaction and information exchange for the elimination of consequences in case of an emergency situation at an NPP, as well as to check the work of the personnel, special equipment and communication means in emergency mode. The scenario of the exercise proposes that the collector of the 3rd generator at the 4th power unit of the Kolsk NPP ripped, resulting in the emission of radioactive substances into the atmosphere. The drill was announced and the personnel were evacuated. Experts from the state concern Rosenergoatom and OPAS, representatives of science and construction institutes of the Russian Nuclear Agency and the Russian Academy of Sciences are holding live videoconferences with participants in the exercise. International experts from the United States, France, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Armenia and Ukraine are observing the exercise. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 38 BBC: Letters show: Oldbury Power Station is set to close by 2008 Last Updated: Monday, 5 September 2005 [Oldbury Power Station] Safety concerns have been raised about Oldbury Nuclear Power station in South Gloucestershire. Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show that inspectors were worried about the strength of some parts of the reactor's graphite core. In letters obtained by the BBC, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate asked if Oldbury should remain open until its 2008 closing date. The operators BNFL say regular tests ensure safety is not being compromised. The letters by the Health and Safety Executive's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate stated that the blocks of granite at the core of the reactor were becoming weaker after constant exposure to heat and radiation, and weight reduced by a third. The inspectorate has said that it has been given assurances about the safety and expertise of the station since the letters were written in 2004 and 2005. In 2001, a leaked report also raised questions about the structural safety of the power station core. It is scheduled to be closed in 2008, as part of a national decommissioning programme. ***************************************************************** 39 Platts: NRC plans to hire 350 new workers next year + NRC says it will be aggressively recruiting new employees next year and plans to hire a total of 350 entry-level and experienced workers. The agency is preparing for several new reactor licensing applications expected in 2007 and 2008 while bracing for staff retirements. NRC says it will look for qualified job candidates at more than 40 recruiting events at colleges and universities in 2006 and will highlight American University's ranking of NRC as among the 10 best places to work in the federal government. The Partnership for Public Service and the Institute for the Study of Public Policy Implementation at American University will release the full list of rankings on Sept. 14. Washington (Platts)--2Sep2005 Copyright © 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 40 CNW Group: Greenpeace call for phase out of nuclear power Shut Down Gentilly-2 Reactor September 7, 2005 QUICK TROIS RIVIERES, Sept. 5 /CNW Telbec/ - Activists from the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise, accompanied by local supporters in a flotilla of small boats, placed a banner at Quebec's only nuclear plant, Gentilly-2. Despite strong opposition to nuclear power in Quebec, Hydro Quebec wants to rebuild the 23- year old CANDU reactor at a cost of $1.2 to $2.3 billion, instead of replacing it with green energy. Greenpeace is calling for it to be shut down in 2010. "During the last election Jean Charest said that the Quebec Liberal Party was against nuclear power. It's time for the government to deliver on that promise." said Greenpeace Climate Campaigner Steven Guilbeault. "The shutdown of Gentilly-2 would make Quebec a world leader in sustainable energy." Greenpeace activists in inflatable boats from the Arctic Sunrise came to the St. Lawrence shoreline of the Hydro-Quebec reactor sit, with mock barrels of radioactive waste and placed a banner near the reactor building reading: "Phase Out Nuclear Power - or our children will pay... and their children and their children, and their children, and their children, etc." "There are already 2500 tonnes of high-level radioactive waste at Gentilly that will be toxic for a million years. Rebuilding the reactor would double Quebec's deadly legacy for future generations." said Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Greenpeace Energy Campaigner Greenpeace, along with other Quebec groups, is calling for Premier Jean Charest to permanently shut down Gentilly-2 in 2010, and minimally order an environmental assessment of nuclear hazards and energy alternatives by the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement (BAPE). "Quebec has no need for nuclear power, and should free itself from the risk of nuclear meltdown. Green energy is cleaner, safer and cheaper. " said Michel Fugere of Mouvement Vert Mauricie. According to a poll commissioned by Greenpeace in 2004, nuclear power is supported by less than 10% of Quebecers. Hydro-Quebec has admitted that Gentilly-2 cannot be operated safely beyond 2010. The reactor began commercial operation in October 1983, and is located on the south shore of the St. Lawrence River, about 5 km east of Becancour and about 10 km east of east of Trois Rivieres. It produces only about 3% of Quebec's electricity. Photos available on PR direct site For further information: Clôde de Guise, Responsable des communications, cell: 514-212-5749; Steven Guilbeault, Responsable de la campagne climat et energie, cell: 514-231-2650; Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Responsable de la campagne energie, cell: 416-884-7053; Michel Fugere, Mouvement Vert Mauricie, tel: 819-532-2073; Also available on our web site : www.greenpeace.ca/arcticsunrise : (a) Gentilly leaflet, (b) letter to Jean Charest, (c) Arctic Sunrise background © 2005 CNW Group Ltd. PRIVACY &TERMS ***************************************************************** 41 Kyiv Post: Ukrainian officials, NGO warn Chornobyl is still a problem Wed, Sep 07. 07:56 Sep 06 2005, 11:43 (AP) - The 1986 explosion at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant continues to cause health and environmental problems and its victims will require international support for years to come, Ukrainian officials and a Chornobyl activist group say. "Chornobyl was, is and will be one of Ukraine's biggest problems," said Oleh Andreev, spokesman for Ukraine's Emergency Situations Ministry. The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency on Sept. 5released a report that suggests the world's worst nuclear accident wasn't as bad as once feared. The report was written on behalf of the Chornobyl Forum, a group that includes the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, seven other U.N. agencies and the governments of Ukraine - where Chornobyl is located - Belarus and Russia. Its experts found that the death toll caused by radiation could reach a total of 4,000, far lower than first feared, and that as of mid-2005, "fewer than 50 deaths had been directly attributed to radiation from the disaster," according to the report. "The one who says the devil is not as black as he is painted had better live here and see the problem from the inside," said Andreev. In the past, the Ukrainian government has said it already had registered 4,400 deaths related to the accident. "The medical and biological consequences are very heavy," Yuriy Andreev, the head of the Chornobyl Union action group, told The Associated Press. He cited increases in cancer of the blood, marrow, lung, liver and intestine. "The situation with thyroid cancer is dramatic," said Galyna Terekhova, a doctor at the Kyiv Institute of Endocrinology. The U.N. report acknowledges that thyroid cancer has become more prominent, but said the survival rate has been almost 99 percent. However, at least nine children have died of the disease. Vladimir Chuprov, coordinator of the anti-nuclear program with Greenpeace Russia, also said he did not agree with the report. Although Chuprov provided no estimates or figures of his own, he questioned the methodology used by U.N. experts, saying it raised doubts about their findings. "They count only cancer deaths, but they don't take into account premature deaths," Chuprov told the AP in a telephone interview. "There were about 100,000 clean-up workers, whose immune system has been weakened and who are now more prone to diseases, which will result in premature deaths." But Rafael Arutyunian, deputy head of the Nuclear Safety Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said the U.N.'s figures were exaggerated. He said the number of eventual Chornobyl-related deaths in Russia is expected to reach 100 and added that the scale of victims in Ukraine as well as in Belarus is comparable to Russia's. Andreev, the Ukrainian activist warned that the international community had not yet fully grappled with the environmental effects of Chornobyl. He said that most of the 800 depots in the 8-kilometer (5-mile) sanitary zone around the plant where radioactive fuel, contaminated clothes and vehicles are preserved do not meet safety requirements. "One of the depots that preserves thousands of tons of ... used fuel is not hermetic," said Andreev, warning about constant leaks into the subsoil waters then into the Prypiat River, a Dnipro tributary. The Dnipro supplies Kyiv residents with drinking water. In neighboring Belarus, President Alexander Lukashenko has long said the dangers posed by Chornobyl were exaggerated. The authoritarian leader has pushed for Belarusians to use contaminated lands. "The Belarusian government's interests coincide with the ones of the world atomic lobby," said Irina Gryshevaya of the Chornobyl children charity fund. "Both the government and the U.N. want to make the problem invisible, like radiation rays." Chornobyl's reactor No. 4 exploded on April 26, 1986, spewing radiation over much of northern Europe. In an effort to prevent further radiation release, engineers hastily erected a shelter over the damaged reactor, but parts of it are crumbling and experts say it needs urgent repairs. © 2004 SputnikMedia.net. ***************************************************************** 42 Reuters: Constellation N.Y. Ginna nuke back at full power Tue Sep 6, 2005 7:49 AM ET NEW YORK, Sept 6 (Reuters) - Constellation Energy Group Inc.'s (CEG.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 497-megawatt Ginna nuclear power station in New York returned to service and ramped up to full power by early Tuesday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. The Baltimore-based company took the unit off line by early Friday to work on an electro hydraulic stop valve in the main turbine. The Ginna station is located in Ontario in Wayne County, about 20 miles east of Rochester, New York. One MW powers about 800 homes, according to North American averages. Baltimore-based Constellation's unregulated Constellation Generation subsidiary owns and operates Ginna. Constellation's subsidiaries own and operate more than 12,000 MW of generating capacity, market energy commodities in North America, and transmit and distribute electricity and natural gas to customers in Maryland. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 43 Reuters: PSEG N.J. Hope Creek nuke exits outage, up to 40 pct Tue Sep 6, 2005 7:52 AM ET NEW YORK, Sept 6 (Reuters) - Public Service Enterprise Group Inc.'s (PEG.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 1,049-megawatt Hope Creek nuclear power station in New Jersey exited an outage and ramped up to 40 percent of capacity by early Tuesday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. On Friday, the unit was operating at 4 percent of capacity. The unit shut on Aug. 28 due to the inoperable vacuum breaker. The company fixed the breaker by Aug. 30 and started to perform some other work. Vacuum breakers act as a check valve to prevent a vacuum from forming in the reactor building that could affect the structural integrity of the containment during an accident. With any outage at Hope Creek, traders are always interested in whether the work will keep the unit down long enough (about three weeks) to require PSEG to replace a vibrating recirculation pump shaft. In an agreement with the NRC in January, PSEG agreed to replace a vibrating recirculation pump shaft during the unit's next refueling outage in the spring of 2006 or during an outage expected to last at least three weeks. The Hope Creek station is located in Hancocks Bridge in Salem County, about 40 miles south of Philadelphia. One MW powers about 800 homes, according to North American averages. Exelon Nuclear, a unit of Chicago-based energy company Exelon Corp.'s (EXC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Exelon Generation Co LLC subsidiary, operates the station for PSEG. In December, Exelon, the biggest nuclear power operator in the United States, agreed to acquire New Jersey-based PSEG. Pending regulatory and shareholder approvals, the companies expect to complete the deal in 2006. Exelon's subsidiaries own and operate more than 38,000 MW of generating capacity, market energy commodities, and transmit and distribute electricity (5.1 million) and natural gas (460,000) to customers in Illinois and Pennsylvania. PSEG's regulated and unregulated subsidiaries own and operate more than 16,000 MW of generating capacity, market energy commodities, and transmit and distribute electricity and natural gas to customers in North America, South America, the Middle East, Europe and India. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 India: Rediff: 'Energy is our most crucial need' Home > News > Interview The Rediff Interview/Ambassador Ronendra Sen September 06, 2005 Indian Ambassador to the United States Ronendra Sen is one of the protagonists behind the recently signed nuclear cooperation deal between India and the USA. He is confident the United States Congress will approve the necessary changes to US non-proliferation laws to facilitate the transfer of civilian nuclear reactors to India. Dr Singh visits Washington Sen recently returned to Washington, DC from New Delhi, after consultations with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and senior Indian officials over strategies that Indians will jointly work with the Bush administration to convince Congress to approve the deal. He spoke to rediff India Abroad Managing Editor Aziz Haniffa in an exclusive interview recently and hoped that Congress would pay heed to Indian President A P J Abdul Kalam's powerful Independence Day address about energy security. Sen said President Kalam's core message about energy was timely not only because it ties in with national priorities but also because it is in sync with New Delhi's relations with Washington. What would you consider President Kalam's message for the George W Bush administration and the Congressional leadership? You heard the speech by President Kalam, a very thoughtful speech, and he concentrated on energy security from a long-term perspective. I have been saying this for more than two-and-a-half decades, because if you look at our economy, energy is going to become the biggest problem for us in the 21st century. It will be connected with water; water will be another big problem, a very serious problem as is clear from our latest surveys on the scarcity of water and how it's going to affect our economy, not just our rural economy but even in terms of meeting the essential requirement of drinking water. These problems are already looming over us. You have already seen isolated instances, like the one where a young 12-year-old boy was killed in a stampede for water, that too in New Delhi. Another problem -- though it need not be a problem but the biggest opportunity -- is population, demographics. How so? In the coming two decades, you will see a tremendous release of creative forces. So many people will come of working age, and with the removal of gender discrimination, the women's workforce will add to our strength. However, without energy you will not be able to maintain a growth rate of 8 per cent plus, which is necessary to create employment. Are you saying that India's present growth rate is not sustainable? I am saying that 6 to 7 per cent is not good enough. We have to maintain 8 per cent plus -- and energy is the biggest constraint on us doing that. If you look at it from every point of view, energy is our single most crucial need; not just nuclear energy but all forms of energy, and that was why it was the focus of the prime minister's recent visit here. So you believe that President Kalam's speech and its focus on energy was meant for a wider international audience, cognisant of the globalising economy and the factors that will govern it? Absolutely. This is a very timely message. It ties in with our national priorities and it also ties in with the priorities in our relationship with the United States, because it is a problem that is going to confront the world and the United States is keenly aware of it. India as a responsible nation can be no cause for concern in terms of non-proliferation. And also, another dimension to this globalising economy will be the environment of this very fragile earth that we inhabit. India needs energy, and the US To make the envisaged nuclear deal a reality, you will need to convince Congress to change existing law. How do you hope to achieve that? By focusing on energy, on the need for energy security which is paramount not only to India's interests, but global interests -- because indiscriminate use of fossil fuels, which in any case we are running out of, is going to affect not only us but the world as a whole. We have no choice. We have to go to nuclear energy, and that too in a massive manner. We should not think in terms of 10,000 megawatts, we should think in terms of 100,000 megawatts. Will you look to mobilise the Indian American community to help win Congressional approval for the nuclear deal? I prefer not to comment on that. As a diplomat, I would not want to interfere in the internal affairs of this country. But, I am sure that thinking people in the Congress, in the media, they will realise that it is not only in the interests of India and the United States, but it's in the larger global interest to have this (nuclear) cooperation between the two countries. 'The US has not fully delivered' The prime minister, in all his speeches while in Washington, emphasised that India has an impeccable track record when it comes to non-proliferation. Do you believe the non-proliferation lobby here in the United States, which seems to be in over-drive on the issue of the India-US nuclear deal, is off base? Absolutely. You have used the world lobby, and that is a true description of them. What they are saying does not bear scrutiny with regard to India. We are a unique country in this respect, and people have now realised that we are partners in non-proliferation; we should not be made a target. The Rediff Interviews Copyright © 2005 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 45 Reuters: CMS Michigan Palisades nuke back at full power Tue Sep 6, 2005 7:58 AM ET NEW YORK, Sept 6 (Reuters) - CMS Energy Corp.'s (CMS.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 767-megawatt Palisades nuclear power station in Michigan exited an outage and ramped up to full power by early Tuesday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report. The Nuclear Management Co. shut the reactor on Sept. 1 to work on a hydrogen leak on the generator. The Palisades station is in South Haven in Van Buren County, about 60 miles southwest of Grand Rapids, Michigan. One MW powers about 800 homes, according to North American averages. Wisconsin-based NMC operates Palisades for CMS' Consumers Energy subsidiary. Michigan-based CMS subsidiaries own and operate more than 14,000 MW of generating capacity in the United States and abroad, market energy commodities, and distribute electricity (1.7 million) and natural gas (1.6 million) to customers in Michigan. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 46 Business Week: Maybe In My Backyard - By John Carey High fuel prices and global warming are making nukes an easier sell September 5, 2005 Hobbled by images of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, staggering costs, and opposition from enviros and politicos, nuclear power once seemed destined to go the way of the dodo. "Just five years ago, utility executives were saying they wouldn't be caught dead even talking about a new plant," recalls Massachusetts Institute of Technology nuclear engineer Andrew C. Kadak. U.S. utilities were shutting reactors, and Germany planned to pull the plug on its facilities. Today, nukes are on the verge of a global comeback. A new plant is under construction in Finland, the first in Europe since 1991. France, which already has 58 plants, says it will build 30 more. China plans to spend $50 billion on atomic energy construction by 2020. In the U.S., where 103 existing reactors have become cash cows, a dozen companies are seriously considering building new plants. And the energy bill signed by President George W. Bush on Aug. 8 has billions of dollars in subsidies. "Things have never looked better," says Dan R. Keuter, vice-president for business development at Entergy Nuclear (ETR ) in New Orleans. What's fueling this resurgence? In a word, economics. Rising natural gas and coal prices are starting to make nukes look inexpensive. Another factor is global warming. Not only do new restrictions on emissions of carbon dioxide increase the costs of fossil fuel-generated electricity, fears of climate change have softened opposition among some enviros. While the government must still solve problems of waste and security, says Steve Cochran of Environmental Defense, "given the challenge of climate change, the world needs to be open to every low carbon initiative -- including nuclear power." Construction in the U.S. won't start tomorrow, however. There are still major uncertainties. Natural gas prices must stay high to make nukes economical. With increasing imports of liquefied natural gas, that's not a sure thing. Utilities must also convince Wall Street that the long delays and huge cost overruns that doomed N-power in the 1980s won't happen again. As a result, companies say they won't order a new plant until they are sure they can get a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a process expected to take four to five years. "At the very earliest, we are looking at construction starting around 2010," says Adrian Heymer, director of new plants deployment at the Nuclear Energy Institute. Since construction would take four to five years, electrons from the new nukes couldn't start flowing until 2014 or 2015 at the soonest. It could be longer than that. John W. Rowe, chairman and CEO of Exelon Corp. (EXC ), believes that a new generation of reactors is essential. But even though Chicago-based Exelon is the nation's biggest nuclear utility, with 17 reactors, Rowe says the risks are still too great to order new plants now. "While the stars and moons are moving in the right direction, they're not there yet for us," he says. FRUSTRATION FACTOR The lack of immediate action frustrates Washington politicians, who crafted energy legislation that, among other things, was designed to make nukes nice again. The bill offers government loan guarantees so that banks won't demand a risk premium when financing new reactors, and a production tax credit. It also provides up to $2 billion to cover costs associated with regulatory delays. That's on top of changes Congress made to the licensing process in 1992. "For anyone who says there is still too much regulatory uncertainty, I have to question how serious they are," says one Senate staffer. Congress has "piled yet one more security blanket on the pile of blankets," he says. Industry execs insist that new plants will be built, but say they are getting there one step at a time. "No one would make a decision to order a plant now," explains Michael J. Wallace, executive vice-president of Constellation Energy Group. The Baltimore utility and others, however, are already partway there. Entergy, Exelon, and Dominion have filed applications with the NRC to get three sites licensed for new reactors. Reactor makers Westinghouse, General Electric (GE ), and Areva, which is building the Finland plant, have filed or will soon file applications to get new designs certified by the agency. A group of eight U.S. power companies, called NuStart Energy Development, is working on applications for construction and operating licenses for the GE and Westinghouse designs. Meanwhile, the public has become more accepting. The percentage of Americans who favor nuclear power jumped from 46% in 1995 to 70% in May, 2005, according to Bisconti Research. Some communities are actually backing new plants. In Calvert County, Md., where Constellation Energy has proposed adding a new reactor to an existing facility, "we are doing everything we can to see that kind of investment made in the county," says David Hale, president of the county board of commissioners. There have also been technological improvements. The basic approach hasn't changed, but new designs are easier to build and operate -- and better able to handle problems. They are "more safe by an order of magnitude," says MIT's Kadak. The industry expects progress on the waste front as well. New radiation exposure limits proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency for the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada in early August could pave the way for the facility to eventually accept waste. Add it up, and nukes no longer look like dodos. "What we are seeing is an economic change that is beginning to overwhelm the construction and licensing risks," says Thomas A. Christopher, CEO of Framatome ANP Inc., a unit of France's Areva. A new 1,000-MW plant is expected to cost at least $1.5 billion. That compares with $1.2 billion for a new coal plant or $500 million for a gas-fired facility, which is quicker to build. But utilities have learned to run reactors more efficiently, making existing nukes cheap producers of power. Now they figure that with natural gas prices tripling and coal prices doubling over the past five years, new nuke plants will be gold mines. "What we have to do is build the first two to six plants and prove to Wall Street that we can do it on schedule," says Entergy's Keuter. If that happens, the mid-21st century could be a new Atomic Age. By John Carey in Washington, with bureau reports BusinessWeek - Maybe In My Backyard- John Carey ***************************************************************** 47 AFP: UN experts present low death toll from Chernobyl but Greenpeace protests - VIENNA (AFP) - Greenpeace and the affected nation of Belarus cast doubt on predictions of a relatively low death toll from the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster, as UN experts opened a meeting in Vienna. The Chernobyl Forum meeting is discussing a report by an international team of scientists that says only 56 people have so far died and 4,000 may eventually perish from radiation exposure, a toll much lower than feared from the accident. Michael Repacholi of the World Health Organization (WHO) had told reporters Monday that there had been "speculation (of) tens of thousands of deaths, lots of cancers", but that the true toll would be far lower. He said the "likely deaths that could occur, using good solid background of radiation research ever since the (World War II atomic) bombing in Japan, (would be) approximately 4,000 people... from cancer over their lifetime." Kalman Mizsei of the UN Development Program (UNDP) said the death toll was so far only 56 -- 47 rescue workers who received high doses of radiation and nine children who contracted thyroid cancer. But William Peden, a researcher for the Greenpeace environmental group, told AFP on Tuesday: "To state so boldly that only 4,000 people will eventually die from Chernobyl is ridiculous. "It is way too early to make such bold assertions when so many questions remain unanswered and many thousands more may die in decades to come," Peden said. Vladimir Tsalka, from the Chernobyl committee of Belarus, one of the three main countries affected by the explosion of the reactor in Ukraine, said cancer would not be the only contributor to the eventual death toll. "Our experts predict that in the nearest future alongside the growth of thyroid cancer cases, there is high probability of increased cancer diseases as well as cardiovascular and other non-cancer diseases," Tsalka said in a speech to the opening session of the Chernobyl Forum. However Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the UN's watchdog atomic agency, said in a speech read out to the opening session, as he was not present, that "poverty, mental health problems and 'lifestyle' diseases have come to pose a far greater threat to affected communities than radiation exposure." He said that people bombarded with dire predictions of apocalyptic death tolls "came to regard themselves not as 'survivors' but as helpless, weak and lacking control over their futures." The forum brings together nuclear, health and development experts from eight UN agencies, meeting under the aegis of ElBaradei's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The explosion on April 26, 1986, of the number four reactor at Chernobyl in the then Soviet Union (in what is now Ukraine), sent a radioactive cloud across Europe in what was the worst nuclear accident in history. The report the forum is reviewing says that out of more than 600,000 people who suffered the most exposure from the accident -- reactor staff, emergency and recovery personnel in 1986-87 and residents of the nearby areas -- an estimated 3,940 are expected to die from radiation-induced cancer and leukemia. Burton Bennett, an expert on radiation effects who is chairing the meeting, said this figure was not at all exact and should be taken as a sign of the extent to which authorities have "overplayed the health consequences" of the accident. He said misinformation was responsible for a range of psychological problems as people in the region of Chernobyl thought they were doomed to get cancer, when in fact their exposure to radiation had been relatively low. Mizsei said an "industry has been built on this unfortunate event," with 22 percent of the national budget of Belarus in 1991 being dedicated to Chernobyl relief, a figure that has since dropped to six percent. In Ukraine, the portion of the national budget devoted to benefits for Chernobyl survivors and other measures has risen from five to seven percent during the same period, a UNDP expert said. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 48 [du-list] Planned survey of DU polluted areas. Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:05:26 -0700 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=222104&source=r_technology Al-Mashriq publishes on page 4 a 230-word report on the plan announced by the Environment Ministry to survey locations that were subjected to bombing and polluted with depleted uranium. Al-Mashriq publishes on page 4 a 50-word report on the training sessions being conducted by Ministry of Health to combat contagious diseases. Al-Mada publishes on page 2 a 230-word report on the inauguration of many mobile medical centers allover Baghdad. Tariq al-Sha'b on 25 August carries on the front page a 200-word report citing the director of SOMO announcing yesterday that Iraq has signed contracts with three foreign companies for the sale of 3m barrels of crude oil from Ceyhan Terminal. Tariq al-Sha'b on 25 August carries on page 2 a 200-word report on the complaint by Federal Union of Workers in Basra complaining about the frequent assaults against railway workers and demanding sufficient protection for passenger and cargo trains. Tariq al-Sha'b on 25 August carries on page 2 a 500-word column urging the government to investigate and reveal the facts about the ongoing large-scale smuggling of fuel out of the country. Tariq al-Sha'b on 25 August carries on page 2 a 100-word report citing an official source at the Communication Ministry asserting that the ministry is planning to enter into a partnership with private investors to develop mobile telecommunications in Iraq. Dar al-Salam on 25 August carries on page 6 a 1,700-word report on fuel crisis. Dar al-Salam on 25 August carries on page 7 a 500-word column criticizing the Iraqi Government for its inadequate anti-corruption measures. ---------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/05 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 49 [du-list] DU & Gamma Radiation Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 14:58:59 -0700 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com 1. What the military says about radiation from DU munitions [bold highlight added by me]: A common misconception is that radiation is depleted uranium's primary hazard. This is not the case under most battlefield exposure scenarios. Depleted uranium is approximately 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium. Depleted uranium emits alpha and beta particles, and gamma rays. Alpha particles, the primary radiation type produced by depleted uranium, are blocked by skin, while beta particles are blocked by the boots and battle dress utility uniform (BDUs) typically worn by service members. While gamma rays are a form of highly-penetrating energy , the amount of gamma radiation emitted by depleted uranium is very low. Thus, depleted uranium does not significantly add to the background radiation that we encounter every day. From: Office of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/faq_17apr.htm 2. What the Office of Hazardous Materials says about GAMMA radiation from massive amounts of DU munitions: The U.S. Department of Transportation [DOT] Information Memorandum to the Chief of Staff dated May 18, 2005 has an attachment: Reevaluation Summary DOT-E 9649. The attachment reveals the following: "Pallet contact radiation dose rates are generally twice, and in one case, over four times the regulatory limit for Limited Quantity materials. However, pallet and modal conveyance dose rates at one meter are generally a multiple of three to six time justifiable Limited Quantity classification, and for one sized round, six to eleven times. In the case of this latter round, inappropriate radiation exposures could occur to transport workers by being in the vicinity of the material for just 100 hours per year." 3. It's important to realize that the radiation dynamics of massive amounts [pallet, truck trailer, railcar load and milvan loads] of highly concentrated uranium, possible containing also plutonium are considerably different than radiation dynamics of what happens on the battlefields. In all cases the uranium is containerized. I know from first-hand experience with containerized uranium that the radiation detected outside the container is not alpha or beta, but must be penetrating ionizing radiation. Must be gamma, as was measured by Office of Hazardous Materials, plus neutrons and x-rays, which were not measured. It is important to ADD this knowledge to what is known about battlefield dynamics of DU. It is reasonable to conclude that both civilian and soldier workers are being exposed to and harmed by radiation of unacceptable doses whose fingerprints will be almost impossible to find and whose presence is probably even more widespread than internalized aerosolized DU. Some may be getting radiologically maxed out in less than 1 month of work. They are being harmed before the munitions are even used in battle. Due to what I would call "radiative event escape profile" the smaller rounds [25mm and 30mm] would be stronger emitters of penetrating ionizing radiation than larger such as 120mm because of the long, slender shape of the DU component of the munition. DOT hasconfirmed this is true. IMPORTANT REITERATION: This is not instead of aerosolized DU effects, but in addition! Wake up and smell the gamma rays--ooops we can't smell, see, feel or taste them. Also the relevant data come from the Department of Transportation NOT my imagination. Elaine Hunter However: "Immagination is more important than knowledge." (Albert Einstein). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 50 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Sub Collides With Cargo Ship in Gulf From the Associated Press [UP] Monday September 5, 2005 10:16 AM By JIM KRANE Associated Press Writer DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) - A nuclear-powered U.S. Navy submarine collided with a Turkish cargo ship in the Persian Gulf early Monday, the U.S. Navy reported. Nobody was injured and both ships appeared to suffer only superficial damage, said the spokesman for the U.S. Navy 5th Fleet, Cmdr. Jeffrey Breslau. It was the U.S. Navy's second collision with a civilian vessel in the Gulf in 14 months. The USS Philadelphia was traveling on the surface of the Gulf when it hit the Turkish-flagged M/V Yaso Aysen at around 2 a.m. local time, said a statement from the 5th Fleet Headquarters in Bahrain. The collision happened about 30 miles northeast of Bahrain, said Breslau. The Philadelphia was conducting surface operations on its way to Bahrain for a scheduled port visit, the Navy said. Afterward, the submarine continued to Bahrain where inspectors will check it for damage. The submarine's nuclear-powered propulsion plant was not damaged in the crash, the Navy said. Breslau said the Turkish ship, a bulk carrier, suffered minor damage to its hull just above the water line. The ship weighed anchor at the site of the crash and a U.S. Coast Guard vessel was sent to offer help, Breslau said. An initial inspection found the cargo vessel to be seaworthy. The cause of the collision was under investigation, Breslau said. The Philadelphia, launched in Groton, Conn., in 1974, has a crew of 125, Breslau added. The submarine is part of a fleet of U.S. and allied navy vessels conducting what are called ``maritime security operations'' in the Gulf against the smuggling of weapons and drugs and movement of terrorists. In July 2004, the aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy collided with a dhow in the Gulf, leaving no survivors on the traditional Arab sailing boat. The Navy relieved the Kennedy's commander, Capt. Stephen B. Squires, after the incident. The Kennedy itself was unscathed, but two jet fighters on the deck were damaged when one slid into the other as the carrier made a hard turn to avoid the dhow. --- Associated Press reporter Adnan Malik contributed to this from Manama, Bahrain. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 51 Vermont Guardian: Tests point to health damage of DU in Iraq September 6, 2005 Headlines | NEW YORK -- After National Guardsman Gerard Matthew returned home from his Iraq tour a year and a half ago, he learned that members of another unit, who accepted an offer by the New York Daily News, had tested positive for depleted uranium (DU) contamination. Since he had spent much of his time lugging around DU-damaged equipment, Matthew also decided to get tested, and it turned out he was the most contaminated of them all. According to a story by Dave Lindorff for In These Times magazine, Matthew next urged his wife to get an ultrasound check of their unborn baby. They discovered that the fetus had a condition common to those with radioactive exposure: atypical syndactyly. The right hand had only two digits. Now Matthew is angry at a government that never warned him about DUs dangers. No one knows how many U.S. soldiers have been contaminated. Despite regulations authorizing DU tests for anyone who suspects exposure, the military avoids doing themor delays until they are meaningless, Lindorff writes. At the wars start, the United States refused to allow UN or other environmental inspectors to test DU levels within Iraq. Now the UN wont go near Iraq because of security concerns. Yet the Pentagon still insists, without field evidence, that DU is safe. To date, only about 270 returned troops have been tested for DU contamination by the military and Veterans Affairs. But those tests, mostly urine samples, are useless 30 days after exposure; by that time most of the DU has left the body or migrated into bones or organs. The Daily News paid for costlier tests that could pinpoint uranium inside the body and identify the special isotope signature of man-made DU. Four of the nine tested positive; all had symptoms of uranium poisoning. Even harder evidence may soon arrive. Connecticut State Representative Pat Dillon, D-New Haven, an epidemiologist, has crafted legislation that both Connecticut and Louisiana have unanimously passed, authorizing returned National Guard troops to request and receive specialized DU contamination tests at the Pentagons expense. Bob Smith, a veteran in Louisiana who spearheaded the push for legislation in Louisiana, claims that 14 to 20 other states are considering similar measures. If enough Guard troops test positive, reservists and active duty troops and veterans are likely to demand similar tests, which can cost upwards of $1000 per person. Britain sets priorities for scarce bird flu drugs LONDON -- If Britain experiences an avian flu pandemic in the coming months, there would be enough drugs to protect less than 2 percent of the population for a week. As a result, the Department of Health has drawn up a priority list of those who would be first to receive lifesaving drugs, the UK Times reports. BBC employees are high on the list because they would have to broadcast vital information during a national disaster. They and some politicians would be given priority over sick patients, pregnant women, and the elderly. Topping the list are health workers and those in key public sector jobs. But prominent politicians such as cabinet ministers also would be given priority to receive the scarce pills and vaccinations. Ken Livingstone, Londons mayor, has already spent almost $1 million to make sure his personal office and employees have their own emergency supplies of 100,000 antiviral tablets. Although senior government ministers also would be among the high-priority recipients, the department has not decided whether to include opposition politicians. posted September 6, 2005 Vermont Guardian PO Box 335 Winooski, VT 05404 ***************************************************************** 52 AU: Sunday Morning Herald: Nuclear exports an option: Costello [www.smh.com.au] September 5, 2005 - 5:24PM Australia should consider nuclear power and boost uranium exports to countries eager to increase their own nuclear energy stocks, Treasurer Peter Costello said. Entering the debate over whether Australia should go nuclear, Mr Costello said it was unlikely that uranium-fired power would be cheaper in Australia because of the nation's ample coal supplies. But he said it would seem strange to boost uranium exports to nations such as Japan and Europe while at the same time ruling out its use in Australia. "On principle, we should accept it," he told reporters. "It would be pretty silly of us to export our uranium for other people but say we're in principle opposed to it for ourselves. That would be a pretty funny thing to do. "I can't see it being commercial in Australia in the short term, but depending on where the greenhouse debate goes, ... nuclear energy I think will be seen as a much cleaner form of energy than carbon energy. "I think it will be seen as a cleaner former of energy than carbon energy." Mr Costello said that with stringent safety conditions there was no reason for Australia not to pursue nuclear energy. Ultimately it would be up to energy companies to decide if it was economically viable to pursue nuclear. "I don't think the government should ban it. We should have rigorous safety standards, very rigorous safety standards, then it becomes a question of commercial provider," he said. "If any state instrumentality believes that it's become commercial it should be left up to them to either develop it themselves or to commission a private developer into buy-back." Mr Costello said demand for nuclear power would only increase around the globe. With up to 70 per cent of known uranium reserves, Australia was in a great position to capitalise on this demand. © 2005 AAP Copyright © 2005. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 53 AU ABC: MPs urge inclusive uranium debate 14:15 (ACST)Monday, 5 September 2005. 15:15 (AEDT)Monday, 5 Mid-west Western Australian MPs say a public debate on uranium mining is needed so younger generations can have their say. The Liberal MP for Moore, Gary Snook, says his opinion is that uranium should be considered as an energy option. Geraldton's Labor MP Shane Hill says younger people should be involved in debates about the issue. The Nationals MP for Greenough, Grant Woodhams, agrees the younger generation need to participate in the debate. "Another generation of Australians, West Australians have come through who haven't been part of the previous debate on uranium mining," Mr Woodhams said. He says mid-west residents need to decide how they feel about uranium mining in the region. "It probably wouldn't surprise anybody if some deposits of uranium were discovered in mineable quantities and so we in the mid-west need to have a position." ***************************************************************** 54 Deseret news: Envirocare plan is bad news [deseretnews.com] Envirocare's proposal to double the size of its nuclear waste dump spells bad news for Utah residents. In recent years, over 90 percent of the radioactive waste dumped in commercial facilities has been dumped at Envirocare — brought into Utah from other states. Every commercial radioactive waste dump has proven unsafe, contaminating the environment in some way. Radioactive waste exposure can lead to cancer, birth defects and a host of other health problems. At a time when 10 other states are fighting hard to keep nuclear waste out, Utah residents should stand up to Envirocare. Michael Zarkin, Ph.D. assistant professor of political science Westminster College World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front Page © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 55 Bellona: Spent nuclear fuel from liquid metal cooled reactor unloaded in Gremikha Spent nuclear fuel from the from Project 705 — Alfa class submarine’s metal liquid cooled reactor was unloaded at the former navy base in Gremikha on the Kola Peninsula, Interfax reported. 2005-09-06 16:27 The operation required to heat the reactor therefore a powerful boiler-house was installed. The personnel engaged in the operation had to take a course and take exams arranged by the Russian Federal Nuclear Agency and the Defence Ministry officials. Gremikha (Iokanga) naval base is the second onshore storage site at the Kola Peninsula for spent nuclear fuel and radwaste from submarines. The base is the easternmost Northern Fleet base at the Kola Peninsula, located some 350 kilometers east of the mouth of the Murmansk fjord. Around 800 elements from pressure water reactors are stored in Gremikha, containing 1.4 tons of nuclear fuel materials. A further six reactor cores from liquid metal reactors are also stored here onshore. Spent nuclear fuel remains in the reactors of all the 6-7 submarines laid up a piers at the base. The base also holds around 300 m3 of solid radioactive waste and around 2,000 m3 of liquid radioactive waste. The European Bank of Reconstruction and Development set Gremikha as priority project in the program of environmental rehabilitation. In particular, France pledged to invest 900m euro in the environmental rehabilitation program of the spent nuclear fuel onshore facility, reported Interfax. 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 ***************************************************************** 56 Bellona: Conscripts to get $1.7 extra for handling radioactive waste The Russian defence minister signed an order concerning salary raise for any Russian military serviceman handling nuclear fuel and radioactive waste. 2005-09-06 18:36 The size of the bonus differs significantly for the conscripts and the professional contract soldiers, Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper reported with reference to the defence minister. Ten percent of the Russian military servicemen are engaged in loading nuclear fuel and handling radioactive waste. According to the order the contract soldiers will get 35% increase to their current salary, while the raise for the conscripts will be just $1.7 per month. 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 ***************************************************************** 57 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Nuclear waste is inviting target Today: September 06, 2005 at 9:0:56 PDT Letter: Nuclear waste is inviting target I am responding to Richard Rychtarik's letter of July 28, which was answered in part by the editorial "Energy bill falls short." It is disgraceful that the nuclear industry and fossil-fuel producers, now making record profits, are receiving subsidies in the billions. Again I am lectured that I must be a realist and pragmatic and accept political expediency instead of sound science on Yucca Mountain. No! I also will never accept President Bush breaking his word during an election campaign. He promised sound science in 2000 and adherence to the court decisions without congressional interference in 2004. Nevadans should never accept that he will break his word. Storing nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain after 9/11 is indefensible in the name of homeland defense. Thousands of targets of opportunity will be presented to terrorists as the waste is transported across the country. There are shoulder-held weapons that can burn through heavy tank armor and then have a secondary explosion to kill the crew. No container can resist this attack. Even if the container isn't hit, the truck or train will be destroyed, bringing up visions of Three Mile Island. Nevadans have the power, as citizens, to stop Yucca Mountain. We must also use this power to encourage the media, print and visual, to tell the story. FRANK PERNA All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 58 ICT: Navajos receive award for banning uranium mining [2005/09/05] by: Brenda Norrell / Indian Country Today Photo courtesy Karen Francis -- Navajos receiving the Karl Souder Water Protection Award of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center were Lynnea K. Smith, Esther Yazzie-Lewis and tribal councilman George Arthur. SANTA FE, N.M. - The Karl Souder Water Protection Award of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center was awarded to three Navajos, including a youth and a tribal councilman, for their role in banning uranium mining on the Navajo Nation. ''We feel it is wrong to threaten either an individual or a society so that one may gain for one's self,'' said Navajo Councilman George Arthur, representing the Burnham, Nenahnezad and San Juan chapters in New Mexico. Arthur sponsored the legislation - the Dine' Natural Resources Protection Act, passed by the Navajo Nation Council in April - which banned uranium mining and processing on the Navajo Nation. ''I believe in economic development and that there is a place for it. However, there is a choice to be made - whether we make a dollar or survive for generations to come. ''We decided it was more important to have generations and generations after us,'' said Arthur, chairman of the council's resource committee, as he accepted his award. Lynnea K. Smith, of the Eastern Navajo Dinï¿© Against Uranium Mining, also received the water protection award along with Esther Yazzie-Lewis, president of the Southwest Research Center board. Smith was 21 years old when she urged the Navajo Nation Council to pass legislation banning uranium mining. During the awards ceremony, Smith was honored for her efforts to prevent uranium mining at Crownpoint, N.M., which began when she was a junior in high school. She said the struggle is ongoing and the fight is not over. ''We are still committed to fight on a daily basis. Just because you pass a piece of legislation does not mean the battle is over,'' she said. ENDAUM is currently fighting a proposal for in situ uranium mining by Hydro Resources, Inc., approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to be carried out at the Navajo Nation's borders and in checkerboard land areas in the Crownpoint and Church Rock. Praising ENDAUM, Arthur said, ''They stood up for what they believed in when strong forces were opposing them.'' Yazzie-Lewis accepted the award on behalf of the late Harris Arthur, brother of George Arthur and leader in the struggle for Navajo rights and justice. ''There are a lot of unsung heroes and I think Harris received this award in a very special way. I believe there is a time and a place for everything, and time presented to us Harris Arthur. He stepped forward to tell us to be patient and to fight one more fight and he made it happen,'' Yazzie-Lewis said. Presenting the award was Emily Souder, the 13-year-old daughter of the late Karl Souder for whom the award is named. During the presentation, Douglas Meiklejohn, director of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center, said that the enactment of the Dinï¿© Natural Resources Protection Act by the council was one of the most significant developments in the state pertaining to protection of water and the environment. Meiklejohn commended Arthur for having the dedication and perseverance to see that the law was passed, especially in the face of powerful opposition. ''He consistently told us that he would get this done, and he did,'' Meiklejohn said. Arthur thanked Eric Jantz from the New Mexico Environmental Law Center and Frank Seanez from the Navajo Nation Office of Legislative Counsel for providing guidance in the drafting of the legislation. Meiklejohn said that the center has been involved in the 10-year struggle to prevent uranium mining around Crownpoint with ENDAUM and the Navajo Nation. Jantz, lawyer with the center, and Smith presented the Dinï¿© Natural Resources Protection Act to the council along with Arthur. Don Hancock, recipient of the center's Griff Salisbury Environmental Protection Award, praised the tremendous job done by the Navajo Nation. ''It takes many people to make the kind of accomplishment happen that the Dine' have done. We have a lot of resources in this state that many people want to use or exploit,'' Hancock said. Hancock remembered the anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945. ''You realize the central role that New Mexico has played in the world and will continue to play in the future.'' Meanwhile in Washington, Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., praised Navajos in the Crownpoint and Church Rock area for their struggle, as he applauded the deletion of $30 million in federal subsidies for uranium mining from the federal energy bill. ''At a time of record deficits, we should not be handing out $30 million in taxpayer dollars to the uranium industry, a mature industry that has existed in the United States for more than half a century,'' Udall said in a written statement. ''While a recent court ruling has allowed a company to proceed with their mining plans in New Mexico, they will not be receiving federal funding to do it. ''I applaud the local citizens in Church Rock and Crownpoint who raised their voices in opposition to this misguided plan. Congress has listened.'' © 1998 - 2005 Indian Country Today. All Rights Reserved  ***************************************************************** 59 Portal da Cidadania: Uranium enrichment factory to open in 2006 08:52 Repórter da Agência Brasil Rio - Yesterday minister of Science and Technology, Sergio Rezende, declared that the inauguration of the Uranium Enrichment Factory (Fábrica de Enriquecimento de Urânio) in Resende (RJ), will take place in 2006. Speaking at a ceremony where Roberto Garcia Esteves took office as the new president of Brazilian Nuclear Industries (INB), Rezende admitted that the factory was supposed to be in operation by now. "Because of delays we are still in the test phase. The inauguration will be next year," he said. Rezende reported that Brazil spends US$15 million to import enriched uranium annually but that the country is one of the few in the world that has the capacity to enrich its own uranium. Translator: Allen Bennett 06/09/2005 © Agencia Brasil - All material may be reproduced ***************************************************************** 60 AU ABC: Growing demand prompts call for more uranium exploration. 05/09/2005. ABC News Online Geoscience Australia says the world demand for mined uranium will rise significantly over the next 15 years. The organisation's principle geologist, Aiden McKay, has told a parliamentary inquiry that Australia has the world's largest reserves of known uranium. He says Australia is the second-largest uranium producer after Canada. The inquiry is examining the strategic importance of Australia's uranium reserves. It coincides with negotiations between the Australian and Chinese governments over uranium exports to China. Mr McKay says while the price for uranium has trebled in recent years, money for mining exploration in Australia has fallen over the past two decades. "There is an emerging consensus that by about 2020 there will be a considerably greater requirement for primary uranium for mined production," he said. "Given the long lead times for environmental clearances and permitting of new uranium mines this means that new discoveries will be needed in the short- to medium-term." Meanwhile the Australian Minerals Council says the nation will miss significant economic opportunities if it fails to cash in on the global demand for uranium. Uranium is currently mined in South Australia and the Northern Territory, but the council's chief executive Mitch Hooke says it is vital other states get on board. "It's quite nonsensical to have restriction on the establishment of further uranium mines when there's no restriction on production from the existing operations," he said. "If you look at Olympic Dam uranium operations in South Australia ... that's 39 per cent of the world's resources right now ... so you know from one mine alone you're going to increase production quite substantially or certainly that's the schedule of that company's activities," he said. ***************************************************************** 61 AU ABCL: States urged to get behind uranium mining - 05/09/2005 The Australian Minerals Council says the nation will miss significant economic opportunities if it fails to cash in on the global demand for uranium. The council's chief executive, Mitch Hooke, will give evidence today to a parliamentary committee. The inquiry will help decide Australia's future strategies for uranium mining and exploration. Uranium is currently mined in South Australia and the Northern Territory, but Mr Hooke says it is vital other states get on board. "It's quite nonsensical to have restriction on the establishment of further uranium mines when there's no restriction on production from the existing operations," he said. "If you look at Olympic Dam uranium operations in South Australia that's 39 per cent of the world's resources right now so you know from one mine alone you're going to increase production quite substantially or certainly that's the schedule of that company's activities." National Rural News ***************************************************************** 62 bizjournals.com: Mound clean-up firm laying off 115 - 2005-09-06 DBJ Senior Reporter As the clean-up of The Mound, a former nuclear site in Miamisburg, is nearing completion, will lay-off 115 of its remaining 240 workers during the next few months, said John Lehew, site manager with CH2M. The company, a Denver-based firm that has been cleaning the facilities and soil in The Mound since 2003, filed a notice with the state under Ohio's Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act Aug. 25 about the layoffs. "We still have some clean-up to go, but we're to the point where we'll have additional (lay-offs) in conjunction with a lot of the work winding down," Lehew said. When the company took over the contract in Jan. 2003, CH2M had 650 workers but has decreased staff as the clean-up completion date approached. Lehew said the clean-up should be completed by next summer. The Mound, once used to make triggers for nuclear weapons, has been in a redevelopment phase since the U.S. Department of Energy decided it would no longer use the site in 1993. Officials at the site recently boosted the size and scope of the 300-acre business park, dubbed the . E-mail cstephens@bizjournals.com. Call 222-6900, ext. 101. © 2005 American City Business Journals Inc. Add RSS Headlines ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************