*****************************************************************
09/14/05 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 13.213
*****************************************************************
   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 U.S. Deploys Slide Show to Press Case Against Iran
2 IRNA: France calls on Iran to remain committed to Paris Agreement -
3 Times of India: India treads softly between US, Iran
4 AFP: Atomic watchdog urges US to give Iran one last chance, US says 
5 Daily Times: IAEA opposes UN action on Iran N-plans 
6 Reuters: Iranian president blasts U.S. at U.N. 
7 Reuters: France threatens Iran with U.N. referral 
8 Guardian Unlimited: Six-Nation N. Korea Nuke Talks Resume
9 Guardian Unlimited: U.S., Allies Nix North Korea Nuke Demand
10 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. and North Korea to Meet One-On-One
11 Korea Herald: Seoul proposes liaison offices in Koreas   
12 Korea Herald: U.S., N. Korea meet during nuclear talks   
13 Xinhua: Chief negociators of DPRK, US hold bilateral meeting   
14 Xinhua: Differences looming over 6-party talks   
15 Xinhua: DPRK, US hold 1st one-on-one consultation   
16 Xinhua: Bilateral consultations start in six-party Talks   
17 Japan Times: Six-party talks resume
18 Japan Times: Major hurdle remains in six-party talks
19 Korea Times: 6-Way Talks Support Peace Regime - Hill 
20 Korea Times: US, NK Delegates Seek to Find Nuke Breakthrough 
21 Reuters: North Korean nuclear arms talks still deadlocked 
22 US: NRC: : Petition for rulemaking; notice of receipt.
23 Guardian Unlimited: Leader: United Nations summit
24 Guardian Unlimited: World Leaders Sign Nuke Terrorism Treaty
25 Guardian Unlimited: Main Points of Nuclear Terrorism Treaty
26 BBC: Blair wins UN backing on terror
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
27 US: [NukeNet] NYT: Aging Nuclear Power Plants May Affect Emissions
28 US: NRC: NRC Ranks No. 3 in the Best Places to Work in the Federal G
29 Platts: BE to shut down two more units over bolt cracking concerns
30 US: NRC: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc., Calvert Cliffs Nu
31 US: Eureka Reporter: NRC officials to meet with residents           
32 US: roanoke.com: New nuclear plants obscure better distributed energ
33 US: NRC: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC; R.E. Ginna Nuclear Pow
34 US: NRC: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company; Notice of Withdrawal
35 US: Lincoln County News:  Maine Yankee Hires New President, CEO
36 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th
37 US: Reuters: Entergy N.Y. FitzPatrick nuke shut 
38 US: San Francisco Bay Guardian News: No (more) nukes
39 AFP: US rules out light water reactors as nuclear energy takes centr
40 Interfax China: N. Korea hopes U.S. will agree to its peaceful nucle
41 Telegraph: Tarapur’s new reactor stepping stone to more power       
42 US: Fort St. John: Fort St. John Ont. won't shy away from nuclear po
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
43 US: Security UN Meeting At Summit Level UN Adopts Anti-terror Steps
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
44 [du-list] Uranium in the teeth of children
45 US: Las Vegas SUN: Study results due on Nevada town hit by leukemia 
46 BBC: Scotland tests disaster response
47 US: BoiseWeekly: Caught in the Cross-Fire
48 US: Paducah Sun: Sick workers seek responses to their claims - 
49 AU ABC: Teeth and nuclear fallout reveal true age. 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
50 EPA: Yucca Mt. proposed rule & notice of hearing 
51 Las Vegas SUN: DOE proposes spending cuts for Yucca Mountain scienti
52 NRC: NRC Issues Draft Environmental Impact Statement on Proposed Enr
53 US: The Australian: Canadians gamble on uranium 
54 ForUm: Ukraine needs storehouse for nuclear waste
55 US: Bradenton Herald: Tallevast residents may add county to list of 
56 Las Vegas RJ: DOE moves to boot agency 
57 Las Vegas RJ: Environmentalists ask Congress for Yucca probe 
58 Bellona: Spent nuclear fuel to be unloaded from two retired submarin
59 Bellona: Unloading of spent nuclear fuel from Russian nuclear cruise
60 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca waste talks likely facing delay 
61 Las Vegas SUN: USGS faces big budget cut 
62 Platts: Germany, Switzerland to search jointly for final nuclear sto
63 US: Chemical & Engineering News: Utah Nuclear Waste Site Advances
64 US: MDN: China seeks new supplies of uranium to feed nuclear power 
65 KVBC: Yucca Mountain Hearing In Caliente
66 US: Canon City Daily Record: Cotter hearing under way
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
67 Tri-City Herald: Hanford lab building lags behind 
68 lamonitor.com: Council critical of NNSA road plan 
69 lamonitor.com: Lab, state settle waste penalty 
70 DOE: Notice of Availability of Draft Section 3116 Determination Idah
71 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Rocky 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 U.S. Deploys Slide Show to Press Case Against Iran
 
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 07:14:10 -0500 (CDT)

 
	version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
X-Mail-from: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu

Wednesday, September 14, 2005
The Washington Post
www.washingtonpost.com

U.S. Deploys Slide Show to Press Case Against Iran

By

Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer

UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 13 -- With an hour-long slide show that blends
satellite imagery with disquieting assumptions about Iran's nuclear energy
program, Bush administration officials have been trying to convince allies
that Tehran is on a fast track toward nuclear weapons.

The PowerPoint briefing, titled "A History of Concealment and Deception,"
has been presented to diplomats from more than a dozen countries. Several
diplomats said the presentation, intended to win allies for increasing
pressure on the Iranian government, dismisses ambiguities in the evidence
about Iran's intentions and omits alternative explanations under debate
among intelligence analysts.

The presenters argue that the evidence leads solidly to a conclusion that
Iran's nuclear program is aimed at producing weapons, according to diplomats
who have attended the briefings and U.S. officials who helped to assemble
the slide show. But even U.S. intelligence estimates acknowledge that other
possibilities are plausible, though unverified.

The problem, acknowledged one U.S. official, is that the evidence is not
definitive. Briefers "say you can't draw any other conclusion, and of course
you can draw other conclusions," said the official, who would discuss the
closed-door sessions only on condition of anonymity.

The briefings were conducted in Vienna over the past month in advance of a
gathering of world leaders this week at the United Nations. President Bush,
who is to address the annual General Assembly gathering Wednesday, and
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, plan to use the meeting to press for
agreement to threaten international sanctions against Iran.

The president's direct involvement marks an escalation of a two-year effort
to bring Iran before the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to
impose sanctions, unless Tehran gives up technology capable of enriching
uranium for a bomb. U.S. officials have acknowledged that it has been an
uphill campaign, with opposition from key allies who fear a prelude to a
military campaign.

Several diplomats said the slide show reminded them of the flawed
presentation on Iraq's weapons programs made by then-secretary of state
Colin L. Powell to the U.N. Security Council in February 2003. "I don't
think they'll lose any support, but it isn't going to win anyone either,"
said one European diplomat who attended the recent briefing and whose
country backs the U.S. position on Iran.

Robert G. Joseph, undersecretary of state for arms control and international
security, acknowledged last week that despite European support, the Bush
administration has traveled a tough road in persuading others that Iran
should face consequences for a nuclear program it built in secret.

"There's a great deal of resistance . . . on the part of many governments
who don't seem to place, quite frankly, nonproliferation and Iran, a
nuclear-armed Iran, at the top of their priority list," he told a
congressional panel last week.

Several influential nations such as India, Russia, China, South Africa and
Brazil share U.S. suspicions about Iran's intentions. But they maintain
profound differences with the Bush administration over how to respond, and
are apprehensive about the goals of a U.S. president who has said "all
options are on the table," in dealing with Tehran.

Three years ago, the White House used the same annual gathering to put both
Iraq, and the world community on notice. In a toughly-worded speech,
delivered six months before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Bush warned that the
United States would deal alone, if necessary, with a dictator bent on
launching nuclear weapons.

The U.S. intelligence community no longer believes Iraq was trying to
reconstitute a nuclear program, as the president said. Those and other U.S.
intelligence failures have remained fresh in the minds of international
decision-makers now being asked to weigh the case of Iran.

The Iraq experience has had a "sobering effect" on Iran discussions, said
President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, a close ally of the Bush
administration. In an interview, he refused to speculate on whether Iran,
whose program was secretly aided by Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, had
been designed for weapons production. But he said he feels confident Iran's
aims are now peaceful and there was no need for Security Council action.

Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is also attending the U.N.
summit, has his own meetings scheduled in New York, and Iranian officials
said he would use the gathering to mount forceful counterarguments. Iranian
diplomats have been in close contact with countries such as Japan, which
relies heavily on Iranian oil.

The outcome of both sides' efforts will be tested on Sept. 19, when
diplomats from 35 countries meet at the International Atomic Energy Agency
in Vienna to decide whether to report Iran's case to the Security Council.

Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns last night suggested the
administration may not be able to press for a successful vote and was
exploring other options. He said the administration was working "with lots
of other governments to devise an international coalition that will call
upon Iran to return to the talks," it walked away from this summer with
European negotiators. "There is a consensus that Iran has got to return to
the talks."

Iran insists its nuclear efforts are aimed at producing nuclear energy, not
bombs. The Bush administration contends that the energy program, built in
secret and exposed in 2002, is just a cover. "They cannot be allowed to
develop nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian nuclear program, which
is what they're trying to do," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack
said earlier this month.

A recent U.S. intelligence estimate found that Iran, mostly through its
energy program, is acquiring and mastering technologies that could also be
used for bomb-making. But there is no proof that such diversion has
occurred, the estimate said, and the intelligence community is uncertain as
to whether Iran's ruling clerics have made a decision to go forward with a
nuclear weapons program.

The estimate judged Iran to be as much as a decade away from being able to
manufacture the fissile material necessary for a nuclear explosion. A report
issued last week by the International Institute for Security Studies, a
London-based research group, found Iran was 10 to 15 years from the
technical know-how to build a bomb.

Both reports are based in large part on the findings of U.N. nuclear
inspectors, now in their third year of investigating Iran's program. While
no proof of a weapons program has been found, serious questions about
Tehran's past work on centrifuge designs and experiments with plutonium -- a
key ingredient for a nuclear weapon -- have yet to be adequately addressed
and have furthered suspicions that the country is hiding information.

With little new information from the probe, the Bush administration put
together its own presentation of Iran's program for diplomats in Vienna who
are weighing whether to report Iran to the Security Council.

The presentation has not been vetted through standard U.S. intelligence
channels because it does not include secret material. One U.S. official
involved in the briefing said the intelligence community had nothing to do
with the presentation and "probably would have disavowed some of it because
it draws conclusions that aren't strictly supported by the facts."

The presentation, conducted in a conference room at the U.S. mission in
Vienna, includes a pictorial comparison of Iranian facilities and missiles
with photos of similar-looking items in North Korea and Pakistan, according
to a copy of the slides handed out to diplomats. Pakistan largely supplied
Iran with its nuclear infrastructure but, as a key U.S. ally, it is
identified in the presentation only as "another country."

Corey Hinderstein, a nuclear analyst with the Institute for Science and
International Security, said the presence of a weapons program could not be
established through such comparisons. She noted that North Korea's missile
wasn't designed for nuclear weapons so comparing it to an Iranian missile
that also wasn't designed to carry a nuclear payload "doesn't make sense."

) 2005 The Washington Post Company

-----------

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/13/AR2005091301
837.html

----------
*****************************************************************
 2 IRNA: France calls on Iran to remain committed to Paris Agreement -
      
 Sept 14, IRNA                                                                                                                  

France on Wednesday called on Iran to remain committed to the
Paris Agreement in connection with its nuclear case, saying it
will defend such a stance at the 60th regular session of the UN
General Assembly.

 The deputy spokesman for French Foreign Ministry said that
France has not changed its stance on Iran's nuclear dossier,
adding Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin would outline
France's stance in his address to the UN General Assembly.

 Iran cancelled voluntary suspension of uranium enrichment and
started parts of nuclear activities at Isfahan uranium
conversion facility (UCF) last month under the supervision of
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) after the
Europeans ignored the country's nuclear right.

 Tehran expressed readiness to resume nuclear talks with Europe
but stressed observation of its rights based on international
regulations including access to nuclear fuel cycle.

 The French Foreign Ministry deputy spokesman said the three
European states (France, Britain and Germany) presented positive
proposals to Iran based on the Paris Agreement.

 He added the UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei's
report on Iran's nuclear activities would be discussed during
the IAEA Board of Governors session on September 19.

 On next round of negotiations and meetings between the three EU
trio and Iran in New York or other states, he said no official
meeting has been planned on Iran's nuclear case, adding
unofficial and unpredicted meetings may be held between
ministers of the countries during the UN General Assembly
session.

 He said Iran would be referred to the UN Security Council if no
solution is found.

*****************************************************************
 3 Times of India: India treads softly between US, Iran

CHIDANAND RAJGHATTA

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2005 05:21:24 PM 		]
   
  Citibank NRI Offer   

  NEW YORK: Caught between a defiant Iran and a hardline US
stance on Teheran's nuclear quest, India has struck a delicate
balancing act to retain its close ties and energy options
involving both sides. 

In a meeting with US President George Bush here on Tuesday in
which the Iran issue was clearly on top of the agenda, Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh said India is resolutely opposed to the
introduction of weapons of mass destruction in its neighborhood
''without any exception.'' India also expected Iran to conform
to its obligations as a member of the Nuclear Non proliferation
Treaty. 

At the same time, in view of the upcoming meeting of the
International Atomic Energy Commission, diplomacy should be
given an opportunity to try and reach a consensus, Singh told
President Bush. 

A solution had to be found within the ambit of commitments and
obligations that Iran had accepted. As a Board member of the
IAEA, India would certainly act constructively in this regard,
Singh assured Bush. 

Indian officials insisted the Iran issue was not a spanner in the 
U.S-India nuclear works and said New Delhi was not being 
subjected to a ''for-us-or-against-us'' test.

A prime ministerial aide quoted Bush as telling Singh ''You are a 
good man. We can do business with you.''

''The meeting confirmed that both countries were unambiguously 
committed to the agreement and there was no question of bringing 
in any additional conditionalities or additional factors,'' 
foreign secretary Shyam Saran said.

Outside the wrinkle over Iran, both leaders reviewed the progress 
on the nuclear deal between the two sides in thier half hour 
meeting at Bush's suite at the Waldorf Astoria. Saran said 
President Bush reiterated his committment to carry the agreement 
through the Congress despite some opposition there.

Then, in an unusual interjection, a senior Prime Ministerial aide 
quoted Singh as telling Bush he was happy the Indian `Parliament 
fully supported the joint statement between the two countries 
issued during his visit to the US less than two months ago though 
he was surprised at the criticism by former Prime Minister Atal 
Bihari Vajpayee.

The reference seemed odd because although the former prime 
minister has indeed been critical of some aspects of the Singh 
government's diplomacy, Indian diplomatic traditions typically do 
not bring domestic disagreements abroad.
  
  Copyright © 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 4 AFP: Atomic watchdog urges US to give Iran one last chance, US says no - 

 Wednesday September 14, 11:41 PM '); 

VIENNA (AFP) - UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei has
urged the United States to give Iran one last chance to halt
suspected weapons-related nuclear activities but Washington is
insisting on immediate UN Security Council action, diplomats
said.

"US ambassador Gregory Schulte asked him (ElBaradei) on
Wednesday not to lobby for this (a delay)" at the Vienna-based
UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a
diplomat who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the
issue told AFP.

The United States and the European Union are pushing for the
IAEA to refer Iran to the Security Council at United Nations
headquarters in New York, when the IAEA's 35-nation board of
governors begins meeting in Vienna on Monday.

The British delegation to the IAEA is Thursday to give a series
of presentations to different board members explaining why the
EU has no confidence in the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear
program, diplomats said.

Still, ElBaradei told US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in
a telephone conversation last week it would be better to give
Iran a deadline for ceasing uranium conversion work, rather than
going for referral to the Council now, as the IAEA board is
split over the issue, a diplomat said.

"Rice said this was not a good idea," another diplomat said.

US and IAEA spokespersons refused to comment.

Conversion is the first step in making enriched uranium which
can be fuel for nuclear power reactors or bomb material.

Russia, China and several non-aligned states oppose sending Iran
before the Security Council, which could impose sanctions on
Tehran, as they say the right to make nuclear fuel is guaranteed
under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

"It would be better to find a compromise that can keep everyone
engaged rather than splitting the board," a diplomat said.

The diplomat said that since Iran was only converting uranium
into a feedstock gas and not actually making enriched uranium,
"it is not that critical that the matter is solved at next
week's board meeting. We can wait another few weeks, or another
few months, as long as the Iranians don't go beyond what they
are doing now."

The IAEA on August 11 called on Iran to stop nuclear fuel
activities in order to resume talks with the European Union on
guaranteeing its nuclear program is peaceful, as Tehran claims
it is.

The United States believes Tehran is using its civilian nuclear
program to hide atomic weapons development and feels the time
has come to make a stand on the issue.

At a UN summit in New York Wednesday, US President George W.
Bush expressed concern over Iran's nuclear program to Indian
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as Washington moved to rally
support against the Islamic republic.

A diplomat said the United States was appealing to countries not
favoring Security Council referral to change their minds.

Washington was asking India to show leadership against Iran as a
proliferation threat since New Delhi wants Washington to help it
get a seat on the Security Council.

Washington was warning Russia that it could end up isolated in
blocking referral and trying to get Pakistan and Brazil, which
both have strong nuclear programs, to wait until they see
developments at the board meeting before deciding what to do.

Meanwhile, French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin
"strongly" called in New York for Iran to keep its nuclear
non-proliferation promises or face action before the Security
Council.

Iran said Monday it would cooperate fully with IAEA inspectors
provided it was allowed to make nuclear fuel, according to a
document presented to IAEA board members and obtained by AFP.

The IAEA, which monitors compliance with the NPT and has since
February 2003 been investigating Iran's nuclear program, has
never been forced to vote on a compliance issue as it uses
consensus decisions to give measures the weight of a united
international community.

Western nations almost certainly have enough votes to get the
IAEA board to send Iran to the Security Council but diplomats
warn against forcing this.

"A vote on this issue would be very damaging so there is
pressure to move ahead only with a consensus," a diplomat said.

European diplomats said if they got the issue to New York, they
would not initially ask the Security Council, which unlike the
IAEA has enforcement powers, to impose sanctions but would
merely recommend a Council "president's statement" as the goal
would be to get Iran to heed the IAEA calls. 
                                
Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
                              - - - 
AFP 
*****************************************************************
 5 Daily Times: IAEA opposes UN action on Iran N-plans 

 Thursday, September 15, 2005       

* Diplomat says IAEA wants to give Tehran one final chance 
* US shows satellite images to foreign diplomats to bolster
charges

BERLIN: The head of the UN nuclear watchdog fears referring Iran
to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions now would be
wrong and instead wants to give Tehran one final chance to
comply, diplomats said on Wednesday. 

The governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) begins meeting on Monday. The main issue will be a joint
EU-US plan to refer Tehran to the Security Council, which could
lead to economic sanctions, due to fears Iran is developing
atomic weapons. 

“Everything points in the direction of the need for more time.
So it would be in everbody’s favour to give it some three or
four weeks,” a senior diplomat close to the UN atomic watchdog
told Reuters on condition of anonymity. 

The diplomat said IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei suggested to US
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the IAEA’s governing
board could instead set a deadline for Iran to resume a
suspension of sensitive atomic activities and help the UN
resolve outstanding questions about Iran’s nuclear programme. 

However, US officials have been showing foreign diplomats an
hour-long slide show that includes satellite pictures to bolster
charges that Iran’s nuclear programmes is aimed at producing
weapons, The Washington Post reported on Wednesday.

The presentation has been shown over the past month in Vienna -
where the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is
based - to diplomats from more than a dozen countries, the Post
reported.

Then-secretary of state Colin Powell also used satellite images
to bolster the US case for war against Iraq in February 2003,
arguing at the UN Security Council that Iraqi leader Saddam
Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.

No such weapons were found after the US-led invasion.

Titled ‘A History of Concealment and Deception,’ the briefing on
Iran firmly states that Iran’s nuclear programmes is aimed at
producing weapons, and does not include any alternative
explanations for the programme, the Post reports, citing foreign
diplomats and US officials.

One US official acknowledged the evidence in the presentation is
not definitive.

The US briefer ‘say you can’t draw any other conclusion, and of
course you can draw other conclusions,’ the US official told the
newspaper, speaking on condition of anonymity. Several diplomats
told the Post the slide show reminded them of Powell’s 2003
United Nations presentation. 

“I don’t think they’ll lose any support, but it isn’t going to
win anyone either,” one European diplomat who went to a briefing
told the Post. Iran insists its nuclear programme has peaceful
aims. agencies 

Daily Times - All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 6 Reuters: Iranian president blasts U.S. at U.N. 

Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:26 PM ET

 By Carol Giacomo

 UNITED NATIONS, Sept 14 (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud 
Ahmadinejad blasted U.S. unilateralism, militarism and privilege 
on Wednesday and called for the United Nations to promote 
spirituality.

 In his first major international speech since taking office last 
month, the conservative Muslim leader advanced broad concepts, 
including recommendations that the United Nations 
"institutionalize justice at the international level" and ensure 
all members have "equal rights."

 "The greatest challenge of our age is the gradual spiritual 
depravation of human beings brought about by the distancing of 
the prevailing order from morality and unity of monotheism," he 
told a U.N. summit.

 "The United Nations should lead in the promotion of spirituality 
and compassion for humanity," he added.

 Ahmadinejad did not hesitate to take on the United States, which 
hosts the world body's New York headquarters and has accused Iran 
of pursuing nuclear weapons in contravention of international 
commitments.

 "Greater power or wealth should not accord expanded rights to 
any (U.N.) member ... The host country should not enjoy any right 
or privilege over the rest of the memberships," he said.

 He criticized "unilateralism, production and use of WMD (weapons 
of mass destruction), intimidation, resort to the threat or use 
of force and imposition of destructive wars on peoples for the 
sake of security and prosperity of a few powers."

 The United States is the world's leading nuclear power and the 
only state to have dropped an atomic bomb. It invaded Iraq in 
2003 and remains embroiled in the fighting there.

 U.S. ABSENCE, BUT NOT WALKOUT

 No senior American diplomats were in the room when Ahmadinejad 
spoke but a U.S. official denied a walkout.

 "We know how to stage a walkout and if we had intended to do so 
we would have done so in a more high-profile coordinated way," he 
said, noting two U.S. "note-takers" were present.

 Still this was a contrast from the first U.N. visit of 
Ahmadinejad's reformist predecessor Mohammad Khatami in 1998.

 Then, President Bill Clinton took the unusual step of sitting in 
on Khatami's speech amid optimism that diplomatic ties broken by 
Washington in 1980 could be repaired.

 Ahmadinejad will attempt to avert referral of Tehran's nuclear 
case to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions during 
this week's tough debut on the world stage.

 The new president, elected in June on a platform which rejected 
the need for renewed dialogue with arch-foe Washington, has 
promised to deliver a new proposal to break the stalemate in 
Iran's atomic standoff with the West.

 There were no such proposals in Wednesday's speech, but 
Ahmadinejad plans to meet journalists for breakfast on Thursday 
and is to address the United Nations again on Saturday.

 He is due to meet on Thursday with officials of the three major 
European Union powers trying to negotiate a solution to the 
nuclear dispute -- Britain, France and Germany.

 The United States and the EU trio accuse Iran of pursuing 
nuclear weapons under the guise of nuclear power development but 
Iran insists its only goal is civilian energy.

 Ahmadinejad's appearance drew thousands of protesters, who 
oppose Iran's hard-line conservative system, to a plaza outside 
the heavily secured U.N. headquarters.

 Hamid Dara, spokesman for New York Against Ahmadinejad, said the 
coalition of pro-democracy groups insist the recent presidential 
elections were rigged.

 "We feel that only when this regime is replaced with a 
democratic government, only then will its problems -- human 
rights, the nuclear program, fundamentalist Islam -- be solved," 
Dara said.

 (Additional reporting by Joseph Giannone) 			 			

© Reuters 2005. 
All Rights Reserved.                    
*****************************************************************
 7 Reuters: France threatens Iran with U.N. referral 

Wed Sep 14, 2005 2:27 PM ET

 UNITED NATIONS, Sept 14 (Reuters) - France threatened Iran with 
referral to the United Nations over its nuclear activities on 
Wednesday despite the misgivings of the IAEA, the U.N.'s atomic 
watchdog agency.

 In remarks to the U.N. Security Council, Prime Minister 
Dominique de Villepin stressed the need for a "determined 
response" against weapons proliferation.

 "In the nuclear sphere, we have put our trust in the 
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)," where there are 
rights to uphold and duties to enforce, he said.

 "If a state fails in its obligations under the 
(Nuclear)Non-proliferation Treaty, it is legitimate, once 
dialogue has been exhausted, to refer it to the Security 
Council."

 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was due to address the 
U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday and again on Saturday.

 At some point, he is expected to outline a new plan aimed at 
reviving suspended EU talks and fending off a referral.

 The IAEA fears that referring Iran to the Security Council now 
for possible sanctions over fears that Tehran wants to build 
nuclear arms would split its members, diplomats said.

 They said the watchdog would rather set a new deadline for Iran 
to halt sensitive work when the 35-nation IAEA governing board 
meets from Monday to decide.

 "Everything points in the direction of a need for more time. So 
it would be in everybody's favor to give it some three or four 
weeks," a senior diplomat close to the Vienna-based IAEA told 
Reuters on condition of anonymity.

 The European Union's three biggest powers -- France, Britain and 
Germany -- joined forces with Washington to back a Council 
referral after Tehran resumed sensitive nuclear activities at its 
Isfahan uranium processing plant last month.

 Work had been suspended under a November deal with the EU.

 The EU trio says it will not seek immediate sanctions and only 
gradually increase pressure on Iran, and EU diplomats said 
Wednesday nothing would be gained by delaying referral.

 Britain's Foreign Office said this was an issue for the IAEA 
board, not IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, to decide.

 IRAN SAYS IT WON'T SUSPEND AGAIN

 Tehran denies wanting atom bombs and says the West would abridge 
Iran's right to a full nuclear energy program. To undercut that 
argument, President George W. Bush on Tuesday publicly endorsed 
Iran's right to peaceful nuclear power.

 Other diplomats said ElBaradei suggested to U.S. Secretary of 
State Condoleezza Rice that the IAEA's governing board could 
instead set a deadline for Iran to resume a suspension of 
sensitive atomic activities and help the U.N. resolve outstanding 
questions about Iran's nuclear program.

 Iran has told the IAEA, however, that it will continue to 
cooperate with it, but only if it can exercise a right to enrich 
uranium, according to a statement obtained by Reuters. The 
statement was circulated to IAEA members this week.

 "There is no reason for Iran to sustain its ... voluntary 
suspension of uranium conversion and enrichment," it said.

 DELAY SEEN UNDERMINING IAEA'S CREDIBILITY

 ElBaradei's former deputy and chief IAEA inspector, Pierre 
Goldschmidt, wrote in a New York Times opinion piece that the 
IAEA board should not hesitate to report Iran for hiding its 
uranium enrichment program for nearly two decades.

 "A failure by the board to make such a report would considerably 
weaken the agency and the global non-proliferation regime. It 
would reveal that the world is unwilling to hold rule-breakers to 
account, inviting proliferation by other countries," wrote 
Goldschmidt, who retired this summer.

 EU diplomats said Ahmadinejad wanted to expand the EU-Iran talks 
to include countries like Russia, China, India or South Africa, 
which oppose U.N. referral and believe Iran should be allowed a 
full nuclear program.

 The EU has ruled out new talks unless Iran re-freezes work at 
Isfahan, which EU diplomats said was unlikely. (Additional 
reporting by Paul Hughes in Tehran, Louis Charbonneau in Berlin 
and Francois Muprhy in Vienna)                                          

© Reuters 2005. 
All Rights Reserved.                    
*****************************************************************
 8 Guardian Unlimited: Six-Nation N. Korea Nuke Talks Resume
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday September 14, 2005 2:31 AM

By BURT HERMAN 

Associated Press Writer 

BEIJING (AP) - North Korea insisted Tuesday it will not give up
its right to civilian nuclear programs, raising questions about
the possibility of a breakthrough as six-nation talks aimed at
persuading Pyongyang to abandon its atomic weapons resumed after
a five-week recess. 

Envoys from China, Japan, Russia, the United States and the two
Koreas clasped hands together at a state guesthouse in Beijing
before continuing the fourth round of talks since 2003 that have
so far failed to resolve the standoff. 

In New York on Tuesday, Chinese President Hu Jintao told
President Bush that China was ready to ``step up'' pressure on
Pyongyang for progress in the negotiations. 

``We stand ready to step up our communication and cooperation''
to gain fresh progress in negotiations aimed at halting North
Korea's nuclear program, he said. 

Mike Green, the National Security Council's senior director for
Asia, said the Bush administration rejects the notion of North
Korea retaining a civilian nuclear program. ``North Korea needs
to get out, completely out, of the nuclear business,'' Green
said. 

Last month, negotiators took a break after a record 13 days of
meetings ended without agreement. The main U.S. negotiator said
it would likely be shorter than last time. 

``We should be able to wrap this up in a matter of days, not
weeks,'' U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said
Tuesday evening. 

South Korea's head negotiator Song Min-soon agreed, saying talks
would continue until Friday at least and then all parties would
consult on a possible closing date, according to official Xinhua
News Agency. 

The issue of the North's peaceful nuclear program will be raised
at the talks but Hill emphasized the focus is on ridding the
North of atomic weapons. 

``The fundamental question is whether (North Korea) is prepared
to abandon its nuclear programs,'' he said, noting those
programs are involved in production of materials for nuclear
weapons. 

Hill saw the North Korean delegation briefly Tuesday and said he
planned a full one-on-one session with them Wednesday where
their views would be made known. 

Contacts between U.S. and North Korean diplomats in New York in
the past month failed to make any progress, Hill said earlier.
But he said ``their position does seem to be evolving a
little,'' without elaborating. 

Chief North Korean negotiator Kim Kye Gwan said before he left
for Beijing that his country will not tolerate any obstruction
to its right to a peaceful nuclear program, China's official
Xinhua News Agency reported. 

``This right is neither awarded nor needs to be approved by
others,'' Kim said in Pyongyang, adding that the country would
``utterly not accept'' if Washington tries to block that right. 

Still, Kim said the North would attend the talks with a sincere
and flexible attitude, according to Xinhua. 

The Chinese hosts also acknowledged the impasse over the North's
demand to keep its civilian nuclear program. 

``There is a major difference between the parties, that is the
DPRK's (North Korea's) peaceful use of nuclear energy,'' Chinese
Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said. 

The South Korea negotiator urged envoys to be open-minded at the
talks. 

``If each party can be a little more flexible in its position,
there will be good results, but if they stick to their current
position, good results will be hard to expect,'' Song said as he
arrived in Beijing. 

The two Koreas also began high-level talks Tuesday in Pyongyang
separate from the nuclear forum, where the South proposed
discussions on how to ease military tension and bring permanent
peace to the divided peninsula. The Korean War ended in a 1953
cease-fire, leaving the two countries still at war. But
reconciliation efforts have flourished since the first-and-only
summit of their leaders in 2000. 

The latest nuclear standoff was sparked in late 2002 after U.S.
officials accused North Korea of running a secret uranium
enrichment program in violation of an earlier deal, in which the
North had agreed to stop weapons development in exchange for
energy aid and other incentives. 

The North has since denied having a uranium enrichment program,
which would provide a way to create radioactive material for
bombs other than its publicly acknowledged plutonium program. 

On Tuesday, the North again called the uranium allegations ``a
sheer fabrication'' in a commentary by the North's main Rodong
Sinmun newspaper carried by the country's official Korean
Central News Agency. 

Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf told The New York
Times in an interview released late Monday that he believed
North Korea had obtained ``probably a dozen'' centrifuges -
equipment needed to enrich uranium - from a network headed by
the father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program.	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited: U.S., Allies Nix North Korea Nuke Demand
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday September 14, 2005 7:01 PM

AP Photo TOK201 

By BURT HERMAN 

Associated Press Writer 

BEIJING (AP) - North Korea insisted Wednesday it should get a
nuclear reactor to generate electricity in exchange for
abandoning atomic weapons development, but the main U.S. envoy
at disarmament talks said Washington and its partners have no
intention of meeting the demand. 

After his first one-on-one meeting with the North Korean
delegation at this round of six-nation talks on the communist
nation's nuclear program, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State
Christopher Hill said the sides ``did not make a lot of
progress.'' 

The talks resumed Tuesday after a five-week recess, and also
include China, Japan, Russia and South Korea. The last session
failed to yield an agreement after 13 days of meetings, and no
end date has been set for these negotiations. 

Under the offer on the table, North Korea would receive economic
aid and security guarantees from Washington along with free
electricity from South Korea for dismantling its nuclear weapons
program. 

But the Pyongyang regime has also asked for a light-water
nuclear reactor, a type believed to be more difficult to be
diverted for weapons use. 

The North was to get two such reactors in a 1994 deal with the
United States under which it agreed to give up nuclear arms.
That project stalled in late 2002, when U.S. officials said the
North admitted to having a secret arms program in violation of
the earlier agreement. 

The White House has been highly critical of the earlier deal,
which was reached by the Clinton administration, and says it
will not repeat what it sees as past mistakes. 

Hill noted Wednesday that North Korea has pursued a nuclear
program for 25 years and used it solely to make weapons-grade
plutonium for atomic bombs - not for generating electricity. 

``Not a single light bulb has been turned on as a result of the
nuclear reactor in North Korea,'' he said, referring to the
country's main atomic facility in Yongbyon. 

Hill also noted that the North has withdrawn from the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty and expelled international atomic
inspectors. 

North Korean diplomats did not comment on the day's talks. But
the North's chief negotiator, Kim Kye Gwan, said Tuesday that
his country had a right to a peaceful nuclear program, China's
official news agency reported. 

Hill warned that the demand for a reactor could become a ``major
problem'' at the talks. 

``There's not too many other ways I know how to say 'no' without
slipping into another language,'' Hill said of his meeting with
the North's delegation. 

None of the other countries at the talks has stepped forward
with an offer to foot the estimated $2 billion to $3 billion
cost for building a light-water reactor for North Korea, Hill
said, noting it would also take up to a decade to construct. 

``These are reactors that cost a considerable amount of money,
they take a considerable amount of time, and in the meantime ...
the same amount of electricity can be pumped into the DPRK in a
much shorter time and we can get the DPRK lit up a little more
than it is today,'' he said, referring to North Korea by the
initials of its official name. 

The South Korean offer to provide the North with electricity
could begin delivering power in a few years. 

``It gives no one any pleasure that the DPRK is literally one of
the darkest countries in the world,'' Hill said. North Korea
``needs to be a little realistic about what it needs to do to
get its economy going and get its energy needs met,'' he said. 

The North suffers from chronic energy shortages and disruptions
that leave the country a black void on nighttime satellite
photos. 

Meanwhile, North Korean and Japanese diplomats at the talks met
to discuss Tokyo's concerns about its citizens that the
communist state admitted abducting. The North Koreans said they
were studying the issue, but Japan pressed for a quick response,
chief Japanese envoy Kenichiro Sasae said. 

Also Wednesday, Cabinet ministers of the two Koreas met in
Pyongyang. Seoul's top official on the North, Unification
Minister Chung Dong-young, urged the North to abandon its
nuclear weapons ambitions. 

The North ``must seize on this historic opportunity,'' Chung
said, according to pool reports. ``Delaying will do no good.'' 

      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 10 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. and North Korea to Meet One-On-One
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

	Wednesday September 14, 2005 11:01 AM

AP Photo TOK205 

By BURT HERMAN 

Associated Press Writer 

BEIJING (AP) - The top U.S. negotiator on North Korea's nuclear
program urged the communist nation Wednesday to focus on
concessions already offered in return for a commitment to disarm
rather than press new demands. 

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill was heading
into a one-on-one meeting with the North Korean delegation at
international nuclear disarmament talks that resumed Tuesday in
Beijing after a five-week recess. 

Hill said the North Koreans have raised new issues that go
beyond a draft agreement being negotiated by the six countries
at the talks, such as the construction of a civilian light-water
nuclear reactor to supply energy. 

``I think they should focus on what is on the table,'' Hill said
of the North Koreans ahead of his meeting with them. ``If it's
electricity they want, the draft certainly provides
electricity.'' 

The six-party talks aimed at getting North Korea to abandon its
nuclear weapons program were put on hold last month when envoys
were unable to agree on a draft statement of principles. The
countries involved - China, Japan, Russia, the United States and
the two Koreas - have agreed to pick up this week where they
left off in discussing that document. 

Hill said none of North Korea's five negotiating partners have
expressed willingness to build a new light-water reactor for the
North. Instead, he said Pyongyang could get energy under a South
Korean proposal to deliver electricity across their heavily
militarized border. 

In the North Korean capital, the two Koreas held separate
high-level talks. Seoul's top official on the North, Unification
Minister Chung Dong-young, appealed Wednesday to the North to
abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions. 

The North ``must seize on this historic opportunity,'' Chung
said, according to pool reports. ``Delaying will do no good ...
let's produce a good outcome.'' 

North Korea has insisted at the Beijing talks on its right to a
peaceful nuclear power program even if it gives up its bomb
programs - an issue that has divided the other countries. 

China, Russia and South Korea have all backed the North's right
in principle to a civilian atomic program if it follows
international norms, but Japan agrees with the United States'
view that the North's history of alleged deceit means it can't
be trusted. 

``When (the North Koreans) complete the dismantlement of their
nuclear weapons and nuclear programs, they can enjoy, they can
have the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy,'' South
Korea's chief envoy, Song Min-soon, said Wednesday alongside
Hill after the two shared lunch. 

Hill has tried to keep the issue from sidetracking the talks,
and emphasized earlier Wednesday that the main focus of the
negotiations was the elimination of nuclear weapons. 

``I want to make sure that on the fundamental issues that
confront us in this draft, namely the denuclearization and
ridding the Korean Peninsula of these terrible weapons ... that
we can achieve agreement on that,'' he said. ``When we do that
we can look at some of these other questions.'' 

Chief North Korean negotiator Kim Kye Gwan said Tuesday before
he left for Beijing that his country had a right to a peaceful
nuclear program, China's official Xinhua News Agency reported.
Still, Kim said the North would attend the talks with a sincere
and flexible attitude. 

No end date for the talks has been set, but Hill said
negotiators hoped to wrap up ``in a few days'' before the Korean
Thanksgiving holiday, Chuseok, which begins this weekend. 

In New York on Tuesday, Chinese President Hu Jintao told
President Bush that China was ready to ``step up'' its efforts
to achieve progress in the negotiations. 

The latest nuclear standoff was sparked in late 2002 after U.S.
officials accused North Korea of running a secret uranium
enrichment program in violation of an earlier deal, in which the
North agreed to stop weapons development in exchange for energy
aid and other incentives.	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 11 Korea Herald: Seoul proposes liaison offices in Koreas   

 (aibang@heraldm.com) By Annie I. Bang 

2005.09.15
        

South Korea yesterday proposed the establishment of residing
liaison offices in Seoul and Pyongyang during the first full-day
of inter-Korean Cabinet-level talks in the North Korean capital. 

Seoul hopes the offices will offer better dialogue channels,
improve relations and ease tensions between the two countries.

 The proposal was made by South Korean Unification Minister
Chung Dong-young during his speech at the general meeting of the
ministerial talks, which coincided with the six-nation talks in
Beijing to rid the North's nuclear weapons program.

 Chung, the South's chief delegate to the talks, stressed that
there should be prompt action to ease the military tension
between the two countries, therefore inter-Korean military talks
or re-opening of general-level military talks is necessary.

  Delegates from South Korea (left) and North Korea meet during
Cabinet-level talks in Pyongyang yesterday. [Joint Press Corps]  

Chung also urged the North to cooperate with adopting a joint
statement in this round of six-nation talks, saying in order to
establish a peace regime on the peninsula, it is important to
resolve the North's nuclear crisis. "Denuclearization of Korean
Peninsula must be carried out," Chung said during his keynote
speech, according to the joint pool reports. "Establishing peace
on the peninsula is more significant now than any other moment.
For this, first, the North's nuclear problem needs to be
resolved."

 Repeating the same demands that lead to failure of six-nation
talks five weeks ago, the communist regime claimed Tuesday that
it had the right to retain its "peaceful" nuclear energy program
after it dismantles its nuclear weapons in return for security
guarantees and other rewards from the United States.

 In response to Chung's proposal to work things together, his
North Korean counterpart, Kwon Ho-ung, a senior Cabinet
counselor, expressed that matters of reunification should be
handled "by our nation itself," saying the two Koreas should end
the tragedy of the separation which happened because of the
influence of foreign powers.

 "It is the (South's) government's position to use the perfectly
restored inter-Korean dialogue, after Minister Chung dong-young
had met with North's leader Kim Jung-il on June 17, for aid to
resolve North's nuclear crisis and to reach an agreement in
six-party talks," a South Korean delegate said in Pyongyang.

 The two Koreas began their 16th inter-Korean ministerial talks
on Tuesday in Pyongyang as follow-on talks to those previously
held in Seoul in June, after a year-long boycott.

 Under the 12-point agreement that was adopted by the two
countries in June, the South and North have achieved many
first-time deals, such as allowing North Korean vessels to pass
through the Strait of Jeju, which is situated just off the south
coast of the peninsula.

 "Seoul's 15th ministerial talks was the shortest, but came up
with many agreements," Kwon said yesterday' in the meeting with
Chung. "For our vessels to have passed through the Strait of
Jeju was an unprecedented deal." 

But some issues are still not agreed upon.

 Both sides held Red Cross talks in August to discuss
humanitarian issues such as finding out the fates of those
reported missing during the Korean War, but did not result any
outcome.

 Alongside tackling the sensitive issues of bringing lasting
peace on the peninsula, the South Korean delegation is expected
to raise issues like South Korean prisoners of war and abductees
believed to be held in the North.

 "We have to grab this historical chance," Chung said referring
to the six-party talks being held during the inter-Korean talks.
"Let's obtain excellent results from the (inter-Korean) talks,
and exert good influence on the Beijing's talks."

*****************************************************************
 12 Korea Herald: U.S., N. Korea meet during nuclear talks   
        
Six-party negotiations enter second day

BEIJING - Negotiators pored over a draft agreement on principles
to rid North Korea of nuclear weapons at the first full day of
six-nation disarmament talks Wednesday, as the United States and
North Korea held a one-on-one meeting.

 The talks resumed Tuesday following a five-week recess after
envoys were unable to agree on a statement of principles during
13 earlier days of meetings.

 The six countries involved - China, Japan, Russia, the United
States and the two Koreas - have agreed to pick up where they
left off and continue discussions of that draft statement.

 ¡°We anticipate this being a very long, very important day,"
the main U.S. envoy, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher
Hill, said Wednesday morning.

 Hill held a separate meeting in the afternoon with the North
Korean delegation to hear their views.

 Contacts between U.S. and North Korean diplomats in New York
over the past month failed to make any progress, Hill said
Tuesday. But he said the North's position "does seem to be
evolving a little," without elaborating.

 North Korea has insisted on its right to a peaceful nuclear
power program even if it gives up its bomb programs - an issue
that has divided the other countries at the talks. China, Russia
and South Korea have all backed the North's right in principle
to a civilian atomic program if it follows international norms,
but Japan agrees with the United States' view that the North's
history of deceit means it can't be trusted.

 Trying to keep the issue from sidetracking the talks, Hill
emphasized Wednesday the main focus was the elimination of
nuclear weapons.

 ¡°I want to make sure that on the fundamental issues that
confront us in this draft, namely the denuclearization and
ridding the Korean Peninsula of these terrible weapons ... that
we can achieve agreement on that," he said. "When we do that we
can look at some of these other questions."

 No end date has been set for this week's talks, although Hill
has said he expected them to be shorter than the previous
session.

 Japan and North Korea met on the sidelines of the talks in a
move Tokyo viewed as a new relaxed approach from its hostile
neighbor.

 Kenichiro Sasae, Japan's chief delegate to the talks, sat
face-to-face with his North Korean counterpart Kim for more than
an hour, signaling hope that the stalled process of normalizing
relations could be revived.

 ¡°In the past North Korea didn't listen at all. Now that
attitude has changed. They are looking into the substance of
discussions," Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda told
reporters in Tokyo.

 Tokyo has used all the previous rounds of the nuclear talks to
pressure Pyongyang on the unsettled abductions of Japanese
nationals by North Korean agents in the 1970s and 1980s to train
spies in Japanese language and culture.

 The two countries held a bilateral meeting only on the final
day in the last round which lasted a record 13 days in July and
August, as North Korea balked at the Japanese move.

 In New York, the U.S. National Security Council's senior
director for Asia, Mike Green, reiterated Washington's stance
that North Korea must give up all nuclear programs, peaceful or
otherwise. "North Korea needs to get out, completely out, of the
nuclear business," Green said.

2005.09.15
*****************************************************************
 13 Xinhua: Chief negociators of DPRK, US hold bilateral meeting   

  www.xinhuanet.com
    
  www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-14 17:01:27   

    BEIJING, Sept.14 (Xinhuanet) -- Chief negotiators of
Demoncratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the United
States held their first meeting in current round of six-party
talks on nuclear issue of Korean Peninsula on Wednesday
afternoon. 

    The US-DPRK meeting lasted about one hour, sources from the
news center of the Chinese delegation said. 

    The meeting was held between US chief negotiator Chirstopher
Hill and Kim Kye Kwan, head of the DPRK delegation. 

    Before the meeting, Hill said he is yet to learn the stance
of the DPRK on the nuclear issue. 

    "We are going to see where the DPRK are and what they
think," Hill said. 

    However, he implied that the United States is unlikely to
move further ahead from its stance in the previous talks. 

    He said the United States will stick to its stance as
expressed in the fourth draft of a common document proposed by
China during the first phase meeting starting late July. 

    "I think the most important to stick to the fourth draft,
try to make minimum changes and not to engage major surgery to
the draft," Hill said. 

    On Wednesday, other bilateral meetings were also held
between China and Russia, and between Japan and Russia, sources
said. Enditem   

  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 14 Xinhua: Differences looming over 6-party talks   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-14 22:48:24   

Special report: 

    BEIJING, Sept. 14 (Xinhuanet) -- As the six parties have put
all their cards on the table, core differences turns out to be
prominent among the parties, dimming the fourth round of talks
on Korean Peninsula nuclear issue. 

  "At present, the demand of the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea (DPRK) for a light-water reactor and the scope of
dismantlement of nuclear programs remain the crucial
differences,"said the Republic of Korea (ROK) delegation chief
Song Min-soon on Wednesday. 

    The six parties, China, the DPRK, the United States, the
ROK, Russia and Japan, reopened the second phase of the fourth
round in China's national capital Tuesday after a five-week
recess. 

    "Since the resumption of the talks, all parties have held a
series of one-on-one meetings to be acquainted with each other's
position," Song told a news briefing. "In the following step,
the parties will continue to hold bilateral consultations
according to their needs." 

    The delegations of the DPRK and the United States held their
first ever one-on-one consultations Wednesday afternoon.
Besides, the one-on-one contacts between the parties filled in
the agenda on the second day of the talks, coordinating their
differences. 

    The chief US delegate Christopher Hill described its
bilateral meeting with the DPRK as "lengthy" and fruitless
because the DPRK delegation insists that "they want to include
in the agreement a light-water reactor" in exchange for scraping
all its nuclear programs. 

    "Neither the United States nor any other participants in the
six-party process is prepared to fund a light-water reactor,"
Hilltold reporter on Wednesday evening. 

    Instead Hill said Pyongyang could get conventional energy,
security guarantee and economic assistance under the fourth
draft circulated by China. 

    Analyst says it is unlikely for the Pyongyang to soften its
stance now. "There is little possibility for the DPRK to make
concessions on its right to civilian nuclear programs from both
political and economic perspectives," said Piao Jianyi, a
professor with the Asia-Pacific Institute of the Chinese Academy
of Social Sciences. 

    The stumbling block remains whether Pyongyang was allowed
for the right to have a civilian nuclear program. The DPRK
insisted onthe right while the United States wanted full
dismantlement of itsnuclear program. 

    Hill think the DPRK's demand for light-water reactor has
gone beyond the fourth draft of statement. Instead, Hill urged
the DPRKto focus on the draft. 

    "We consider the fourth draft to be an very excellent basis
for reaching the goals of principles that will guide us to the
eventual agreement," said Hill. 

    "I think the most important is to stick to the fourth draft,
try to make minimum changes and not to engage major surgery to
the draft," Hill said. 

    The fourth draft of a common document proposed by China
duringthe first phase meeting starting late July remained the
focus of the talks. However, the emerging core differences have
overshadowed the outcome of an agreement on a set of principles. 

    Song said the talks have not yet entered the stage of
formulating an agreement, adding that China is collecting and
sorting out opinions from all the parties in verbal or written
forms. 

    The first three rounds of six-party talks ended
inconclusively. The fourth round began in late July and then
went into five-week recess. Enditem    

  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 15 Xinhua: DPRK, US hold 1st one-on-one consultation   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-14 16:33:25   

    BEIJING, Sept. 14 (Xinhuanet) -- The Democratic People's
Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the United States held their first
one-on-one consultations on Wednesday afternoon, aiming at
settling nuclear issue on Korean peninsula. 

    It is the first ever consultation between the two main
parties since the fourth round of six-party talks resumed
Tuesday in China's capital after a five-week recess. 

    "We are going to see where the DPRK is and what they think,"
Christopher Hill, head of the US delegation, told reporters when
leaving for the meeting with the DPRK delegates. 

    Hill said the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is
the "key element" of the onging talks, which also involves
China, the Republic of Korea (ROK), Russia and Japan. 

    He also said the common document should base on the fourth
draft proposed by China during the first phase meeting starting
late July. 

    "I think the most important is to stick to the fourth draft,
try to make minimum changes and not to engage major surgery to
the draft," Hill said. 

    Earlier this morning, Hill told reporters that it is
possible to reach an agreement for the six-party talks, but the
detailed differences remain ahead. 

    "We consider the fourth draft to be an very excellent basis
for reaching the goals of principles that will guide us to the
eventual agreement," he said. 

    "Though we don't have any strong problems with the fourth
draft, how the DPRK react to the fourth draft is something we
have to see today," said Hill. 

    The first phase of the talks got stuck on Aug. 7 as the DPRK
insisted on the right to have a civilian nuclear program while
the United States wanted full dismantlement of its nuclear
program. 

    The six parties decided to fix on "substantial discussions"
on Wednesday after a meeting of chief delegates on Tuesday
afternoon. 

    The first three rounds of six-party talks ended
inconclusively. The fourth round began in late July and then
went into 5-week recess. Enditem   

  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 16 Xinhua: Bilateral consultations start in six-party Talks   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-15 08:19:01   

    BEIJING, Sept. 15 -- A series of bilateral consultations
began in Beijing yesterday as negotiators at the nuclear
disarmament talks seek agreement on a joint statement outlining
the basic principles of any deal. 

    US Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill held a
one-on-one meeting with his DPRK counterpart Kim Gye-gwan
yesterday afternoon, following on from dinner talks between the
two on Tuesday night. 

    Hill said he sat next to Kim during the reception banquet on
Tuesday night, and they "reiterated their desire to reach an
agreement" at the end of this round of discussions. 

    It is reported that the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea (DPRK) has asked the United Sates to construct a light
water reactor as it wants to retain the right to a civilian
nuclear programme. 

    However, Washington ruled out such a possibility in the
previous phase of talks. 

    Observers pointed out that the light water reactors would
take centre stage in this phase of the nuclear disarmament
talks. 

    This issue has been touched upon previously, but there has
been no in-depth discussion. 

    Republic of Korea (ROK)'s chief delegate Song Min-Soon told
reporters after having lunch with his US counterpart that the
DPRK could have the right to peaceful use of nuclear power after
completing dismantlement of their nuclear weapons and nuclear
programmes. 

    He said they have not yet arrived at the stage where they
discuss details of this concept. 

    Japan and the DPRK also held an 80-minute bilateral meeting
yesterday morning, and Japanese chief negotiator Kenichiro Sasae
said the nuclear issue is the main issue at the moment,
indicating that Japan may show flexibility on the abduction
issue if necessary for reaching agreement on the joint document. 

    Japan has been seeking talks with the DPRK since the opening
of the fourth round of the talks in July, but the DPRK had
repeatedly turned down the request. 

    Chinese delegation spokesman Liu Jianchao said on Tuesday
that many people are expecting breakthroughs or major progress
in this phase of the Six-Party Talks. 

    He said that there should be no reason to be pessimistic
about such a difficult process. "If we review the process, we
indeed have achieved some substantive progress and consensus,
which is very valuable and beneficial," he said. 

    According to reports from Seoul, the ROK delegation
deliberately changed their residential place this time, so as
not to stay in the same hotel as the US and Japanese
delegations. 

    The ROK side said the reason is that they didn't want to
leave people with the impression that the three countries are
jointly putting pressure onto Pyongyang. Enditem 

(Source: China Daily)   

  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 17 Japan Times: Six-party talks resume

  Wednesday, September 14, 2005   
  
EDITORIAL

The six-party talks to resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis
have resumed in Beijing. With a month of consultations at hand,
negotiators should be ready to agree on a joint statement that
outlines the basic principles of any deal. A failure to release
that statement will suggest that there is no basic consensus on
the purpose of these talks and that this stage of multilateral
diplomacy has run its course.

 A deal is possible, but only if North Korea accepts that it
must provide a full accounting of its nuclear programs, return
to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) regime, and accept
the norms of international society. Of course, other nations
must give in return, but the fundamental responsibility rests on
Pyongyang: It will only shoulder those burdens if the other five
parties speak with one voice in the negotiations.

 The key questions that swirl around North Korea's nuclear
program remain unanswered. Pyongyang has declared that it has
nuclear weapons, but other governments are not prepared to
accept that assertion. They believe that the reclusive regime
continues to be a threat to regional peace and security,
however, and demand that it negotiate with them over the fate of
its nuclear ambitions.

 Four rounds of talks have been held to reach a diplomatic
settlement to the thorny problems surrounding Pyongyang's
relations with its neighbors. All parties to the talks -- China,
Japan, North Korea, Russia, South Korea and the United States --
agree that the end goal is a denuclearized Korean Peninsula
achieved through negotiation, not by the threat or use of force.
The six governments agree on little more than that meager
framework.

 The fourth round of talks commenced in July, amid high hopes
that the atmosphere surrounding the negotiations had changed and
that a deal, or at least the outline of a deal, was possible.
The two main protagonists, North Korea and the U.S., seemed to
have changed their approaches and appeared more ready to talk to
and negotiate with each other. The talks broke up after 13 days,
however, as the parties were unable to agree on a joint
declaration. After a 37-day recess, the negotiators have
reconvened this week to see if that joint declaration is now
possible.

 A joint statement is a key step, but it is only a first step.
Any deal will require a complete accounting for and dismantling
of North Korea's nuclear-weapons programs, its stockpiled
uranium and plutonium, and whatever weapons that Pyongyang has
claimed to produce. The country must rejoin the NPT and accept
International Atomic Energy Agency supervision of its nuclear
facilities. In exchange, its neighbors will have to provide
security guarantees, energy supplies, economic assistance and
diplomatic recognition.

 There are other issues -- the North's missile programs, its
human-rights record, and its abductions of Japanese citizens, as
well as the fate of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of South
Korean prisoners of war -- but they will be subordinated to a
nuclear deal. That is painful for those who champion the cause
of the Japanese abductees, but it is a fact nonetheless.

 The main sticking point now appears to be North Korea's right
to a peaceful nuclear-energy program. As a sovereign state,
Pyongyang argues that it has that right if it agrees to a
settlement and returns to the NPT. Tokyo and Washington, fearing
that the North would cheat, as it has in the past, are reluctant
to agree. It is unclear how important this issue really is.
North Korean pride would demand that it not be singled out; if
the NPT provides this right, Pyongyang should enjoy it like
every other state. On the other hand, this could be a bargaining
tactic that the North is using to stall for time, up the ante of
any eventual deal, or to try to split the other five parties to
the talks. Pyongyang is no doubt closely watching the
negotiations between Iran and the European Union, which is
dealing with many of these issues. The June Indo-U.S. agreement
on nuclear cooperation is also sure to influence North Korean
thinking.

 The six parties can solve the questions about North Korea's
right to peaceful nuclear energy, which is merely the first of
many difficult, and sometimes seemingly intractable, issues that
will have to be dealt with during the negotiation and
implementation of any eventual deal. This process will be long
and cumbersome, punctuated by threats and brinkmanship. A
solution can be reached, however, if Pyongyang's negotiating
partners speak with one voice to it about North Korea's options.
There can be no alternative to the abandonment of the North's
nuclear aspirations. Pyongyang must be convinced that it will
have no allies if it holds out. If it is ready to deal, and
rejoin the international community, then the other five parties
-- and other governments -- should be prepared to help.

 The Japan Times: Sept. 14, 2005
(C) All rights reserved 

*****************************************************************
 18 Japan Times: Major hurdle remains in six-party talks

  Wednesday, September 14, 2005   

 By RALPH COSSA

KYOTO -- The fourth round of six-party talks aimed at ending
North Korea's nuclear-weapons aspirations resumed Tuesday in
Beijing after a five-week recess. One main sticking point,
seemingly still unresolved, centers around North Korea's "right"
to have a peaceful nuclear-energy program.

 Pyongyang says it will never give up this right and expects
Washington to resume construction of the nuclear light-water
reactors (LWRs) promised under the now-defunct 1994 Agreed
Framework. Washington, while stating that the issue of a
peaceful nuclear energy program sometime in the future may not
be a complete "show stopper," has rejected the idea of resuming
LWR construction, indicating that neither the United States nor
any of the other parties -- China, Japan, Russia, and South
Korea -- are prepared to finance such an effort. While it has
not said as much, there is an offer on the table from Seoul to
provide North Korea with the same amount of power that would
have been generated by the LWRs, presumably as compensation for
letting this program die a graceful death.

 As the talks resume, it may be useful to try to understand the
motivation behind these conflicting stands. In discussing
Pyongyang's reasons, of course, we can only make an educated
guess based on its past statements and actions.

 A number of factors likely lie behind Pyongyang's insistence on
pursuing a peaceful nuclear-energy program. Primary among them
is disagreement of the other five parties on this issue.
Beijing, Seoul and Moscow are on record supporting this "right."
Washington and Tokyo oppose it, arguing that North Korea gave up
this right when it cheated on its prior agreements and walked
away from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. A failure of the
five to speak with one voice on this issue presents too tempting
a target for Pyongyang to pass up.

 Another strong possibility is that maintaining a "peaceful"
nuclear program is a hedging strategy aimed at preserving a
future nuclear-weapons option, even if its current programs are
eventually abandoned. As long as the North has direct access to
spent fuel rods, it can always eject International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) inspectors and resume reprocessing activities to
acquire more weapons-grade plutonium. This is, of course,
exactly why Washington and Tokyo do not want to see any type of
nuclear energy programs in North Korea.

 The North is likely also raising the nuclear energy issue as a
diversionary tactic to draw attention away from the real
problem, which is ending both its acknowledged plutonium-based
nuclear-weapons program and its once-acknowledged and now denied
uranium-based program. It may even be aimed at providing some
political cover for the latter.

 Of late, Chinese interlocutors seem to be making a distinction
between a weapons-related highly-enriched uranium program and an
energy-related uranium enrichment program. This may represent a
possible face-saving way to acknowledge the presence of
centrifuges that Pyongyang is known to have purchased without
acknowledging yet another violation or lie.

 Adding the nuclear-energy demand may also be a delaying tactic
driven by greed and/or by more sinister motives. The more
problems one lays on the table, the higher the anticipated
reward for cooperating. This has been a long-standing North
Korean tactic. At a minimum, it is likely to demand power
plants, not just power-transmission lines emanating from the
South (which could be cut off).

 More troublesome is the view by many in Washington that
Pyongyang has no intention of ever giving up its nuclear-weapons
program but recognizes that simply staying away from the talks
is no longer an option. Therefore the smart thing to do is to
show up but to keep piling on demands that one or more of the
parties find unacceptable, in order to indefinitely stall while
producing as many nuclear weapons as possible.

 There is another factor that can't be overlooked, and that is
North Korean pride. As a sovereign state, Pyongyang argues, it
has as much right to nuclear energy as South Korea and Japan.
Washington's allegations that it cannot be trusted to have such
a program just make matters worse.

 It would appear that the only way to deal with all these
possible motives and still achieve Washington's long-term
objective is for the other five parties (absent Pyongyang) to
come to a common position regarding the nuclear-energy program,
one that agrees that such a program could exist, in principle,
as soon as North Korea comes into full compliance with IAEA
safeguards and fully accounts for all its past nuclear
activities -- this is the same standard followed by Seoul, Tokyo
and all states with peaceful energy programs. All must also
agree, and publicly and firmly state, that the Agreed Framework
LWR program is dead and will not be resurrected.

 The other five nations also need to set a deadline for some
form of meaningful progress on denuclearization to restrict the
benefits currently gained by stalling. Absent some sort of
progress, each must warn Pyongyang that its current level of
diplomatic and economic interaction with North Korea will not be
sustainable. They must also make it clear that if the current
diplomatic process does not yield some positive results, then
the only logical action is to take things to the next higher
diplomatic level; namely, the United Nations Security Council.

 Ralph A. Cossa is president of the Pacific Forum CSIS, a
Honolulu-based nonprofit research institute. 

The Japan Times: Sept. 14, 2005
(C) All rights reserved 
*****************************************************************
 19 Korea Times: 6-Way Talks Support Peace Regime - Hill 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   

By Park Song-wu Korea Times Correspondent

 BEIJING _ Christopher Hill, U.S. assistant secretary of state
for East Asia and Pacific affairs, said Wednesday that the
on-going six-party negotiations on North Korea¡¯s nuclear
programs are a good process to support a peace regime on the
Korean Peninsula. 

Christopher Hill, center in background, top U.S. envoy to the
six-party talks on Pyongyang¡¯s nuclear programs, speaks to
reporters in Beijing, China, Wednesday. The denuclearization
talks resumed Tuesday after a 37-day recess.   /Yonhap   

The top U.S. envoy to the talks also confirmed that the latest
draft of a principle statement, designed by host China on how to
reach the goal of denuclearization on the divided peninsula, has
a ``very general¡¯¡¯ reference to the peace regime. 

His remarks came as South Korea¡¯s Unification Minister Chung
Dong-young was in Pyongyang to attend inter-Korean Cabinet-level
talks, in which one point of the 14-point agenda was to discuss
how to end the current armistice status. 

The talks in Pyongyang, which began on Tuesday, will end on
Friday. 

``If we can succeed with this process (of the six-party talks),
we would like to move on and see what can be done in terms of a
peace regime on the Korean Peninsula,¡¯¡¯ Hill told reporters. 

A ceasefire has been in effect with a truce agreement on the
Korean Peninsula since July 27, 1953. But it has never been
changed into a peace treaty, leaving the two Koreas technically
at war. 

``(A peace regime) is a very important issue and indeed we would
like to use the momentum of the six-party process, that is, this
process dealing with the issue of denuclearization,¡¯¡¯ Hill
said. 

But the former U.S. ambassador to South Korea said that
Washington is only interested in pursuing it at an appropriate
forum after solving the protracted nuclear standoff first and
foremost. 

``While I think the six-party process is a good place to support
a peace regime, it is probably not a good place to negotiate a
peace regime because it¡¯s not the appropriate place, not
necessarily the appropriate partners, and probably not the
appropriate time, given that we are working on this nuclear
question,¡¯¡¯ Hill said. 

The Roh Moo-hyun government raised the issue of how to transform
the armistice status into a peace regime on Aug. 15, 2003, when
he addressed the nation marking Liberation Day. 

``It should be noted that a strong army and prosperous economy
alone do not guarantee complete security,¡¯¡¯ Roh said. ``We
have to strive to prevent war. We have to establish a peace
regime on the Korean Peninsula as well as in Northeast Asia.¡¯¡¯ 

In a booklet published in May 2004, the National Security
Council (NSC) said that the Roh administration has presented the
establishment of a peace regime as a high priority task on the
national agenda. 

The NSC underlined in the booklet that a peace treaty should be
signed by the two Koreas as principal parties with the active
participation, support and guarantees of the international
community. 

The 1953 armistice was signed by the commander-in-chief of the
United Nations Command, the Supreme Commander of the (North)
Korean People¡¯s Army and the commander of the Chinese People¡¯s
Volunteer Army. 

im@koreatimes.co.kr 09-14-2005 17:51         

*****************************************************************
 20 Korea Times: US, NK Delegates Seek to Find Nuke Breakthrough 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times   

By Park Song-wu Korea Times Correspondent

 BEIJING _ The United States and North Korea, the two main
parties in the six-nation talks on Pyongyang¡¯s nuclear
programs, held their first one-on-one meeting Wednesday with
differences on key issues still remaining wide. 

After a 37-day recess, the talks resumed Tuesday. Host China
announced the intermission on Aug. 7 after failing to reach
compromises on the scope of denuclearization and the North¡¯s
demand for peaceful nuclear activities. 

Pyongyang wants to have a light-water nuclear reactor to
generate electricity, but Washington thinks it is unnecessary
because Seoul has already made a generous offer of 2 million
kilowatts of electricity to its northern neighbor. 

Christopher Hill, the top U.S. envoy to the talks, said that no
party in the six-nation talks would be willing to construct a
light-water reactor in North Korea. 

``With respect to the light-water reactor issue that has come up
in discussions, I don't detect among any of the parties a
willingness to construct a light-water reactor, which after all,
is a very expensive and very long-term type project,¡¯¡¯ he told
reporters. 

It was not immediately known what Pyongyang¡¯s reaction to
Hill¡¯s remarks was. 

Hill underlined that North Korea should first agree in the
principle of how to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. 

``When we can achieve an agreement on the denuclearization of
the Korean Peninsula, and when we do that, we can look at some
of these other questions,¡¯¡¯ he said, referring to Pyongyang¡¯s
hope to have light-water reactors. 

Song Min-soon, South Korea¡¯s chief delegate to the talks,
declined to elaborate on exactly what North Korea wants to
achieve when it talks about light-water reactors. 

``(At a meeting with the North Koreans a day earlier), we
discussed the main issues of light-water reactors and the
peaceful nuclear activities in a comprehensive way,¡¯¡¯ he told
reporters. ``We have to wait and see how far the two issues
could develop during the six-party talks.¡¯¡¯ 

According to a wire news story, however, Kim raised a new demand
during the bilateral meeting, saying that the five countries
involved in the talks should build a light-water reactor in
North Korea _ not the two reactors which an international
consortium agreed to build in Sinpo, South Hamkyong Province, in
1994. 

But a Seoul official in China flatly denied the news report. 

Experts have believed that what North Korea wants to see was the
completion of the Sinpo project, which Pyongyang got as a reward
in 1994 for its promise to scrap the nuclear weapons programs. 

No closing date of the second session of the fourth round of the
talks has been set. The six countries involved _ the two Koreas,
the U.S., China, Russia and Japan _ had agreed to pick up where
they left off in the first session. 

The fourth draft of a joint statement, outlined in a two and a
half page document, was the starting point for the six nations
to reopen the talks. China is expected to issue the fifth draft
document after coordinating each side¡¯s stances on the key
issues. 

Hill said the U.S. side wanted to make ``small modifications¡¯¡¯
while North Korea was hoping to make ``large modifications¡¯¡¯
in the fourth draft. 

``We consider the fourth draft to be really an excellent basis
for reaching the goals and principles that will guide us to the
eventual agreement,¡¯¡¯ he said. ``So we don¡¯t have any strong
problems with the fourth draft. How (North Korea) reacts to the
draft is something we have to see.¡¯¡¯ 

The latest nuclear standoff began in late 2002 when U.S.
officials accused Pyongyang of running a secret uranium-based
weapons program in violation of the 1994 deal, in which North
Korea agreed to freeze its nuclear weapons programs in return
for two light-water reactors and other incentives. 

im@koreatimes.co.kr 09-14-2005 17:24         
  
*****************************************************************
 21 Reuters: North Korean nuclear arms talks still deadlocked 

Wed Sep 14, 2005 2:03 PM ET

 By Brian Rhoads and Jack Kim

 BEIJING, Sept 15 (Reuters) - Negotiators from six countries will 
try again on Thursday to break a deadlock in talks designed to 
end North Korea's nuclear arms programme, but there is little 
sign of an end to a nearly three-year-old crisis.

 The negotiations in Beijing between the United States, North and 
South Korea, Japan, Russia and host China enter a third day with 
an impasse over Pyongyang's insistence on a right to nuclear 
energy programmes for civilian use.

 Failure to reach an accord in Beijing could prompt the United 
States to take the issue to the U.N. Security Council and press 
for sanctions. China opposes such a move, and communist North 
Korea has said sanctions would be tantamount to war.

 On Wednesday, chief U.S. negotiator Christopher Hill rejected 
North Korea's demand for a light-water reactor.

 "It is very clear that they wanted to spend today making this a 
light-water day. I hope this does not become a light-water week," 
Hill told reporters after a bilateral meeting with North Korea's 
negotiator Kim Kye-gwan.

 Hill urged North Korea to focus on a draft joint statement, 
which sets out the principle of a nuclear-free Korean peninsula 
and contains an offer from South Korea to provide conventional 
energy to its impoverished neighbour.

"AXIS OF EVIL"

 The United States, which once described North Korea as part of 
an "axis of evil", has said the North must abandon all nuclear 
programmes verifiably and irreversibly, after which aid and 
security guarantees could be granted.

 The North wants aid and guarantees first and the right to keep 
civilian programmes.

 The latest talks resumed on Tuesday, five weeks after a marathon 
13-day session at which the six countries failed to reach 
agreement even on a statement of basic principles. Negotiations 
first began in 2003.

 South Korea has offered to supply the North with 2,000 megawatts 
of electricity, roughly equivalent to the North's total power 
output, if it scraps its nuclear plans.

 But South Korea's chief negotiator, Song Min-soon, said Seoul 
would not be opposed in principle to Pyongyang having a civilian 
atomic energy programme in future.

 The crisis erupted in October 2002 when Washington said 
Pyongyang had admitted to a secret programme to enrich uranium, 
used to make nuclear weapons, in violation of a 1994 agreement.

 North Korea denied the charge at the time, and responded by 
throwing out U.N. weapons inspectors at the end of 2002 and 
withdrawing from the Non-Proliferation Treaty in January 2003.

 Last February, the North said it had nuclear bombs. It has also 
reactivated a mothballed plutonium plant near its capital.                      
			
© Reuters 2005. 
All Rights Reserved.                    
*****************************************************************
 22 NRC: : Petition for rulemaking; notice of receipt.

NRC: [Docket No. PRM-54-03]
 
                        FR Doc 05-18192 
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 54310-54311]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14se05-20]                         
 

 
Joseph Scarpelli, Mayor of Brick Township, NJ; Receipt of 
Petition for Rulemaking
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
 
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing 
for public comment a notice of receipt of a petition for 
rulemaking, dated July 20, 2005, which was filed with the 
Commission by Michele R. Donato, Esquire, on behalf of Mayor 
Joseph Scarpelli of Brick Township. The petition was docketed by 
the NRC on July 25, 2005, and has been assigned Docket No. 
PRM-54-03. The petitioner requests that the NRC amend its 
regulations to provide that a renewed license will be issued only 
if the plant operator demonstrates that the plant meets all 
criteria and requirements that would be applicable if the plant 
was being proposed de novo for initial construction.
 
 
DATES: Submit comments by November 28, 2005. Comments received 
after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, 
but the Commission is able to assure consideration only for 
comments received on or before this date.
 
 
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following 
methods. Please include PRM-54-03 in the subject line of your 
comments.
 
Comments on petitions submitted in writing or in electronic form 
will be made available for public inspection. Because your 
comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact 
information, the NRC cautions you against including any 
information in your submission that you do not want to be 
publicly disclosed.
 
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications 
Staff.
 
E-mail comments to: . If you do not receive a reply e- mail 
confirming that we have received your comments, contact us 
directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the 
NRC's rulemaking Web site at . Address questions about our 
rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail . 
Comments can also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal 
.
 
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm Federal workdays. 
(Telephone (301) 415-1966.) Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101.
 
Publicly available documents related to this petition may be 
viewed electronically on the public computers located at the 
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Room O1 F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 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 .
 
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after 
November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at . 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 PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by 
e-mail to .
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules 
and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, 
Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Telephone: 301-415-7163 or Toll Free: 
800-368-5642.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petitioner The petitioner is the 
Mayor of Brick Township, New Jersey.
 
Brick Township is situated in the northern part of Ocean County, 
directly on the border of Monmouth County, New Jersey. Brick 
Township is located approximately 18 miles north of the Oyster 
Creek Nuclear Generating Station. The petitioner states that 
Brick Township experienced great growth over the past four 
decades. Today, Brick Township is home to over 77,000 residents. 
In 1970, Brick Township had 35,057 residents.
 
The petitioner states that Ocean County is located on the Jersey 
Shore, approximately 50 miles south of New York City and 50 miles 
east of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Ocean County encompasses 
nearly 640 square miles. The petitioner states that its location 
on the Atlantic Ocean makes Ocean County one of the premier 
tourist destinations in the United States.
 
The petitioner states that Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 
Station, which is located in Lacey Township, became operational 
in 1969.
 
In 1970, one year after Oyster Creek began producing electricity, 
Ocean County, New Jersey had 208,470 residents. The petitioner 
also states that according to the 2000 Census, Ocean County today 
has 510,916 residents, a growth of over 245 percent.
 
Background The petitioner submitted two letters dated July 7, 
2005, and July 13, 2005, respectively. These letters are being 
treated as one petition. The petitioner also included letters 
from the New Jersey Chapter of the Sierra Club and the New Jersey 
Environmental Federation in support of the petition.
 
The petitioner states that there have been numerous incidents 
that have occurred since Oyster Creek began operating that have 
raised concerns among many people about using nuclear power to 
generate energy, particularly in densely populated areas. The 
petitioner states that the near catastrophe at Three Mile Island, 
the realized catastrophe at Chernobyl, the controversy about 
Yucca Mountain and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, 
have raised concerns about the safety and security of nuclear 
power plants.
 
The petitioner believes that the evacuation of the communities
 
[[Page 54311]] surrounding Oyster Creek is of particular concern 
and requires extensive review and consideration. The petitioner 
states that traffic congestion is a growing concern in Ocean 
County as the infrastructure has not kept up with the population 
growth. Any large scale evacuation would likely be fraught with 
difficulties that would endanger lives.
 
The Proposed Amendment The petitioner requests that the NRC amend 
its regulations to provide that a renewed license will be issued 
only if the plant operator demonstrates that the plant meets all 
criteria and requirements that would be applicable if the plant 
was being proposed de novo for initial construction. The 
petitioner also requests that Sec.  54.29 be amended to provide 
that a renewed license may be issued by the Commission if the 
Commission finds that, upon a de novo review, the plant would be 
entitled to an initial operating license in accordance with all 
criteria applicable to initial operating licenses, as set out in 
the Commission's regulations, including 10 CFR parts 2, 19, 20, 
21, 26, 30, 40, 50, 51, 54, 55, 71, 100, and the appendices to 
these regulations. The petitioner requests that corresponding 
amendments be made to Sec. Sec.  54.4, 54.19, 54.21, and 54.23, 
and that Sec.  54.30 be rescinded. The petitioner states that the 
criteria to be examined as part of a renewal application should 
include such factors as demographics, siting, emergency 
evacuation, site security, etc. The petitioner believes that this 
analysis should be performed in a manner that focuses the NRC's 
attention on the critical plant- specific factors and conditions 
that have the greatest potential to affect public safety.
 
Problems With the Current Process The petitioner believes that 
the process and criteria currently established in part 54 is 
seriously flawed. The petitioner states that the process for 
license renewal appears to be based on the theory that if the 
plant was originally licensed at the site, it is satisfactory to 
renew the license, barring any significant issues having to do 
with passive systems, structures, and components (SSCs). The 
petitioner states that the regulations for license renewal should 
be broadened and sufficiently comprehensive to cover all of the 
facets (including consideration of a worst-case scenario) that 
were considered for initial construction. Alternatively, the 
petitioner states that the license renewal process should examine 
all issues related to the plant and its original license, and 
then concentrate on any issues that are new to that plant or have 
changed since the original license was issued or that deviate 
from the original licensing basis.
 
Key Renewal Issues The petitioner states that as Oyster Creek 
approaches the end of its 40 year operating license, it is 
necessary to answer important questions about the plant. The 
petitioner states that these questions are specific to the Oyster 
Creek plant and those who live near the plant deserve to have 
these questions reviewed. These questions include the following: 
Could a new plant, designed and built to current standards, be 
licensed on the same site today? With the growth of Ocean County, 
which continues today, it is not certain that a nuclear plant 
would be permitted there today.
 
The design of Oyster Creek's reactor has been prohibited for 
nearly four decades. Does that reactor conform to today's 
standards? Would Oyster Creek receive a license today with that 
reactor? In light of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, 
would Oyster Creek's storage system, which is located close to 
Route 9, be acceptable today? Is the evacuation plan realistic in 
today's Ocean County? Would the tremendous growth of Ocean County 
over the past four decades, and the failure of Ocean County's 
infrastructure to keep pace with this growth, inhibit Oyster 
Creek's likelihood of receiving an operating license? Would a 
license be permitted in light of the public opposition to the 
plant? To date, 21 municipalities in Ocean County, as well as 
Congressmen Smith, Saxton and Pallone, New Jersey Department of 
Environmental Protection Commissioner Bradley, and the Ocean 
County Board of Chosen Freeholders, have expressed either their 
concern for a thorough review and/or their opposition to the 
re-licensing.
 
In recent weeks, two studies released by the National Academy of 
Sciences have raised serious concerns about nuclear plant 
security and the health effects of low-level radiation upon 
people who reside near nuclear plants. Should these two 
scientific studies and other relevant scientific data regarding 
human health and anti- terrorism be taken into account when 
considering Oyster Creek's license renewal application? 
Conclusion The petitioner states that many key factors that 
affect nuclear plant licensing evolve over time: Population 
grows, local/state Federal regulations evolve, public awareness 
increases, technology improves, and plant economic values change. 
The petitioner believes that all of these factors should be 
examined and weighed in the formal 10 CFR part 54 relicensing 
process. Accordingly, the petitioner requests that the NRC amend 
its regulations related to license renewal as described 
previously in the section titled, ``The Proposed Amendment.'' 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of September, 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.
 
[FR Doc. 05-18192 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 23 Guardian Unlimited: Leader: United Nations summit
 
Divided they stand 
		 	
Leader

Wednesday September 14, 2005
The Guardian 		
 		
The United Nations was founded 60 years ago to reflect the 
noblest ideals of the democracies that came together to defeat 
fascism and build a juster world. It has often been said since by 
cynics that a more accurate name for the organisation would be 
"Divided States". Sadly, it is only realistic to predict that, 
barring a diplomatic miracle before the UN's biggest-ever summit 
opens in New York today, it will once again fail to meet its own 
expectations.

The 150 or so heads of state and government who will be attending 
are reviewing progress since their millennium summit five years 
ago. That was held to learn from the lessons of a first turbulent 
post-cold war decade that saw catastrophic failure in Somalia, 
Bosnia and Rwanda and a widening gap between the developed and 
developing worlds. Since then the 9/11 attacks and the wars in 
Afghanistan and Iraq have raised painful questions about the 
efficacy and relevance of the world body. Last week's report on 
the Iraq oil-for-food scandal exposed an organisation tainted by 
corruption, though it spared Kofi Annan, the secretary-general. 
And the latest human development report highlighted the distance 
still to be travelled if there is to be any substance to so many 
pious declarations about eradicating global inequalities.

Any accounting of what happens on the East river this week is 
bound to focus on how it leaves the millennium development goals 
- to end hunger, poverty and disease. The United States, 
represented by the controversial John Bolton, initially demanded 
that the very phrase be removed from the summit's "outcome" 
document, and only relented in the face of outrage by many other 
countries. Yet whatever the final wording, there is no prospect 
that the world's only superpower will pledge to spend 0.7% of its 
GDP on development aid, the target agreed by Europeans. That is a 
depressing step backwards from the Monterrey summit in 2002. 
Acting on a holistic view of human development needs - from 
sanitation to education - is vital to post-Gleneagles decisions 
on further multilateral debt relief and ending farm subsidies in 
the next WTO talks in December.

Development is the biggest of the "problems without borders", 
that the UN should be in the forefront of tackling. But there 
have been huge difficulties in addressing the remainder of its 
three-part mandate - security and human rights. Mindful of Kosovo 
and Iraq, countries such as China and Russia (thinking of Tibet 
and Chechnya) are unhappy with the concept of the "duty to 
protect" - humanitarian intervention that can override state 
sovereignty.

Excellent ideas for a post-conflict peace-building commission 
(one would have been very handy in Iraq had the war been legal) 
and a human rights body with teeth instead of the discredited 
Geneva commission, have met opposition from similar quarters. It 
is hard to square the circle on nuclear proliferation without the 
big powers meeting their own disarmament obligations. And if 
dexterous diplomatic drafting has solved the conundrum of an 
agreed definition of terrorism (the issue is the old one of 
legitimate resistance to occupation), climate change seems stuck 
over US rejection of Kyoto.

Regrettably, reform of other key UN procedures and bodies also 
looks like stalling. Long-standing attempts to end the anomalous 
structure of the security council, frozen in the lost world of 
1945, are to be put off. Mr Annan's call for greater powers to 
prioritise and manage is being blocked by the general assembly, 
ignoring the good work of the "high level panel" he convened to 
focus on "threats, challenges and change". Those threats and 
challenges look like emerging from this summit largely intact, 
with broad statements of principle replacing concrete commitments 
so as to avoid the impression of failure. And with the member 
states the biggest obstacles, significant change is elusive. As 
ever, divided states make for a United Nations with a heart of 
gold but limbs of clay.
 	
 	 			 		 		 
[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited ¿ Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 24 Guardian Unlimited: World Leaders Sign Nuke Terrorism Treaty
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday September 14, 2005 10:16 PM

AP Photo NYJM104 

By KIM GAMEL 

Associated Press Writer 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - World leaders began signing a global
treaty Wednesday making it a crime to possess radioactive
material or weapons with the intention of committing a terrorist
act or to damage a nuclear facility. 

The Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism
was the 13th anti-terrorism treaty to be adopted by the U.N.
General Assembly but the first since the Sept. 11 terror attacks
on the United States. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose country sponsored the
seven-year effort leading to the treaty's adoption by consensus
in April, was the first leader to sign the document Wednesday
morning at a desk in a makeshift hall on the sidelines of the
U.N. summit. 

President Bush signed next, followed by French Prime Minister
Dominique de Villepin, as the first of more than 50 leaders who
were expected to sign by the end of Thursday. The treaty must be
ratified by 22 countries to take effect. 

Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, who was the fourth to sign,
said it was important that the document be followed quickly by a
broad treaty covering all aspects of terrorism - an effort that
has been blocked for years by disagreements over defining
terrorism and other concerns. 

``With the other signatories we have taken an important step
forward in reducing the risk of nuclear terrorism,'' Martin
said. ``That being said, if we are to make the world a safer
place, clearly we need a more comprehensive approach to
disarmament and proliferation, and we must get on with it.'' 

A U.N. document that the national leaders are to adopt at the
end of the three-day summit stresses the ``need to make all
efforts to reach an agreement on and conclude a comprehensive
convention on international terrorism'' in the next year. 

The nuclear terrorism treaty makes it a crime for any person to
possess radioactive material or a radioactive device with the
intent to cause death or injury or damage property or the
environment. It also would be a crime to damage a civilian or
military nuclear facility. 

Threatening to use radioactive material or devices - or
unlawfully demanding nuclear material or other radioactive
substances - also is outlawed. 

Such activities would have to involve actions across national
boundaries. Offenses committed by people within their own
country are excluded, along with the activities of military
forces during conflict. 

Countries that are party to the treaty will be required to make
the covered acts criminal offenses under their national laws,
``punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account
the grave nature of these offenses.'' 

The treaty also calls on countries to cooperate in related
investigations and to detain people suspected in such crimes, as
well as outlining the rights of the detainees. 

Steven Welsh, a research analyst and legal expert with the
Center for Defense Information, welcomed the emphasis on
international cooperation and using the rule of law to fight
terror. 

``It's an important step toward finding a more comprehensive way
of dealing with terrorism,'' he said. 

Russia began campaigning for the treaty in 1997, but it was
stymied for years because some countries believed the draft was
trying to define terrorism and they fear such a definition would
implicate those involved in independence struggles, such as the
Palestinians. 

Diplomats said the roadblock was broken late last year when the
57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference decided the
treaty could focus on criminalizing specific actions - in this
instance, nuclear attacks - as other anti-terrorism treaties
have done. 

The drafting committee then quickly agreed on a text April 1,
leaving the difficult issue of defining terrorism to a new
overall convention on terrorism. 

All states that sign the treaty must adopt measures to make
clear that acts designed to provoke terror in the general public
or in specific groups cannot be justified under any
circumstances ``by considerations of a political, philosophical,
ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other similar
nature.'' 

The convention is one of 32 treaties being acted on during the
summit that began Wednesday to mark the 60th anniversary of the
world body, said Palitha Kohona, chief of the U.N. treaty
section. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 25 Guardian Unlimited: Main Points of Nuclear Terrorism Treaty
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday September 14, 2005 10:16 PM

By The Associated Press 

Main points of International Convention for the Suppression of
Acts of Nuclear Terrorism: 

-Outlaws possession of radioactive material with the intent of
killing or seriously injuring someone or of causing substantial
damage property or the environment. 

-Makes it illegal to use or damage a nuclear facility with the
intent of killing or seriously injuring someone, substantially
damaging the environment, or coercing a person, organization or
a state to do something. 

-Does not cover nuclear attacks committed within a single state
by citizens of that nation and no victim is from another
country. Also excludes activities of military forces during
armed conflict. 

-Stresses that treaty ``does not address, nor can it be
interpreted as addressing, in any way, the issue of the legality
of the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons by states.'' 

-Requires signatory nations to adopt measures making clear that
acts designed to provoke terror in the general public or in
specific groups cannot be justified ``by considerations of a
political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious
or other similar nature.'' 

-Calls for participating states to cooperate and exchange
``accurate and verified information in accordance with their
national law.'' 

-Requires that any person taken into custody or otherwise
affected by the treaty ``be guaranteed fair treatment, including
enjoyment of all rights and guarantees'' of the law. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 26 BBC: Blair wins UN backing on terror
 
Last Updated: Wednesday, 14 September 2005
 
[Tony Blair]                            

Tony Blair wants movement on terrorism as well as poverty                                                            

The United Nations Security Council has backed Tony Blair's call 
to outlaw incitement to terrorism. 

The UN is meeting in an effort to find consensus on moves to 
reform the body, as well as tackling poverty. 

But Mr Blair has also ensured terrorism is on the agenda and said 
the world must make sure "the future does not belong to 
fanatics". 

Terrorists would not be defeated until "our passion for the 
democratic way is as great as their passion for tyranny". 

Mr Blair said at the UN's 60th anniversary summit: "We should not 
underestimate what we face. 

"This terrorism that has today again claimed the lives of 
innocent people, this time queuing for jobs in Iraq, that has now 
disfigured countries in every continent, at every stage of 
development, with every conceivable mix of races and religions. 

"This terrorism is a movement. It has an ideology and it has a 
strategy. And the strategy is not just to kill. It is by terror 
to cause chaos and instability and to divide and confuse us, the 
enemy of this terrorism. 

"It won't be defeated until we unite, not just in condemning the 
acts of terrorism, which we all do, but in fighting the poisonous 
propaganda that the root cause of this terrorism somehow lies 
with us around this table and not with them." 

Draft 

He added: "They want us to believe that somehow it is our fault. 
That their extremism is somehow our responsibility. 

"They play on our divisions... they exploit our hesitations. This 
is our weakness and they know it - and we must unite against this 
ghastly game with our conscience." 

The UN Security Council backed the resolution brought forward by 
the UK, calling on all states to outlaw incitement to terrorism. 

US President George Bush told the Security Council that 
governments had a "solemn obligation" to stop terrorism in its 
early stages. 

He said: "Today we support a resolution sponsored by the United 
Kingdom that condemns the incitement of terrorist acts and calls 
on all states to take appropriate steps to end such incitement. 

"We have a solemn obligation to stop terrorism in its early 
stages, we have a solemn obligation to defend our citizens 
against terrorism, to attack terrorist networks and deprive them 
of any safe haven, to promote an ideology of freedom and 
tolerance that will defeat the dark vision of the terrorists. 

"We must do all we can to disrupt each stage of planning and 
support for terrorist acts. Each of us must... deny terrorists 
freedom of movement by using effective border controls and secure 
travel documents, to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons, 
including weapons of mass destruction." 
	
The three-day World Summit has been dominated by discussion of 
what to do about global poverty and how to reform the UN after 60 
years in operation. 

The draft hammered out after weeks of bitter wrangling pledges to 
honour anti-poverty goals, but other points are diluted or 
omitted entirely. 

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan told reporters the draft document 
had two important omissions - non-proliferation of nuclear 
weapons and disarmament.                                                         
*****************************************************************
 27 [NukeNet] NYT: Aging Nuclear Power Plants May Affect Emissions
 
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 14:38:56 -0700

 
	WHITE_LINKS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com

<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

September 14, 2005
Aging Nuclear Power Plants May Affect Emissions Pact
By MATTHEW L. WALD
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/14/national/14nuke.html

WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 - A proposed agreement among nine Northeast states to 
cap greenhouse gas emissions from power plants casts a new light on 
arguments in New Jersey and Vermont about whether the licenses of two aging 
nuclear plants should be extended.

Community groups in both states are opposing the extensions of the licenses 
beyond their 40-year terms, but environmentalists are generally supportive 
of the proposed agreement among the governors to reduce these greenhouse 
gases, which contribute to global climate change. Shutting down the two 
reactors would mean immediate, substantial increases in the emissions, 
because it would increase reliance on fossil fuel plants, probably tripling 
emissions in Vermont and doubling them in New Jersey.

"I think the environmental community is confused right now in terms of 
where they want to go," said Richard A. Valentinetti, director of Vermont's 
air quality program, who has been deeply involved in drafting the 
nine-state agreement. "Obviously there's some real polarization."

Some environmentalists say the goals can be met even without the two 
nuclear plants, Vermont Yankee and Oyster Creek, and without other nuclear 
plants whose licenses will expire in the next few years.

"We just have to bust the myth that we need to be using more energy," said 
Rob Sargent, senior energy policy analyst for the State Public Interest 
Research Groups, a nonprofit consumer organization. The New Jersey 
affiliate of his group is a leading voice against Oyster Creek, the 
nation's oldest commercial nuclear plant. Mr. Sargent said that rising 
electricity prices would make many new energy-saving technologies 
practical, but he acknowledged that simply saving money would not be enough 
to reduce power consumption by the required amount.

Engineers and environmental experts have long predicted that planners would 
eventually have to choose between greater greenhouse gas emissions and 
heavier reliance on nuclear power. The debate has been mostly hypothetical, 
since nobody in the United States has ordered a new nuclear plant since the 
1970's, long before global climate change was widely perceived as an issue. 
It was also hypothetical because there were no limits on carbon dioxide 
emissions in the United States.

Suddenly, both parts of the question are changing. The governors are 
proposing a cap on emissions, and renewal of power plant licenses has 
become imminent.

Oyster Creek opened near Egg Harbor, N.J., in 1969 and its license expires 
in 2009. A little over half the electricity produced in New Jersey comes 
from nuclear power, and Oyster Creek alone produces about 9 percent; in 
2004 it generated 27.1 million megawatt hours.

In December 2004, the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group came out 
against a license extension. It said that the plant was designed to last 40 
years, and that the decision by Exelon, Oyster Creek's owner, to seek a 
license extension was "ignoring public safety."

The plant is in a rapidly growing part of the state, the group noted, and 
it argued that in an emergency evacuation would be impractical.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced on Monday that it had evaluated 
the application by Exelon for a license extension, and had decided that it 
merited review.

Vermont Yankee, in Vernon, near the border with Massachusetts and New 
Hampshire, began commercial operation in November 1972, and its license 
expires in March 2012. Its capacity is 535 megawatts. In 2004 the reactor 
produced 3.9 million megawatt hours, which was about 71 percent of the 
electricity produced in the state. (That production was only about 
one-third of the electricity consumed in the state, because Vermont is a 
chronic importer of power.)

Just how much carbon dioxide the two reactors are saving depends on what 
the replacement power source would be. A megawatt-hour from a coal plant 
produces about one ton of carbon dioxide. In the long run, power companies 
could build natural gas plants, which produce only about half a ton per 
megawatt hour.

The governors' draft agreement gives Vermont a limit of 1.35 million tons 
of carbon dioxide, approximately equal to its current emissions. But if the 
Vermont Yankee nuclear plant's output were replaced with coal, Vermont's 
emissions would increase by nearly four million tons. If natural gas were 
used, the increase would still be nearly two million tons.

The agreement gives New Jersey a cap of 23 million tons, but if Oyster 
Creek's output was replaced with coal, the state's output of carbon dioxide 
would more than double.

Some environmentalists say that greenhouse emissions should be cut by 
switching to "renewable" fuels, including wind, solar and hydroelectric. 
Wind-produced power, in fact, is growing rapidly, but over all, electricity 
from renewable sources in 2004 was about 1 percent lower than in 2003, 
mostly because of less hydroelectric production. Environmentalists propose 
reducing carbon dioxide output by building wind turbines. But utility 
experts say that the amount of wind that a utility grid can tolerate is 
limited, because wind is intermittent and often unpredictable. In fact, the 
"capacity factor" of a wind turbine, defined as the amount of power 
actually produced in a year, compared with the amount that would result 
from around-the-clock generation, is about 33 percent.

In addition to Vermont and New Jersey, the seven other states in the accord 
are New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire 
and Rhode Island.

_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 28 NRC: NRC Ranks No. 3 in the Best Places to Work in the Federal Government
 
News Release - 2005-12
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION   
  Office of Public Affairs     Telephone: 301/415-8200   
  Washington, DC 20555-0001     E-mail: opa@nrc.gov  
  No. 05-129     September 14, 2005   
  

agencies in a survey of employees asked to rate the best places
in government to work, and it was the top-ranked regulatory
agency in government. 

The agency, along with others, was recognized in a ceremony
today in Washington, D.C. The survey was conducted earlier this
year among 150,000 employees at 250 Federal organizations by the
Partnership for Public Service and American Universitys
Institute for the Study of Public Policy Implementation. 

The survey results support my belief that our agencys workforce
has some of the brightest, most dedicated, and highly
professional employees in civil service, said Luis A. Reyes, NRC
Executive Director for Operations. 

We will continue to work toward making NRC the Federal agency of
choice, added Reyes, whose agency is recruiting about 350
employees in the next few years because of the expected arrival
of a number of applications for new reactor licenses. He said
the latest ranking, along with new recruiting authority provided
by Congress, should assist in the agencys efforts. 

The survey, drawing from the Office of Personnel Management's
Federal Human Capital Survey of late 2004, found that high
satisfaction ratings typically appeared where employees believed
the work they were doing was important.
 
The survey included 10 work environment categories. The NRC
ranked first in work/life balance and training and development,
and ranked second in effective leadership, strategic management,
and support for diversity. In the remaining five categories, the
NRC consistently scored in the top five. 

Not only did the NRC rank third across all major agencies in
government, it was ranked first among those surveyed under 40
years of age and among African-Americans in the agency. It also
had high ratings among other ethnic groups. 

Details of the survey can be found at:
http://www.bestplacestowork.organd will be featured soon on the
US News & World Report website at:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/rankguide/rghome.htm.   



  


 	Last revised Wednesday, September 14, 2005 	   
*****************************************************************
 29 Platts: BE to shut down two more units over bolt cracking concerns
 
+ British Energy (BE) said it will keep the two Hartlepool AGRs 
off-line and will shut down both Heysham A units because of 
concerns about the potential for stress corrosion cracking of the 
primary "holding down" bolts. 

All four units are likely to be down for at least a month, BE 
said. The company said yesterday that it currently expects to 
lose around one terawatt of output while carrying out the work 
but much depends on how things develop. 

Hartlepool and Heysham A are of similar design and differ 
considerably from BE's other five AGR stations. 

BE first raised its concerns about potential stress corrosion 
cracking in May when some moisture was found on a bolt helping 
anchor one of Heysham A-2's eight boilers. 

Then, in June, a similar bolt was found to have "slight moisture" 
at Hartlepool-1. BE said this week that "testing has shown no 
evidence of cracking at Hartlepool or Heysham (A) to date." 

London (Platts)--13Sep2005
 
Copyright © 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 [The McGraw-Hill Companies]   
*****************************************************************
 30 NRC: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc., Calvert Cliffs Nuclear 
 
                        FR Doc 05-18193 
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)] 
[Notices] [Page 54412-54416] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14se05-110]                         
 
Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Exemption 1.0 Background The 
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc. (the licensee) is the 
holder of Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-53 and 
DPR-69, which authorize operation of Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power 
Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (CCNPP), respectively. The licenses 
provide, among other things, that the facility is subject to all 
rules, regulations, and orders of the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC, the Commission) now or hereafter in effect.
 
The facility consists of two pressurized-water reactors located 
in Calvert County in Maryland.
 
2.0 Request/Action Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR), Part 50, Section 50.68, ``Criticality accident 
requirements,'' sets forth requirements for which a licensee 
shall comply in lieu of maintaining a monitoring system capable 
of detecting a criticality as described in 10 CFR 70.24. In 
particular, subsection (b)(1) of 10 CFR 50.68 requires that plant 
procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any one 
time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be 
safely subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions 
feasible by unborated water.
 
By letter dated December 21, 2004, as supplemented on May 31, 
2005, the licensee submitted a request for an exemption from the 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) during the pent fuel pool 
(SFP) activities related to the underwater handling, loading, and 
unloading of the Transnuclear NUHOMS-32P[supreg] dry shielded 
canister (DSC), as described in its proposed Amendment to 
Materials License No.
 
SNM-2505, dated December 12, 2003, for the plant-specific 
independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) at CCNPP.
 
In summary, the licensee is unable to satisfy the above 
requirement for handling of the Transnuclear NUHOMS-32P[supreg] 
DSC authorized by 10 CFR Part 72 at CCNPP. Section 50.12(a) 
allows licensees to apply for an exemption from the requirements 
of 10 CFR Part 50 if the application of the regulation is not 
necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule and 
special conditions are met. The licensee stated in its 
application that compliance with 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is not 
necessary for handling the Transnuclear NUHOMS-32P[supreg] DSC 
system to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.
 
3.0 Discussion Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, upon 
application by any interested person or upon its own initiative, 
grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 when: 
(1) The exemptions are authorized by law, will not present an 
undue risk to public health or safety, and are consistent with 
the common defense and security; and (2) when special 
circumstances are present. Therefore, in determining the 
acceptability of the licensee's exemption request, the NRC staff 
has performed the following regulatory, technical, and legal 
evaluations to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12 for 
granting the exemption.
 
3.1 Regulatory Evaluation The CCNPP Technical Specifications 
(TSs) currently permit the licensee to store spent fuel 
assemblies in high-density storage racks in its SFP. In 
accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(4), the 
licensee takes credit for soluble boron for criticality control 
and ensures that the effective neutron multiplication factor 
(keff) of the SFP does not exceed 0.95, if flooded with borated 
water. Subsection 50.68(b)(4) also requires that if credit is 
taken for soluble boron, the keff must remain below 1.0 
(subcritical) if flooded with unborated water. However, the 
licensee is unable to satisfy the requirement to maintain the 
keff below 1.0 (subcritical) with unborated water, which is also 
the requirement of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), during cask handling 
operations in the SFP. Therefore, the licensee proposed an 
exemption from 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) to permit the performance of 
spent fuel loading, unloading, and handling operations related to 
dry cask storage without being analyzed to be subcritical under 
the most adverse moderation conditions feasible by unborated 
water.
 
Appendix A, ``General Design Criteria (GDC) for Nuclear Power 
Plants,'' to 10 CFR Part 50 provides a list of the minimum design 
requirements for nuclear power plants. According to GDC 62, 
``Prevention of criticality in fuel storage and handling,'' the 
licensee must limit the potential for criticality in the fuel 
handling and storage system by physical systems or processes. 
Since CCNPP was licensed prior to the issuance of the Appendix A 
to 10 CFR Part 50, GDC 62 is not directly applicable. However, 
CCNPP was licensed to the 1967 draft GDC, as discussed in 
Appendix 1C of the CCNNP Updated Final Safety Analysis Report 
(UFSAR). The comparable draft GDC is Criterion 66, ``Prevention 
of Fuel Storage Criticality,'' that states: ``Criticality in new 
and spent fuel storage shall be prevented by physical systems or 
processes. Such means as geometrically safe configurations shall 
be emphasized over procedural controls.''
 
[[Page 54413]] Section 50.68 of 10 CFR Part 50 provides the NRC 
requirements for maintaining subcritical conditions in SFPs. 
Section 50.68 provides criticality control requirements that, if 
satisfied, ensure that an inadvertent criticality in the SFP is 
an extremely unlikely event. These requirements ensure that the 
licensee has appropriately conservative criticality margins 
during handling and storage of spent fuel. Section 50.68(b)(1) 
states, ``Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and 
storage at any one time of more fuel assemblies than have been 
determined to be safely subcritical under the most adverse 
moderation conditions feasible by unborated water.'' 
Specifically, 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) ensures that the licensee will 
maintain the pool in a subcritical condition during handling and 
storage operations without crediting the soluble boron in the SFP 
water.
 
The licensee is authorized under plant-specific Materials License 
No. SNM-2505 to construct and operate an ISFSI at CCNPP. The 
ISFSI permits the licensee to store spent fuel assemblies in 
large concrete dry storage casks. As part of its ISFSI loading 
campaigns, the licensee transfers spent fuel assemblies to a DSC 
in the cask pit area of the SFP. The licensee performed 
criticality analyses assuming the DSC fully loaded with fuel 
having the highest permissible reactivity and determined that a 
soluble boron credit was necessary to ensure that the DSC would 
remain subcritical in the SFP. Since the licensee is unable to 
satisfy the requirement of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) to ensure 
subcritical conditions during handling and storage of spent fuel 
assemblies in the pool with unborated water, the licensee 
identified the need for an exemption from the 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) 
requirement to support DSC loading, unloading, and handling 
operations without being subcritical under the most adverse 
moderation conditions feasible by unborated water.
 
The NRC staff evaluated the possibility of an inadvertent 
criticality of the spent nuclear fuel at CCNPP during DSC 
loading, unloading, and handling. The NRC staff has established a 
set of acceptance criteria that, if met, satisfy the underlying 
intent of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1). In lieu of complying with 10 CFR 
50.68(b)(1), the NRC staff determined that an inadvertent 
criticality accident is unlikely to occur if the licensee meets 
the following five criteria: \1\ 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \1\ The criteria have been used previously in the 
review of similar exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR 
50.68(b)(1) for Diablo Canyon Units No. 1 and 2 and Sequoyah 
Units No. 1 and 2. The evaluations for these exemptions are 
available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management 
System under accession numbers ML040300693 and ML041540213, 
respectively.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- 1. The cask criticality analyses are based on the 
following conservative assumptions: a. All fuel assemblies in the 
cask are unirradiated and at the highest permissible enrichment, 
b. Only 75 percent of the Boron-10 in the fixed poison panel 
inserts is credited, c. No credit is taken for fuel-related 
burnable absorbers, and d. The cask is assumed to be flooded with 
moderator at the temperature and density corresponding to optimum 
moderation.
 
2. The licensee's ISFSI TSs require the soluble boron 
concentration to be equal to or greater than the level assumed in 
the criticality analysis, and surveillance requirements 
necessitate the periodic verification of the concentration both 
prior to and during loading and unloading operations.
 
3. Radiation monitors, as required by GDC 63, ``Monitoring fuel 
and waste storage,'' are provided in fuel storage and handling 
areas to detect excessive radiation levels and to initiate 
appropriate safety actions.
 
4. The quantity of other forms of special nuclear material, such 
as sources, detectors, etc., to be stored in the cask will not 
increase the effective multiplication factor above the limit 
calculated in the criticality analysis.
 
5. Sufficient time exists for plant personnel to identify and 
terminate a boron dilution event prior to achieving a critical 
boron concentration in the DSC. To demonstrate that it can safely 
identify and terminate a boron dilution event, the licensee must 
provide the following: a. A plant-specific criticality analysis 
to identify the critical boron concentration in the cask based on 
the highest reactivity loading pattern.
 
b. A plant-specific boron dilution analysis to identify all 
potential dilution pathways, their flowrates, and the time 
necessary to reach a critical boron concentration.
 
c. A description of all alarms and indications available to 
promptly alert operators of a boron dilution event.
 
d. A description of plant controls that will be implemented to 
minimize the potential for a boron dilution event.
 
e. A summary of operator training and procedures that will be 
used to ensure that operators can quickly identify and terminate 
a boron dilution event.
 
3.2 Technical Evaluation In determining the acceptability of the 
licensee's exemption request, the NRC staff reviewed three 
aspects of the licensee's analyses: (1) Criticality analyses 
submitted to support the ISFSI license application and its 
exemption request, (2) boron dilution analysis, and (3) legal 
basis for approving the exemption. For each of the aspects, the 
staff evaluated whether the licensee's analyses and methodologies 
provide reasonable assurance that adequate safety margins are 
developed and can be maintained in the CCNPP SFP during loading 
of spent fuel into canisters for dry cask storage.
 
3.2.1 Criticality Analyses For evaluation of the acceptability of 
the licensee's exemption request, the NRC staff reviewed the 
criticality analyses provided by the licensee in support of its 
ISFSI license application.
 
First, the NRC staff reviewed the methodology and assumptions 
used by the licensee in its criticality analysis to determine if 
Criterion 1 of Section 3.1 above was satisfied. The licensee 
stated that it took no credit in the criticality analyses for 
burnup or fuel-related burnable neutron absorbers. Specifically, 
the licensee stated that its criticality analyses did not take 
credit for integral burnable absorbers, integral fuel burnable 
absorbers, nor control element assemblies. The licensee also 
stated that all assemblies were analyzed at the highest 
permissible enrichment, 4.5 weight percent Uranium-235 at CCNPP. 
Additionally, the licensee stated that all criticality analyses 
for a flooded DSC were performed at temperatures and densities of 
water corresponding to optimum moderation conditions.
 
Finally, the licensee stated that it credited 90 percent of the 
Boron-10 content for the fixed neutron absorber in the DSC. 
NUREG-1536, ``Standard Review Plan for Dry Cask Storage System,'' 
states that ``[f] or a greater credit allowance [i.e., greater 
than 75 percent for fixed neutron absorbers] special, 
comprehensive fabrication tests capable of verifying the presence 
and uniformity of the neutron absorber are needed.'' As part of 
an amendment to the Part 72 license for the Transnuclear 
NUHOMS-32P[supreg] design, the NRC staff reviewed and accepted 
the results of additional data supplied by the manufacturer that 
demonstrated that a 90-percent credit for the fixed neutron 
absorbers was acceptable. Therefore, for the purposes of this 
exemption, the staff finds a 90-percent credit acceptable on the 
basis that it has previously been reviewed and approved by the 
NRC. Subsequently, based on its review of the criticality 
analyses and the information submitted in its exemption request, 
the
 
[[Page 54414]] NRC staff finds that the licensee has satisfied 
Criterion 1.
 
Second, the NRC staff reviewed the proposed CCNPP ISFSI TSs and 
the licensee's criticality analyses credit soluble boron for 
reactivity control during DSC loading, unloading, and handling 
operations.
 
Since the boron concentration is a key safety component necessary 
for ensuring subcritical conditions in the pool, the licensee 
must have a conservative ISFSI TS capable of ensuring that 
sufficient soluble boron is present to perform its safety 
function. The licensee stated that ISFSI TS Limiting Condition 
for Operation (LCO) 3.2.1.1 requires that the NUHOMS-32P[supreg] 
DSC cavity be moderated by water with a boron concentration 
greater than or equal to 2450 ppm to accommodate cask operations. 
In all cases, the boron concentration required by the ISFSI TS 
ensures that the keff will be below 0.95 for the analyzed loading 
configuration. Additionally, the licensee's ISFSI TS contain 
surveillance requirements (SRs) that assure it will verify the 
boron concentration is above the required level both prior to and 
during DSC loading, unloading, and handling operations. 
Specifically, SRs 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.1.2 require verification of the 
boron concentration in the SFP within 24 hours prior to either 
insertion of the first spent fuel assembly into a DSC for loading 
operations or flooding the DSC cavity for unloading operations. 
Additionally, both SRs require the licensee to reconfirm the 
boron concentration is above the TS LCO limit at intervals not to 
exceed 48 hours until such time as the DSC is removed from the 
SFP. Based on its review of the CCNPP ISFSI TS, the NRC staff 
finds that the licensee has satisfied Criterion 2.
 
Third, the NRC staff reviewed the CCNPP UFSAR and the information 
provided by the licensee in its exemption request to ensure that 
it complies with GDC 63. GDC 63 requires that licensees have 
radiation monitors in fuel storage and associated handling areas 
to detect conditions that may result in a loss of residual heat 
removal capability and excessive radiation levels and initiate 
appropriate safety actions. As previously described, since CCNPP 
was licensed prior to the issuance of the GDC listed in Appendix 
A to 10 CFR Part 50, GDC 63 is not directly applicable. However, 
CCNPP is licensed to the 1967 draft GDC as discussed in its 
UFSAR, Appendix 1C. The comparable draft GDC is Criterion 18, 
``Monitoring Fuel and Waste Storage,'' that states the following: 
``Monitoring and alarm instrumentation shall be provided for fuel 
and waste storage and handling areas for conditions that might 
contribute to loss of continuity in decay heat removal and to 
radiation exposure.'' The NRC staff reviewed the CCNPP UFSAR, 
1967 draft GDC, and exemption request to determine whether the 
licensee had provided sufficient information to demonstrate 
compliance with the intent of GDC 63. In its exemption request, 
the licensee stated that three area radiation monitors are 
provided for detecting high radiation levels in the fuel storage 
areas. Specifically, the monitors are located in the SFP area, on 
the spent fuel handling machine, and in the new fuel storage 
area. At the montors' alarm setpoints, audible and visual alarms 
annunciate locally and in the Control Room. Based on its review 
of the exemption request, the CCNPP UFSAR, and the 1967 draft 
GDC, the NRC staff finds that the licensee has satisfied 
Criterion 3.
 
Finally, as part of the criticality analysis review, the NRC 
staff evaluated the storage of non-fuel-related material in a 
DSC. The NRC staff evaluated the potential to increase the 
reactivity of a DSC by loading it with materials other than spent 
nuclear fuel and fuel debris. The approved contents for storage 
in the NUHOMS-32P[supreg] cask design are listed in the CCNPP 
ISFSI TS LCO 3.1.1 (1), ``Fuel to be Stored at ISFSI.'' This 
ISFSI TS LCO restricts the contents of the DSC to only fuels (14 
x 14 Combustion Engineering-type pressurized water reactor fuel) 
irradiated at CCNPP. As such, CCNPP is prohibited from loading 
other forms of special nuclear material, such as sources, 
detectors, etc., in the DSC. Therefore, the NRC staff determined 
that the loading limitations described in the CCNPP ISFSI TSs 
will ensure that any authorized components loaded in the DSCs 
will not result in a reactivity increase. Based on its review of 
the loading restrictions, the NRC staff finds that the licensee 
has satisfied Criterion 4.
 
3.2.2 Boron Dilution Analysis Since the licensee's ISFSI 
application relies on soluble boron to maintain subcritical 
conditions within the DSCs during loading, unloading, and 
handling operations, the NRC staff reviewed the licensee's boron 
dilution analysis to determine whether appropriate controls, 
alarms, and procedures were available to identify and terminate a 
boron dilution accident prior to reaching a critical boron 
concentration.
 
By letter dated October 25, 1996, the NRC staff issued a safety 
evaluation (SE) on licensing topical report WCAP-14416, 
``Westinghouse Spent Fuel Rack Criticality Analysis 
Methodology.'' This SE specified that the following issues be 
evaluated for applications involving soluble boron credit: the 
events that could cause boron dilution, the time available to 
detect and mitigate each dilution event, the potential for 
incomplete boron mixing, and the adequacy of the boron 
concentration surveillance interval.
 
In its exemption request, the licensee described the criticality 
analyses performed to determine the worst-case bounding keff. The 
CCNPP criticality calculations employed the KENO V.a code with 
the 44-group ENDF/B-V cross section library. The calculations 
determined the minimum soluble boron concentration required to 
maintain subcriticality (keff eff is maintained less than 0.95. 
TS SRs require the boron concentration in the DSC water to be 
verified within 24 hours prior to the insertion of the first 
spent fuel assembly into a DSC and reconfirmed at intervals not 
to exceed 48 hours until such time as the DSC is removed from the 
SFP.
 
The licensee contracted with Transnuclear to perform a 
criticality analysis to determine the soluble boron concentration 
that results in a keff equal to 1.0 for 4.5 wt-percent U-235 fuel 
enrichments using the same methodology as approved in the 
Standardized NUHOMS Cask System Final Safety Analysis. The 
analysis determined the critical boron concentration level for 
4.5 wt-percent U-235 enriched fuel was 1650 ppm. The boron 
concentration within the canister would have to decrease from the 
TS limit to the critical boron concentration before criticality 
is possible. The licensee based its boron dilution analyses and 
its preventive and
 
[[Page 54415]] mitigative actions on dilution sources with the 
potential to reduce the boron concentration from the TS minimum 
values for the two fuel enrichment bands to the respective 
concentration for criticality.
 
During the current analysis the licensee identified all credible 
potential sources that could dilute the SFP to critical 
conditions. The licensee determined that the limiting boron 
dilution event occurs when water from the fire protection system 
(FPS), with a maximum flow rate of 1000 gpm from the most 
limiting hose (a 3-inch diameter with a 2- inch nozzle), is added 
to the SFP. The licensee's calculations show that at least 4 
hours will be available to terminate the event before the DSC 
water boron concentration decreases from 2450 ppm to the critical 
concentration of 1650 ppm, assuming a straight dilution to the 
SFP overflow limit and a feed and bleed operation thereafter with 
instantaneous complete mixing.
 
To demonstrate that sufficient time exists for plant personnel to 
identify and terminate a boron dilution event, the licensee 
provided a description of all alarms available to alert 
operators, and plant controls that will be implemented. There is 
no automatic level control system for the SFP; therefore, the SFP 
will overflow on an uncontrolled water addition. However, a high 
level alarm in the control room would alert personnel of a 
potential boron dilution event within 15 minutes for a 1000 gpm 
dilution rate. In addition to the SFP high level alarm, 
annunciator alarms for the FPS exist in the Control Room, which 
would alert operators to identify and terminate the worst-case 
boron dilution source. This means that there would be more than 3 
additional hours before the critical boron concentration of 1650 
ppm within the DSC is reached. The NRC staff finds that this is 
acceptable. The CCNPP's SFP is a large rectangular structure 
filled with borated water that completely covers the spent fuel 
assemblies.
 
A 3.5- foot wall divides the pool, with the north half associated 
to Unit 1 and the south half associated to Unit 2. A slot in the 
dividing wall has removable gates, which allow movement of the 
fuel assemblies between the two halves of the pool. The slot is 
normally open and the removable gate stored in the Unit 1 SFP 
close to the west end of the south wall. However, to ensure the 
applicability of the assumptions in its dilution and criticality 
evaluations, the licensee has committed to revise the 
fuel-handling procedure to include an initial condition that 
requires the slot between the two pools to be open and the gate 
to be stored in its proper storage location when a DSC is present 
in the Unit 1 SFP.
 
To ensure that operators are capable of identifying and 
terminating a boron dilution event during DSC loading, unloading, 
and handling operations, operator training will be conducted. 
During training activities operators will receive revised alarm 
manual procedures which verify that the SFP boron concentration 
is in compliance with the new ISFSI TS limit prior to the loading 
of a NUHOMS-32P[supreg] DSC.
 
Based on the NRC staff's review of the licensee's exemption 
request dated December 21, 2004, as supplemented on May 31, 2005, 
and its boron dilution analysis, the NRC staff finds that the 
licensee has provided sufficient information to demonstrate that 
an undetected and uncorrected dilution from the TS required boron 
concentration to the calculated critical boron concentration is 
very unlikely. Based on its review of the boron analysis and 
enhancements to the operating procedures and operator training 
program, the NRC staff finds the licensee has satisfied Criterion 
5.
 
Therefore, in conjunction with the conservative assumptions used 
to establish the TS required boron concentration and critical 
boron concentration, the boron dilution evaluation demonstrates 
that the underlying intent of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is satisfied. 
3.3 Legal Basis for the Exemption 3.3.1 Authorized by Law This 
exemption results in changes to the operation of the plant by 
allowing the operation of the new dry fuel storage facility and 
loading of the NUHOMS-32P[reg] DSC. As stated above, 10 CFR 50.12 
allows the NRC to grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 
CFR Part 50.
 
In addition, the granting of the licensee's exemption request 
will not result in a violation of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 
as amended, or the intent of the Commission's regulations. 
Therefore, the exemption is authorized by law.
 
3.3.2 No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety The underlying 
purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is to ensure that adequate controls 
are in place to ensure that the handling and storage of fuel 
assemblies is conducted in a manner such that the fuel assemblies 
remain safely subcritical. Based on the NRC staff's review of the 
licensee's exemption request, the licensee has demonstrated that 
sufficient controls are in place to provide reasonable assurance 
that there is no undue risk to public health and safety given 
conservative assumptions in the criticality analysis (Criterion 1 
above); surveillances periodically verify the boron concentration 
before and during loading and unloading (Criterion 2 above); 
radiation monitoring equipment is used to detect excessive 
radiation and initiate appropriate protective actions (Criterion 
3 above); only fuel authorized by the ISFSI TS will be loaded and 
stored in the ISFSI (Criterion 4 above); and boron dilution 
events have been analyzed, and there are sufficient monitoring 
capabilities and time for the licensee to identify and terminate 
a dilution event prior to achieving a critical boron 
concentration in the cask (Criterion 5 above). Therefore, the NRC 
staff concluded that the underlying purpose of the rule has been 
satisfied and that there is no undue risk to public health and 
safety.
 
3.3.3 Consistent with Common Defense and Security This exemption 
results in changes to the operation of the plant by allowing the 
operation of the new dry fuel storage facility and loading of the 
NUHOMS-32P[reg] DSC. This change to the fuel assembly storage and 
handling in the plant does not affect the national defense 
strategy because the national defense is maintained by resources 
(hardware or software or other) that are outside the plant and 
that have no direct relation to plant operation. In addition, 
loading spent fuel into the NUHOMS-32P[reg] DSC in the SFP does 
not affect the ability of the licensee to defend the plant 
against a terrorist attack.
 
Therefore, the common defense and security is not impacted by 
this exemption request.
 
3.3.4 Special Circumstances Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, ``Specific 
exemptions,'' the NRC staff reviewed the licensee's exemption 
request to determine if the legal basis for granting an exemption 
had been satisfied. With regards to the six special circumstances 
listed in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2), the NRC staff finds that the 
licensee's exemption request satisfies 50.12(a)(2)(ii), 
``Application of the regulation in the particular circumstances 
would not serve the underlying purpose of the rule or is not 
necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.'' 
Specifically, the NRC staff concludes that since the licensee has 
satisfied the five criteria in Section 3.1 of this exemption, the 
application of the rule is not necessary to achieve its 
underlying purpose in this particular case.
 
 
[[Page 54416]] 3.4 Summary Based upon the review of the 
licensee's exemption request to credit soluble boron during DSC 
loading, unloading, and handling in the CCNPP SFP, the NRC staff 
concludes that pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2) the licensee's 
exemption request is acceptable. However, the NRC staff places 
the following limitations and/or conditions on the approval of 
this exemption: 1. This exemption is limited to the loading, 
unloading, and handling of the DSC for only the TN 
NUHOMS-32P[reg] at CCNPP.
 
2. This exemption is limited to the loading, unloading, and 
handling in the DSC at CCNPP of Combustion Engineering 14x14 fuel 
assemblies that had maximum initial, unirradiated U-235 
enrichments of 4.5 weight percent. 4.0 Conclusion Accordingly, 
the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), 
the exemption is authorized by law, will not present an undue 
risk to the public health and safety, and is consistent with the 
common defense and security. Also, special circumstances are 
present. Therefore, the Commission hereby grants the licensee an 
exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) for the 
loading, unloading, and handling of the components of the 
Transnuclear NUHOMS-32P[reg] dry cask storage system at CCNPP. 
However, since the licensee does not have an NRC-approved 
methodology for evaluating changes to the analyses or systems 
supporting this exemption request, the NRC staff's approval of 
the exemption is restricted to those specific design and 
operating conditions described in the licensee's December 21, 
2004, exemption request. The licensee may not apply the 10 CFR 
50.59 process for evaluating changes to specific exemptions. Any 
changes to the design or operation of (1) the dry cask storage 
system, (2) the SFP, (3) the fuel assemblies to be stored, (4) 
the boron dilution analyses, or (5) supporting procedures and 
controls, regardless of whether they are approved under the 
general Part 72 license or perceived to be conservative, will 
invalidate this exemption. Upon invalidation of the exemption, 
the licensee will be required to comply with NRC regulations 
prior to future cask loadings.
 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the 
granting of this exemption will not have a significant effect on 
the quality of the human environment (70 FR 51853).
 
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of September, 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Ledyard B. Marsh, Director, Division of Licensing Project 
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. 05-18193 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 31 Eureka Reporter: NRC officials to meet with residents                  

9/13/2005             
 		      	 	
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials will meet 
with the public Thursday to discuss results of a special 
inspection regarding the circumstances of the companys reported 
loss of nuclear material from the Humboldt Bay nuclear plant at 
King Salmon. 

The meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m. in the Humboldt Bay Yacht 
Clubs meeting room at the Wharfinger Building, 1 Marina Way, in 
Eureka.

NRC staff will brief the public on the results of its inspection 
and invite questions and comments from the public. Executives 
from Pacific Gas & Electric Co., which owns the plant that shut 
down in 1976, will also participate.

PG&E officials notified the NRC on Aug. 17, 2004, that they were 
unable to locate three sections of a spent nuclear fuel rod that 
records show was removed from the reactor in 1968.

In addition to the fuel rod segments, PG&E has informed the NRC 
that it cannot account for several small detectors removed from 
the reactor core, which contain small amounts of nuclear 
material.

The special inspection reviewed PG&Es search activities and its 
radioactive material control and accountability program. 

It is considered highly unlikely that the material is in an area 
to which the public would have access, and is most likely either 
in the spent fuel pool or has been sent to a licensed disposal 
facility, according to an NRC news release.

Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka                                                        Reporter. All
*****************************************************************
 32 roanoke.com: New nuclear plants obscure better distributed energy options

Commentary Stories -

The Roanoke Times 							 						 						 							 								Manage
							 								
Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Benjamin K. Sovacool 

Sovacool is a graduate fellow in the Division of Engineering,
Science and Technology at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and
a doctoral candidate in the Department of Science and Technology
Studies at Virginia Tech. The views expressed here are his own. 

Despite a recent resurgence in the promotion of nuclear power,
nuclear energy is not a cost competitive, clean, efficient or
secure energy option. 

Currently, 103 commercial nuclear reactors provide 97 gigawatts
of electricity in the United States, making it the world's
largest producer of nuclear power. The Department of Energy
spends more than $510 million a year on research and development
alone for nuclear reactors, almost the same amount as on all
renewable energy technologies combined. 

While the last nuclear plant built in the United States is more
than 30 years old, pollution issues related to existing
fossil-fueled technology, industry investments and political
favor all coalesce to create an atmosphere amenable to nuclear
power. Concern with global warming, coupled with the Kyoto
protocol that entered into force for 141 countries in early
2005, has heightened the importance of "zero carbon dioxide
emission" technologies like nuclear reactors. 

Three large utilities -- Exelon, Entergy and Dominion -- have
filed early site permits for the construction of new nuclear
plants in Illinois, Texas and Virginia with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. And the nuclear lobby has recently funded
commercials in favor of nuclear power for viewing in select
cities, a move that coincides with reinvigorated political
support from the Bush administration. 

For example, in a well publicized speech in March, President
Bush remarked that "to ensure a diverse energy supply, we need
to promote clean, safe nuclear power." 

The establishment of new nuclear power plants in the United
States would be unfortunate, as such facilities are extremely
capital intensive, taking years to build and often costing
between $2 billion to $3 billion each for licensing and
construction. 

The capital intensity of nuclear projects creates significant
complications for matching projected capacity with demand, and
the government is proposing a "risk insurance" for the first set
of new plants as their licensing process becomes drawn out. This
could be why a 2002 MIT study concluded that implementing a
carbon tax of $200 per ton remained the only way even the most
advanced of nuclear reactors would be cost competitive with
existing technologies. As Peter Asmus recently stated in The
Washington Post, "Without government intervention, there simply
would be no nuclear industry." 

Because nuclear plants produce between 300 and 1,600 megawatts
of centralized electricity and are habitually sited away from
urban centers, they must rely on a vast and complex transmission
network to distribute power. Yet such transmission and
distribution loses between 8 percent to 12 percent of
electricity due to poor enforcement of reliability standards and
aging equipment. 

Nuclear plants also need ample amounts of energy to contain and
cool nuclear reactions. The discharge of hot water from these
plants, for instance, has been correlated with the destruction
of marine and riparian ecosystems. Moreover, a typical reactor
uses prodigious amounts of fuel compared to renewable options --
one 2004 Congressional Research Report concluded that each
nuclear reactor generates 30 metric tons of spent fuel per year. 

Finally, while the security issues associated with terrorism and
accidents have been argued to the point of becoming hackneyed,
two less obvious political concerns exist. Newer reactors that
recycle spent fuel as part of the DOE's Generation IV program
are still 30 to 40 years away, forcing existing plants to
operate on a wasteful "once-through" fuel cycle that
disseminates large amounts of fissile material. 

A 2004 Jane's Intelligence Review concluded that a substantial
rise in the number of new nuclear power plants would directly
increase the risks associated with nuclear weapons
proliferation, especially in light of the inability of the
International Atomic Energy Agency to prevent Iranian, North
Korean, Indian and Pakistani weapons programs. Commercial
uranium enrichment facilities also recycle excess fuel into
depleted uranium shells, making the nuclear power industry a
tacit adherent to the military weapons industry. 

Collectively, these financial, environmental, technical and
political concerns make nuclear power a poor source for new
electricity. Many scholars have long noted that distributed
generation -- using smaller, decentralized units such as wind
turbines or photovoltaic systems -- to produce power offers a
much better strategy. 

Such technologies are quicker to construct, less capital
intensive per unit and more modular, meaning that almost any
demand can be matched. It is these miniature generators -- not
mammoth and capital intensive nuclear plants -- that offer the
best strategy for diversifying electrical generation in a
restructured and competitive energy environment. In the words of
a 2001 article in The Economist, "It is micro-power, not
mega-power, that the market favors, thanks to the far smaller
financial risk involved." 

In the end, the belief that nuclear power represents a clean and
safe alternative to coal- or natural gas-fired power generation
is misguided and entrenches similar problems posed by the use of
fossil fuels. It legitimates transmission and distribution
efficiency losses and obscures better alternatives toward a
truly sustainable energy portfolio. For these reasons, the
proposed benefits of nuclear power need to be re-examined.

*****************************************************************
 33 NRC: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC; R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power 
 
                        FR Doc 05-18194 
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)] 
[Notices] [Page 54416-54417] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14se05-112]                         
 
Plant; Notice of Public Meeting To Obtain Comments on Request 
Regarding Proposed Release of Part of Site for Unrestricted Use 
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of 
public meeting.
 
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is 
conducting a meeting, pursuant to Section 50.83, ``Release of 
part of a power reactor facility or site for unrestricted use,'' 
of Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 
CFR), for purpose of obtaining comments from the public on the 
proposed release of part of the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant 
(Ginna Plant) site, located in Wayne County, New York.
 
 
DATES: The public meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 
28, 2005, from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Ginna Plant Training 
Center, 1517 Lake Road Ontario, NY 14519.
 
Travel Information: From Rochester, take Interstate I-590 towards 
RT-590. Road name changes to SR-590. At exit 10B, take Ramp 
(Right) onto SR-104 towards RT-104/Webster. Turn LEFT (North) 
onto CR-102 (Lakeside Road). Turn RIGHT (East) onto CR-101 (Lake 
Road). Follow Lake Road to the Ginna Information Center.
 
Notification of Attendance: It is strongly encouraged that 
prospective participants contact NRC prior to the meeting to 
ensure adequate accommodations and to expedite the required 
visitor processing. Contact Shannine DiMora, telephone: (315) 
524-6935; e-mail: sjd1@nrc.gov, and submit participant name and 
affiliated organization by September 23, 2005. Also, it is 
suggested that attendees limit the amount of personal items and 
electronic devices brought into the
 
[[Page 54417]] building. Those needing accommodations under the 
Americans with Disabilities Act or having special concerns should 
contact Thomas Harding, Ginna LLC, in advance at (585) 771-3384.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC has received, by letter dated 
May 20, 2005, an application filed by R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power 
Plant, LLC (Ginna LLC) requesting the release of a part of the 
site for unrestricted use at its Ginna Plant. Before approving 
the proposed partial site release, the NRC will need to determine 
that the licensee has met the criteria set forth in Section 50.83 
of 10 CFR Part 50. The tract of land proposed for release 
consists of two adjacent parcels, comprising a total of 
approximately 15 acres located along the western edge of the 
Ginna Plant site boundary, and is entirely outside of the 
Exclusion Area.
 
The NRC had previously provided notice in the Federal Register on 
July 11, 2005 (70 FR 39802) to individuals in the vicinity of the 
facility that the NRC was in receipt of a proposed request 
release of the part of the site and would accept written comments 
concerning this proposal by August 10, 2005. Furthermore, the NRC 
stated that, before acting upon this request, it would also 
conduct a public meeting in the vicinity of the Ginna Plant for 
the purpose of obtaining public comments. The NRC will consider 
and, if appropriate, respond to these written and verbal 
comments, but such comments will not otherwise constitute part of 
the decisional record. Comments received after the public meeting 
will be considered if practicable to do so, but only those 
comments received on or before the public meeting can be assured 
consideration.
 
Documents related to this action, including the application for 
approval and supporting documentation, are available for public 
inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at 
One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville 
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will also be accessible electronically as text and image 
files from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management 
System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 
at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems 
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the 
NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 
301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. The PDR reproduction 
contractor will copy documents for a fee.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick D. Milano, Senior 
Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555. Telephone: 301-415-1457; fax no: 301-415-2102; e-mail: 
pdm@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 7th day of 
September, 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Patrick D. Milano, Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project 
Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office 
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. 05-18194 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 34 NRC: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company; Notice of Withdrawal of 
 
                        FR Doc 05-18195 
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)] 
[Notices] [Page 54416] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14se05-111]                         
 
Application for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the 
request of South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) 
to withdraw its January 14, 2003, application for proposed 
amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-12 for the Virgil 
C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, located in Fairfield 
County, South Carolina. The proposed amendment would have revised 
the Technical Specifications pertaining to emergency core cooling 
systems (ECCS); exclusion of safety injection pumps from the 
requirement to vent ECCS pumps.
 
The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on March 
4, 2003 (68 FR 10281). However, by letter dated June 22, 2005, 
the licensee withdrew the proposed change.
 
For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated January 14, 2003, and the 
licensee's letter dated June 22, 2005, which withdrew the 
application for license amendment. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 
available records will be accessible electronically from the 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference 
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by 
e-mail to

 
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of 
September, 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project 
Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office 
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. 05-18195 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 35 Lincoln County News:  Maine Yankee Hires New President, CEO

September 14, 2005                                                            

Greg Foster                                                                                                                                

Maine Yankee has hired Board Chairman Gerald Poulin as the new 
president and CEO of the company for its storage facility phase 
of the plant’s operation, company spokesman Eric Howes announced 
this week.

 Poulin has served as member of the Maine Yankee board since
1989 and its chairman for the past six years, which he will be
continuing to do. 

Poulin will be overseeing the 64-concrete dry cask storage
facility for spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste at Bailey
Point, which is all that will be left on the site along with the
security and operations building for the installation. Presently
John Niles is the manager of the facility.

 Poulin was employed with the Central Maine Power Co. for 30
years having retired as the senior vice president of engineering
and power generation.

 The previous president and CEO, Ted Feigenbaum, has accepted a
position as president and general manager of the Bechtel SAIC in
Nevada, which is associated with the proposed national high
level nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain.

 Currently Maine Yankee has been continuing it decommissioning
operations, including the removal of tons of soil stockpiled on
site as part of its remediation on the site. Howes estimated
that there are 85 rail cars left to ship to a low level nuclear
waste dump out of state. 

“We have added additional cars to the fleet and are hopeful of
being done in early to mid-October,” Howes said. “There is not a
lot of work to be done.” 

A new gatehouse is now complete and will be in use as soon as
the new gate is operational, according to Howes. The gatehouse
is located on the access road closer to the storage area. 

The measure is a part of the security provision for the storage
facility, which is mostly surrounded by an earthen berm as well
as fencing.

 “We provide security there in accordance with the (federal)
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations,” Howes said.

 Baily Point use:

 Recently Maine Yankee received federal Nuclear Regulatory
Commission acceptance of its final status survey packages for
its radiological cleanup of the site, Howes said. 

The next step in the process is a formal amendment to its NRC
operating license which the company is waiting for now. The
amendment will reduce the footprint of the plant from the
original 180 acres at Bailey Point to the 12-acre parcel
comprising the spent fuel storage facility.

 As far as the future use of the acreage that will be freed up,
that is uncertain, although there has been talk in the past
about the sale of the property for possible economic development.

 “The future of the peninsula is up in the air as long as the
spent fuel is stored there,” he said. “Our goal now is to get
the spent fuel removed from there.”

 Public CAP meeting

 The next meeting of company’s reorganized Community Advisory
Panel is scheduled Thurs., Oct. 20 at 6 p.m. at the Chewonki
Foundation. 																			   																		
																	

 																	 																	   																
															

 														   													 												

 												 											   										 									

 								   							 						

 					   				 			

				 			 		   		 		 		   			 			

 				
 					  Vol. 130 - No. 37   				 				 				
 					  [ border=]    				 				
 					   						

 							
 								   								

 									 									 									 									 									
 										  [ border=]    									 									
 									 										   											 												 											
										   									 									 									 									 									
									
 										  [ border=]    									 									
 									 										   											 												 											
										   									 									 									 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													 												
											   										 										 										 										
  [ border=]    										
 											   												 													[0]  												
											   										 										 									 																		
									
 										  [ border=]    									 								

 								   							 						

 					   				 				 			

 		   	 



	
 		  This site is owned by Lincoln County News © 2002   	 	
 		  [ border=]    	 	
 		  <img src="images/website_footer_logo.gif" alt=""
border="0">   	 	
 		  [ border=]    	 


*****************************************************************
 36 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the 
 
                        FR Doc 05-18196 
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)] 
[Notices] [Page 54411-54412] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14se05-109]                         
 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request 
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
 
ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and 
solicitation of public comment.
 
SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the 
following proposal for the collection of information under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an 
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
 
1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension.
 
2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 9, Public 
Records.
 
3. The form number if applicable: NRC-509 and NRC-509A. 4. How 
often the collection is required: On occasion. 5. Who will be 
required or asked to report: Individuals requesting access to 
records under the Freedom of Information or Privacy Acts, or to 
records that are already publicly available in the NRC's Public 
Document Room. Submitters of information containing trade secrets 
or confidential commercial or financial information who have been 
notified that the NRC has made an initial determination that the 
information should be disclosed.
 
6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 7,987. 7. The 
estimated number of annual respondents: 7,987. 8. An estimate of 
the total number of hours needed annually to complete the 
requirement or request: 2,120 (.3 hours per response).
 
9. An indication of whether Section 3507(d), Public Law 104-13 
applies: N/A.
 
10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 9 establishes information collection 
requirements for individuals making requests for records under 
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or Privacy Act (PA). It 
also contains requests to waive or reduce fees for searching for 
and reproducing records in response to FOIA requests; and 
requests for expedited processing of requests. The information 
required from the public is necessary to identify the records 
they are requesting; to justify requests for waivers or 
reductions in searching or copying fees; or to justify expedited 
processing. Section 9.28(b) provides that if the submitter of 
information designated to be trade secrets or confidential 
commercial or financial information objects to the disclosure, he 
must provide a written statement within 30 days that specifies 
all grounds why the information is a trade secret or commercial 
or financial information that is privileged or confidential.
 
 
[[Page 54412]] Submit, by November 14, 2005, comments that 
address the following questions: 1. Is the proposed collection of 
information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its 
functions? Does the information have practical utility? 2. Is the 
burden estimate accurate? 3. Is there a way to enhance the 
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected? 
4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized, 
including the use of automated collection techniques or other 
forms of information technology? A copy of the final supporting 
statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document 
Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, 
Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the 
NRC World Wide Web site: 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The 
document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days 
after the signature date of this notice.
 
Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer 
listed below by October 14, 2005. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but 
assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received 
after this date. John A. Asalone, Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs (3150- 0043), NEOB-10202, Office of Management 
and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
 
Comments can also be e-mailed to John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or 
submitted by telephone at (202) 395-4650.
 
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301-415-7233.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of September, 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Beth St. Mary, Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of 
Information Services.
 
[FR Doc. 05-18196 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 37 Reuters: Entergy N.Y. FitzPatrick nuke shut 

Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:37 AM ET

 NEW YORK, Sept 14 (Reuters) - Entergy Corp.'s (ETR.N: Quote, 
Profile, Research) 825-megawatt FitzPatrick nuclear power station 
in New York automatically tripped on Wednesday because of a low 
reactor vessel water level during planned maintenance, the 
company told the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in an event 
report.

 Prior to the trip, plant workers were in the process of 
transferring the uninterruptible power supply to the alternate 
power supply, which resulted in a momentary power loss that 
locked out the reactor feed pumps. Reactor feed pumps move water 
to the reactor vessel.

 Before workers could establish manual control over the feed 
pumps, the company said, the water level in the vessel declined 
enough to trip the plant.

 A spokeswoman for the plant said the company was investigating 
to determine the root cause of the shutdown. She noted it was too 
soon to say that the maintenance caused the outage.

 She could not estimate when the unit would return to service due 
to competitive reasons.

 On Tuesday, the unit was operating at full power.

 The FitzPatrick station is in Scriba in Oswego County, about 90 
miles east of Rochester, New York.

 One MW powers about 800 homes, according to North American 
averages.

 Entergy's unregulated Entergy Nuc FitzPatrick LLC subsidiary 
operates the station.

 Entergy's subsidiaries own and operate about 30,000 MW of 
generating capacity, market energy commodities, and transmit and 
distribute power to 2.6 million customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, 
Mississippi and Texas.                                               

© Reuters 2005. 
All Rights Reserved.                    
*****************************************************************
 38 San Francisco Bay Guardian News: No (more) nukes

www.sfbg.com

TWENTY-FIVE years ago, the antinuclear movement was about the
biggest thing going on in California. Mass demonstrations
routinely drew huge crowds. In October 1981, close to 2,000
people were arrested at the gates of Pacific Gas and Electric
Co.'s Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, in San Luis Obispo, and
groups like the Abalone Alliance and Mothers for Peace helped
block the plant from opening on time and forced years of delays.
Then-governor Jerry Brown formally intervened in the federal
hearings on licensing the plant. Movie stars, rock stars,
religious leaders ... all sorts of celebrities put the
antinuclear movement in the headlines. 

And on a very important level, it worked. Yes, Diablo got its
license and eventually went into operation, and we're all still
paying for it today in high electric bills and the risk of
radioactive contamination along the central coast. But that was
the last nuclear plant built in California, and for a long time
it was easy to believe that there was no future in the state for
this dangerous, astronomically expensive technology. 

Think again. 

As Matthew Hirsch reports on page 16, the nuclear industry,
emboldened by a 2005 Bush initiative called NP (for nuclear
power) 2010 that sets aside $1 billion for siting new nukes, has
its eyes on building a new generation of plants all over the
country. And while California still has laws limiting the
construction of new plants, PG, which owns the Diablo Canyon
nuke, is already taking the preliminary steps to relicense the
plant for another 20 years. That's not just equivalent to
building a new plant – it's worse. 

Nuclear power plants were designed to last about 30 years, and
that's how long the federal government licenses allow them to
operate. But quietly, more than 100 utilities around the country
have applied for license renewals. In some cases they're
applying 10 years before the current license runs out. 

Diablo is licensed until 2025, but unless the state intervenes,
PG could sneak through a license renewal and have the plant
certified to operate until 2056. That's a truly frightening
prospect. The particles emitted by the reactor core batter the
thick concrete and make it brittle. The parts wear out. The
growing pile of deadly, radioactive nuclear waste sits in the
equivalent of swimming pools on the reactor site, near a city of
50,000 people, because there's no place else to put it – and if
the government ever builds a long-term waste dump, that huge
pile of poison will have to be shipped right through town. 

PG isn't even sure exactly how to refuel the plant (a necessity
for another 30 years of operation). The reactor core, which is
about as radioactive as anything can be short of a nuclear bomb,
is too big to fit out the door of the plant, so the current
scenario involves cutting a big hole in the roof and lifting it
out with a crane. Talk about a disaster waiting to happen. 

And let's remember: This plant sits on an active earthquake
fault. The Hosgri Fault has been relatively stable since the
plant was built, but that won't last – and every day that this
menace sits on the shoreline is another day that the odds of a
catastrophic event increase, involving long-term contamination
of wide swaths of land and water. 

The antinuclear movement of the 1970s and '80s largely
disappeared as the threat of new plants waned (nobody has
actually placed an order for a commercial nuclear power plant
since 1973). But that's going to change: The Bush administration
has a goal of getting at least one new order by the end of this
decade and 39 new plants over the next 25 years – and PG has
already started on a feasibility study for relicensing. 

Of course, San Francisco ratepayers have forked over vast sums
of cash to pay for Diablo Canyon. And as long as PG has monopoly
control over the local energy market, that's going to continue.
Which is another reason the city needs to move at full speed
toward replacing PG with public power. (In Sacramento the
public-power agency shut down its ill-considered nuke years ago,
saving ratepayers millions.) 

Meanwhile, the state legislature needs to pass a bill barring
any relicensing of existing California nukes. And San Francisco
– along with every other city in the state – needs to join the
battle immediately.     

*****************************************************************
 39 AFP: US rules out light water reactors as nuclear energy takes centre stage 

 BEIJING (AFP) - The United States ruled out building light
water reactors for North Korea as the Stalinist state's demand
for peaceful atomic energy took centre stage at nuclear
disarmament talks.

The six countries in the negotiations -- the two Koreas, Japan,
China, Russia and the United States -- reconvened for their
first full day since the fourth round of talks adjourned on
August 7.

The bargaining is aimed at persuading the North, which expelled
international monitors and now says it has nuclear weapons, to 
give up the bomb in exchange for security guarantees as well as 
energy and economic aid.

Negotiations have been bogged down over North Korea's demand for
peaceful nuclear energy, and its insistence that the
international community complete construction of two light-water
reactors.

"I don't detect among any of the parties a willingness to
construct a light water reactor which will be a very expensive,
very long-term type of project," said chief US envoy Christopher
Hill.

"So I haven't seen any of the parties coming forward to say that
they are prepared to fund such a thing, so we are talking about
a theoretical issue at this period."

Under a now defunct 1994 agreement, the two light-water reactors
were to have been built by a US-led consortium to replace North
Korea's existing graphite-moderated reactors, which can produce
weapons-grade plutonium.

But construction was suspended after the United States in 2002
accused the North of developing a secret uranium-enrichment
program.

North Korea's demand to use nuclear power for civilian purposes
was a focus of the talks Wednesday, said South Korea's chief
delegate Song Min-Soon, standing next to Hill at a briefing
after the two men lunched together.

"Now we are talking about the concept of the right to peaceful
use of nuclear energy. We are not the stage to discuss in
details about how this concept will develop at a later stage,"
said Song.

"But North Korea, when they complete dismantlement of their
nuclear weapons and nuclear programs, they can have their right
to peaceful use of nuclear energy."

South Korea, along with China and Russia, has previously voiced
support for North Korea's proposal. Japan and the US have been
opposed.

Hill declined to comment when asked if Song's remarks
represented his position.

However at the White House, President George W. Bush indicated
that it was every nation's right to have such programs.

"It's a right of a government to want to have a civilian nuclear
program, but there ought to be guidelines in which they be
allowed to have that civilian nuclear program," Bush, referring
to Iran, said at a press conference.

His aides later played down the significance of the remark, with
a senior administration official replying: "No, he was not,"
when asked if it was meant as a signal to North Korea.

Hill said the fundamental issue remained "ridding the Korean
peninsula of these terrible weapons -- weapons that lead to mass
destruction".

The focus, he said, should be on the more immediate goal of
reaching agreement on a set of principles, drafted by China, to
speed the way to a permanent deal in ending the three-year
crisis .

"What is important is to stick with the fourth draft (document),
to try and make minimal changes to the fourth draft, but not to
engage in any major surgery, and see if we can get an agreement
on the fourth draft and then move on to the next phase."

Hill met his North Korean counterpart Kim Gye-gwan Wednesday
following on from dinner talks between the two Tuesday.

The United States has argued that there is no need for the North
to maintain civilian nuclear programs because South Korea has
pledged to provide its neighbour with electricity. 

Song said the offer remained on the table.

The talks are open-ended although China said it hopes they are
over by Sunday -- the mid-Autumn festival when Chinese and
Koreans enjoy family reunions. 
                                
    Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 40 Interfax China: N. Korea hopes U.S. will agree to its peaceful nuclear energy
plans   
  
Siangan. September 14. (Interfax) - North Korea has agreed to
resume the fourth round of the six-nation talks in the hope that
the U.S. could change its position and recognize North Korea's
right to a peaceful use of nuclear energy, a North Korean
diplomatic source told Interfax on Wednesday. 

"North Korea hopes that the U.S. can act according to existing
reality and recognize North Korea's right to peaceful nuclear
projects. North Korea cannot relinquish the right to a peaceful
use of nuclear energy. This is its principled position," the
source said. 

During the first phase of the fourth round, the U.S. "refused to
understand that, without resolving this issue, no success in the
fourth round is possible," the source said. During the second
phase of the fourth round,  "North Korea's position on this
problem will remain unchanged, and North Korea will insist that
all countries recognize this right," the diplomat said. 

"If the U.S. is really striving for a practical taresult in the
talks, it should agree that the final document must not insist
that North Korea abandon not only miliry but other nuclear
projects as well. It is the mentioning of 'other' nuclear
projects that gives grounds to demand that North Korea abandon
peaceful nuclear energy," he said. 

"The U.S. is trying to show that it has softened its position by
offering three principles for resolving the North Korean nuclear
problem: North Korea's abandoning all, including paceful,
nuclear projects, its re-joining of the Non-Proliferation
Treaty, and its consent to IAEA inspections. However, the
dismantling of peaceful nuclear facilities would throw North
Korea 10-20 years back in this area. We cannot agree to this
under any circumstances," he said. 

At the same time, "there is little hope that the United States
would alter its position, and this means that there is not much
hope for success in the fourth round, either," he said. 

"A small success" in the fourth round would be "a decision by
all countries, including the U.S., to continue the six-nation
process," he said. 

  
1991-2005 Interfax Information Service. All rights reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 41 Telegraph: Tarapur’s new reactor stepping stone to more power                                                                                                                                                             

Calcutta : Nation
 
Thursday, September 15, 2005            |                

Biggest plant in fastest start                                                        

  OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT                      
  				 								
The Tarapur atomic power station                                                                                               
				 		
New Delhi, Sept. 14: India’s latest and largest nuclear reactor
at Tarapur that began feeding electricity to the nation on
Monday is also the fastest-constructed and a stepping stone to
an even more powerful reactor. 																						
														 				 								 																								
The 540 MW reactor that took just five years to build is a
typical homegrown nuclear power plant that uses domestic natural
uranium as fuel. 																						 														 				
								 																								
In the past, the construction of nuclear reactors typically took
seven to eight years. 																						 														 				
								 																								
While existing indigenous reactors deliver about 220 MW of
power, the new reactor uses advanced technologies and improved
designs to extract 540 MW of electricity from the nuclear
reactions at its core. 																						 														
				 								 																								
However, with some tweaking of its operating parameters, the
same core could also be used to develop a 700 MW reactor, a
senior NPC official said. Candidate sites to erect such a 700 MW
reactor are under evaluation, he said. 																						
														 				 								 																								
The 540 MW reactor — Unit 4 at Tarapur — first began burning
nuclear fuel in March this year, and had been synchronised with
the electricity grid in June. NPC declared it ready for
commercial operations on Monday. 																						
														 				 								 																								
Another 540 MW reactor at Tarapur — Unit 3 — is expected to be
ready for power generation by early 2006. Tarapur is the site of
India’s oldest, imported nuclear reactors — two 160 MW US-made
boiling water reactors that rely on imported enriched uranium as
fuel. 																						 														 				 								
																								
In the 540 MW reactor, as in the existing indigenous reactors,
pressurised heavy water remains liquid as it passes through the
channels within the reactor’s core picking up heat.
																						 														 				 								
																								
However, by allowing partial boiling of this heavy water, more
heat may be extracted from the reactor’s core and used to drive
steam turbines and produce 700 MW of power, the NPC official
said. 																						 														 				 								
																								
The NPC now operates 15 nuclear reactors leading to 3310 MW of
power. Seven more reactors are under construction. These include
two at Kaiga, Karnataka, two in Rajasthan, two Soviet-made
reactors in Tamil Nadu and Unit 3 of Tarapur.
																						 														 				 								
																								
All 14 NPC power plants have been achieving an availability
factor of 84 per cent since the year 2000.
																						 														 				 								
																								
The availability factor is a measure of the time for which a
power plant is available to feed the grid. A factor of 84 per
cent means that the plant was available 84 out of 100 days. Last
year, the availability factor of plants was 88 per cent which,
NPC officials said, compares with international figures.
																						 											 					   											 			 
   Copyright © 2005 The Telegraph. All rights reserved.    
*****************************************************************
 42 Fort St. John: Fort St. John Ont. won't shy away from nuclear power 

 - canada.com network
               
  Steve Erwin Canadian Press   

Wednesday, September 14, 2005
 
NIAGARA FALLS, Ont. -- Billions of dollars will be spent to
build new nuclear plants in Ontario if a review of the
province's tight energy supply concludes they're necessary,
Premier Dalton McGuinty said Wednesday. 

In providing his strongest indication yet that he might look to
nuclear energy to meet Ontario's long-term electricity supply
concerns, McGuinty said he's prepared to agree on construction
of multibillion-dollar nuclear plants if that's what it takes to
quench the province's increasing thirst for energy. 

The premier said he's awaiting a Dec. 1 report from the newly
created Ontario Power Authority, which is reviewing what needs
to be done to address concerns about the province's energy
supply. 

"Should the OPA recommend nuclear as being an indispensable part
of a diverse supply of electricity, then we will build new
nuclear in this province," McGuinty said. 

McGuinty was speaking from Niagara Falls, where he attended a
ground-breaking ceremony for Ontario Power Generation's
construction of a 10-kilometre tunnel. The tunnel will divert
more hydroelectric power from the waters around Canada's
honeymoon capital to a power station further up the Niagara
River. 

The premier said it's an example of how the government is
addressing concerns about the energy supply in the short-term,
especially in light of extreme heat in Ontario this summer. 

But he said that over the longer term, larger projects will be
needed, even if it means expanding the use of controversial
nuclear energy. 

Proponents of nuclear power say it's the cleanest and safest way
to add significant power to the province's electricity system. 

Critics say nuclear plants cost billions of dollars to
construct, take 10 years or longer to build and raise
environmental concerns about radioactive waste. 

The Toronto Environmental Alliance said it was "appalled" to
hear McGuinty open the door to more nuclear plants, which it
warned would leave a huge financial and environmental debt. 

"We're very concerned because the (electricity) system is still
very much in the hands of the people who built our last nuclear
plants and got us into the mess we're in today," said alliance
spokesman Keith Stewart. 

"The McGuinty government should not be repeating the mistakes of
the previous provincial government, which put us massively in
debt and left us with nuclear plants that don't work very well,
and we're all paying for right now." 

Greenpeace Canada also asked why Ontario would consider building
more nuclear plants after such a bad -- and expensive --
experience with its current nuclear generators. 

"Do the lessons of the past mean nothing to Premier McGuinty?"
wondered Greenpeace spokesman Dave Martin. 

"We know that nuclear power is extremely unreliable, it's dirty,
it produces waste that's toxic for millions of years, and we
know it's astoundingly expensive." 

Even after the OPA report is completed, Energy Minister Dwight
Duncan noted that months of review will be necessary before the
province gives the go-ahead to any nuclear projects. 

The Conservatives and New Democrats said McGuinty is taking too
long to make up his mind on an energy strategy two years into
his mandate. 

"They don't seem to have a plan for replacing the generation
that they've committed to shutting down," Tory energy critic
John Yakabuski said, referring to the premier's promise to close
coal-fired plants, which has been delayed. 

Yakabuski said Ontario manufacturers won't invest more in the
province until they're sure the energy supply is reliable. 

NDP Leader Howard Hampton said the province should look to ways
of encouraging better energy conservation. 

Hampton estimated a new nuclear plant could cost as much as $10
billion to construct, and noted the Darlington nuclear plant
cost nearly three times as much to build than originally
anticipated. 

"We can get further with energy efficiency. ... It will be
cheaper than building $10-billion nuclear plants." 

At a speech to the Ontario Energy Association in Niagara Falls,
McGuinty said he's willing to take a political hit for building
nuclear plants even if they prove unpopular. He accused previous
governments of having delayed dealing with the nuclear issue. 

"We won't gamble away Ontario's future prosperity because of
what the next poll might or might not say," he told industry
officials. 

Murray Elston, president of the Canadian Nuclear Association,
said costs to build a nuclear plant can be kept under control as
long as there's a firm commitment to construct them. 

"The one thing which is absolutely key for our industry is that
once the decision is taken that we get on with putting the
projects in the ground," Elston said. © The Canadian Press 2004 

  Copyright © CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest
*****************************************************************
 43 Security UN Meeting At Summit Level UN Adopts Anti-terror Steps
 
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:13:46 -0400

 

 
SECURITY COUNCIL MEETING AT SUMMIT LEVEL UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTS ANTI-TERROR 
STEPS
New York, Sep 14 2005  4:00PM
United Nations Security Council Heads of State and Government,  meeting 
within the framework of the 2005 World Summit, today unanimously 
adopted resolutions calling on all states to reinforce the 
battle against terrorism and to strengthen the Council's role in 
preventing conflict, particularly in Africa.

In <"http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=s/res/1624(2005)">Resolution 
1624, adopted at what was officially called the Security 
Council Summit on Threats to Peace and Security, the leaders 
condemned "in the strongest terms all acts of terrorism irrespective 
of their motivation, whenever and by whomsoever committed, as 
one of the most serious threats to peace and security."

They reaffirmed "the imperative to combat terrorism in all its forms 
and manifestations by all means, in accordance with the Charter 
of the United Nations."

They called upon all States to adopt all necessary measures, including 
prohibiting by law incitement to commit terrorist acts, denying 
safe haven to anyone thus involved, and cooperation to strengthen 
security of international borders and combat fraudulent travel 
documents.

The resolution also calls upon all States to continue international 
efforts to enhance dialogue and broaden understanding among civilizations 
in an effort to prevent indiscriminate targeting of different 
religions and cultures and to ensure that measures taken 
comply with all obligations under international law, in particular 
international human rights law, refugee law, and humanitarian 
law.

In Council <"http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=s/res/1625(2005)">Resolution 
1625 on conflict prevention, the leaders called 
for a raft of measures ranging from preventive-diplomacy initiatives, 
regional mediation and early warnings of potential conflict 
to promoting fairness and transparency of electoral processes 
and acting against illegal exploitation and trafficking of natural 
resources.

"We must be at the forefront of the fight against terrorism," Secretary-General 
Kofi Annan said, calling on the international community 
to complete a comprehensive convention that outlaws terrorism 
in all its forms.

He <"http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/sgsm10092.doc.htm">called 
the need to prevent conflict in Africa a "crucial issue," adding: 
"I consider it thoroughly appropriate that at this summit, 
you have reflected the priority it deserves – as is the case in the 
daily work of the Security Council."

Following Mr. Annan, President Benjamin William Mkapa of Tanzania 
said it was important that the Council address not only the threats 
but also their underlying causes. "We need to agree on, and pursue 
an effective strategy that will address the root causes and 
underlying conditions of terrorism and conflict," he added.

Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin said today's session 
underlined the fundamental importance of the UN and its Security 
Council as the headquarters for the international anti-terrorist 
front, and declared his country's readiness  to take practical steps 
to strengthen the UN's central role in ensuring international 
security and stability.

Greek Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis stressed that "actions to 
combat terrorism and the protection of human rights and fundamental 
freedoms are not mutually exclusive," and he called for a more 
comprehensive concept of collective security and strengthening the 
UN.

Speaking next, United States President George W. Bush stressed the 
"solemn obligation to stop terrorism at its early stages" including 
freezing terrorists' assets, denying them freedom of movement 
and preventing them from acquiring weapons, including weapons of 
mass destruction. "The United States will continue to work with 
and through the Security Council to help all nations meet these 
commitments," he said.

President Nestor Kirchner of Argentina, said tackling terrorism required 
a legitimate international response that entailed looking 
at the problem in a broader perspective rather than unilaterally. 
There should be a closer relationship between preserving human 
rights and combating terrorism, he added.

Echoing the need to address both symptoms and root causes, Chinese 
President Hu Jintao said the Council should devise a comprehensive 
strategy that included prevention, peace restoration, peacekeeping 
and post-conflict reconstruction. As terrorism posed a serious 
threat to global peace and security, the international community 
should act in strict accordance with the UN Charter, he added.

Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika condemned all manifestations 
of terrorism, calling on all states to work together under UN 
authority to combat it. He called for an agreed definition of terrorism 
that recognized the legitimate struggle for self-determination.

Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom said terrorism would 
not be defeated until the Council's determination was as complete 
as the terrorists', until its defence of freedom was as absolute 
as their fanaticism and until its passion for democracy was 
as great as their passion for tyranny. "They play on our divisions. 
They exploit our hesitations. This is our weakness. And they know 
it", he said.

Benin's President Mathieu Kerekou said combating terrorism required 
a scrupulous respect for the sovereignty of States and international 
law, and the protection of human rights and international 
humanitarian law. On conflict prevention, he said the Council could 
establish a regular evaluation of risk situations around the world, 
so as to appraise existing threats. Africa required specific 
attention, he concluded.

President Traian Basescu of Romania noted that "global anti-terrorism 
can be sustained only by action taken at the Security Council 
level. It has to be a UN undertaking as a whole," he added.

Echoing the theme of combating both symptoms and causes, Brazilian 
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said repression alone will 
not defeat terrorism. "We must prevent terror from breeding in hotbeds 
of hopelessness," he declared. "In combating irrational violence, 
the best means at our disposal are the promotion of a culture 
of dialogue, the promotion of development and the unyielding 
protection of human rights."

In similar vein, French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin called 
for "resolute action on everything that fuels terrorism – the 
inequalities, the persistence of violence, injustices and conflicts, 
the lack of understanding among cultures," since force alone 
"does not answer peoples' frustrations, it does not address the roots 
of evil."

For his part, Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said he 
found it appalling that a few countries are still blocking a common 
definition of terrorism. "Let me be very clear," he declared. 
"Terrorism can never be justified. Terrorism is never a legitimate 
weapon. The targeting and deliberate killing of civilians is unacceptable. 
Full stop."

Speaking for Japan, Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura said the 
Security Council must play a key role in addressing anti-terrorism 
and conflict prevention in Africa and needed to be reformed to 
reflect today's reality.

Wrapping up the session and speaking in her national capacity, President 
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of the Philippines, which holds this 
month's Council presidency, said the United States was the natural 
leader in the war on terror since it remained the biggest victim 
of terrorism in the present era and was the best equipped to 
fight it. She called on the Council's Counter-Terrorism Committee 
to coordinate intelligence with the US.
 2005-09-14 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
*****************************************************************
 44 [du-list] Uranium in the teeth of children
 
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 14:38:45 -0700

 
	autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com

<x-flowed>
Yes, uranium is a bone seeker. But I have not been able to find a
single clinical or biological study that indicates uranium collects
in
teeth. Sr90 does accumulate in teeth but that is not necessarily
generalizable to uranium. Depends on morphology and chemistry.

I would like to read the project terms of reference including
references to uranium assay studies showing the abundance in teeth
and comparisons to quantities in other biological sample types
(femur, lung tissue, lymph, urine).

Mr Helbig's friend predicts and questions the merit of a conclusive
determination of DU in Iraqi childrens' teeth. Since Iraqi's are
inhaling uranium weapons' fallout, the findings might be useful to
add to other Iraqi data.

More interesting will be the radionuclide and isotope profiles and
comparing Iraqi's to pre-Manhatten Project profiles.Many
organizations will be watching and waiting for the results.
Presumably the study will measure the presence of fast and thermal
fission products.

If possible,please post the projects' terms of reference and its
bibliography.








------------------------ 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/
  

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 45 Las Vegas SUN: Study results due on Nevada town hit by leukemia cluster 

Today: September 14, 2005 at 13:43:35 PDT 

ASSOCIATED PRESS 

FALLON, Nev. (AP) - Results of a federal study analyzing
possible health effects resulting from exposure to arsenic or
other substances in this rural Nevada town hit by a baffling
outbreak of leukemia will be released at a town hall meeting
next Wednesday. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study involved 905
long-term area residents who provided blood and urine samples
and answered questions regarding diet, water consumption,
medical history and exposure to substances such as diesel,
pesticides and solvents. 

While the EPA study results are being made public for the first
time now, agency spokeswoman Ann Brown said study participants
received partial reports nine months after samples were
collected in September 2002. 

Since 1997, 17 children with ties to Fallon have been diagnosed
with childhood acute lymphocytic leukemia, or ALL, and three of
those children have died. Former Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga
of Fallon said there may have been three more cases of ALL,
including two in the last six months. 

In a town the size of Fallon, an agricultural community with
about 8,300 residents, just one case of childhood leukemia would
be expected in five years. 

Arsenic and heavy metals such as tungsten have been mentioned as
possible causes of Fallon's ALL cluster. University of Arizona
scientists Paul Sheppard and Mark Witten have said their tests
show that Fallon has up to 13 times more tungsten in its dust
than other Nevada cities. 

Tests also have found elevated levels of tungsten in tree rings
in Fallon and three other towns with leukemia clusters, they
said. 

But other studies turned up no link to the tungsten levels or to
high levels of naturally occurring arsenic in Fallon's water
supply, a pipeline carrying jet fuel to the Fallon Naval Air
Station where the Navy's Top Gun training program is located,
local pesticide spraying or an underground nuclear test
conducted 30 miles away about 40 years ago. 

         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 46 BBC: Scotland tests disaster response
 
Last Updated: Wednesday, 14 September 2005
 
[Decontamination team - generic]                                

Emergency workers will be testing their procedures                                                                

A major training exercise involving a simulated explosion on a 
nuclear weapons convoy is being staged. 

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) exercise in Edinburgh, entitled 
Senator 05, is designed to test Scotland's response to a serious 
disaster. 

It involves nearly 1,000 people and is based on a scenario where 
a plane engine falls onto a nuclear convoy. 

Emergency services are dealing with simulated explosions, smoke 
and students acting as casualties. 

The event is taking place at Dreghorn Barracks in the capital. 

The scenario we're exercisi here truly can be described as 
extreme ACC Tom Halpin Lothian and Borders Police      

Authorities stressed that the exercise has been planned for two 
years and has nothing to do with the threat of terrorism or the 
recent bombings in London. 

The mock disaster began with a nuclear weapons convoy passing 
Edinburgh Airport. This was struck by an engine falling from an 
aircraft which had just taken off. 

In the exercise, a road tanker then lost control and crashed into 
the same vehicle, creating a massive disaster zone. 

Rear Admiral Nick Harris, of the Royal Navy, said a run-through 
of this kind and on this scale would normally happen about once a 
year in the UK. 

Safety and security 

He said: "This is nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism, but I 
think it's important to note that any kind of emergency response 
exercise means that people rehearse skills that are 
transferable." 

The rear admiral added: "The MoD has an exemplary nuclear safety 
record and continues to place the highest importance on the 
safety and security of nuclear weapons." 

Assistant Chief Constable Tom Halpin, of Lothian and Borders 
Police, said more than 100 officers are involved in a 
co-ordinating role between all the agencies. 

He said: "The scenario we're exercising here truly can be 
described as extreme and I really would never foresee us 
experiencing that. 

Our continued possession nuclear weapons threatens all Scotland 
Chris Ballance Green MSP       

"We need to test the boundaries of our capability and it's only 
by using such an extreme example that we're able to test that." 

Bill Ness, head of emergency planning at the City of Edinburgh 
Council, said this exercise is the largest to be carried out in 
the city in the past 10 years. 

The drill spans three days, with press officers, council workers 
and staff at the Scottish Executive among those also getting the 
chance to play out the roles they would take in any similar 
emergency. 

But environmental campaigners said the exercise would be 
unnecessary if nuclear weapons were scrapped. 

Anti-nuclear group NukeWatch Scotland said it did not make them 
feel safer or happier about weapons of mass destruction 
travelling on Scotland's roads. 

Green MSP Chris Ballance, who speaks on nuclear issues for the 
party, added: "Our continued possession of nuclear weapons 
threatens all Scotland. 

"Britain must honour our commitments under the Nuclear 
Non-Proliferation Treaty and take real steps to disarm. 

"I am appalled that the MoD sends nuclear warheads through major 
population centres in Scotland."                                                         



*****************************************************************
 47 BoiseWeekly: Caught in the Cross-Fire
 
SEPTEMBER 14, 2005

 Are U.S. troops dying as experts debate?
 
BY PETER WOLLHEIM
 
While state legislators in Louisiana and Connecticut are calling
for extra measures to protect U.S. troops from combat-related
health hazards, local military sources are reluctant to talk
openly regarding the possible dangers faced by the approximately
1,780 Idahoans currently serving in either Afghanistan or Iraq.
At stake is exposure of those soldiers to radioactive, heavy
metals from munitions made out of depleted uranium, described by
both advocates and objectors as "the ultimate in battlefield
weaponry." 

Depleted uranium (uranium oxide, or DU) is a cheap waste-product
of nuclear reactors, but is preferred as "the silver bullet" in
modern combat operations. With its high density and explosive
combustibility, the U.S. military has incorporated DU into105-
and 120-mm tank rounds, .50 caliber machine gun shells, cruise
missiles, cluster bombs, so-called "bunker busters," and even
M-16 and pistol shells. The Pentagon has admitted to utilizing
320 tons of DU during the first Gulf War, at least twice that
much while bombing Kosovo, at least 1,000 tons in Afghanistan
and another 2,000 tons so far in Operation Iraqi Freedom. DU
munitions are currently employed in counter-insurgency efforts,
to destroy apartment buildings, shelters and other structures,
but the legality of such use has long been questioned by the
United Nations in light of various international treaties and
war conventions. 

Complex health problems for troops and civilians exposed to DU
have been linked to three basic characteristics of this
weaponry. First, aside from U-234, U-235 and U-238, the heavy
metals in DU include trace amounts of plutonium, neptunium and
other transuranic substances. DU waste releases alpha, beta and
gamma radiation for some 4.5 billion years. Secondly, since a
billion DU particles fit on a pinhead, DU dust cannot be
filtered out by standard issue protective masks. Finally,
because it is not soluable in water, DU permanently lodges in
bones, organs and seminal/vaginal fluids and is not easily
eliminated by kidney function. 

During the heated mid-1990s debates about Gulf War Syndrome, DU
was often alleged to contribute to breathing impairments,
dizziness, kidney stones, vision loss, skin rashes and cancers,
lymphoma, neurological and psychological disorders including
depression, sexual dysfunction and birth defects in the
offspring of combat veterans. Even with considerable controversy
among the experts about such links, the Army Surgeon General's
current orders require a urine bioassay, monitoring and tracking
for "all personnel with actual or potential exposures to DU." 

Officials contacted by BW at the Idaho National Guard and Boise
VA Hospital stated they were "ignorant" about DU, or referred us
to Department of Defense Web sites. The only local source to
comment was Jacques Chung Hee, who served for 25 years as a
master sergeant in the U.S. Air Force. He currently works as a
service officer for the Idaho Division of Veterans Services,
helping veterans process claims for combat-related injuries.
Chung Hee recalled being exposed to both DU and other
"biological and chemical and environmental hazards" during the
first Gulf War. During an interview conducted two years ago, he
recalled being tested by the Air Force prior to deployment to
Iraq, and receiving an exemplary health profile. After returning
home, he began experiencing debilitating pain, fatigue,
dizziness, constipation, chronic headaches and fevers, none of
which VA physicians could diagnose or treat. But in the course
of dealing with veterans with similar ailments, Chung Hee read
about DU and started researching the topic in-depth--despite
denials from doctors reluctant to perform tests. When pushed, VA
doctors referred him to a Department of Defense study at Johns
Hopkins University hospital, which did not return phone messages
to either Chung Hee or BW. 

In a recent e-mail interview with BW, Chung Hee stated no
returning Iraq or Afghan veterans have yet complained to him of
DU-related symptoms. While he still believed a combination of
exposures to be responsible for the dramatic decline in his own
health, he carefully wrote, "I can't speak for others but as me,
as one of those who was exposed not only to DU during Desert
Shield/Desert Storm 1991, but also to biological and chemical
and environmental hazards." He also noted that the Air Force has
announced plans to change previous practices in regards to
"recording medical conditions before and after any type of
deployment in the Persian Gulf due to lessons learned from
Desert Shield/Desert Storm 1991." 

He acknowledged the possibility that "some veterans are still
asking for answers, some want medical treatment and others are
still wondering what went wrong and who to turn to. There are
some Persian Gulf War veterans who have passed on since we last
talked (in May 2003). There are still some Persian Gulf War
[veterans] who are suffering out there and who have no answers
to their medical conditions and have not come in to see any
Service Officers to file a VA claim." 

Alerted by local officials to BW's interest, VA spokesman in Los
Angeles David Bayard contacted us for an interview. Bayard said
he was familiar with veterans attributing their health problems
to DU, but added, "I don't know that any of the research has
indicated that is in fact the case." He cited one ongoing
longitudinal study, saying "the preliminary results from that
have not shown any adverse health effects from DU. I know that
people have theories but I'm only looking at the science of it."
Bayard alluded to studies referenced on the Department of
Defense Web site, including a meta-study conducted by the Rand
Corporation that determined no convincing link between DU and
kidney disease. He also pointed out that no comprehensive DU
studies have yet appeared in peer-reviewed journals. 

Retired Major Doug Rokke, Ph.D., a former Pentagon DU expert,
angrily dismissed what he calls "Pentagon junk science." He
alleged in an interview with BW that the standard journals
censor themselves on the topic, while "the VA moves to muzzle
all internal dissent or questioning" about DU. Rokke pointed to
Louisiana and Connecticut, two states that have considered
legislation requiring the VA to provide all returning troops
with screening for DU exposure. He said such tests go beyond
mere urinalysis. "All we're asking is that the military obey its
own regulations and orders. They're not doing that and soldiers
are getting sick and dying. I've been there and my body is hot
is hell from DU." Rokke said soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan
"still aren't being informed, trained or protected" against DU,
which even contaminates troop food and drinking water. Despite
Pentagon assurances to the contrary, Rokke stated the military
refuses to clean up "battlefields which are toxic soups to which
all civilians and military are exposed." 

Meanwhile, while the experts attack each other's credibility,
returning Idaho soldiers may be given no more than a urine test
and Bayard's offer to enroll them in a longitudinal study.
Otherwise, they could find themselves in situations similar to
that of Chung Hee, who despite his suffering, still attempts to
maintain a positive attitude. "I am trying to live life as best
as I can," he wrote. "I always say to myself that others are
worse than me! I never mind things that are beyond my control
but I make sure I can control my attitude! It has helped me live
through these years." 

-- Peter Wollhein is a Boise State University professor. 



*****************************************************************
 48 Paducah Sun: Sick workers seek responses to their claims - 

Paducah, Kentucky 

Town hall meetings are being held for workers to seek answers
regarding compensation for medical claims. 

By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656 

Wednesday, September 14, 2005 

The director of a federal program to compensate nuclear workers
sickened by toxins says he understands their frustration at
getting worse and still not being paid. 

"That's why we are really working diligently to move things as
rapidly as we can," Pete Turcic said in an interview before a
town hall meeting attended by about 450 people Tuesday night at
the Robert Cherry Civic Center. Another meeting is scheduled for
1 p.m. today at the center. 

Paducahan George Bourgois, a former instrument mechanic, told
Turcic he has waited four years on claims of peripheral
neuropathy and chronic lung disease related to heavy metal
exposure at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. 

"Why is it taking so long to hear from those claims?" Bourgois
asked. 

Turcic suggested Bourgois' claim was more complex than most
because it was not among those previously approved by the
Department of Energy. Last fall, by act of Congress, the Labor
Department assumed a nationwide backlog of 25,000 DOE claims and
expects to have processed most of them by the end of 2006,
Turcic said. 

On Friday, three weeks ahead of schedule, labor officials
exceeded a goal of making 1,200 payments nationally since May
when it finalized regulations, Turcic said. Of $156.8 million
paid overall, $26.3 million has been paid at Paducah. Although
most of that has gone to survivors with simple cases not
requiring regulations, checks are now being paid more rapidly to
workers themselves, he said. 

Leading the list of claimants are those who received a positive
finding from DOE: Those with established lost wages or
impairment from toxic exposure, and with the clearest links
between illness and exposure. 

As of a week ago, out of 3,749 cases at Paducah, 379 had been
recommended for approval, 281 had received final approval, 209
had been paid and 72 were awaiting payment, Turcic said. There
has been no finding in the remaining 2,808 cases. Workers have
60 days after recommended approval to object. If none is filed,
a final decision is reached within another 30 days. Payments
come within 15 days of a final decision, Turcic said. 

More complex cases with worker objections can last six months if
a hearing is required, he said. Turcic said complications arise
when claimants have received state workers' compensation
benefits or lawsuit tort judgments. Those payments are deducted
from the Labor Department claims, which pay up to $250,000 to
the sickest workers for bodily impairment and lost wages. 

To expedite claims, tables are being developed to match jobs,
chemicals and diseases without having to quantify exposures.

Turcic said, for example, that neuropathy and chronic lung
disease are common in welders, and asbestosis is solely caused
by asbestos exposure. 

Claims are paid when it is determined "as least as likely as
not" that toxic exposure caused, contributed to or aggravated an
illness, Turcic said. "That's a pretty low bar." 

Cases that aren't as clear take longer because they are
forwarded to experts for recommendations, but that doesn't mean
claims will be denied, he said. 

Another provision allows surviving spouses and dependent
children of workers who died from toxic exposure to receive up
to $175,000. At the time of the worker´s death, an eligible
child must have been under 18, a full-time student under 23, or
any age and incapable of self-support. 

Claims may be filed or reviewed at 125 Memorial Drive, next to
Milner & Orr Funeral Home off Blandville Road. Phone: 534-0599
or toll-free 866-534-0599. Claims problems may be forwarded to
the new ombudsman's office at ombudsman@dol.com or toll-free,
877-662-8363. 
*****************************************************************
 49 AU ABC: Teeth and nuclear fallout reveal true age. 

15/09/2005. ABC News Online

Nuclear fallout used for age estimates.

Forensic scientists are using tooth enamel and the fallout from
nuclear tests in the 1950s to more precisely deduce the age of a
person at the time of their death.

 Professor Jonas Frisen from the Karolinska Institute in
Stockholm, Sweden, developed the method and said it had already
been used to help identify people who died in the Indian Ocean
tsunami last year.

 US researchers are also offering to use the technique to
determine the age of unidentified victims of Hurricane Katrina.

 Until now, forensic scientists studied the skeleton and wear on
the teeth to determine the age of a person, a system which was
accurate to within about five to 10 years.

 But by looking at the amount of radioactive carbon-14 in the
tooth enamel, scientists can correctly predict a person's age to
within about 1.6 years.

 Tooth enamel is formed at distinct times during childhood and
contains only 0.4 per cent carbon, so higher concentrations of
carbon in teeth reflect the amount in the atmosphere when the
enamel was formed.

 When nuclear testing began in 1955, it increased the amounts of
carbon-14 in the atmosphere.

 Regardless of where the tests were done, the levels very
quickly became uniform around the globe, so the technique can be
used to determine the age of people around the world.

 "It is a simple method to determine the age of an individual by
measuring the level of the compound in teeth," Professor Frisen
said.

 However, the technique does not work for individuals born
before 1943 because their teeth were already formed by the time
the nuclear tests began.

 Professor Frisen, a cell biologist, and his colleagues were
studying the age of cells in the body when they realised
carbon-dating tooth enamel could help forensic scientists.

 The researchers, who reported their findings in the science
journal Nature, say using the technique is no more difficult
than doing a blood test.

 - Reuters 
*****************************************************************
 50 EPA: Yucca Mt. proposed rule & notice of hearing 

FR Doc 05-18226 

[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)] 
[Proposed Rules] [Page 54325-54327] From the Federal Register 
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14se05-29] 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 197 [FRL-7968-7] RIN 
2060-AN15 

Opportunity to Obtain Information and Present Testimony on 
Proposed Public Health Environmental Radiation Protection 
Standards for Yucca Mountain, NV; Notice of Public Hearings 
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Proposed rule; 
notice of public hearings. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will conduct 
public hearings to receive comments on its proposed amendments to 
the Public Health and Environmental Radiation Protection 
Standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada in Amargosa Valley, NV; Las 
Vegas, NV; and Washington, DC. 

The amended proposed standards were published in the Federal 
Register on August 22, 2005. The 60-day public comment period 
closes on October 21, 2005. DATES: The schedule for the hearings 
is as follows: 

Amargosa Valley, NV, October 3, 2005, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. This 
hearing will be preceded by an information session from 4 p.m. to 
5:30 p.m., and a roundtable discussion from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 
p.m. 

Las Vegas, NV, October 4, 2005, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. This 
hearing will be preceded by an information session from 4 p.m. to 
5:30 p.m., and a roundtable discussion from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 
p.m. 

Las Vegas, NV, October 5, 2005, from 11 a.m. to 12 a.m. This 
hearing will be preceded by an information session from 10 a.m. 
to 11 a.m. 

Washington, DC, October 11, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. This hearing will be 
preceded by an information session from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. Specific 
locations for each city are detailed in the next section, 
ADDRESSES. Procedures for preregistering for and testifying at 
these public hearings are detailed in the ``'Hearings 
Procedures''' subsection (under Unit II) of the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section. ADDRESSES: EPA's public hearings to receive 
comments on the Agency's amended proposed radiation protection 
standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada will be held on: 

October 3, 2005 at the Amargosa Valley Community Center, 821 East 
Farm Road, Amargosa Valley, NV; 

October 4 and 5, 2005 at The Cashman Center, 850 North Las Vegas 
Blvd, Las Vegas, NV; 

October 11, 2005 at the EPA East Building, Room 1153, 1202 
Constitution Ave, NW. (Federal Triangle Metro Stop). For 
additional information regarding the purpose and format of the 
hearings, please refer to Unit II of the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section. 

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083, 
by one of the following methods: 

Electronically: If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed 
below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing 
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in 
the body of your comment. Also include this contact information 
on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover 
letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can 
be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to 
contact you in case we cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties or we need further information on the substance of 
your comment. EPA's policy is that we will not edit your comment, 
and any identifying or contact information provided in the body 
of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's 
electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 
we may not be able to consider your comment. 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: . Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments. 

Agency Web site: . EDOCKET, EPA's [[Page 54326]] electronic 
public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method for 
receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments. 

E-mail: Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to , 
Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083. 

Fax: Fax your comments to: 202-566-1741, Attention Docket ID. No. 
OAR-2005-0083. 

Surface Mail: Send your comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), 
Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 
West, Mail Code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, 
DC 20460. Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083. 

Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Air and 
Radiation Docket, EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 
B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Attention 
Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Docket Center's normal hours of operation and special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments and information to Docket ID 
No. OAR-2005-0083. EPA's policy is that all comments received 
will be included in the public docket without change and may be 
made available online at , including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit 
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected 
through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA EDOCKET and 
the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are ``anonymous access'' 
systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If 
you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through 
EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that 
is placed in the public docket and made available on the 
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends 
that you include your name and other contact information in the 
body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If 
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and 
cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to 
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of 
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any 
defects or viruses. 

Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or 
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic 
public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to 
the docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public 
docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, 
and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public 
docket along with a brief description written by the docket 
staff. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit 
EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31, 2002 (67 
FR 38102). For additional instructions on submitting comments, 
please refer to Units I.B., I.C., and I.D. of the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document. 

Docket: The official docket is the collection of materials that 
is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket 
in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center 
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number 
for the Public Reading Room is 202-566- 1744. The telephone 
number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-566- 1742. As 
provided in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 2, and in accordance 
with normal EPA docket procedures, if copies of any docket 
materials are requested, a reasonable fee may be charged. FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ray Clark, Office of Radiation and 
Indoor Air, Radiation Protection Division (6608J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460- 0001; telephone number: 202-343-9601; fax 
number: 202-343-2305; e-mail address: . SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does This Action Apply to 
Me? 

The DOE is the only entity regulated by these standards. Our 
standards affect NRC only because, under Section 801(b) of the 
EnPA, 42 U.S.C. 10141 n., NRC must modify its licensing 
requirements, as necessary, to make them consistent with our 
final standards. Before it may accept waste at the Yucca Mountain 
site, DOE must obtain a license from NRC. DOE will be subject to 
NRC's modified regulations, which NRC will implement through its 
licensing proceedings. B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My 
Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. If you submit CBI, clearly mark the part or 
all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 
information on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the 
outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify 
electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information 
that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of 
the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of 
the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI 
must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information 
so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. You may find the following 
suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 

1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 

2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 

3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that 
support your views. 

4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate. 

5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 

6. Offer alternatives. 

7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified. 

8. Respond to specific questions from the Agency. 

9. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate 
docket identification number in the subject line on the first 
page of your response. C. How Can I View Items in the Docket? 

1. Information Files. EPA is working with the Lied Library at the 
University of Nevada-Las Vegas ( ) and the Amargosa Valley, 
Nevada public library () to provide information files on this 
rulemaking. These files are not legal dockets, however every 
effort will be made to put the same material in them as in the 
official public docket in Washington, DC. The Lied Library 
information file is at the Research and Information Desk, 
Government Publications Section (702-895-2200). Hours vary based 
upon the academic calendar, so we suggest that you call ahead to 
be certain that the library will be open at the time you wish to 
visit (for a recorded message, call 702- 895-2255). [[Page 
54327]] The other information file is in the Public Library in 
Amargosa Valley, Nevada (phone 775-372-5340). As of the date of 
publication, the hours are Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (9 
a.m.-5 p.m.); Tuesday and Thursday (9 a.m.-7 p.m.); and Saturday 
(9 a.m.-1 p.m.). The library is closed on Sunday. These hours can 
change, so we suggest that you call ahead to be certain when the 
library will be open. 

2. Electronic Access. An electronic version of the public docket 
is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment 
system, EPA Dockets (EDOCKET). You may use EDOCKET to submit or 
view comments, access the index listing of the contents of the 
official public docket, and to access those documents in the 
public docket that are available electronically. To access the 
docket either go directly to or, from the EPA Internet Home Page 
( ), select ``Information Sources'' (in the left column), then 
``Dockets,'' then ``EPA Dockets'' (in the first paragraph). For 
either route, then click on ``Quick Search'' (in the left 
column). In the search window, type in the docket identification 
number OAR-2005-0083. Please be patient, the search could take 
about 30 seconds. This will bring you to the ``Docket Search 
Results'' page. At that point, click on OAR-2005-0083. From the 
resulting page, you may access the docket contents (e.g., 
OAR-2005-0083-0002) by clicking on the icon in the ``Rendition'' 
column. D. Can I Access Information by Telephone or via the 
Internet? 

Yes. You may call our toll-free information line (800-331-9477) 
24 hours per day. By calling this number, you may listen to a 
brief update describing our rulemaking activities for Yucca 
Mountain, leave a message requesting that we add your name and 
address to the Yucca Mountain mailing list, or request that an 
EPA staff person return your call. In addition, we have 
established an electronic listserv through which you can receive 
electronic updates of activities related to this rulemaking. To 
subscribe to the listserv, please visit . 

Click on ``Yucca Updates Listserv'' and follow to directions 
there. You also can find information and documents relevant to 
this rulemaking on the World Wide Web at . We also recommend that 
you examine the preamble and regulatory language for the earlier 
proposed and final rules, which appeared in the Federal Register 
on August 27, 1999 (64 FR 46976) and June 13, 2001 (66 FR 32074), 
respectively. II. Meeting Purpose and Format 

The meetings will provide opportunities for both informal 
exchanges of information and formal comments. Meeting formats are 
as follows: 

Information Sessions: an informal opportunity to learn about the 
standards, meet EPA staff, and ask questions. Comments on the 
record can also be provided in writing or on tape. 

Roundtable Dialogues: a facilitated conversation with EPA staff 
to discuss the standards and allow opportunities for the public 
to ask questions of EPA staff, and for EPA to respond. A summary 
of key points and questions will be recorded for the record. 

Public Hearings: a formal opportunity to make verbal statements 
that will be recorded for the public record. For the convenience 
of the public, individuals and organizations should schedule a 
specific time to make their comments (see Hearings Procedures 
below). Hearing Procedures 

Persons wishing to testify at any of the public hearings are 
requested to pre-register by calling EPA's toll-free Yucca 
Mountain Information Line at 1-800-331-9477 at any time. You will 
be asked to leave a message with the following information: 

Name/Organizational Affiliation (if any). 

Hearing date, location, time(s) available to testify. 

Daytime telephone number. 

Your call will be returned within one business day to confirm a 
scheduled time for testimony. In order to obtain a scheduled 
speaking time, EPA must receive requests no later than September 
30, 2005, for the hearings in Amargosa Valley and Las Vegas, 
Nevada; and October 7, 2005, for the hearing in Washington, DC. 
Speakers not registered in advance may register at the door but 
are not guaranteed the opportunity to testify, depending on time 
constraints (all individuals will also be able to comment in 
writing or on tape). Individuals testifying on their own behalf 
will be allowed 5 minutes. Groups or organizations must designate 
one individual to testify as the official representative, and 
each group will be allocated ten minutes for an oral 
presentation. Individuals and organizations may submit written 
comments in addition to oral testimony. Time allowed is exclusive 
of any time consumed by questions from the government panel and 
answers to these questions. Testimony from individuals and 
representatives of organizations is limited to one hearing 
location. In order to ensure that all individuals and groups are 
given an opportunity to testify, substitutions will not be 
permitted for any pre-registered person. Registrants will not be 
permitted to yield their time to other individuals or groups, nor 
will hearing time be used to ``'read into the record''' testimony 
from individuals not present at the hearings. In the event any 
person wishes to enter comments for the record, but either cannot 
or does not appear personally at the hearings, EPA will accept 
written comments during the hearings and other meetings. These 
written comments will be considered to the same extent as oral 
testimony and will be included as part of the official hearings 
transcripts. The hearing transcript will constitute the official 
record of the hearings. Written comments submitted outside of the 
public hearings must be received by EPA Docket OAR-2005-0083 in 
Washington, DC, by October 21, 2005. All comments received by 
EPA, whether written or oral, will be given equal consideration 
in development of the final rule. 

Dated: September 8, 2005. William L. Wehrum, Acting Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation. [FR Doc. 05-18226 Filed 
b9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 
*****************************************************************
 51 Las Vegas SUN: DOE proposes spending cuts for Yucca Mountain scientists 

Today: September 14, 2005 at 17:28:41 PDT 

ASSOCIATED PRESS 

LAS VEGAS (AP) - The Energy Department has notified the U.S.
Geological Survey that it should expect a large reduction in its
2006 funding for work on a proposed nuclear waste dump in
southern Nevada. 

The proposed 89 percent cut follows the disclosure in March that
USGS scientists may have falsified data regarding the Yucca
Mountain project. 

The reduced budget would force the USGS to lay off or reassign
54 government employees and contractors in Nevada and Colorado
by the end of the month, according to an Aug. 30 letter sent
from USGS Associate Director Robert Hirsch to DOE's Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. 

"This effectively would end our Yucca Mountain project," USGS
spokeswoman Barbara Wainman said, noting USGS scientists were
responsible for about a third of the data DOE plans to use in
its upcoming application to open the Yucca repository. 

"This is pretty serious when you think about losing all the
institutional knowledge and expertise needed to defend that
work," she said. 

DOE spokesman Allen Benson said Wednesday the USGS has been paid
$379 million for Yucca Mountain work since 1983 and called
discussion about Yucca Mountain funding projections "purely
speculation." 

In March, the DOE revealed that several USGS hydrologists wrote
in e-mails of possibly falsifying quality assurance documents
related to their Yucca research. 

The e-mails, written between 1998 and 2000, prompted ongoing
investigations by a House subcommittee and inspectors general in
the Energy and Interior departments. The e-mail authors remain
employed at USGS but have been removed from work on the Yucca
project. 

An aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada called
the timing of the proposed funding cuts "somewhat suspect,"
while Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., asked Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman in a letter to explain the proposal and how the
department planned to replace the USGS. 

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., questioned eliminating funding for
work by the USGS, and Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., chairman of a
subcommittee investigating the e-mails, said he has asked to
meet with Hirsch. 

With the Energy Department shifting emphasis from site selection
to licensing, Energy Department spending on USGS activity at
Yucca Mountain has decreased from a peak of $31.5 million in
fiscal 1995 to $8.7 million this year, according to budget
documents. The 2006 proposal calls for $940,000. 

Congress in 2002 picked Yucca Mountain as the site of the
nation's nuclear waste repository, and the Energy Department
plans to seek an operating license from the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. It would entomb 77,000 tons of the nation's most
radioactive waste for tens of thousands of years. 

--- 

On the Net: 

Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: http://www.nrc.gov 

U.S. Geological Survey: http://www.usgs.gov 

         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 52 NRC: NRC Issues Draft Environmental Impact Statement on Proposed Enrichment Plant in Ohio, Announces
Public Meeting

News Release - 2005-13
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION   
  Office of Public Affairs     Telephone: 301/415-8200   
  Washington, DC 20555-0001     E-mail: opa@nrc.gov  
  No. 05-130     September 14, 2005   
  

environmental impact statement on a proposed gas centrifuge
uranium enrichment plant in Piketon, Ohio, concluding there
would be small to moderate impacts on traffic, air pollution and
the local economy. 

NRC staff will hold a public meeting Sept. 29 at the Vern Riffe
Career Technology Center, 175 Beaver Creek Rd., in Piketon, to
discuss the findings and receive written and oral public
comments. The meeting will run from 7 p.m. to 9:45 p.m., and a
transcription will subsequently be posted on the NRC Web site.
NRC staff members will be available for informal discussion an
hour before the meeting. 

USEC Inc. submitted its application to construct and operate the
American Centrifuge Plant in August 2004. The plant would be
located on land leased from the U.S. Department of Energy at
DOEs Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant site in Piketon. 

The draft environmental impact statement categorizes potential
impacts of the plant in three ways: Small impacts are not
detectable or are so minor that they would neither destabilize
nor noticeably alter the environment. Moderate impacts are
sufficient to noticeably alter but not destabilize a resource,
while large impacts are clearly noticeable and sufficient to
destabilize a resource. 

The draft study describes small-to-moderate socioeconomic
impacts of the proposed plant. Specifically, an estimated 3,362
full-time jobs would be created in the area from 2006 to 2010 as
a result of plant construction. During operation from 2010 to
2040, about 1,500 jobs would be created in the Piketon area. The
study also notes moderate socioeconomic impacts to Paducah, Ky.,
where USEC is expected to terminate operations at its gaseous
diffusion enrichment plant once the Piketon centrifuge plant
begins production. 

The draft study also notes small-to-moderate impacts on traffic
along the two main roads in the Piketon area, especially during
construction of the centrifuge plant. Air quality may also be
affected by dust and other particulate matter kicked up in an
area that already sees similar impacts from agriculture. Impacts
on geology, water resources, noise and public occupational
health and safety, among others, are also discussed. 

The draft environmental impact statement is available for public
viewing and comment on the NRCs Web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1834
/. Public comments will be accepted through Oct. 24. Comments
may be submitted to the Chief, Rules Review and Directives
Branch, Mail Stop T6-D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001; or by e-mail at NRCREP@nrc.gov, or by
fax to (301) 415-5397, attention Matthew Blevins. Comments
should note Docket No. 70-7004.   



  


 	Last revised Wednesday, September 14, 2005 	   
*****************************************************************
 53 The Australian: Canadians gamble on uranium 

[September 15, 2005]
 	 
Ian Gerard

CANADIAN miner Maple Minerals is to take control of one of 
Queensland's richest uranium deposits in a gamble that the 
Beattie Government will bow to pressure to reverse Labor's ban on 
new mines.

Maple acquired Ben Lomond mine, near Charters Towers, from French 
multinational Cogema earlier this year for a bargain $1 million, 
before Canberra's decision last month to take over the Northern 
Territory's administration of uranium mining. 

The company is waiting for Queensland Natural Resources and
Mining Minister Henry Palaszczuk to give final approval for the
deal and is expecting an answer in coming weeks. 

A spokesman for Maple's Australian subsidiary, UMVI, said the
deal had been given indicative approval from previous minister
Stephen Robertson. 

There are an estimated 4760tonnes of high-grade uranium at Ben
Lomond, which has not been active since 1981. 

Maple chief executive Gino Falzone said the company had plans to
carry out immediate exploration under its 10-year lease, amid
expectations there was potential for the discovery of another
large uranium deposit. 

"Notwithstanding the present political considerations, the
company believes that the Ben Lomond deposit has reasonable
prospects for economic extraction," Mr Falzone said. 

While Queensland, Western Australia and Victoria do not allow
uranium mining, they have come under renewed pressure this year
to reverse those bans. 

In May, federal Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane urged states to
rethink their policies amid growing support for environmentally
friendly nuclear energy, China's insatiable thirst for the ore
and a spike in the global price of uranium. 

Despite being rich in uranium deposits, Australia has only three
active mines - Ranger in the Northern Territory and Olympic Dam
and Beverly in South Australia. 

Queensland Premier Peter Beattie yesterday said allowing new
uranium mines would undermine the state's booming coal industry. 

Queensland Resources Council chief executive Michael Roche said
the state's resource sector was in favour of uranium mining and
dismissed arguments that it would hurt the state's coal exports.
"There is, in fact, scope for all Queensland's mineral resources
to be exploited," he said. 

"We don't see uranium as a threat to the coal industry and are
hoping that the Government will agree to reconsider its policy
position." Mr Roche said the Queensland Nationals had indicated
they would reverse the ban if they won government. 

Charters Towers mayor Brian Beveridge said the mine was near a
tributary of the Burdekin river, from which the town sourced its
drinking water. 

"On that basis alone, we would want safeguards in place to
prevent leaching," he said. "We have a legitimate claim to being
consulted and reassured that whatever they did wasn't going to
affect us or the environment." 
		 		 	 
© The Australian   

*****************************************************************
 54 ForUm: Ukraine needs storehouse for nuclear waste
 
  News / 14 September 2005 | 10:57   

It is needed to start building an artificial storehouse for
nuclear waste, as reported by Chairman of State committee on
nuclear regulation of Ukraine, Elena Nickolaychuk. 

Presently, Ukraine has five nuclear stations, four of which are
functioning. Partially waste nuclear fuel is delivered to
Russia, after which Russia returns high-level waste. 

According to Nickolaychuk, a part of nuclear waste of Ukrainian
nuclear stations is kept in storehouses, operation term of which
makes no more than 30 years. She pointed out that these
storehouses can be used during seven years more, but the
government should consider about long-term storehouses, e.g. for
100 or 300 years. 

Similar storehouses exist in Finland, Spain, Belgium, and
France. But Ukraine has not even determined an area for such
storehouses. 

At the same time, Nickolaychuk could not say with certainty what
is more advantageous for Ukraine: to deliver waste to Russia and
pay for reservation or to build storehouses on the own
territory. 

“To determine finally is needed to conduct corresponding
calculations,” underlined Nickolaychuk.   

  Editorial staff:english@for-ua.com
 All rights are reserved by © LTD. Inter-Media,
 ForUm 2001-2005       

*****************************************************************
 55 Bradenton Herald: Tallevast residents may add county to list of defendants

09/14/2005 | 

DUANE MARSTELLER

 Herald Staff Writer

MANATEE - Lawyers for Tallevast residents suing over their
community's pollution are thinking of adding Manatee County as a
defendant, but the county said Tuesday it won't give them more
time than allowed by law to decide. 

County commissioners unanimously rejected a proposed agreement,
offered by one of the residents' attorneys, that would have
given residents more time to decide whether to sue the county
over pollution emanating from a former beryllium plant. 

Under the agreement, the county would have suspended the statute
of limitations and any other deadlines related to the timeliness
of filing suit. 

The county is not named in the existing lawsuit, filed on behalf
of more than 200 Tallevast residents earlier this month. The
suit names Lockheed Martin Corp., Loral Corp., Wire Pro Inc.,
WPI Sarasota Division Inc. and BECSD as defendants. 

The lawsuit contends the defendants knew for years that their
operations and waste management practices at the 1600 Tallevast
Road site were environmentally unsound, leading to the release
of toxins that migrated into residents' wells and yards. 

Loral operated the beryllium plant from 1961 to 1996, the year
Lockheed Martin acquired it in a corporate buyout. Lockheed
discovered the leak in 2000 while preparing to sell the property
to WPI, a cable manufacturer that still uses the facility. BECSD
is a holding company that currently owns the site. 

Upon finding the contamination, Lockheed informed county
officials and the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection. But there was no requirement at the time to tell
neighboring residents, who didn't learn of the pollution until
late 2003. 

The suit seeks unspecified relief for property damages and
emotional distress. 

Besides putting the county on notice that it might be drawn into
the lawsuit, the proposal also put county officials on guard. 

Commissioners agreed to start including the county attorney's
office in any meetings between county officials and Tallevast
residents. The two groups have met several times to discuss the
contamination. 

"Anything you say and do could be used against you, so we need
to be even more careful than before," County Attorney Tedd
Williams said. 

But the threat of being sued shouldn't stop county efforts to
protect residents' health and welfare, Commissioner Amy Stein
said. 

"Just because there is a lawsuit between Tallevast and Lockheed
Martin is not a reason for us to abdicate our responsibilities,"
she said. "I'm sure it's a lawyer request, not a community
request." 

Ed Cottingham, the residents' lead attorney, did not immediately
return a message left on his cell phone Tuesday evening. Bruce
Denson, the attorney who proposed the agreement, did not
immediately return a message left with his office and has an
unlisted home number. 

Duane Marsteller, transportation and growth/development
reporter, can be reached at 745-7080, ext. 2630, or at
dmarsteller@HeraldToday.com.   

*****************************************************************
 56 Las Vegas RJ: DOE moves to boot agency 
 
Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Proposed cuts follow disclosure of Yucca e-mails 

By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
 
WASHINGTON -- Months after the discovery of scientist e-mails
critical of the Yucca Mountain Project, the Energy Department is
preparing deep cuts in spending next year for the federal
geology agency at the nuclear waste site, officials said.
 
 The cuts essentially could sever ties between DOE and the U.S.
Geological Survey at Yucca Mountain, which USGS earth scientists
have studied for 26 years.
 
 The timing of the proposal has caught interest in Congress. It
follows the disclosure in March that several USGS hydrologists
wrote of possibly falsifying quality assurance documents on
their Yucca research.
 
 The e-mails, written between 1998 and 2000, rocked both
agencies and prompted ongoing investigations by a House
subcommittee and inspectors general in the Energy and Interior
departments.
 
 USGS officials said they were surprised by DOE's plans, which
formed over the summer. There is belief that DOE's decisions
were linked to the e-mail controversy, according to three USGS
officials who asked not to be identified.
 
 "Obviously we were as disturbed by the e-mails as they were," a
USGS executive said. "It is hard to completely separate the two,
but we were not anticipating our budget would take this kind of
decline."
 
 The Energy Department had no immediate comment Tuesday.
Spokesman Allen Benson said Congress has not yet appropriated a
Yucca Mountain budget for next year, and it would be premature
to speculate how it would be spent.
 
 With the Energy Department shifting emphasis to Yucca Mountain
licensing, science work at the site has been tapering. DOE
spending on USGS activity has decreased gradually from a high of
$31.5 million in fiscal 1995 to $8.7 million this year,
according to budget documents.
 
 In an Aug. 30 letter, USGS Associate Director Robert Hirsch
said the agency was told by DOE and Yucca Mountain management
firm Bechtel SAIC that it should expect an 89 percent cut in its
2006 work funding, to $940,000.
 
 The budget projections place USGS's work "in great jeopardy,"
Hirsch said in the letter to Paul Golan, DOE deputy director of
the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
 
 "This effectively would end our Yucca Mountain project," USGS
Communications Director Barbara Wainman said. "This has been a
long-standing relationship. We were anticipating being on the
project through the licensing process."
 
 USGS personnel monitor water and precipitation at the Yucca
site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, take part in studies of
natural characteristics that could corrode waste canisters, and
have been working on revised peak radiation dose calculations
that would be required by the Environmental Protection Agency,
Wainman said. 
Scientists also provide technical support on Nye County nuclear
waste studies, she said.
 
 The USGS has alerted federal lawmakers in Nevada and Colorado,
where workers would be affected by the proposed cuts.
 
 The lawmakers began reacting Tuesday.
 
 Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman
in a letter to explain the proposal and how DOE planned to
replace the USGS.
 
 "At a time when the integrity of the science and overall
technical process surrounding the Yucca Mountain Project is
being called into question, how can the DOE ensure that the
scientific process meant to assure public safety will not be
compromised by such a drastic budget cut?" Gibbons wrote.
 
 "I question eliminating nearly all funding for work by the
USGS, given the role that they have played in performing
scientific assessments and the knowledge base that exists within
the agency," said Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev.
 
 Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., chairman of a subcommittee
investigating the e-mails, said he has asked to meet with Hirsch
"to get to the bottom of this."
 
 "DOE is remaining true to their standard operating procedure:
Never let good science get in the way of a bad project," said
Tessa Hafen, spokeswoman for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.
 
 Authors of the controversial e-mails remain employed at USGS.
They have been removed from Nevada work.
 
 A primary e-mail author, hydrologist Joseph Hevesi, told
Porter's subcommittee at a hearing in June that he did not
falsify documents and his criticism of the project was "water
cooler talk."
 
 DOE managers authorized an internal probe to dissect work that
Hevesi and others associated with the e-mail had performed. The
investigation has tentatively concluded repository science was
not compromised, but officials have said the scientists' work
would be redone in any case to increase confidence.
 
 Hirsch and USGS Director Patrick Leahy were scheduled to meet
with DOE counterparts on Sept. 19 to discuss funding and the
e-mail controversy. Wainman said DOE recently indicated it might
increase spending on USGS work above the $940,000 amount.
 
 USGS workers assigned to Yucca Mountain have been told they
might be laid off or transferred. Forty-six federal workers and
contractor employees are based in Denver while eight are in
Nevada.
 
 "As we move into the nuclear licensing process, over a third of
the data sets that have been used in the science to support
Yucca Mountain, and that DOE will be using in its license
application, are USGS data," Wainman said. "This is pretty
serious when you think about losing all the institutional
knowledge and expertise needed to defend that work."
 
 
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
 57 Las Vegas RJ: Environmentalists ask Congress for Yucca probe 
 
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
 

By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
 

WASHINGTON -- Environmental activists on Tuesday called on
Congress to convene an independent investigation of possible
document falsification at Yucca Mountain, saying the Energy
Department has avoided scrutiny on the issue.
 
 E-mails made public in March show that U.S. Geological Survey
scientists assigned to the nuclear waste repository project did
not follow procedures to verify their work, the groups said.
 
 They questioned an internal probe that DOE is conducting.
 
 They also urged Congress to halt work on Yucca Mountain and
require the department to "publicly release all relevant
information."
 
 "Asking DOE to conduct a sound, reliable investigation of
itself is akin to asking the fox to count the hens to make sure
none of them have been eaten," the groups said in a letter sent
to Senate and House members.
 
 The letter was signed by leaders of 22 environmental
organizations that have been critical of the Yucca Mountain
Project, including Nevada-based Citizen Alert and the Nevada
Nuclear Waste Task Force. 
Inspectors general for the Energy Department and the Interior
Department are investigating the e-mails, but they are
concentrating on possible criminal activity and not issues that
would affect repository health and safety licensing, the
activists said.
 
 A House panel also is looking into the issue. DOE "has
repeatedly ignored requests by the subcommittee for relevant
documents, meetings with DOE managers and DOE and USGS
scientists and responses to written questions," the groups said.
 
 The House subcommittee chairman is Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev. He
said he understands activists' frustration, but he believes his
investigation will be fruitful.
 
 "We've been at this for five months and with hundreds of hours
of investigation," Porter said. "If I believed we need an
additional investigation, I would be the first one to call for
it."
 
 
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
 58 Bellona: Spent nuclear fuel to be unloaded from two retired submarines 
in Severodvinsk
 
The specialists of the Zvezdochka plant will unload spent
nuclear fuel from Victor-III and Typhoon nuclear submarines. 

2005-09-14 16:42

The plant’s chief engineer Oleg Frolov said to Interfax that the
Rosatom Commission issued permission to unload spent nuclear
fuel from retired Victor-III nuclear submarine (K-502), order
641, project 671 RTM. Canada sponsors the dismantlement of this
submarine. K-502 entered active service December 31, 1980. 

The preparation for the same operation is under way on Typhoon
nuclear submarine (TK-12), project 941, order 713. The USA in
the frames of CTR program sponsors the dismantlement of this
submarine. Unloading is scheduled for December. In 2006, the
submarine will be placed in the dry dock for further
dismantlement. Then the empty reactor compartment will be
shipped for storage to the Sayda bay on the Kola Peninsula.
TK-12 was in active service from 1984 till 1996. 
  

  Publisher: , President: 
Information: , Technical contact: 
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62  * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
 59 Bellona: Unloading of spent nuclear fuel from Russian nuclear cruiser
postponed till the end of September

The unloading operation on the nuclear cruiser Admiral Nakhimov
was postponed due to the financial constraints.

2005-09-14 18:49

The Sevmash specialists prepared the heavy missile cruiser
Admiral Nakhimov for spent nuclear fuel unloading and received
the official permission for the operation. Unfortunately, the
navy failed to pay for the train, which is supposed to ship the
spent nuclear fuel to the Mayak plant in the South Ural,
Interfax reported. 

Admiral Nakhimov arrived at the Sevmash plant for planned
intermediate overhaul back in 1999. The design works for the
overhaul should be completed in 2006, and then the works should
start on board the cruiser. The new computer equipment should be
installed as well as new missile launching installations,
Interfax reported. 

The Russian Heavy Missile Cruise Ship, Project 1144.2 Kirov
Class was built by the Baltic Shipyard in Saint Petersburg. The
Kirov Class provides the capability to engage large surface
ships and to defend the fleet against air and submarine attack.
Four cruisers were built but only Admiral Nakhimov (commissioned
in 1988) and Pyotr Velikhiy (commissioned in 1995) remain
active. 
  
  Publisher: , President: 
Information: , Technical contact: 
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62  * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
 60 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca waste talks likely facing delay 

September 13, 2005 

By Suzanne Struglinski <>
 SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- A crowded congressional calendar may slow down
talks on a government plan to move nuclear waste somewhere
before Yucca Mountain would open, but House Appropriation
Committee aides are happy that the discussion is expected to
eventually take place.

 Finding money for Hurricane Katrina aid and the confirmation
process for two Supreme Court nominees will overshadow nuclear
waste talks -- and rightly so -- aides said at a National
Academy of Sciences meeting Monday, but they are still willing
to debate the issue as spending bills compete for completion
before the end of the year.

 The House approved allocating $10 million for the Energy
Department to begin moving nuclear waste to a government site
that has yet to be determined. Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, who
leads the House Appropriation Energy and Water Subcommittee,
earmarked the money because the plan to put 77,000 tons of
nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas, is not moving forward right now.

 The Senate version of the bill, passed earlier this year, did
not include that additional money. 

Hobson emphasized the money is not designed to replace Yucca or
move away from the process at all; it is just a way to get waste
out of the hands of utilities.

 The government was supposed to take waste from nuclear power
plants by 1998, but it missed the deadline. Nuclear power users
are still paying toward a federal repository that does not exist
yet as well as costs for storing waste on-site.

 Hobson's subcommittee clerk, Kevin Cook told the Academy's
Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board Monday that there are other
things dominating the schedule now, as they probably should be.
It is not clear when meetings would start between House and
Senate negotiators to work out differences between the two
versions of the bill. Cook said the Senate's bill is $1.5
billion higher than the House already.

 "We intended to start a dialogue," Cook said. "We have been
surprised by a lack of administration response." Although he
said the administration may still submit a plan that would have
to be introduced as a bill in Congress. He did not know when or
if one would go to the Hill. 

"We have obviously succeeded in stirring the waters," said Dixon
Butler, of the subcommittee's Democratic staff. "We hope the
administration will come through with something that could
trigger legislation."

 The energy and water spending bill, at the earliest, would come
up in October, said Tessa Hafen, spokeswoman for Senate Minority
Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Reid is the top Democrat on the Senate
subcommittee that writes the bill. Hafen said it is not likely
to come up this month at all.

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval of the proposed
Private Fuel Storage site in Utah may help calm transportation
fears, Cook said. 

"It helps prove the point the centralized interim storage makes
more sense," Cook said. "Once you start moving it, it blows the
whole 'mobile Chernobyl' argument out of the water." 

Nevada officials, who strongly oppose Yucca Mountain, do not
want to see waste moved anywhere but would rather the government
pay to store waste on site a nuclear power plants. 

         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 61 Las Vegas SUN: USGS faces big budget cut 

Today: September 14, 2005 at 11:23:18 PDT 

By Suzanne Struglinski <suzanne@lasvegassun.com>
 SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Geological Survey faces an 89 percent
budget cut for its work on the Energy Department's Yucca
Mountain project. If finalized, government employees and
contractors in Nevada and Colorado would lose their jobs by the
end of the month.

 Congress has not approved the Energy Department's final budget,
which could change the outcome. Until it does, the USGS is
taking action to prepare for the lower budget that would start
Oct. 1. Officials from both agencies are scheduled to meet Sept.
19 to figure out the next steps or how to solve the problem.

 "You don't wait until you get your appropriation," said Barbara
Wainman, USGS communications director, who said it is normal for
the agency to be taking these steps now with the type of budget
cut proposed.

 "We were anticipating the budget would have a steady decline,
but not anticipating such a precipitous drop," Wainman said.

 Controversy has surrounded the federal agencies this year when
the department discovered e-mails written by USGS employees
complaining about adhering to rules on how to document their
work. Several government investigations are now in progress,
including one by a congressional subcommittee led by Rep. Jon
Porter, R-Nev., to see if any they falsified any data.

 Wainman could not specify why the department was proposing such
a dramatic cut.

 In an Aug. 30 letter to Yucca's deputy director Paul Golan,
USGS Associate Director Robert Hirsch said the Energy
Department's "present budget projections place our proposed
transition, continuity of the science program, and license
support in great jeopardy."

 Hirsch said the USGS would need to let go 15 contractors by the
end of the month and reassign 39 employees or let them go as
well. USGS will notify Nevada and Colorado officials that people
will lose their jobs.

 Wainman said six government employees and two contractors in
Nevada would be at risk.

 The USGS has worked with the department on the proposed nuclear
waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas, since its inception, Wainman said. In 1995 it had a
budget of $31.5 million for its research and scientific work.
The USGS does not use any of its budget for Yucca, but acts more
like a contractor to the Energy Department. The department
reimburses the agency for its employees' work, Wainman said.

 USGS officials met with aides to Senate Minority Leader Harry
Reid, D-Nev., and informed them of the cuts, Reid spokeswoman
Tessa Hafen said. The Reid staffers were struck by the fact that
the Energy Department had given the USGS no clear reason for the
cuts, she said.

 Hafen said the timing was "somewhat suspect" coming so soon
after the disclosure of the controversial e-mails, Hafen said.
The USGS still has an important role to play at Yucca, she said.

 "They are still an independent agency -- independent from DOE,"
Hafen said.

 Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., sent a letter to the Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman Tuesday demanding answers on the budget reduction.

 "At a time when the integrity of the science and overall
technical process surrounding the Yucca Mountain Project is
being called into question and is the subject of a congressional
investigation, how can the DOE ensure that the scientific
process meant to assure public safety will not be compromised by
such a drastic budget cut?," Gibbons wrote.

 Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said no more money should be
spent on Yucca Mountain at all, but because the White House
wants to move forward with it, she wonders why the USGS would be
cut out.

 "I question eliminating funding for work by the USGS given its
role in performing scientific assessments at Yucca Mountain and
the knowledge base that exists within the agency." Berkley said.
"This move is the latest signal that all remaining science at
the site is being jettisoned and that there is no interest on
the part of the White House in answering lingering questions
about the shoddy science and lack of quality assurance that has
been well documented."

 Berkley said the cuts also give the department a way to get rid
of employees "who may know exactly what corners were cut and
what findings were doctored" at the project.

 Porter has requested a meeting with Hirsch to discus exactly
what is happening,he said. The department's action does not
surprise him. Porter believes the e-mail controversy is
affecting all aspects of the program.

 "If they take away the Quality Assurance and the scientists,
what is going on there?," Porter said. 

         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 62 Platts: Germany, Switzerland to search jointly for final nuclear storage
 
+ Germany's environment ministry has installed a commission to 
work with Switzerland on the latter's search for a final nuclear 
waste storage facility, the ministry said. 

The latest proposal foresees a location near the town of Benken, 
near the German border, as an option for a final storage 
facility. 

The rock formation there is sounder than elsewhere, say the 
Swiss. 

The commission is to work with the Swiss while representing 
German interests, and the minister will then represent Germany 
against Switzerland when it comes to the crunch in 2006. 

Everyone in Switzerland and neighboring Germany can comment on 
the proposal by Dec 12. A final storage facility should be in 
operation by the middle of this century. 

Germany itself has not found a final waste facility yet and is 
using intermediate storage facilities on the site of nuclear 
units until it can agree on where to store the waste for good. 
For more information, take a trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at 
http://nucweek.platts.com. 

Freiburg (Platts)--13Sep2005
 
Copyright © 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 [The McGraw-Hill Companies]   
*****************************************************************
 63 Chemical & Engineering News: Utah Nuclear Waste Site Advances

September 14, 2005

GOVERNMENT & POLICY

NRC approves private temporary storage site, but big challenges
remain 

Glenn Hess

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)has denied Utahs final
appeal of a federal licensing boards approval of a private
companys plan to build a nuclear waste storage facility on an
Indian reservation about 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City.

Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. intends to challenge the NRC decision
in the courts. Although this is certainly a setback, it does not
mean that spent nuclear fuel will be shipped to Utah anytime
soon, Huntsman says. This is a battle that will take several
years to fight to completion, but it is also a battle that I
intend to win.

Private Fuel Storage (PFS), a consortium of eight commercial
power companies, plans to build an aboveground facility to store
44,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel on the Goshute Indian
Reservation in Skull Valley, Utah.

By a 3 to 1 vote, NRC rejected Utahs request for review of a
February ruling by the Atomic Safety & Licensing Board. That
board had rejected the states claim that the thousands of
flights over the Skull Valley each year by military aircraft
from nearby Hill Air Force Base pose an unacceptable risk of an
accidental crash into the facility and a catastrophic release of
radiation.

The proposed independent facility is designed to be temporary
and would operate until the Department of Energys long-delayed
permanent storage site for commercial waste opens at Nevadas
Yucca Mountain. PFS has said the earliest its facility could
begin accepting fuel is 2008.

Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid(D-Nev.), who is fighting to
stop the Yucca Mountainproject, has proposed storing nuclear
waste at the facilities where it is being produced. Transporting
high-level radioactive waste to Utah is as dangerous as it would
be transporting it to Nevada, he remarks. There is simply no way
to safely do this. Chemical & Engineering News 

+ ISSN 0009-2347 
+ Copyright © 2005 
 
*****************************************************************
 64 MDN: China seeks new supplies of uranium to feed nuclear power 
ambitions 

MSN-Mainichi Daily News: 

September 15, 2005                                                                                                                                                      National                        

SHANGHAI -- As China moves to line up uranium supplies to feed
its planned massive nuclear power expansion, it's facing
surprisingly little resistance and sparking a lot of interest
from countries with deposits of the mineral.

In the next 15 years, China plans to build as many as 40 nuclear
plants to supplement the nine it has now.

The move is part of Beijing's strategy to become less dependent
on crude oil and develop a wider range of energy sources -- a
plan that could have China bumping up against the strategic
interests of the United States and its own neighbors.

China's search for oil and gas in nearby waters, and as far
afield as North and South America, has already provoked
political tension.

But Australia, Canada, and Kazakhstan -- which hold much of the
world's readily extracted low cost uranium -- appear keen to
sell uranium to China.

"China will be the main source of rising demand for the next 10
to 15 years. U.S demand is less certain. China is already
happening," said Steve Kidd, director of strategy and research
at the World Nuclear Association, a not-for-profit nuclear power
advocacy group.

The administration of U.S. President George W. Bush has strongly
supported the use of nuclear energy in the U.S., but it still
needs to convince private utility companies to make the big
investments needed to expand the sector.

China's communist-led government can execute its own long-term
nuclear energy plans with little resistance, said Kidd.

China's known uranium reserves stand at 70,000 metric tons. Now
it consumes 1,500 metric tons a year. By 2020, this could soar
five-fold.

Domestic uranium production now provides about half of China's
annual needs, according to data from the World Nuclear
Association.

China National Nuclear Corp., a state-owned firm responsible for
all aspects of China's civilian and military nuclear programs,
has been successfully shoring up the country's future uranium
supplies.

In November, signed a long-term uranium production and
processing agreement with KazAtomProm, Kazakhstan's national
atomic company, which already has been supplying China with
uranium.

Kazahkstan, which shares China's northwest border, sits on 17
percent of the world's uranium reserves.

Canada, which built two reactors for China in the 1990s, is a
potential source as well.

Last week, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. and CNNC agreed to
cooperate on the further development of the Canadian-designed
CANDU reactor.

The agreement doesn't include uranium sales by Canada, which has
14 percent of the world's uranium reserves. But it certainly
fosters closer nuclear cooperation.

The size of the China market has also spurred interest in
Australia, which has strict rules requiring safeguards that
exported ore won't be used for weapons.

Australia sits on an estimated 30 percent of the world's uranium
reserves and already is a heavy resources exporter to China.

Australia announced last month that the two trading partners had
formally begun negotiations on an agreement that would ensure
Australian uranium sold to China would only be used for energy
generation. (AP)

September 14, 2005 				   

Copyright 2004-2005 THE MAINICHI NEWSPAPERS. All
*****************************************************************
 65 KVBC: Yucca Mountain Hearing In Caliente

September 15, 2005   

A reminder for folks in the Caliente area. The Department Of 
Energy is holding a public hearing Thursday on the Yucca Mountain 
issue. 

It concerns the Caliente Corridor. That's the proposed rail line 
that would carry radioactive waste from Caliente to Yucca 
Mountain. The rail line is 319 miles long. 

The DOE wants to set aside 308,600 acres for up to 20 years while 
it looks at building that line. The set aside prevents any mining 
claims on that land. The public hearing is from 4p.m. to 8p.m. 
Thursday night at the Caliente Youth Center on Highway 93. 
  






Copyright 2000 - 2005 WorldNow and KVBC. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 66 Canon City Daily Record: Cotter hearing under way
 
http://www.canoncitydailyrecord.com

  Publish Date: 9/13/2005 			 

Blakely Thomas-Aguilar Daily Record Staff Writer                                                                               

Opening statements were heard Monday during the first day of the 
Cotter Corp. renewal licensing hearing at the Fremont County 
Administration Building, and the four groups involved did not 
hide their determina-tion to satisfy their agendas. 

Four primary issues are at hand as Cotter appeals the renewal
licensing agreement proposed by the Colo-rado Department of
Public Health and Environment. Of the 60 items Cotter initially
challenged, the CDPHE and Cotter have agreed on most of the
stipulations outlined by the Order on Consent. 

The agreement gives Cotter the capability to continue its
operations mining and processing uranium ore from its mines on
the Western Slope until the groups agree on the issues under
amendment. 

Cotter attorney John Watson said the company disagrees with the
CDPHE’s stipulations requiring the dewatering of the primary
impoundment, converting to dry tailings in the primary
impoundment, dewater-ing and decommissioning of the secondary
impoundment, and the disallowance of direct disposal into the
primary impoundment. 

The company contends the complete use of the primary and
secondary ponds are necessary to continue production at the
current level. The uranium processing requires large amounts of
water during the proce-dures, and the “slurried tailings,” a
waste combination of liquids and metals, are then deposited in
the impoundments, Watson said. 

The water drains from the tailings, and the company uses
evaporative cells and a sump pump system to deal with the
disposal of these waters. Watson said this evaporative process
is dependent on the surface level of both tailings ponds. 

The secondary impoundment, located directly next to its primary
counterpart, is about 40 acres. Watson said the reduction of the
evaporative surface level by closing the secondary impoundment
would decrease the productivity level of the mill. 

“The real problem we have is the company needs evaporation
capacity,” Watson said. “It’s like a bathtub. … If you keep
putting water in it, there’s no place for it to go. We can’t
poor that water down the drain like you can at home. The only
way we can do it is to have mother nature, the sun, evaporate
it.” 

Cotter’s Manager of Environmental Affairs Steven Landau said the
evaporative waters separate from the radioactive metals and is
then cleanly dispersed into the atmosphere. This evaporation
also assists with the head pressure, or “weight” of the feet of
tailings and water, on the 50 mil hypalon liner. 

A large concern of the public and health department is the
protective lining, which is 48-50 mil thicker than the average
household trash bag, under the impoundments could be leaking
into the springs and ground under the ponds. All parties agree
there have been no studies showing conclusive data proving the
ponds are leaking. 

Concerned Citizens Against Toxic Waste, a group that has party
status in the hearing, said this uncertainty should be enough to
halt production until data proves the radiation-laden waste
water is not leaking into the neighboring communities,
specifically the Lincoln Park area adjacent to the Cotter
property. 

“We in this community have been living with a disaster that
happens in slow motion. It’s in my well,” said CCAT
co-chairwoman Sharyn Cunningham, who lives in the Lincoln Park
area. “Common sense went out the window when they built ponds
over those springs.” 

The key issue Cotter is appealing is the denial of direct
disposal of waste materials on the 2,500-acre facility,
particularly a 400,000 ton shipment of materials from the
Maywood, N.J., site. Cotter, already classi-fied as a Superfund
site, said the materials are lesser in radon dosages than the
slurried tailings currently in the ponds. Watson said the CDPHE
Radiation Management Unit, the Environmental Protection Agency
and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission have not been able to
supply just cause for the denial of direct disposal rights. 

“There is no technical or regulatory basis to deny direct
disposal of materials such as the Maywood soils into the primary
impound,” Watson said. 

In the CDPHE’s opening statement, Colorado assistant district
attorney Jerry Goad said the issues at hand were covering up the
underlying issues between Cotter and the state. 

“We have a drastically different view on what this case is
about,” Goad said. “All that is a distraction. The real issue is
the authority of the department to regulate the amount of
radioactive materials.” 

Goad said the department has not issued a long-term decree for
Cotter to close the secondary impoundment. The closure, he said,
was an “interim” situation until Cotter could come up with
reasonable data to support its evaporative needs and to assure
that the linings were not leaking. 

The department also is concerned with the technological
infrastructure of the facility. Many of the materials at the
facility were implemented in the 1980s and 90s, and the
department is requiring Cotter to evaluate new technology for
more accurate results on leakage, radon emissions and employee
safety. 

“We also feel that the system in place … is inadequate. We have
a suspicion (the impoundments) are leak-ing,” Goad said. 

After opening statements, Landau testified on the exhibits
entered into the hearing, including the licensing application,
the Order on Consent, letters between the CDPHE and Cotter, and
recommendations and stud-ies from various organizations on the
Cotter milling facility. The last exhibit is a report on the
Cotter em-ployee who twice ingested uranium at the compound. 

Landau also testified on Cotter’s intentions to use the Maywood
soils to cover exposed tailings on the beach of the secondary
tailings pond. Currently, a layer of water from the slurried
materials sits atop the tailings. This layer of water is
believed to serve as a buffer to limit radon emissions, but the
water does not cover the waste materials entirely. Landau
explained the soils from New Jersey would be shipped in
“bur-rito bags” to protect the environment and water spray would
limit the dust entering the air. 

When the milling facility is decommissioned, which Watson said
is under the discretion of the company, a thick layer of clean
soil will cover the entire pond area and the “cork,” which stops
“all water” from enter-ing surrounding communities, will become
a permanent stoppage. The land then will be turned over to the
federal government for monitoring. The half life of uranium is
69,000 years. 

Cañon City resident and CCAT member Anthony Belaski disagreed
with Watson regarding the introduc-tion of the Maywood soils
approximately one mile from his front door. He said Cotter’s
history of irresponsibility, including contamination that
brought on more than $3 million dollars worth of lawsuits over
the past 20 years, shows that the company is not taking care its
waste properly. 

“What I care about is the fact that nothing is being done to
identify the source or sources of the continued contamination or
any effort to get it fixed now,” Belaski said during the 1-hour
public testimony portion of the hearing. “Enough is enough. Not
one more shovel full of radioactive material should be allowed
to be disposed of at the Cotter site.” 				   

All contents Copyright © 2005 The Cañon City Daily Record. All
*****************************************************************
 67 Tri-City Herald: Hanford lab building lags behind 

This story was published Wednesday, September 14th, 2005 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

The structural steel design of the Analytical Laboratory at
Hanford's massive vitrification plant does not meet commercial
building standards used nationwide. 

That and other problems at the laboratory under construction
have caused DOE's confidence to decrease in contractor Bechtel
National's ability to achieve quality performance and meet the
construction schedule for the lab, DOE told the contractor in a
recent letter. 

DOE also has sent Bechtel National a second letter saying it is
"concerned with an apparent significant decline in quality
associated" with the welding and welding inspection of the
construction project. Repeated problems have been found over the
past year, wrote Roy Schepens, manager of DOE's Office of River
Protection for Hanford. 

Bechtel National is building a $5.8 billion plant to turn
millions of gallons of radioactive waste into a stable glass
form for permanent disposal. The waste, held in underground
tanks, is left from the past production of plutonium for the
nation's nuclear weapons program. 

Since a new earthquake study showed key parts of the plant might
not withstand a severe earthquake, construction has slowed on
the buildings at the plant that would pretreat and treat
high-level radioactive and hazardous chemical waste. 

But construction has continued on other buildings, such as the
analytical laboratory. 

In July, Bechtel National discovered that two engineers working
on part of the structural steel design had drawn up plans that
did not meet the Universal Building Code. By then the company
was putting out bids for the building's structural steel columns
and beams. 

"We did not catch it nearly as early as we should have," said
John Britton, spokesman for Bechtel National. But when the
contractor did discover the problem, it reported the lapse to
DOE's Office of Price-Anderson Enforcement, which has federal
authority on nuclear safety issues. 

The two engineers who developed the faulty design no longer work
on the project, he said. 

According to the report attached to the letter sent by Roy
Schepens, the manager of DOE's Office of River Protection, the
structural steel design did not meet requirements for
compression load limits, connection details and column strength,
among other standards. 

Work to correct the design will put construction on the
Analytical Laboratory about three months behind the contract
schedule and seven months behind the contractor's more ambitious
schedule for project completion. 

However, that may have no practical effect on the overall
vitrification plant schedule. Problems with other facilities at
the plant affected by the new earthquake design standards could
delay the waste treatment at the plant until 2015, four years
after the legal deadline of 2011. 

The DOE report on lab construction also pointed out that in
July, materials went missing, resulting in the delay of 10
cement pours. The material is believed to have been lost when it
was transferred between two subcontractors, according to DOE. 

Four months earlier, Bechtel National discovered that some welds
needed more work. When it checked all 233 similar welds, it
found 83 needed more work, causing delays in subsequent
construction. 

Welding issues were not confined to the Analytical Laboratory. 

In 2005 the contractor repeatedly did not meet requirements for
welding or welding inspections, Schepens wrote. 

Problems primarily were procedural, such as welders given
instructions or "weld cards" with incorrect requirements for
preheating metal before welding and weld cards that had not been
updated for the latest design drawings. 

In another instance at the Analytical Laboratory, Bechtel
National found in July that workers had installed piping that
was the wrong material type or had been fabricated and labeled
for use elsewhere. 

Schepens has asked Bechtel to respond with plans for correction
and also information on how the cost and the schedule of
construction of the Analytical Laboratory will be affected. 

© 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 68 lamonitor.com: Council critical of NNSA road plan 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
DARRYL NEWMAN, lareporter@lamonitor.com, Monitor Staff Writer

Expressing deep dissatisfaction with the road plan
characterizing the security perimeter project along West Jemez
Road, the county council is calling on federal entities to
modify the plan to allow more public access to certain areas. 
The National Nuclear Security Administration is poised to begin
the design and construction of the project that is expected to
eliminate open public use of a section of the road, despite
concerns and requests from the community to work together on a
solution to satisfy the need of both parties.

The possible restriction of access to areas of the county, such
as the ski hill and the Research Park, have several
organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce and the LA Ski
Club wary of the economic impacts that a road closure could
have. 

Under NNSA plans, checkpoints would permit around-the-clock
public use of the section of the road inside the perimeter of
Los Alamos National Laboratory under normal and lowest threat
level conditions, with the inspection of large vehicles only.

Councilor Mike Wismer, a LANL employee in the Safeguards and
Security Division, opened up the business item on the agenda and
spoke on behalf of the council. 
Wismer said the original project guidelines as drafted by the
Department of Energy three years ago were simplistic and not
nearly as expensive as they have become.

"I have to look at this from a balanced perspective," Wismer
said. "In putting on my county hat, I don't think that all of
the actions to date have been necessarily thorough as they could
be." 
Wismer added that there is a need to be very careful in how the
county cooperates and coordinates with the lab and the assets
that it protects.

"We do not believe that NNSA officials have adequately evaluated
the economic impact of the project that they are about to
begin," Wismer said. "We recognize their right to construct the
project, but we believe that there are alternatives that can be
considered.

The council voted unanimously to draft a letter to Sen. Pete
Domenici, stating the impact that the decision will have on the
county's future in addition to thanking the senior senator for
his efforts in helping to secure an additional $5 million in
funding for the project.

"We want to ask for his assistance once more to look fully at
the planning and execution of this project," Wismer said.

In addition, county staff will engage DOE and NNSA officials and
present to them what the county feels are defective compliance
review issues, asking them to stop their work and review what
has occurred so far in the process.

Councilor Mike Wheeler said the road plan as presented would
have profound effects on the self-sufficiency of the county.

"It harms the safety of the county and while safety is the
correct approach, I'm really at the end of my rope," Wheeler
said. "I'm tired of talking to these people and receiving blank
stares. They change the plans and then come back with something
that makes less sense than the previous plan."

Pushing for one more attempt at working with the NNSA and DOE in
regard to the road perimeter project was one point that
Councilor Jim Hall drove.

"We need to give this one more focused aggressive try," he said.
"We owe that to the lab and our citizens before going forward
with anything else."

Domenici said through spokesman Matt Letourneau on Friday that
he has requested a briefing from the NNSA on the road plan
within the next two weeks.

Several residents spoke during public comment regarding the road
project.

Local business owner Dave Fox said it is important to consider
what impact the decision could have on the community.

"The economic future of this community is in further
development," he said. "To get just a picture of a setback from
where we are now would not do justice to the damage that can be
done."

Bill Godwin identified the road project as an issue of national
concern.

"There's an overriding issue here," he said. "We have the
premier national lab and we have to save it and be able to
attract the best minds. The issue of what the town life is like,
especially commercially, is directly related to the success of
the lab."   

  © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 69 lamonitor.com: Lab, state settle waste penalty 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor

The New Mexico Environment Department and Los Alamos National
Laboratory resolved a piece of old business related to
environmental fines. 
The laboratory has agreed to pay $60,328 to settle eight
hazardous waste violations discovered during inspections in 2004
and 2005.

The state's formal Notice of Violation, issued on April 20,
called for a total fine of $63,578. 

NMED spokesperson Jon Goldstein said the enforcement process
allows the subject of the fine to come forward with exculpatory
information, if available, which probably accounts for the
slightly lower final amount.

Kevin Roark of the LANL Public Affairs Office said the fine
shows progress. 
"What it represents is a relatively low number of violations,
which we interpret as a substantial improvement over the last
number of years," he said, a sign of the laboratory's commitment
in recent years.

Early this year, NMED fined the laboratory $1.4 million for 21
violations identified during 2003. 
"This settlement is a good example of NMED's 'tough but fair'
enforcement policy," said NMED Secretary Ron Curry, in a press
announcement. "Sizable penalties like this one should help deter
future environmental problems."

The department cited the lab for violations such as storage of
waste in unpermitted areas, inadequate containers, improper
labeling and inadequate record keeping.

They were considered violations of the New Mexico Hazardous
Waste Act and LANL's permit.

The penalty goes into the State of New Mexico Hazardous Waste
Emergency Fund, where the money is used for hazardous waste
cleanups, primarily meth labs, where the waste has been dumped
in the ground or in septic tanks.

"I think this brings us up to date," Goldstein said, who was not
aware of any subsequent inspections or violations.

The state has carried out hazardous waste inspections and issued
compliance orders since 1993.

The most recent fines were the result nearly three weeks of
scrutiny by six state inspectors, examining hazardous waste
practices in some 600 buildings.   

  © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 70 DOE: Notice of Availability of Draft Section 3116 Determination Idaho 
 
                        FR Doc 05-18224 
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)] 
[Notices] [Page 54374-54375] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14se05-64]                         
 
Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility 
AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of 
availability.
 
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) announces the 
availability of a draft determination that certain residual 
radioactive waste at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering 
Center (INTEC) Tank Farm Facility, located at the Idaho National 
Laboratory, is not high-level radioactive waste. DOE prepared the 
draft determination pursuant to Section 3116 of the Ronald W. 
Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. 
Although not required by the Act, DOE is making the draft 
determination available for public review and comment.
 
 
DATES: The comment period will end on October 28, 2005. Comments 
received after this date will be considered to the extent 
practicable.
 
 
ADDRESSES: The draft waste determination is available on the 
Internet at http://apps.em.doe.gov/idwd/, and is publicly 
available for review at the following locations: U.S. Department 
of Energy, Public Reading Room, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585, Phone: (202) 586-5955, or Fax: (202) 
586-0575; and U.S. Department of Energy Idaho, Public Reading 
Room, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415, Phone: 
(208) 526-9162, or Fax: (208) 526-1697. Written comments should 
be addressed to: Mr. Matthew Duchesne, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Office of Environmental Management, EM-2, 1000 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. Alternatively, comments can be 
filed electronically by e-mail to emidahotankfarmwd@hq.doe.gov, 
or by Fax at (202) 586-4314.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Tank Farm Facility (TFF) at INTEC 
consists of eleven 300,000-gallon, below-grade, stainless-steel 
tanks in unlined concrete vaults; four 30,000-gallon, 
below-grade, stainless- steel tanks; and associated ancillary 
equipment and piping. Historically, the TFF tanks were used to 
store various INTEC wastes, including those from reprocessing 
spent nuclear fuel, decontamination waste, laboratory waste, and 
contaminated liquids from other INTEC operations. DOE is 
currently in the process of closing the
 
[[Page 54375]] TFF, a process that includes consolidating 
remaining wastes in the minimum number of tanks necessary, and 
then cleaning the empty tanks and ancillary equipment. After 
completing cleaning operations, a small amount of residual 
radioactive waste that cannot be removed remains in the tanks and 
ancillary equipment. DOE plans to stabilize this residual waste, 
as well as the TFF system overall, by filling the system with 
grout.
 
Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 authorizes the Secretary 
of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC), to determine that certain waste from reprocessing spent 
nuclear fuel is not high- level waste (HLW) and that it may 
instead be disposed of as low-level waste (LLW) if it meets the 
criteria set forth in Section 3116.
 
The draft determination sets forth the basis for concluding that 
the TFF residual wastes, as well as the tanks, vaults, and 
associated piping, structures, and equipment will meet all of 
those criteria, and thus is not high-level waste.
 
Final Determination: DOE will issue a final determination 
following the completion of consultation with the NRC, and 
consideration of any public comments.
 
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 8, 2005.
 
Charles E. Anderson, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Environmental Management.
 
[FR Doc. 05-18224 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 71 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Rocky 
 
                        FR Doc 05-18225 
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)] 
[Notices] [Page 54374] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14se05-63]                         
 
Flats AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Rocky Flats.
 
The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) 
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the 
Federal Register.
 
 
DATES: Thursday, October 6, 2005, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.
 
ADDRESSES: College Hill Library, Room L-268, Front Range 
Community College, 3705 W. 112th Avenue, Westminster, Colorado. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Korkia, Executive Director, 
Rocky Flats Citizens Advisory Board, 12101 Airport Way, Unit B, 
Broomfield, CO 80021; telephone (303) 966-7855; fax (303) 
966-7856.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management, and related 
activities.
 
Tentative Agenda: 1. Presentation and Discussion on the Updated 
Site-Wide Water Balance for Rocky Flats.
 
2. Approval of the Board's 2006 Work Plan and Budget. 3. Progress 
Update on Regulatory Closure Activities at Rocky Flats.
 
4. Other Board business may be conducted as necessary. Public 
Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
 
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or 
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact Ken Korkia at the 
address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be 
received at least five days prior to the meeting and reasonable 
provisions will be made to include the presentation in the 
agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to 
conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly 
conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment 
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their 
comments.
 
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the office of the Rocky Flats Citizens 
Advisory Board, 12101 Airport Way, Unit B, Broomfield, CO 80021; 
telephone (303) 966-7855. Hours of operations are 7:30 a.m. to 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday. Minutes will also be made available 
by writing or calling Ken Korkia at the address or telephone 
number listed above. Board meeting minutes are posted on RFCAB's 
Web site within one month following each meeting at: 
http://www.rfcab.org/Minutes.HTML. Issued at Washington, DC, on 
September 8, 2005.
 
Carol Matthews, Acting Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. 05-18225 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************