*****************************************************************
09/15/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.214
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 [NYTr] Iran offers nuclear know-how to Islamic states
2 [NYTr] Iran Warns of Nuke Crisis Escalation
3 Nuclear Plans And Iraq Dominate Talks Between Iranian Leader And Ann
4 Guardian Unlimited: Effort to Refer Iran for Sanctions Opposed
5 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Ready to Delay Showdown on Iran
6 Guardian Unlimited: US steps up pressure to isolate Iran
7 Guardian Unlimited: European leaders hold nuclear talks with Iran
8 TIME.com: Why China's Not Backing Bush on Iran
9 BBC: Iran 'will trade nuclear secrets'
10 [NYTr] No progress in Korea nuclear talks
11 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea's Demand Stalls Six-Nation Talks
12 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea's Refusal Scuttles Nuclear Talks
13 Guardian Unlimited: Dispute Over Reactor Stalls N. Korea Talks
14 AFP: Major differences hamper nuclear talks as US tells N.Korea to
15 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Refuses N. Korean Nuke Reactor Demand
16 Guardian Unlimited China: Sides Far Apart in N. Korea Talks
17 IPS-English POLITICS-U.S: Trans-Atlantic Group Calls for
18 US: Register-Guard: Nuke 'em if ya got 'em
19 AFP: India, Pakistan leaders vow to pursue peace process
20 Daily Times: Foreigners wont be allowed to quiz AQ Khan, says Musha
NUCLEAR REACTORS
21 US: [NukeNet] FirstEnergy pays record fines for Davis-Besse
22 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear power station granted life extension
23 US: Modesto Bee: Exorcising the demons of Chernobyl
24 Globe and Mail: McGuinty touts 'new nuclear'
25 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Joint Meeting of
26 US: NRC: Carolina Power & Light Company, Brunswick Steam Electric Pl
27 US: NRC: Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Haddam Neck Plant;
28 US: NRC: American Energy Company, LLC Oyster Creek Nuclear Generatin
29 People's Daily: Russia wants to build more units at Tianwan nuke pla
30 US: Reuters: FPL braces Florida nukes for Tropical Storm Katrina
31 US: Reuters: AEP gets license extensions for Michigan nuke
32 US: Reuters: Scana, Santee Cooper to consider new nuclear plant
NUCLEAR SECURITY
33 US: Las Vegas SUN: Study: Security lacking at Test Site
NUCLEAR SAFETY
34 US: NRC: NRC Officials to Meet with Officials from PA Hospital to D
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
35 US: Deseret News: Stand on nuclear waste is helpful
36 Las Vegas RJ: DOE denies budget cuts single out Yucca geologists
37 Las Vegas RJ: Panel gets 4,980 documents in e-mail probe
38 Las Vegas SUN: Porter committee gets 4,980 more pages in probe
39 US: Las Vegas SUN: NRC: Casks would survive big blaze
40 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Guv calls feds out on waste
41 US: Salt Lake Tribune: It's now official: Radioactive refuse will be
42 Whitehaven News: More US firms at Sellafield
43 Whitehaven News: Nuclear birds set a poser
44 Whitehaven News: Speculation over BNG sale
45 Paducah Sun: USEC delays Piketon centrifuge demonstration
46 US: India: PIB: URANIUM INDUSTRY TO CONTINUE AS A PUBLIC UTILITY SER
47 US: Sentinel: Lockheed talks safety with concerned residents
48 Whitehaven News: Nuclear waste ‘not fit to dump or send overseas
49 US: Deseret News: Utah to file appeal of nuclear repository ruling
50 Whitehaven News: The nuclear legacy that demands straight answers
51 US: Deseret News: DOE signs decision to move Moab mill tailings
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
52 Las Vegas RJ: NEVADA TEST SITE: Plan to 'accelerate closure'
53 kgw.com: Costs up for Hanford K Basin cleanup
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Iran offers nuclear know-how to Islamic states
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:01:30 -0500 (CDT)
WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
X-Mail-from: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Reuters via MSNBC - Sep 15, 2005
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9352275/
Iran offers nuclear know-how to Islamic states
Move comes amid dispute between Tehran and West over nuke program
NEW YORK - Iran is ready to share its nuclear technology, considered to be a
front for bomb-making by Washington, with other Islamic countries, President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday, according to Iran's official news agency.
The comments were likely to heighten Western concerns about Tehrans nuclear
program just ahead of a key meeting of the U.N.s nuclear watchdog this
month which could decide to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for
punitive action.
The Islamic Republic never seeks weapons of mass destruction and with
respect to the needs of Islamic countries, we are ready to transfer nuclear
know-how to these countries, the official IRNA news agency quoted
Ahmadinejad as saying.
The remarks were made during a meeting with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip
Erdogan on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York,
IRNA said.
Washington and its allies say Iran has failed to provide full and timely
information about its nuclear program and are alarmed that Tehran last month
broke U.N. seals at a uranium processing facility.
A vote on sending Irans nuclear case to the U.N. Security Council may be
taken at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agencys board on
Sept. 19. However, Western diplomats acknowledge that many non-aligned
countries and the IAEA itself oppose referring Iran at this stage.
Seeking to avert referral to the Security Council, which could impose
sanctions, Iran is engaged in intense lobbying for support from non-aligned
countries at the U.N. summit.
Iran state media reported that Ahmadinejad, who took office last month, had
also held meetings with the leaders of Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan and Chile in
New York.
Offer unclear A British Foreign Office spokesman said it was not clear what
Ahamdinejads offer to Islamic countries involved.
In any case, this is not the pressing question, he said. The issue is the
lack of confidence in Irans nuclear program as a result of two decades of
non-disclosures and concealment.
Iran insists it has every right as a signatory of the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty to develop a full atomic program to generate
electricity.
We have firmly decided to use this technology for peaceful purposes within
the framework of the NPT, international regulations and cooperation with the
IAEA, IRNA quoted Ahmadinejad as saying.
Turkey has said it plans to generate about five percent of its energy demand
by 2012 from nuclear power through the construction of reactors with 4,500
megawatt capacity.
Like Iran, Egypt has been accused of carrying out undeclared nuclear work
which Cairo says was linked solely to peaceful applications such as power
generation and desalinization.
Saudi Arabia has said it is open to IAEA inspections but is not interested
in developing either a nuclear weapons or power program.
Iran, which received much of its own nuclear know-how from Islamic neighbor
and nuclear weapons power Pakistan, says it wants to produce at least 6,000
megawatt from nuclear power by 2021 with eventual plans to generate 20,000
MW from atomic reactors.
Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
2 [NYTr] Iran Warns of Nuke Crisis Escalation
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:01:42 -0500 (CDT)
autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
X-Mail-from: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Rick Rozoff and StopNato list via mart
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
AFP via SpaceWar.com - Sep 13, 2005
http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050913093250.8g0c55dh.html
Iran warns of escalation in nuclear crisis
Agence France-Presse
TEHRAN - A senior Iranian official issued yet another blunt warning to the
European Union Tuesday not to refer a crisis over the Islamic republic's
nuclear programme to the UN Security Council.
Britain, France and Germany "are mistaken on our policies, and think that if
they increase the pressure we will back down," senior national security
official Ali Agha Mohammadi was quoted as saying by the student news agency
"This is an error because if they do such a thing, the Iranian strategy will
also be to raise the stakes in response," said Mohammadi, spokesman for
Iran's Supreme National Security Council.
Last month Iran resumed converting uranium -- a precursor to the
ultra-sensitive enrichment process -- in violation of a deal reached with
the so-called EU-3.
On August 11, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) called on Iran
to halt all nuclear fuel work and return to the table, but Iran is standing
firm in its refusal.
The United States and EU-3 are pushing for a Security Council referral when
the UN nuclear watchdog's board of governors next meets on September 19.
As a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran insists it is
allowed to make nuclear fuel by enriching uranium.
But the process can be diverted to military purposes, and there are
widespread suspicions the clerical regime wants to acquire the technology to
produce nuclear weapons.
"If the Europeans understand that we will defend our interests and that it
is impossible for us to compromise (on enrichment), we could reach an
understanding and have a good board of governors meeting at the IAEA,"
Mohammadi said.
"But if they miscalculate, this would lead to a challenging situation," he
added.
***
Xinhua News Agency - September 13, 2005
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-09/12/content_3481482.htm
Iran slams warning on referral of nuclear issue to UN
MOSCOW - Iranian Vice President Gholamreza Aghazadeh said here Monday that
referring his country's nuclear issue to the UN Security Council cannot be
justified, and threatened with tough reactions should that happen.
Germany, France and Britain, the so-called European trio that has been in
talks with Tehran to persuade it to scrap uranium enrichment, bristled at
Iran's August move to renew uranium conversion activities and warned of
backing a US push to bring Iran before the UN Security Council for
sanctions.
Aghazadeh, who also heads Iran's nuclear energy agency and is in town to
meet Russian officials including Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, said there
are no technical or legal reasons for referring Iran's nuclear issue to the
UN Security Council.
"Let me assure you we are not seeking dividends in exchange for suspending
our nuclear activity either at the talks with the 'European trio' or with
Russia. What we are interested in is creating an atmosphere of trust and
transparency before the whole world so as to convince everyone that we are
conducting peaceful research," Aghazadeh was quoted by the Interfax news
agency as saying....
Moscow, which insisted on Iran's right to develop peaceful nuclear
technologies, has urged Tehran to halt uranium conversion and continue
cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Aghazadeh, however, said his country would not budge on nuclear fuel work.
"This matter has already become a national issue that concerns the whole of
the Iranian society and I can assure you no Iranian government will agree to
conclude a bargain deal on this issue," Aghazadeh said.
The Iranian government will announce new proposals to the European trio
ahead of a session of the IAEA board of governors, scheduled for Sept. 19,
Aghazadeh said.
"The nature of our cooperation with the IAEA is positive, which is stated in
Director General Mohamed ElBaradei's reports," Aghazadeh said, adding that a
number of countries, including Russia, have objected to bringing Iran before
the UN Security Council.
"Should other sides like to politicize this issue, we will react
accordingly. Iran's reaction will be tough and clear, and if this happens,
then you will learn what our reaction will be like,"Aghazadeh said.
In meetings with Russian officials, Aghazadeh discussed nuclear energy
cooperation with Russia, which is building a nuclear power plant in Iran
under a one-billion-US dollar contract.
Both sides confirmed their wish to launch the Bushehr nuclear power plant
before the end of 2006 at a meeting between Aghazadeh and Russian Atomic
Energy Agency chief Alexander Rumyantsev, an agency source told Interfax.
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
3 Nuclear Plans And Iraq Dominate Talks Between Iranian Leader And Annan
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 20:00:47 -0400
X-Mail-from:
NUCLEAR PLANS AND IRAQ DOMINATE TALKS BETWEEN IRANIAN LEADER AND
ANNAN
New York, Sep 15 2005 8:00PM
Irans nuclear plans and the situation in neighbouring Iraq topped
the agenda during talks today at United Nations Headquarters in
New York between Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In a statement issued after the meeting, a UN spokesman said Mr.
Annan invited the foreign ministers of France, Germany and the United
Kingdom often known collectively as the E3 and the European
Unions High Representative Javier Solana to join them later
for further discussions on the nuclear issue.
Describing those talks as cordial, the spokesman said the parties
all agreed on the need to keep searching for a mutually agreed solution
to the nuclear issue. Mr. Ahmadinejad also reiterated his
commitment to outline new proposals during his scheduled speech
to the General Assembly on Saturday.
Iran's nuclear programme has been a matter of concern since 2003,
when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) determined that
the country had for almost two decades concealed its nuclear activities
in breach of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT).
Todays meeting is one of a series taking place during the World
Summit this week between the Secretary-General and international
leaders.
2005-09-15 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
*****************************************************************
4 Guardian Unlimited: Effort to Refer Iran for Sanctions Opposed
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday September 15, 2005 2:31 PM
AP Photo NYJJ101
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria (AP) - A U.S.-European drive to refer Iran to
the U.N. Security Council is encountering fierce opposition and
could be postponed despite deep international concerns about
Tehran's nuclear agenda, diplomats and government officials said
Thursday.
Just days before planned action on referral, the diplomats and
officials told The Associated Press that the idea of giving Iran
a deadline of several weeks to comply with international demands
on its nuclear activities is gaining favor.
``It would not be a change in policy but a change in timing,''
said one European official about the possibility of delaying -
but not withdrawing - the U.N. Security Council threat. There
has been strong opposition from more than a dozen nations on the
board of the International Atomic Energy Agency to a demand for
referral at next week's board meeting.
The officials and diplomats demanded spoke on condition of
anonymity because of the delicacy of the negotiations on what
tack to take on Iran.
Their comments seemed to mirror indications from Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice that Washington was prepared to delay
again its drive for Security Council referral.
Rice last week appealed openly to China, Russia, India and other
nations to support the United States in threatening Iran with
sanctions for refusing to halt its nuclear program.
Russia quickly registered its opposition to trying to impose
sanctions in the U.N. Security Council, and the White House
acknowledged Wednesday that President Bush was unable to get a
commitment from Chinese President Hu Jintao.
Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, urged the U.N. not to
bend to U.S. pressure.
``The raison d'etre of the United Nations is to promote global
peace and tranquility,'' he told the General Assembly.
``Therefore, any license for pre-emptive measures which are
essentially based on gauging intentions rather than objective
facts ... is a blatant contradiction to the very foundation of
the United Nations and the letter and the spirit of its
charter.''
Washington had been a key force in trying to marshal enough
support at Monday's board meeting of the Vienna-based IAEA for
referral. But in comments Wednesday, Rice indirectly
acknowledged that drive was faltering.
``I am not so concerned about exactly when it happens,'' Rice
told the Fox News Editorial Board, ``because I don't think this
matter is so urgent that it has to come on Sept. 19.''
The European Union has taken the lead in trying to persuade Iran
to halt development of nuclear activities that could be used to
make weapons in exchange for economic concessions.
The European official said that - as of Thursday - any
resolution in Vienna demanding immediate referral to the
Security Council would have ``only a slim majority of two or
three countries'' on the 35-member IAEA board.
Rice on Wednesday suggested the EU remained fully committed to
referral, saying: ``The question is how much support can you
bring that is non-European support.''
But officials and diplomats said that was not so.
About a half-dozen EU member nations - among them Italy, Spain
and Portugal - are openly questioning the authority of France,
Britain and Germany to negotiate a resolution at the board
meeting on behalf of the European Union, said the official.
Iran's lobby efforts against referral ``have been rather
successful,'' said the official. ``Both African countries and
nonaligned countries are very keen on it not going to the
Security Council.''
A senior nonaligned diplomat in Vienna said informal but
high-level contacts were under way between Tehran and key EU
countries on what concessions Iran was prepared to make in
exchange for a delay of the push to have Iran hauled before the
Security Council.
Ahmedinejad is expected to reveal new Iranian proposals by the
weekend at the U.N. summit of world leaders in New York, which
it hopes will defuse the nuclear crisis.
Among those leaning against the idea of immediate referral in
favor of a several-weeks-long deadline is IAEA head Mohamed
ElBaradei, said several officials and diplomats. One of them
said ElBaradei ``moved over to the camp'' of countries opposed
to referral in recent weeks as that group of countries has
grown.
While an EU diplomat said ElBaradei had suggested a delay as one
of several options, the European official said the IAEA chief
appeared increasingly to be backing that approach over others in
recent conversations with EU foreign ministers and Rice.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
5 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Ready to Delay Showdown on Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday September 15, 2005 3:16 AM
AP Photo XUN136
By BARRY SCHWEID
AP Diplomatic Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - Apparently lacking the votes to win, Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice indicated Wednesday the Bush
administration was prepared to delay again a showdown with Iran
over its nuclear weapons program.
Describing efforts to constrain Iran from producing nuclear
weapons, Rice said ``the world is not perfect in international
politics. You cannot always get a 100 percent solution.''
Rice last week appealed openly to China, Russia, India and other
nations to support threatening Iran with sanctions for refusing
to halt its nuclear program.
``Iran needs to get a message from the international community
that is a unified message,'' Rice said Friday at a news
conference.
But Russia quickly registered its opposition to trying to impose
sanctions now on Iran in the U.N. Security Council, and the
White House acknowledged Wednesday that President Bush was
unable to get a commitment from Chinese President Hu Jintao.
Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, urged the U.N. not to
bend to U.S. pressure.
``The raison d'etre of the United Nations is to promote global
peace and tranquility,'' he told the General Assembly.
``Therefore, any license for pre-emptive measures which are
essentially based on gauging intentions rather than objective
facts ... is a blatant contradiction to the very foundation of
the United Nations and the letter and the spirit of its
charter.''
The Bush administration had been expected to turn to the U.N.
Security Council to pressure Iran to resume negotiations with
the European Union after the board of governors of the
International Atomic Energy Agency meets next Monday.
But in an interview Wednesday with the Fox News Editorial Board,
Rice took a step backward.
``I am not so concerned about exactly when it happens,'' Rice
said, ``because I don't think this matter is so urgent that it
has to come on Sept. 19.''
She said the goal now was mostly to send a ``political message''
to Iran that it that it just cannot break out of a commitment
not to engage in nuclear weapons preparations ``and have
everybody say, well, OK.''
The problem, she said, is there was a ``lot of consensus'' on
the goal of having negotiations with the European Union resume.
But, she said, there was ``a lot of difference about tactics.''
The European Union has taken the lead in trying to persuade Iran
to halt development of nuclear weapons in exchange for economic
concessions. But Rice said ``the question is, how much support
can you bring that is non-European support.''
``That's really more the issue,'' she said.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: US steps up pressure to isolate Iran
Ewen MacAskill in New York
Thursday September 15, 2005
The Guardian
The US administration has embarked on a series of
face-to-face meetings with world leaders at the UN summit to try
to isolate Iran diplomatically over Iran's push to expand its
nuclear programme.
George Bush met Hu Jintao, the Chinese leader, on Tuesday and
will hold talks with Vladimir Putin, Russia's president,
tomorrow in an attempt to secure their support for referring
Iran to the UN security council, a move that could see sanctions
imposed on Tehran. The Chinese leader refused to commit himself.
Article continues
In support of Mr Bush's diplomatic drive, US officials have
delivered hour-long PowerPoint briefings, entitled A History of
Concealment and Deception, to diplomats from at least a dozen
countries. The officials making the presentation, which includes
satellite photographs of Iran's nuclear installations, admit they
cannot say definitively that Tehran is covertly trying to secure
a nuclear weapons capability. Iran has repeatedly denied it has
any ambition to build a nuclear weapon and claims it only wants a
civilian nuclear programme.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's new president, is due to make a
speech at the UN summit today, his first major international
outing since his surprise election in June. He said before
leaving Iran that he would tell the UN: "All nations should be
allowed to use different kinds of energies, including nuclear."
Mr Ahmadinejad is also holding a series of bilateral talks with
other leaders to try to win support. Iranian officials have been
hinting for weeks that their delegation to the summit will offer
a new set of proposals, possibly suggesting that the
two-year-long talks between Iran and the European Union trio of
Britain, France and Germany be expanded to include the US,
Russia and China. Iran has good relations with the latter two,
both of which are big importers of Iranian oil.
As well as security council members, Mr Bush is targeting the 35
board members of the International Atomic Energy Authority, the
UN nuclear watchdog which on Monday will consider referral to
the security council. The PowerPoint presentations have been
held at the US mission in Vienna, headquarters of the IAEA.
The US has long called on Iran to drop its nuclear programme
altogether, even for non-military purposes, but Mr Bush on
Tuesday accepted that Iran had the right to pursue a civilian
programme. "Some of us are wondering why they need civilian
nuclear power anyway. They're awash with hydrocarbons.
Nevertheless, it's a right of a government to want to have a
civilian nuclear programme."
But Iran should not be allowed to gain the technical skill that
would enable it to make weapons. "This is a subject of grave
concern, and it's something that we're spending a lot of time on
in this administration. It is very important for the world to
understand that Iran with a nuclear weapon will be incredibly
destabilising."
Nicholas Burns, US undersecretary of state for political
affairs, said Iran was probably the most important issue being
discussed on the sidelines of the summit.
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
7 Guardian Unlimited: European leaders hold nuclear talks with Iran
Staff and agencies
Thursday September 15, 2005
The leaders of Britain, France and Germany are meeting the new
Iranian president today in an attempt to avoid referring Iran to
the UN security council over its nuclear activities. Iran's
hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, meets the leaders to
discuss ways of avoiding possible sanctions after Iran resumed
its uranium enrichment programme last month. The meeting is part
of the three-day UN summit being held in New York. A key aim of
the summit is to take action to achieve the UN Millennium
Development Goals, a set of eight targets intended to reduce
global poverty and disease by 2015.
The UN meeting will also decide ways in which to
reform the institution, but several member states - most notably
the US - have opposed many of the sweeping changes proposed and
instead insisted on a "watered-down" version of the body's final
declaration.
George Bush, the US president, has held a series of one-to-one
meetings with other world leaders to try to diplomatically
isolate Iran over its nuclear activities.
Mr Ahmadinejad is also holding talks with other leaders in an
effort to win support for Iran's programme.
Analysts say the Iranian nuclear programme is the most important
issue being discussed alongside the official aims of the summit.
Today's talks come ahead of a meeting of International Atomic
Energy Agency - the UN's nuclear watchdog - on Monday. The
meeting will decide whether to refer Iran to the security
council for possible sanctions.
Yesterday, the French prime minister, Dominique De Villepin,
threatened Iran with referral to the security council. "In the
nuclear sphere, we have put our trust in the IAEA where there
are rights to uphold and duties to enforce," he told a security
council meeting.
"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."
However, Mr Ahmadinejad insists Iran has a right to resume its
nuclear programme, and reportedly said before leaving for the
summit: "All nations should be allowed to use different kinds of
energies, including nuclear."
He is due to address the summit this afternoon - his first major
international appearance since being elected in June.
Tehran suspended its nuclear programme in November 2004 and
began talks with Britain, France and Germany aimed on using
imported low-enriched nuclear fuel for its reactors instead.
However, work last month restarted at the processing plant in
Isfahan, south of Tehran, prompting a flurry of proposals from
the troika designed to halt Iran's enrichment activities.
Tehran has always maintained that it wants to enrich uranium for
use as fuel in its nuclear power plants. However, the Europeans
and Washington suspect it of wanting to continue the enrichment
process in an effort to produce a nuclear bomb.
At the opening assembly of the summit yesterday, the UN
secretary general, Kofi Annan, criticised states that had
blocked plans for reform and said they had allowed "posturing to
get in the way of results".
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
8 TIME.com: Why China's Not Backing Bush on Iran
TIME's Beijing bureau chief Matthew Forney explains President
Hu's position on two nuclear showdowns
By MATTHEW FORNEY/BEIJING
Posted Thursday, Sep. 15, 2005
Vignette StoryServer 5.0 Thu Sep 15 23:47:21 2005
President Hu Jintao's talks with President Bush this week have
shown just how far apart the two countries remain on issues dear
to Washington most significantly, on the goal of depriving
"Axis of Evil" states of nuclear programs.
Even as the two presidents met at New York's Waldorf-Astoria
Hotel on Tuesday, Bush's top negotiator on North Korea was 12
time zones away in Beijing for a new round of six-party talks on
Pyongyangs nuclear weapons program. The objective of those
talks is not only to stop North Korea's declared weapons
program, but also to dismantle the estimated seven weapons that
Pyongyang has already built the U.S. wants to put the
toothpaste back in the tube, but hasn't made much progress. The
last round of talks ended early last month with the participants
North Korea, South Korea, Japan, Russia, China and the U.S.
unable to agree even on a "statement of principles."
The sticking point is peaceful nuclear power: The U.S. wants to
deprive North Korea of all its nuclear capabilities, including
nuclear power reactors, in exchange for aid and respect. But
Pyongyang wants a deal that would replace its current reactor
with a light-water reactor, whose fuel cycle is not conducive to
a weapons program, paid for by the other parties to the talks.
China supports North Korea's position and wishes the U.S. would
just give in. After all, the U.S. in 1994 had promised to build
a nearly identical light-water reactor for North Korea as part
of a deal to quash the country's nuclear weapons program. That
deal unraveled in 2002. Today, President Hu would be glad for
any type of agreement. He has presented his country as capable
of brokering a difficult agreement on its home turf, so he'll
look bad if the talks fail. Plus, he'll face the downside of a
nuclear-armed loonocracy just across the Yalu River.
No one disputes that North Korea needs an energy source oil,
nuclear, something to address a shortage that causes regular
blackouts, even in the capital. An oil-rich country like Iran
has a tougher time making a case for a nuclear energy program,
according to President Bush, and he wants China's support in
pressuring Iran to surrender its nuclear ambitions.
Specifically, he wants President Hu to support his efforts next
week to have the UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic
Energy Agency, refer Iran to the Security Council over failure
to disclose aspects of its nuclear program. That's a little like
asking the glue factory manager to punish the guy who shoots
horses: China imports roughly half of the 6.7 million barrels of
oil it uses every day, and Iran is its biggest supplier. China
feels little threat from Iran's nuclear program, but UN
sanctions against Iran could cause Beijing a great deal of
discomfort. As a permanent member of the Security Council, China
can use its veto to prevent sanctions against Iran, but it would
rather not call so much attention to itself. Far better to keep
the issue out of the Security Council altogether.
Mr. Hu may also be thinking in terms of payback. Remember just a
few months ago, when China's state-run oil company, CNOOC, bid to
buy California-based Unocal? Capitol Hill went crazy with talk
that China was muscling in on America's strategic interests.
China's leaders were baffled by all the politicking: CNOOC made a
pretty good offer, they thought; Chevron wound up bidding less
but still winning the deal. So Mr. Hu is in no mood to hear Mr.
Bush talk about how China should use its leverage against Iran.
Copyright 2005 Time Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
9 BBC: Iran 'will trade nuclear secrets'
Last Updated: Thursday, 15 September 2005
[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]
The UN summit is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's first foreign trip
Iran is ready to trade nuclear secrets with other Islamic states
for peaceful purposes, the country's leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
has said.
State news agency Irna quoted him as saying an Islamic republic
"never seeks weapons of mass destruction".
The ultra-conservative leader, elected in June, was speaking at a
fringe meeting at the UN world summit.
The UK, France, Germany and the US are pressing Iran to provide
more access to its nuclear plans.
The four countries are expected to put their case to a meeting of
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Monday.
'Nuclear know-how'
Mr Ahmadinejad's comments on nuclear technology came at a meeting
with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Irna quoted the Iranian president as saying: "With respect to the
needs of Islamic countries, we are ready to transfer nuclear
know-how to these countries."
Iran has insisted it has the right to pursue a civilian nuclear
programme for peaceful purposes until negotiations break down.
But the US suspects Iran's scheme is a cover for a nuclear
weapons programme.
An IAEA report earlier this month said questions about Iran's
nuclear programme remained unanswered, despite an intensive
investigation.
Tehran argued the findings were politically motivated, but said
it would continue to co-operate with the agency.
b
*****************************************************************
10 [NYTr] No progress in Korea nuclear talks
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:11:03 -0500 (CDT)
autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
X-Mail-from: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Reuters via Al Jazeera - Sep 15, 2005
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/A4807794-787C-4E98-B168-9BA6472D9D1C.htm
No progress in Korea nuclear talks
Negotiators from six countries have tried again to break a deadlock in talks
designed to end North Korea's nuclear arms programme, but there is no sign
of an early 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 entered the third day on Thursday with
an impasse over Pyongyang's insistence on its right to a civilian nuclear
energy programme.
Officials from the US and North Korea, the two main protagonists in the
negotiations, met for about 90 minutes, but no progress was reported.
"We understand they were not able to narrow differences," a South Korean
official said.
Sanctions threat
Failure to reach an accord in Beijing could prompt the US to take the issue
to the UN Security Council and press for sanctions. China opposes such a
move, and communist North Korea has said sanctions would be tantamount to
war.
"The DPRK has been engaged in nuclear energy for some 25 years. They have
not succeeded in turning it into electricity. They have succeeded in turning
it into plutonium," chief US negotiator Christopher Hill said, referring to
Pyongyang's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Corey Hinderstein, deputy director of the Washington-based Institute for
Science and Internationational Security, says new satellite photos show for
the first time that North Korea has resumed some work on a nuclear reactor
that could enable it to increase stocks of weapons-grade plutonium.
He claims the pictures appear to confirm earlier reports that the North
Koreans had unloaded and restocked a smaller plutonium-producing reactor at
its Yongbyon nuclear complex.
Deal wrangling
Asked to comment on US President George Bush's endorsement of Iran's right
to civilian nuclear energy, Hill said: "I think the president's words speak
for themselves.
"But I think the main issue here with the DPRK is we put together a
comprehensive package to deal with the issue here and they've chosen to
focus on something that is not in the package."
The US, which once described North Korea as part of an "axis of evil" along
with Iran and pre-war Iraq, insists that Pyongyang dismantle all nuclear
programmes verifiably and irreversibly, after which it could expect energy
aid and security guarantees.
The North wants aid and security guarantees first and the right to keep
civilian nuclear programmes. It has also demanded a light-water reactor, a
nuclear reactor which generates electricity but is unsuitable for making
nuclear weapons.
Draft joint statement
Washington has 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 supply the North with 2000 megawatts of
electricity, roughly equivalent to the North's total power output, if it
scraps its nuclear plans. But Seoul has said it would not be opposed in
principle to Pyongyang having a civilian atomic energy programme in future.
"If their concern is electricity, there is a very generous electricity
package. If their concern is something else, they ought to be clear with us
and tell us what that is," Hill said.
"Light-water reactor is a non-starter. We have a pretty good deal on the
table," he added. "Our view on the talks is we are prepared to participate
in the talks as long as we believe the talks are in fact useful."
Talks resume
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.
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 UN
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.
-Reuters
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
11 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea's Demand Stalls Six-Nation Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday September 15, 2005 1:46 PM
By BO-MI LIM Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - North Korea said Thursday that it will not give
up its nuclear weapons without receiving a nuclear reactor for
generating power, stalling six-nation talks on Pyongyang's
atomic programs.
The United States has said giving such a reactor to the North is
out of the question, given the cost and the communist nation's
history of deceit over its pursuit of nuclear technology to
build weapons.
``The basic stumbling block has to do with the issue of
providing a light-water reactor,'' North Korean spokesman Hyun
Hak Bong said in the first comment from the delegation since the
talks resumed Tuesday.
The North was promised two such reactors under a 1994 deal that
fell apart in late 2002 after the latest nuclear crisis erupted.
Light-water reactors are believed to be less easily diverted for
weapons use.
``Providing a light-water reactor is a matter of principle for
building trust,'' said Hyun. ``The United States says it cannot
give us a light-water reactor no matter what. It is telling us
to give up the nuclear (program) first without doing its part.''
``This is a problem related to the United States' political will
to get rid of its hostile policy toward us and peacefully
coexist,'' he said.
Still, the North Korean spokesman said, ``There is no change in
our position to solve the nuclear issue peacefully through
dialogue.''
The North has been offered economic aid, security guarantees
from Washington and free electricity from South Korea in
exchange for dismantling its nuclear weapons program.
The main U.S. envoy said earlier Thursday that the reactor issue
was a ``nonstarter.''
``We have a pretty good deal on the table,'' U.S. Assistant
Secretary of State Christopher Hill said.
None of the other countries at the talks has stepped forward
with an offer to foot the estimated US$2 billion to US$3 billion
(euro1.6 billion to euro2.4 billion) cost for building a
reactor, Hill said, noting it could take up to a decade to be
completed.
The South Korean offer to send electricity to the North could
begin delivering power in a few years. The North suffers chronic
energy shortages that have further hampered its already
struggling economy.
Other participants in the talks said Washington and Pyongyang
remained far apart.
``There are still great differences on certain issues,'' Chinese
Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said after delegates
from all six nations participating in the talks met but failed
to break the deadlock.
Liu said the talks would continue.
The head of Japan's delegation, Kenichiro Sasae, also expressed
pessimism Thursday evening, saying the situation was ``extremely
difficult.''
These talks, which also include South Korea and Russia, ended a
five-week recess after the last session failed to yield an
agreement after 13 days of meetings. No end date has been set
for the negotiations.
South Korea's top envoy said the conflict wasn't an
insurmountable barrier to an agreement, if Washington and
Pyongyang show flexibility.
``We know very well what North Korea wants, and we have opened
the window of opportunity for North Korea to have a light-water
reactor in the future,'' said Deputy Foreign Minister Song
Min-soon.
Song said it was not necessary for that promise to be mentioned
explicitly in the statement the six sides are seeking agreement
on now.
China also called for the sides to seek compromise, but held off
from going as far as saying it backed the North's stand.
``We think that any legitimate, reasonable, concern or interest
of any party deserves careful study and consideration,'' Chinese
Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said.
Hill said Wednesday that North Korea has used its 25-year-old
nuclear program 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.
A Washington-based think tank released a satellite photo
Wednesday showing that the reactor at Yongbyon has apparently
been restarted, noting a steam plume was seen Sunday rising from
its cooling tower. The reactor was shut down earlier this year
and the North said its fuel rods were removed, a move that would
allow it to harvest more weapons-grade plutonium.
The Institute for Science and International Security also
released a satellite photo showing activity at the North's
50-megawatt nuclear reactor under construction, including a new
road surface and possibly a crane, but said it didn't appear
there was large-scale work at the site.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
12 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea's Refusal Scuttles Nuclear Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday September 15, 2005 8:01 PM
AP Photo BEJ112
By BO-MI LIM Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - Talks on North Korea's nuclear program were
deadlocked Thursday as the communist nation stuck to its refusal
to halt atomic bomb development until it receives a nuclear
reactor to generate power.
The main U.S. envoy said the North was isolating itself from the
other five countries at the talks, which aren't inclined to fund
a reactor or give nuclear technology to a country that withdrew
from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and kicked out
international inspectors.
``We're in a bit of a standoff at this point,'' U.S. Assistant
Secretary of State Christopher Hill said after 2 days of
meetings.
The head of Japan's delegation, Kenichiro Sasae, called the
situation ``extremely difficult'' and said the negotiations were
at a ``deadlock.''
``There is no prospect for the reaching of an agreement,'' he
said.
Quoting unidentified sources at the talks, Japan's Kyodo news
agency reported that North Korea had told the other nations at
the negotiations that it would boost its production of nuclear
material if its demand for a light-water reactor is not met.
It was offered two light-water reactors as a reward under a 1994
agreement with the United States to give up weapons development
brokered by the Clinton administration.
Construction on those reactors was halted in 2002 with the
outbreak of the latest nuclear standoff, when U.S. officials
said the North admitted to secretly pursuing a nuclear weapons
program. The Bush administration has been loudly critical of the
earlier deal.
Still, the North's delegation claimed Thursday in its first
public comments at the talks that getting a reactor would help
reassure it that Washington has the ``political will to get rid
of its hostile policy toward us and peacefully coexist.''
``Providing a light-water reactor is a matter of principle for
building trust,'' North Korean spokesman Hyun Hak Bong said.
``The United States says it cannot give us a light-water reactor
no matter what. It is telling us to give up the nuclear
(program) first without doing its part.''
Hyun added that the North still hoped to ``solve the nuclear
issue peacefully through dialogue.''
Hill also repeated pledges to try and resolve the issue
diplomatically, but questioned the North's will to do the same.
``One gets the impression that this is not so much an economic
development issue or an energy issue but rather a political
issue and an issue relating to the idea that they want to have a
sort of trophy project,'' the U.S. diplomat said.
The Americans will stay at the talks as long as progress is
being made, but Hill said he didn't get the impression the North
would change its mind on the reactor demand.
North Korea ``has a rather sad and long history of making
decision on things,'' he said, adding that the country ``not for
the first time has chosen to isolate itself.''
Hill said he didn't have another one-on-one meeting scheduled
with the North Koreans, after seeing them already twice during
the talks, which also include China, Japan, Russia and South
Korea.
On Wednesday, a Washington-based think tank released a satellite
photo showing that North Korea's reactor at Yongbyon has
apparently been restarted.
The photo, taken Sunday and released by the Institute for
Science and International Security, apparently shows a steam
plume rising from the plant's cooling tower.
The reactor was shut down earlier this year and the North said
its fuel rods were removed, a move that would allow it to
harvest more weapons-grade plutonium.
North Korea has been offered economic aid, security guarantees
from Washington and free electricity from South Korea in
exchange for dismantling its nuclear weapons program under a
draft agreement proposed at the last round of talks that ended
five weeks ago.
The North first raised the reactor demand at the end of those 13
days of meetings, but the sides decided to take a recess with
Hill saying at the time the North Koreans would discuss the
issue further with officials in their capital.
However, the North appears to have only hardened its position -
despite postponing its return two weeks beyond the agreed
resumption of talks in professed anger over annual U.S.-South
Korean military exercises and Washington's appointment of a
human rights envoy on North Korea.
Even host China, normally upbeat, sounded a tone of pessimism
Thursday.
``There are still great differences on certain issues,'' Chinese
Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said.
North Korea is believed to have reprocessed enough plutonium for
at least a half-dozen bombs, and claimed in February that it had
nuclear weapons.
However, it hasn't performed any known nuclear tests that would
confirm its arsenal, which Pyongyang says it needs to deter a
U.S. invasion. Washington denies it intends to attack.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
13 Guardian Unlimited: Dispute Over Reactor Stalls N. Korea Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday September 15, 2005 6:01 PM
By BO-MI LIM
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - North Korea said Thursday it won't give up its
nuclear weapons without receiving a reactor for generating
power, stalling six-nation talks on Pyongyang's atomic programs.
``We're in a bit of a standoff at this point,'' said the chief
U.S. delegate to the talks, Assistant Secretary of State
Christopher Hill.
Hill said no progress was made during a 90-minute meeting
Thursday because Pyongyang was demanding that it get a
light-water reactor before dismantling its nuclear program.
Quoting unidentified sources at the talks, Japan's Kyodo news
agency reported that North Korea had told the other nations at
the negotiations that it would boost its production of nuclear
material if its demand for such a reactor is not met.
``The basic stumbling block has to do with the issue of
providing a light-water reactor,'' North Korean spokesman Hyun
Hak Bong said in the first comment from the delegation since the
talks resumed Tuesday.
The head of Japan's delegation, Kenichiro Sasae, called the
situation ``extremely difficult'' and said the negotiations were
at a ``deadlock.''
``There is no prospect for the reaching of an agreement,'' he
said.
Still, Hill and other delegates said the talks would continue,
with no end date set.
The United States has said giving such a reactor to the North is
out of the question, given the cost and the communist nation's
history of deceit over its pursuit of nuclear technology to
build weapons.
The North was promised two such reactors under a 1994 deal that
fell apart in late 2002 after the latest nuclear crisis erupted.
Light-water reactors are believed to be less easily diverted for
weapons use.
``Providing a light-water reactor is a matter of principle for
building trust,'' Hyun said. ``The United States says it cannot
give us a light-water reactor no matter what. It is telling us
to give up the nuclear (program) first without doing its part.''
``This is a problem related to the United States' political will
to get rid of its hostile policy toward us and peacefully
coexist,'' he said.
But the North Korean spokesman added that his government still
hoped to ``solve the nuclear issue peacefully through
dialogue.''
The North has been offered economic aid, security guarantees
from Washington and free electricity from South Korea in
exchange for dismantling its nuclear weapons program. The South
Korean offer to send electricity to the North could begin
delivering power in a few years, helping alleviate chronic
energy shortages that have further hampered its already
struggling economy.
Hill described the reactor issue as a ``nonstarter.''
North Korea, ``not for the first time, has chosen to isolate
itself,'' Hill said. The country ``has a rather sad and long
history of making the wrong decision on things.''
None of the other countries at the talks, which also include
Russia and South Korea, has stepped forward with an offer to
foot the estimated $2 billion to $3 billion cost for building a
reactor, Hill said, noting it could take up to a decade to be
completed.
``There are still great differences on certain issues,'' Chinese
Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said after Thursday's
meeting. He said the talks would continue.
These talks ended a five-week recess after the last session
failed to yield an agreement after 13 days of meetings. No end
date has been set.
South Korea's top envoy said the conflict wasn't an
insurmountable barrier to an agreement, if Washington and
Pyongyang show flexibility.
``We know very well what North Korea wants, and we have opened
the window of opportunity for North Korea to have a light-water
reactor in the future,'' said Deputy Foreign Minister Song
Min-soon.
Song said it was not necessary for that promise to be mentioned
explicitly in the statement the six sides are seeking agreement
on now.
China also called for the sides to seek compromise, but did not
go as far as to openly back the North's stand.
``We think that any legitimate, reasonable, concern or interest
of any party deserves careful study and consideration,'' Chinese
Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said.
Hill said Wednesday that North Korea has used its 25-year-old
nuclear program 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.
A Washington-based think tank released a satellite photo
Wednesday showing that the reactor at Yongbyon has apparently
been restarted, noting a steam plume was seen Sunday rising from
its cooling tower. The reactor was shut down earlier this year
and the North said its fuel rods were removed, a move that would
allow it to harvest more weapons-grade plutonium.
The Institute for Science and International Security also
released a satellite photo showing activity at the North's
50-megawatt nuclear reactor under construction, including a new
road surface and possibly a crane, but said it didn't appear
there was large-scale work at the site.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
14 AFP: Major differences hamper nuclear talks as US tells N.Korea to
accept deal
15/09/2005 11h37
Song Min-soon (L) and Christopher Hill (R) speak to the press
in Beijing
AFP/File - Guang Niu
BEIJING (AFP) - Major differences remain after three days of
talks on halting North Korea's atomic weapons drive, China said
as the United States urged the North to abandon hopes for
nuclear power reactors and take the deal on offer.
"There are still great differences on certain issues (among the
six parties)," Chinese delegation spokesman Liu Jianchao said on
Thursday after a meeting of the top envoys on the third day of
talks.
Delegates from the two Koreas, Japan, Russia, China and the
United States resumed discussions on Tuesday after a five-week
recess but have got nowhere.
With frustrations creeping in, the United States envoy
Christopher Hill called on North Korea to accept what was on the
table.
"We have a pretty good deal on the table," he said.
"The deal consists of really a lot of what the DPRK (North
Korea) should want -- security guarantees, a recognition
package, access to international financial institutions, a very
serious energy package."
In an attempt to work through their differences, Hill and his
North Korean counterpart Kim Gye-gwan held a 90-minute
one-on-one meeting Thursday but failed to reach a compromise.
"I understand North Korea and the United States did not narrow
their differences," said a South Korean official. "On their way
out of the meeting, they had stiff faces."
The talks, in their fourth round, are aimed at persuading North
Korea, which says it has nuclear weapons, to give them up
verifiably and irreversibly in exchange for security guarantees
as well as energy and economic aid.
But they have become bogged down by Pyongyang's insistence that
its right to peaceful atomic energy be included in a statement
of principles which the six nations are trying to adopt to
denuclearize the Korean peninsula.
Differences of opinion between the six have became stark, with
the United States and Japan insisting that light water reactors
were out of the question while South Korea said "the window of
opportunity" remained open.
China and Russia have also sided with North Korea on the nuclear
energy issue, though not as vocally as Seoul.
"If their concern is electricity, there is a very generous
electricity package here. If their concern is something else,
they ought to tell us what that is," Hill said. "A light water
reactor, for us, is a non-starter."
Kenichiro Sasae, Japan's chief delegate, also said it was not
appropriate to discuss light water reactors at this stage but
did not rule it out it later.
"Basically, what is important is that North Korea commits itself
to abandoning all of its nuclear programs and restoring its
credibility as a precondition," he said.
Hill said it would take up to a decade to build a light-water
reactor and cost two to three billion dollars, urging the North
instead to accept a South Korean offer to run power lines across
the border.
Under a now defunct 1994 agreement, 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.
It was not clear if North Korea wanted these reactors
resurrected or if they wanted new ones, Hill said, repeating
that Pyongyang has acknowledged using its civilian program in
the past as a cover for making weapons.
South Korean envoy Song Min-Soon said the possibility of light
water reactors should remain an option, and urged flexibility.
"It would be impossible to compromise on this issue without
flexibility," he said.
Failure to reach agreement in Beijing could prompt the United
States to take the issue to the UN Security Council and press
for sanctions.
Copyright Disclaimer AFP 2005
*****************************************************************
15 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Refuses N. Korean Nuke Reactor Demand
From the Associated Press
[UP]
September 15, 2005 10:46 AM
By BO-MI LIM Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - The U.S. envoy on North Korea's nuclear program
said Thursday he hoped to move beyond an impasse at arms talks
after Washington rejected the North's demand for a nuclear
reactor in exchange for abandoning its atomic bomb program.
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said the
sides ``did not make a lot of progress'' during a one-on-one
meeting with the North Korean delegation Wednesday, his first
since the six-nation talks on the communist nation's nuclear
program resumed this week.
``Yesterday was a long day,'' Hill said Thursday as he left his
hotel. ``Let's see if we can do a little better today.''
Hill met later with the chief North Korean delegate, U.S. and
South Korean officials said. The U.S. side had no immediate
comment on the outcome of the meeting.
However, a South Korean official, speaking on condition of
anonymity, said the two sides appeared not to have bridged their
differences when they emerged grim-faced after the 90-minute
session.
The talks reconvened 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 the current negotiations.
All six delegations met later Thursday, the Chinese press center
for the talks said, but it wasn't known how long the session
would last.
The current offer to North Korea would provide economic aid and
security guarantees from Washington along with free electricity
from South Korea in exchange for dismantling its nuclear weapons
program. But North Korea has also asked for a light-water
nuclear reactor to generate electricity, a type more difficult
to divert to weapons use.
``The light-water reactor for us is a nonstarter,'' Hill said
Thursday. ``We have a pretty good deal on the table.''
Hill said the North Koreans continued to insist on their right
to nuclear energy instead of discussing the proposed package.
South Korea's top envoy said the conflict wasn't an
insurmountable barrier to an agreement if Washington and
Pyongyang show flexibility.
``We know very well what North Korea wants, and we have opened
the window of opportunity for North Korea to have a light-water
reactor in the future,'' said Deputy Foreign Minister Song
Min-soon.
Song said it was not necessary for that promise to be mentioned
explicitly in the statement the six sides are seeking agreement
on now.
China also called for the sides to seek compromise, but held off
from going as far as saying it backed the North's stand.
North Korean diplomats haven't commented at the talks. But the
North's chief negotiator, Kim Kye Gwan, reportedly said before
they started that his country had a right to a peaceful nuclear
program.
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 reactor, Hill said, noting it could take up
to a decade to be completed.
The South Korean offer to send electricity to the North could
begin delivering power in a few years. The North suffers chronic
energy shortages that have further hampered its already
struggling economy.
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.
A Washington-based think tank released a satellite photo
Wednesday showing that the reactor at Yongbyon has apparently
been restarted, noting a steam plume was seen Sunday rising from
its cooling tower. The reactor was shut down earlier this year
and the North said its fuel rods were removed, a move that would
allow it to harvest more weapons-grade plutonium.
The Institute for Science and International Security also
released a satellite photo showing activity at the North's
50-megawatt nuclear reactor under construction, including a new
road surface and possibly a crane, but said it didn't appear
there was large-scale work at the site.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
16 Guardian Unlimited China: Sides Far Apart in N. Korea Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday September 15, 2005 12:46 PM
By BO-MI LIM Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - The U.S. envoy on North Korea's nuclear program
said Thursday he hoped to move beyond an impasse at arms talks
after Washington rejected the North's demand for a nuclear
reactor in exchange for abandoning its atomic bomb program.
China said, however, that the sides remained far apart.
``There are still great differences on certain issues,'' Chinese
Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said after delegates
from all six nations met but failed to break the deadlock, the
official Xinhua News Agency reported.
Pyongyang wants a reactor in exchange for abandoning its nuclear
program.
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said
Washington could not agree to the demand.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
17 IPS-English POLITICS-U.S: Trans-Atlantic Group Calls for
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 14:46:56 -0700
autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
ROMAIPS NA IP BW ML DV=20
POLITICS-U.S: Trans-Atlantic Group Calls for Nuclear Deal With Iran
By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Sep 15 (IPS) =FB Ahead of a crucial International Atomic=20
Energy Agency (IAEA) meeting, next week, a group of some 50 prominent=20
experts and former foreign-policy officials from the United States and=20
Europe have mooted a deal with Iran on it's controversial nuclear=20
programme.
If Iran agrees to a permanent and verifiable end to its efforts to=20
enrich uranium and accounts fully for its past and present nuclear=20
programme, both the U.S. and the European Union (EU) should provide=20
significant benefits to Tehran, according to a statement issued by the=20
group, Wednesday.
Washington, in particular, should enter into a dialogue with the Iranian=20
government on issues of regional concern and ''declare its willingness=20
to explore directly with Iran other areas of concern,'' including moving=20
toward the normalisation of diplomatic and economic ties, the statement=20
said.
If, on the other hand, Iran rejects such a deal, the EU could join the=20
U.S. in imposing economic and diplomatic sanctions against Iran, even if=20
they were not authorised by the UN Security Council, and ''consider=20
additional steps'' should Iran proceed with nuclear enrichment, withdraw=20
=66rom the IAEA Additional Protocol, or withdraw from the Nuclear=20
Proliferation Treaty (NPT.)
''The credibility of western non-proliferation policy is now clearly on=20
the line,'' according to the statement, which was released here by the=20
Brookings Institution Wednesday evening. ''The European Union and the=20
United States have a strong common interest in bringing Iran back to the=20
negotiating table and persuading it to change course.''
''The best way to do that is to make clear to Iran that it can win=20
significant political and economic benefits if it foregoes a nuclear=20
weapons programme, but that it will pay a very big political and=20
economic price if it does not. Such an effort will only work if America=20
and Europe stand united,'' the statement said.
The group, including top U.S. national security policymakers, Sandy=20
Berger and Anthony Lake; former defence secretary William Perry; and=20
former deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott, as well as former top=20
Spanish and British foreign policy officials, was formed last February=20
to foster trans-Atlantic unity on a range of issues that had caused=20
friction between Washington and Brussels during U.S. President George W.=20
Bush's first term.
It proposed a 13-point ''Compact Between the United States and Europe''=20
as ''a demonstration that a comprehensive strategy can be forged to=20
deal with the full range of key challenges we face''.=20
Among other things, it called for Europe to be more supportive of=20
Washington's efforts in Iraq, and for the U.S. to commit itself to=20
negotiations over Tehran's nuclear programme being carried out with Iran=20
by Germany, Britain and France (EU-3).
While Bush has stuck to its first-term guns on a number of issues, it=20
has shown greater flexibility on others and did, in fact, commit itself =FB
albeit grudgingly =FB to abide by the results of any successful=20
negotiation between the EU-3 and Iran.
Those negotiations, however, have run into what many observers =FB=20
including some who believe that Washington went along with the EU-3=20
talks in the almost-certain belief that they would fail =FB see as a dead=
-
end.
Rejecting an offer by the EU-3 to provide Iran with support, for a=20
civilian nuclear-energy programme, in exchange for its agreement not to=20
develop mastery over the nuclear-fuel cycle, the new government of=20
President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, last month, removed IAEA seals at its=20
nuclear facility in Isfahan and restarted its uranium conversion plant=20
that could produce fuel for nuclear weapons.=20
The Europeans had repeatedly warned Tehran that such a move would prompt=20
them to support a U.S. effort to refer violations of the NPT allegedly=20
committed by Iran to the UN Security Council for possible economic and=20
diplomatic sanctions. The Vienna-based agency's 35-member board is=20
scheduled to take up Iran's nuclear programme next Monday.
Iran, which has steadfastly denied it intends to produce nuclear weapons=20
and insisted that it has complied fully with its NPT obligations, has=20
warned against any such move, suggesting even that such an action may=20
provoke it to withdraw from the NPT. It has, however, offered to resume=20
talks with the EU-3, possibly within the context of a larger group of=20
nations, including perhaps Russia and China.
The latter two countries have already indicated their opposition to=20
sending the issue to the Security Council, and some observers believe=20
one or both of them may ultimately be prepared to veto any sanctions=20
resolution. China has invested heavily in Iran's oil and gas sector,=20
while Tehran is a major arms market for Russia, which has helped build=20
Iran's Bushehr nuclear plant.
Moreover, Iran retains considerable sympathy among key developing=20
countries on the IAEA board, which normally acts by consensus. India,=20
Brazil, Malaysia, and South Africa, among others, point out that no=20
concrete proof of the existence of a weapons programme has been=20
forthcoming and that important gaps in information about Iran's nuclear=20
programme provided to the agency by Tehran have since been adequately=20
explained.
In his maiden speech to the UN General Assembly on Wednesday,=20
Ahmedinejad appealed for support. =94The raison d'etre of the United=20
Nations is to promote global peace and tranquility,=94 he=20
said. =94Therefore, any licence for pre-emptive measures which are=20
essentially based on gauging intentions, rather than objective facts ...=20
is a blatant contradiction to the very foundation of the United Nations=20
and the letter and the spirit of its charter.=94
For its part, Washington has stepped up its own lobbying efforts against=20
Tehran, according to an account in Wednesday's Wall Street Journal,=20
dispatching intelligence analysts to China and India last week, for=20
example, to brief them on Iran's alleged efforts to develop a missile=20
warhead, specifically designed to carry a nuclear payload. The IAEA=20
secretariat has reportedly been given a similar briefing.
Due to the lack of consensus on the agency's board =FB as well as the=20
uncertain situation on the Security Council =FB many analysts believe tha=
t=20
the IAEA is unlikely to act on Sep.19, and indeed U.S. Secretary of=20
State Condoleezza Rice seemed resigned Wednesday to delay. =94I am not so=
=20
concerned about exactly when it happens,=94 Rice told Fox News, =94becaus=
e I=20
don't think this matter is so urgent that it has to come on Sep.19.=94
But Wednesday's statement reflects a sense of urgency, even among Bush=20
critics here. Noting that an Iranian nuclear weapons capability would=20
be ''dangerous and destabilising,'' the group said it ''could be a fatal=20
blow to the NPT''.
''Permitting Iran to develop enrichment and reprocessing capabilities --
even under an international inspection regime-- would leave (it) one=20
short step away from a nuclear weapons capability-- with which it could=20
easily proceed, once the fuel cycle was in hand, by withdrawing from the=20
NPT and asking inspectors to leave.'' =20
(END/IPS/NA/IP/BW/ML/DV/JL/RDR/05)=20
=20
=3D 09151100 ORP005
NNNN
*****************************************************************
18 Register-Guard: Nuke 'em if ya got 'em
Eugene, Oregon, USA
Register-Guard Editorial Published:
Thursday, September 15, 2005
The Bush administration's Orwellian doctrine of pre-emptive
military attack as a justifiable form of self-defense has
spawned a proposal from the Pentagon to incorporate nuclear
weapons among the nation's "defensive" options.
In other words, in for a dime, in for a dollar. If you're going
to strike first anyway to prevent an enemy from using weapons of
mass destruction against America or its allies, why not blast
'em with the Big One and be done with it?
Here's why: Because it's insane to dream up justifications to
launch nuclear weapons against stateless, independent terrorist
cells, the members of which are undeterred by the prospect of
"mutually assured destruction." Because it would be madness for
President Bush to insist that his policy is to reduce the role
of nuclear weapons in U.S. military strategy while
simultaneously agreeing to make nukes just another hammer in the
toolbox in the global struggle against violent extremism.
Given the Bush Doctrine's fondness for shooting first and asking
questions later, it's not surprising that the military brass
drafted a document titled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear
Operations" that incorporates nuclear weapons into the mix. But
outside the insular mind-set of the Pentagon, American citizens
ought to be shouting, "Don't even think about it!"
Nuclear weapons are so horrific and destructive that every
responsible government in the world has sought at various times
to limit their development, reduce existing stockpiles and work
toward their eventual elimination. In a study that examined one
of the scenarios outlined in the Pentagon draft for first-strike
use of a nuclear earth penetrator, the National Academy of
Sciences pointed out that fallout from a bunker buster explosion
could spread over 1,000 miles and kill up to a million or more
people.
The World War II generation that actually lived through the only
military use of nuclear weapons has been replaced by baby
boomers for whom "fallout" is nothing more than a synonym for
"consequence." The end of the Cold War and its associated threat
of global nuclear annihilation has apparently weakened the
concept of deterrence based on the apocalyptic effects of a
nuclear explosion. In its place is a grisly, utilitarian respect
for how well nukes might get a military job done.
Playing on U.S. fears in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist
attacks, Bush and the Pentagon have driven home the message that
biological and chemical weapons pose a grave enough threat to
the American people to justify a nuclear response. But there is
never any acknowledgement of the almost incalculable difference
in destructive and lethal impact between chemical agents and
nuclear weapons.
It is imperative that the Bush administration's effort to build
legitimacy for pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons not be allowed
to succeed. So far, Congress has mustered enough cooler heads to
kill funding for development of new nukes, but pressure is
intensifying.
U.S. troops are overextended in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the
administration never misses an opportunity to highlight the
potential nuclear threats posed by Iran and North Korea.
Let's review. The new policy would allow the United States to
launch a pre-emptive, first-strike nuclear attack against any
target its intelligence agencies determine has weapons of mass
destruction. People who've forgotten the catastrophic failure of
those same intelligence agencies with regard to weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq should read that last sentence again.
Copyright 2005 The Register-Guard
*****************************************************************
19 AFP: India, Pakistan leaders vow to pursue peace process
Thursday September 15, 4:48 PM
Photo: AFP
NEW YORK (AFP) - The leaders of India and Pakistan vowed to
pursue efforts to settle all bilateral disputes, following a
lengthy summit that offered no progress in the peace dialogue
between the south Asian rivals.
In a joint statement on Thursday, Pakistan President Pervez
Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh did little
more than reiterate their commitment to measures agreed on
during their two previous meetings.
They included the peaceful settlement of "all pending issues,"
including the key territorial dispute over divided Kashmir.
"We agreed all possible options for a peaceful negotiated
settlement in this regard should continue to be pursued in a
sincere spirit and purposeful manner," said the statement, which
Musharraf read to reporters.
The two men also reaffirmed a pledge not to allow terrorism to
impede the peace process.
During talks with US President George W. Bush late Tuesday,
Singh had said that Pakistan still controls "the flow of terror"
into Indian Kashmir.
One of India's key demands to settle the dispute has been to end
"infiltration" or cross-border movement of Muslim rebels from
Pakistan-administered Kashmir to the Indian-administered zone.
After Musharraf read the joint statement, Singh pronounced
himself "very satisfied" with the outcome of the meeting. Both
men then left the press briefing without taking questions.
The talks, which were held in a New York hotel on the sidelines
of the UN summit of world leaders, began Wednesday at 8:00 pm
(0001 GMT) and moved into a working dinner.
The two men finally emerged with their joint statement shortly
after midnight (0400 GMT).
Musharraf also said he had invited Singh to visit Pakistan and
that the Indian leader had accepted.
The statement welcomed the progress made within the framework of
the so-called "composite dialogue" between the two sides,
including promotion of trade and economic relations and the
exchange of prisoners which began earlier this month.
The prisoner releases would continue "on a humanitarian basis,"
the leaders said.
Nuclear-armed India and Pakistan formally launched the peace
process in January 2004. A flood of feel-good measures followed,
including a historic bus service across the divided region of
Kashmir and the resumption of sporting ties.
But progress has been sluggish on central issues, especially the
fate of Kashmir itself. The Himalayan territory, divided between
the two nations but claimed in full by both, has sparked two of
their three wars since independence in 1947.
The peace dialogue covers eight issues ranging from Kashmir to
boosting trade and cultural ties and setting up safeguards to
prevent an accidental nuclear exchange.
The last time the two leaders met -- to coincide with an
India-Pakistan cricket match in New Delhi in April -- they
jointly declared the peace process "irreversible".
Just hours before his talks with Singh in New York, Musharraf
had addressed the UN summit, saying he wanted the dialogue with
India to be "result oriented" and to initiate "a new era of
peace and cooperation" in South Asia.
"Our nations must not remain trapped by hate and history, in a
cycle of confrontation and conflict," Musharraf said.
He also appealed to the international community Wednesday to
refocus attention on finding a quick end to the Kashmir dispute.
More than 44,000 people have been killed since the outbreak of
the Muslim insurgency in Indian Kashmir in 1989.
India accuses Pakistan of training, arming and funding the
insurgency. Islamabad denies the charge but admits extending
moral, political and diplomatic support to Kashmiris seeking
independence from India.
Copyright 2005 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
20 Daily Times: Foreigners wont be allowed to quiz AQ Khan, says Musharraf
| Friday, September 16, 2005
UNITED NATIONS: President General Pervez Musharraf on Thursday
said Pakistan would not allow any foreigner to interview nuclear
scientist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan about his proliferation
activities.
We are not allowing that, he said in reply to a question at a
press conference at the UN Headquarters. The president described
it as a matter of great sensitivity for Pakistan and said any
idea of non-Pakistanis interrogating the nuclear scientist would
show a lack of trust in the countrys ability to interrogate and
a lack of trust in its intentions to share information.
We are more capable of interrogating than others and we have no
intention of hiding the facts, he emphasised. app
Daily Times - All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
21 [NukeNet] FirstEnergy pays record fines for Davis-Besse
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 14:50:50 -0700
version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Pittsburgh Business Times - September 15, 2005
http://pittsburgh.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/stories/2005/09/12/daily26.html
LATEST NEWS
Pittsburgh Business Times - 9:10 AM EDT Thursday
FirstEnergy unit pays steep NRC fine
A subsidiary of the FirstEnergy Corp. said Thursday it will pay a $5.45
million fine from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for reactor head damage
that led to a two-year shutdown of an Ohio nuclear plant.
The fine is the largest penalty ever levied by the NRC.
The FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co., a division of Akron, Ohio-based
FirstEnergy (NYSE:FE), said it sent the NRC a letter admitting "full
responsibility for the significant performance deficiencies that led to the
reactor head issue."
The NRC said FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. restarted and operated the
Davis-Besse plant in May 2000 without repairing a leak from the reactor
vessel head.
The leaking boric acid was found two years later during a routine
inspection. The corrosion had eaten almost through a 6-inch-thick steel cap.
FirstEnergy companies have more than 13,000 employees in Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, and first began selling electricity to
Pittsburgh-area customers in 1997.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
22 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear power station granted life extension
Press Association
Thursday September 15, 2005
[Dungeness B nuclear power station in Kent] Dungeness B nuclear
power station in Kent will stay open until 2018. Photograph: PA
British Energy said today it was extending the life of its Kent
nuclear power station by 10 years, a move that stoked the debate
on the future of atomic energy in the UK.
The operator said the decision to keep Dungeness B open until
2018 would allow it to continue making a "powerful contribution"
to the UK's energy needs and would safeguard hundreds of jobs.
It insisted the decision would not pave the way for further
extensions at its other UK nuclear power stations.
Article continues
The move will increase the lifetime of the plant
to 35 years - in line with many of its other sites. British
Energy, which produces around one-fifth of the UK's electricity,
has already been granted extensions to the life of six of its
seven other plants.
Environmental campaigners criticised the decision, saying it had
"little relevance" for the future of Britain's energy policy.
The government has suspended any decision on its future nuclear
power policy until it resolves issues such as nuclear waste, but
it is under pressure to cut carbon dioxide emissions by more
than 60% by 2050.
"Squeezing a few more years out of Dungeness B does not take
away from the fact that there is no long-term future for nuclear
power," said Friends of the Earth spokesman Roger Higman.
British Energy chief executive Bill Coley said the move was
important in helping the UK achieve its climate change goals on
reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
"The life extension for Dungeness B is not indicative of
potential for further life extensions at the company's other
nuclear power stations," he said. Tests would be carried out on
other stations at least three years before their scheduled
closing dates, he added.
British Energy has seen a major improvement in output from
Dungeness B in the last couple of years. The Kent plant is one
of the region's largest employers, with more than 550 full-time
staff, and brings in an estimated 30m a year to the local
community.
It first started supplying the National Grid in 1983 and has so
far generated 75.87 terawatt hours (TWh) of power - an amount
that could provide all the electricity needed for Greater London
and the south-east for a year.
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
23 Modesto Bee: Exorcising the demons of Chernobyl
Modbee.com |
MICHAEL FUMENTO:
Scripps Howard News Service
Last Updated: September 15, 2005, 12:35:00 PM PDT
(SH) - Why would an energy-craving nation (the U.S.) that also
demands a pristine environment put the kibosh on a limitless
form of power (nuclear energy) that produces no air pollution
and none of the emissions that environmentalists claim cause
global warming?
It stems essentially from two massively publicized incidents
that plague our imagination: Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania
in 1979 and especially Chernobyl in Ukraine. Nobody was even
injured at TMI, but Chernobyl was a disaster of epic
proportions. Or was it?
For the answer go back to 1986 in the former Soviet Union, a
regime in which worker and public safety mattered zilch. A
powerful steam explosion at one of four reactors of the
Chernobyl nuclear facility near Kiev - a hunk of junk compared
to any American nuke plant - caused additional explosions, a
fire, and a full nuclear meltdown. More than 100,000 people were
evacuated.
United Press International's immediate death toll was 2,000
while others used far higher figures. "Late Word From Inside
Russia: Mass Grave for 15,000 N-Victims," blared the New York
Post. Blame these perhaps on confusion and Soviet secrecy. But
in 2001 Agence Presse France reported the highest toll ever,
claiming "between 15,000 and 30,000 people died" from the
initial blast and radiation exposure. As to delayed cancer
deaths from radiation, some nuclear energy opponents estimated
almost a half million.
But a voluminous new report assembled by the Chernobyl Forum,
comprising eight United Nations agencies, shows not only that
the accident's immediate impact was grossly exaggerated but that
even delayed cancer deaths will prove miniscule compared to the
outrageous predictions.
The actual number of immediate deaths? Not 30,000 but rather
47, says the report. All were among plant personnel and
emergency workers, none among the general public.
Delayed cancer deaths estimated in the new report? Not a half
million but about 4,000. This though 5 million people received
excess radiation exposure. Yet the report also admits that
although there's been plenty of time for cancers to start
showing up, researchers are having trouble finding enough cases
even to justify the 4,000.
The report did attribute nine thyroid cancer deaths in children
from drinking contaminated milk (which may be preventable with
cheap iodine supplementation).
But even for the cancer most linked to radiation exposure
(leukemia) and for those with the greatest such exposure
(cleanup workers), it found studies repeatedly showing no
increased risks.
Tragically, women as far away as southern Italy aborted their
babies because of environmentalist propaganda essentially
claiming they'd be born with three eyes and tentacles. Yet the
report finds no evidence for excessive birth defects.
Indeed, "the largest public health problem created by the
accident" is the "damaging psychological impact (due) to a lack
of accurate information," the Chernobyl Forum found. "These
problems manifest as negative self-assessments of health, belief
in a shortened life expectancy, lack of initiative, and
dependency on assistance from the state." As FDR might have put
it, these poor people have nothing to fear but fear itself.
Yet all of us suffer from nuclear hysteria - if not our own,
then from those who force the hands of policy-makers. It's why
no new nuclear power plants have been ordered since the late
1970s and more than 100 new reactors have been canceled. Never
mind that nuke plants supply 20 percent of our energy and yet
have never harmed a single American, nor that there's never been
an accident in France where they supply 75 percent of the
nation's energy.
Never mind that accidents caused by natural gas, petroleum
products, and accidents and black lung disease from coal take a
steady toll of lives each year. Never mind that we're constantly
bombarded with radiation from above (the sun) and below (the
earth).
And never mind that even U.S. reactors designed four decades
ago are incomparably safer than Chernobyl. Newer technologies
such as "pebble bed reactors," in which the radioactive material
is sealed in small graphite balls, are safer still.
Environmentalists think cheap food and housing are great, yet
somehow affordable energy from any source is evil. Saintliness,
to them, is achieved by paying through the nose for
extravagantly inefficient power sources like windmills and solar
panels.
Well, let them build a windmill in their backyards. The rest of
us need an exorcism from the demons of anti-nuclear hysteria.
Michael Fumento is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and
the author of "The Fat of the Land: The Obesity Epidemic and How
Overweight Americans Can Help Themselves." E-mail
fumento@pobox.com.
Copyright 2005 The Modesto Bee.
*****************************************************************
24 Globe and Mail: McGuinty touts 'new nuclear'
theglobeandmail.com
With Ontario facing soaring energy needs, Premier hints reactors
could be on the way
By KAREN HOWLETT
Thursday, September 15, 2005 Page A11
NIAGARA FALLS, ONT. -- Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has given
his strongest signal yet that his government is considering
building new nuclear reactors to help address the province's
looming electricity crisis.
The government has asked the Ontario Power Authority to prepare
a 20-year plan to meet the province's soaring electricity needs.
The province faces a severe energy shortfall over the next
decade if it does not urgently deal with the gap between supply
and demand, warns another agency that manages Ontario's
electricity system. The OPA plans to submit its report on Dec. 1.
"We are prepared to go ahead with economical, safe, new nuclear
if that is recommended by the OPA," Mr. McGuinty said yesterday
in a luncheon address to the Ontario Energy Association in
Niagara Falls.
The Premier also attended the groundbreaking ceremony for a
10.4-kilometre tunnel that will increase electricity output at
the Sir Adam Beck Generating Station in Niagara Falls.
He said the province needs to refurbish, rebuild or replace
25,000 megawatts of supply over the next 15 years. The province's
entire capacity is 30,000 megawatts. On a high-demand day,
Ontario consumes 25,000 megawatts of electricity, while on
moderate days it uses between 16,000 and 18,000 megawatts.
Ontario is dealing with the legacy of successive governments'
failure to bring new sources of power on line, one that left it
no choice but to import expensive power from the United States
on many days to meet soaring demand during the province's
hottest and driest summer in 50 years, Mr. McGuinty told
reporters.
"It's time for us to mature and in a sense grow up in Ontario
when it comes to understanding what our energy needs are and
making the decisions today that have been avoided yesterday to
ensure that we have a reliable supply of affordable, clean, safe
electricity," he said.
The Ontario government is considering spending billions of
dollars on new reactors just as the nuclear power industry is
going through a quiet rehabilitation in North America. Three
things are driving the renewed interest in nuclear: the high
cost of oil and gas, concerns about security of energy supplies,
and the need to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
In the United States, a broad energy bill was signed into law
last month that is intended to make the nation's electricity
supply more reliable and encourage construction of nuclear power
plants. The bill comes more than 26 years after a near meltdown
at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant.
In Ontario, the last time a new nuclear plant went on-line was
1992. In 1997, Ontario Power Generation, the government-owned
electricity utility, took seven of its 19 reactors off line
because they weren't up to standard.
In late 2003, the government fired the top three executives of
OPG for botching the restoration of the Unit 4 nuclear reactor
at the Pickering A station, which was years late and millions of
dollars over budget.
Then in July, OPG scrapped plans to restart two other mothballed
reactors at the Pickering A station, saying it wasn't
economically viable to spend $2-billion refurbishing Units 2 and
3.
OPG returned Unit 4 to service in 2003 and the refurbished Unit
1 is expected to come back on line in October at a projected
cost of about $1-billion.
Mr. McGuinty reiterated yesterday that he has no interest in
"pouring billions of dollars into un-economical, old nuclear."
New Democratic Party Leader Howard Hampton said the government
has been going down the nuclear road from Day 1, simply because
it has not aggressively pursued other energy strategies. He said
reactors are not only potentially unsafe and unreliable, but
expensive to build. The province's previous forays into nuclear
energy saddled Ontarians with $20-billion in debts, he said.
"I see no arguments that tell me we should go down the nuclear
road again," he told reporters. "Energy efficiency is our best
bet."
Progressive Conservative MPP John Yakabuski criticized the
government's plan to shut down the province's aging, coal-fired
generating plants by 2009, before it has enough new sources of
power.
+ Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
Globeandmail.com:
*****************************************************************
25 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Joint Meeting of the
FR Doc E5-5021
[Federal Register: September 15, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 178)]
[Notices] [Page 54589-54590] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15se05-70]
Subcommittees on Plant License Renewal and on Plant Operations;
Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittees on Plant License Renewal
and on Plant Operations will hold a joint meeting on September
21, 2005, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance.
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:
Wednesday, September 21, 2005--8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m. The purpose
of this meeting is to gather information regarding the current
status and condition of Browns Ferry Unit 1 in preparation for
ACRS reviews of the license renewal application for Browns Ferry
Units 1, 2, and 3, and the restart of Browns Ferry Unit 1. The
Subcommittees will hear presentations by and hold discussions
with representatives of the NRC staff, Tennessee Valley
Authority, and other interested persons regarding this matter.
The Subcommittees will gather information, analyze relevant
issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions,
as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official,
Mr. Cayetano Santos (telephone 301/415-7270) five days prior to
the meeting, if possible, so that
[[Page 54590]] appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic
recordings will be permitted.
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged
to contact the above named individual at least two working days
prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to
the agenda.
Dated: September 8, 2005.
Michael L. Scott, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. E5-5021 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
26 NRC: Carolina Power & Light Company, Brunswick Steam Electric Plant,
FR Doc E5-5022
[Federal Register: September 15, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 178)]
[Notices] [Page 54586-54587] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15se05-68]
Units 1 and 2; Notice of Withdrawal of Applications for
Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses The U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of
Carolina Power & Light Company (the licensee) to withdraw its
November 12, 2002, application, as supplemented on March 5, 2004,
for proposed amendments to Facility Operating License No. DPR- 71
and Facility Operating License No. DPR-62 for Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, respectively, located in Brunswick
County, North Carolina.
The proposed amendments would have revised the Technical
Specifications, as necessary, to support an expansion of the core
flow operating range (i.e., Maximum Extended Load Line Limit
Analysis Plus (MELLLA+)). As part of the MELLLA+ implementation,
Carolina Power & Light Company would implement the Detect and
Suppress Solution- Confirmation Density (DSS-CD) approach to
automatically detect and suppress neutronic/thermal-hydraulic
instabilities.
The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on
February 18, 2003 (68 FR 7813), and renoticed on April 27, 2004
(69 FR 22880). However, by letter dated August 25, 2005, the
licensee withdrew the proposed change.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendments dated November 12, 2002, as
supplemented March 5, 2004, and the licensee's letter dated
August 25, 2005, which withdrew the application for license
amendments. 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
[[Page 54587]] 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.
Brenda L. Mozafari, Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project
Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-5022 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
27 NRC: Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Haddam Neck Plant;
FR Doc E5-5023
[Federal Register: September 15, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 178)]
[Notices] [Page 54587-54589] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15se05-69]
Partial Exemption from Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A,
Criterion 1, 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B, Criterion XVII, and 10
CFR 50.59(d)(3) 1.0 Background Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power
Company (CY) is the licensee and holder of Facility Operating
License No. DPR-61 for the Haddam Neck Plant (HNP), a permanently
shutdown decommissioning nuclear plant. Although permanently
shutdown, this facility is still subject to all rules,
regulations, and orders of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC).
On December 5, 1996, CY notified NRC that operations had
permanently ceased and that all fuel had been permanently removed
from the reactor. On July 7, 2000, CY submitted its License
Termination Plan (LTP), which the NRC approved on November 25,
2002.
CY began actively decommissioning HNP in April 1999, through a
contract with Bechtel Power Corporation. In June 2003, CY began
managing the decommissioning using staff augmentation and
subcontractors for speciality work.
The nuclear reactor and all associated systems and components
necessary for the safe generation of power have been removed from
the facility and disposed or sold off-site. Additionally, the
structures necessary for safe power generation are either
demolished or in an advanced state of demolition. There are no
safety-related structures, systems and components (SSCs)
remaining at the HNP. Transfer of the spent fuel (SF) and
greater-than-Class C (GTCC) waste from the SF pool to the HNP
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) was completed
on March 30, 2005, but the SF pool has not yet been drained, so
it is not ready for demolition.
On February 16, 2005, CY filed a request for NRC approval of an
exemption from the recordkeeping requirements of 10 CFR Part 50
Appendix A, Criterion 1, 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B, Criterion
XVII, and 10 CFR 50.59(d)(3). 2.0 Request/Action Pursuant to the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.12, CY requested the following
exemption, to the extent necessary, from the record retention
requirements of: (1) 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A, Criterion 1,
which requires certain records be retained ``throughout the life
of the unit''; (2) 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B, Section XVII, which
requires certain records be retained consistent with applicable
regulatory requirements for a duration established by the
licensee; and (3) 10 CFR Part 50.59(d)(3), which requires certain
records be maintained until ``termination of a license issued
pursuant to'' Part 50.
CY proposes to eliminate these records when: (1) The nuclear
power unit and associated support systems no longer exist for
SSCs associated with safe power generation, or (2) spent nuclear
fuel has been completely transferred from the spent fuel pool and
the building is ready for demolition.
CY is not requesting any exemption associated with record keeping
requirements for storage of spent fuel at its ISFSI under 10 CFR
Part 50 or the general license requirements of 10 CFR Part 72.
Most of these records are for SSCs that have been removed from
HNP and disposed of offsite. Disposal of these records will not
adversely impact the ability to meet other NRC regulatory
requirements for the retention of records [e.g., 10 CFR 50.54(a),
(p), (q), and (bb); 10 CFR 50.59(d); 10 CFR 50.57(g)]. These
regulatory requirements ensure that records from operation and
decommissioning activities are maintained for safe
decommissioning, spent nuclear fuel storage, completion and
verification of final site survey, and license termination.
3.0 Discussion NRC licensees are required to maintain their
records according to the NRC regulatory recordkeeping
requirements. Pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12,
``Specific Exemptions,'' CY filed a request for a partial
exemption from the NRC recordkeeping requirements contained in 10
CFR Part 50 Appendix A, Criterion 1, 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B,
Criterion XVII, and 10 CFR 50.59 (d)(3). The NRC recordkeeping
requirements at issue in CY's request for exemption are as
follows.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, ``General Design Criteria for Nuclear
Power Plants,'' establishes the necessary design, fabrication,
construction, testing, and performance requirements for
structures, systems, and components important to safety.
Specifically, CY requests an exemption from Criterion 1,
``Quality standards and records,'' which states in part:
Appropriate records of the design, fabrication, erection, and
testing of structures, systems, and components important to
safety shall be maintained by or under the control of the nuclear
power unit licensee throughout the life of the unit.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, ``Quality Assurance Criteria for
Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants,'' establishes
quality assurance requirements for the design, construction, and
operation of structures, systems, and components that prevent or
mitigate the consequences of postulated accidents that could
cause undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
Specifically, CY requests an exemption from Criterion XVII,
``Quality Assurance Records'', which states: Sufficient records
shall be maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting
quality. The records shall include at least the following:
Operating logs and the results of reviews, inspections, tests,
audits, monitoring of work performance, and materials analyses.
The records shall also include closely-related data such as
qualifications of personnel, procedures, and equipment.
Inspection and test records shall, as a minimum, identify the
inspector or data recorder, the type of observation, the results,
the acceptability, and the action taken in connection with any
deficiencies noted. Records shall be identifiable and
retrievable. Consistent with applicable regulatory requirements,
the applicant shall establish requirements concerning record
retention, such as duration, location, and assigned
responsibility.
CY also requests an exemption from 10 CFR 50.59(d)(3), which
states: ``The records of changes in the facility must be
maintained until the termination of a license issued pursuant to
this part or
[[Page 54588]] the termination of a license issued pursuant to 10
CFR Part 54, whichever is later. Records of changes in procedures
and records of tests and experiments must be maintained for a
period of 5 years.'' Exemption Requirements In order to be
granted an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix A, Criterion I, Appendix B, Criterion XVII, and 10 CFR
50.59(d)(3), the licensee must meet the requirements of 10 CFR
Part 50.12(a)(1), and demonstrate that special circumstances, as
defined in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2) exist. In its exemption request
dated February 16, 2005, CY provides the following justification
for granting the exemption request and regulatory basis for
meeting the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12(a)(1), and that the
special circumstances, as defined in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2), exist:
I. General Justification for Granting the Exemption Request A.
Nuclear Power Generation SSCs The HNP power generation unit no
longer exists. Its systems and components have been removed to
various offsite disposal facilities or reuse applications. The
structures that have not yet been fully demolished have been
remediated or partially demolished to the point of rendering them
useless for any application. The general justification for
disposition of records associated with these SSCs is that the
SSCs no longer exist, they no longer serve, nor can they
conceivably serve, any function regulated by the NRC.
While the safe power generation SSCs no longer exist, the HNP
site and the power generation ``footprint'' continue to be under
NRC regulation due, primarily, to presence of residual
radioactivity. The radiological controls (and other programmatic
controls such as quality assurance) of the ``footprint'' and the
implementation of cleanup criteria are fully covered through the
current plant documents such as the updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR), which includes the HNP License Termination Plan
and the Quality Assurance Program.
These programmatic elements and their associated records are
unaffected by the exemption request.
B. Spent Fuel and Associated SSCs With all spent fuel and GTCC
transferred from the spent fuel pool (SFP) to the ISFSI on March
30, 2005, the SFP and its associated SSCs no longer have a safety
function. All records necessary for spent fuel storage have been
retained for the ISFSI. Similar to the power generation SSC
records, once the SFP is drained and ready for demolition, there
is no safety-significance or other regulatory value in retaining
SFP SSC records. Also, similar to the power generation
``footprint'', the SFP SSCs ``footprint'' is included under the
radiological control provided by the UFSAR, Quality Assurance
Program, and their programmatic elements.
Finally, CY believes that when the NRC developed record retention
requirements, there was little, if any discussion related to
decommissioning facilities. In the case of ISFSI records,
however, recent clarification was provided. Specifically, when
updating 10 CFR 72.48 requirements (72.48 is the dry fuel storage
equivalent of 10 CFR 50.59), the NRC clarified the retention
period for records for changes in the facility or spent fuel
storage cask design to be until ``* * *. Spent fuel is no longer
stored in the facility'' (10 CFR 72.48(d)(3)(I). This is
analogous to what CY is requesting--retention of related records
until fuel is no longer stored in the SFP and the SFP building is
ready for demolition.
C. ISFSI SSCs and Spent Nuclear Fuel CY is not requesting any
exemption associated with retention of these records.
II. Specific Justification for Exemptions and Special
Circumstances A. Specific Exemption Is Authorized by Law The CY
exemption request to reduce record retention durations is
authorized by law and within the Commission's authority. CY
believes that the Commission would have made these clarifying
changes to the regulations had there been sufficient industry
experience in performing decommissioning and license termination
at Part 50 facilities when the record retention rules were
originally promulgated.
B. Specific Exemption Will Not Present an Undue Risk to the
Public Health and Safety The public health and safety are not
affected by the proposed exemption. Removal of the underlying
SSCs associated with the records has been already determined by
CY, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59, to have no adverse public
health and safety impact. Elimination of associated records for
these SSCs will not impact health and safety.
C. Specific Exemption Consistent With the Common Defense and
Security CY believes that the elimination of these records is
administrative in nature and does not involve information or
activities that could potentially impact the common defense and
security of the United States.
D. Special Circumstances Further CY provides the following
regulatory basis for meeting the requirements of: 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii) ``Application of the regulation in the particular
circumstances would not serve the underlying purpose of the rule
* * *'' The common and underlying purpose for the regulations
cited above is to ensure that the current license and design
basis of the facility is understood, documented, preserved and
retrievable. The current license basis encompasses all those
elements of SSCs functionally necessary to ensure, within the
boundaries of nuclear regulation, safe operation of the facility.
In order to ensure future safe operation, a license basis is
maintained current by evaluating changes against up- to-date
information. The terms such as ``safety functions'', and ``safe
operation'' is meaningless if a facility has been dismantled and
disposed. In this case, retention of records associated with
nonexistent SSCs serves no safety or regulatory purpose.
Therefore, application of these record requirements in CY's
circumstances does not serve the underlying purpose of the
regulations.
10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) ``Compliance would result in undue
hardship or other costs that are significantly in excess of those
contemplated when the regulation was adopted,* * *'' The records
retention itself is an expensive proposition.
Retention of records alone is not sufficient. They must be
legible, retrievable and stored in a safe condition. This expense
was understood on the part of the Commission and the nuclear
industry for the current license basis to ensure the continued
safe operation of the facility.
However, what was not well understood (when the regulation was
adopted) was the effect of explicit record retention durations
that survived the life of a facility and no longer served an
underlying safety purpose.
This is the current situation at the decommissioning facilities.
CY's available record storage capacity continues to shrink as
buildings are
[[Page 54589]] remediated, surveyed and demolished. CY is less
than one year from demolishing the administrative building where
many of the records are stored and retained. Retaining records
associated with non-existent SSCs and a non-existent nuclear
power generator is a significant hardship today as records are
shuffled between buildings and administrative support personnel
are reduced. It will become more of a hardship and cost increase
as they must make provisions for offsite storage well in advance
of building demolition.
10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(vi) ``There is present any other material
circumstances not considered when the regulation was adopted for
which it would be in the public interest to grant an exemption.''
First, the cost associated with maintaining records that no
longer serve a safety purpose can be significant, particularly
for a facility at an advanced stage in the decommissioning
process.
Decommissioning costs, including record maintenance, are paid by
the ratepayers throughout the multi-state region that benefitted
from the power produced by the HNP when it was operating. Since
HNP is no longer generating electric power and is in
decommissioning, the requested records exemption helps towards
maintaining a cost-efficient decommissioning.
Second, elimination of these records ensures their future
unavailability to individuals and groups interested in adversely
affecting commercial nuclear facilities.
4.0 Conclusion Based on its evaluation, the staff concludes the
requirements for a specific exemption in 10 CFR 50.12 have been
satisfied. The staff concludes that the requested exemption from
the recordkeeping requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A,
Criterion 1, 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B Criterion XVII, and 10
CFR 50.59(d)(3), will not present an undue risk to the public
health and safety. The destruction of the identified records will
not impact remaining decommissioning activities; plant
operations, configuration, and/or radiological effluents;
operational and/or installed SSCs that are quality-related or
important to safety; or nuclear security.
Further, the staff concludes that the destruction of the
identified records is administrative in nature and does not
involve information or activities that could potentially impact
the common defense and security of the United States.
The staff agrees that an underlying purpose of the record keeping
regulations in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, Criterion 1, 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVII, and 10 CFR 50.59(d)(3) is to
ensure that the NRC staff has access to information in order for
the NRC to perform its regulatory functions including inspection
and licensing. For example, in the event of any accident,
incident, or condition that could impact public health and
safety, the records would assist in the protection of public
health and safety during recovery from the given accident,
incident, or condition, and also could help prevent future events
or conditions at the site adversely impacting public health and
safety. Because the CY-HNP reactor primary systems, including the
reactor vessel, steam generators, pressurizer, reactor coolant
pumps and piping, and their associated support systems have been
removed for offsite disposal or resale, there are no longer
regulatory functions for NRC to perform associated with these
systems or components.
Thus, the records identified in the exemption would not provide
the NRC with information for carrying out its regulatory
function. To the extent that CY had sold components, the new user
of the components may have need for the associated records,
however, that is an issue for the new owner and not a regulatory
issue under CY's license.
Therefore, the Commission grants CY the requested exemption to
the recordkeeping requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix A,
Criterion 1, 10 CFR 50 Appendix B, Criterion XVII, and 10 CFR
50.59(d)(3), as described in the February 16, 2005, letter.
Specifically, pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12, CY is
exempted from the record retention requirements of 10 CFR Part 50
Appendix A, Criterion I, 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B, Criterion
XVII, and 10 CFR 50.59(d)(3) for: (1) Records pertaining to
structures, systems, and components, or activities associated
with the nuclear power unit and associated support systems that
no longer exist at the CY site; and (2) records pertaining to the
spent fuel pool and associated support systems for the safe
storage of fuel in the spent fuel pool after the spent nuclear
fuel and GTCC has been completely transferred from the spent fuel
pool and the spent fuel pool is ready for demolition. This
exemption does not apply to any recordkeeping requirements for
storage of spent fuel at the CY ISFSI under 10 CFR Part 50 or the
general requirements of 10 CFR Part 72. In addition, this
exemption does not apply to any records reflecting spills,
releases or other information relevant to remaining
decommissioning requirements and activities at the CY site.
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 as documented in Federal
Register (70 FR 53258, September 7, 2005).
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of September, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Claudia M. Craig, Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning
Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental
Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E5-5023 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
28 NRC: American Energy Company, LLC Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
FR Doc E5-5024
[Federal Register: September 15, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 178)]
[Notices] [Page 54585-54586] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15se05-67]
Station; Notice of Acceptance for Docketing of the Application
and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing Regarding Renewal of
Facility Operating License No. DRP-16 for an Additional 20-Year
Period The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the
Commission) is considering application for the renewal of
Operating License No.
DPR- 16, which authorizes the AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, to
operate the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station at 1930
megawatts (MWt) thermal. The renewed license would authorize the
applicant to operate the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station
for an additional 20 years beyond the period specified in the
current license. The current Operating License for the Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station expires on April 9, 2009.
The Commission's staff has received an application dated July 22,
2005, from AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, pursuant to 10 CFR Part
54, to renew the operating license number DPR-16 for Oyster Creek
Nuclear Generating Station. A Notice of Receipt and Availability
of the license renewal application, ``AmerGen Energy Company,
LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; Notice of Receipt
and Availability of Application for Renewal Facility Operating
License No. DPR-16 for an Additional 20-Year Period,'' was
published in the Federal Register on August 4, 2005 (70 FR
44940).
The Commission's staff has determined that AmerGen Energy
Company, LLC has submitted sufficient information in accordance
with 10 CFR 54.19, 54.21, 54.22, 54.23, and 51.53(c) that is
acceptable for docketing. The current Docket No. 50-219 for
Operating License No. DPR- 16 will be retained. The docketing of
the renewal application does not preclude requesting additional
information as the review proceeds, nor does it predict whether
the Commission will grant or deny the application.
Before issuance of each requested renewed license, the NRC will
have made the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations.
In accordance with 10 CFR 54.29, the NRC will issue a renewed
license on the basis of its review if it finds that actions have
been identified and have been or will be taken with respect to:
(1) Managing the effects of aging during the period of extended
operation on the functionality of structures and components that
have been identified as requiring aging management review, and
(2) time-limited aging analyses that have been identified as
requiring review, such that there is reasonable assurance that
the activities authorized by the renewed license will continue to
be conducted in accordance with the current licensing basis
(CLB), and that any changes made to the plant's CLB comply with
the Act and the Commission's regulations.
Additionally, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.95(c), the NRC will
prepare an environmental impact statement that is a supplement to
the Commission's NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' dated
May 1996.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.26, and as part of the environmental
scoping process, the staff intends to hold a public scoping
meeting. Detailed information regarding this meeting will be the
subject of a separate Federal Register notice.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this Federal
Register Notice, the applicant may file a request for a hearing,
and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding
and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must
file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to
intervene with respect to the renewal of the licenses. Requests
for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be
filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for
Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested
persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is
available at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located
at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, First Floor,
Rockville, Maryland 20852 and is accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at
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's PDR reference
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or by e-mail at
pdr@nrc.gov. If a request for a hearing/petition for leave to
intervene is filed within the 60-day period, the Commission or a
presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel will rule on the request/petition; and the Secretary or the
Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
In the event that no request for a hearing/petition for leave to
intervene is filed within the 60-day period, the NRC may, upon
completion of its evaluations and upon making the findings
required under 10 CFR parts 51 and 54, renew the license without
further notice.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner
in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding, taking into consideration the limited
scope of matters that may be considered pursuant to 10 CFR parts
51 and 54. The petition must specifically explain the reasons why
intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following factors: (1) The nature of the requestor's/petitioner's
right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the
nature and extent of the requestor's/ petitioner's property,
financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in
the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The
petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the
petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the
bases of each contention and a concise statement of the alleged
facts or the expert opinion that supports the contention on which
the requestor/ petitioner intends to rely in proving the
contention at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner must also
provide references to those specific sources and documents of
which the requestor/petitioner is aware and on which the
requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or
expert opinion. The requestor/petitioner must provide sufficient
information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the
[[Page 54586]] applicant on a material issue of law or fact.\1\
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the
action under consideration. The contention must be one that, if
proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A
requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with
respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to
participate as a party.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \1\ To the extent that the application contains
attachments and supporting documents that are not publicly
available because they are asserted to contain safeguards or
proprietary information, petitioners desiring access to this
information should contact the applicant or applicant's counsel
to discuss the need for a protection order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- The Commission requests that each contention be given
a separate numeric or alpha designation within one of the
following groups: (1) Technical (primarily related to safety
concerns); (2) environmental; or (3) miscellaneous.
As specified in 10 CFR 2.309, if two or more
requestors/petitioners seek to co-sponsor a contention or propose
substantially the same contention, the requestors/petitioners
will be required to jointly designate a representative who shall
have the authority to act for the requestors/petitioners with
respect to that contention.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the
conduct of the hearing. A request for a hearing or a petition for
leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 20555-0001,
Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier,
express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the
Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
and Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail addressed to the Office of
the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to
the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at
301-415-1101, verification number is 301-415-1966.\2\ A copy of
the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene must
also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 20555-0001, and it is
requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile
transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to
OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy of the request for hearing and
petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the
attorney for the applicant, Kathryn M. Sutton, Esquire, Morgan,
Lewis, & Bockius LLP, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC, 20004.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \2\ If the request/petition is filed by e-mail or
facsimile, an original and two copies of the document must be
mailed within 2 (two) business days thereafter to the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001;
Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions
will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission,
the presiding officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
that the petition, request and/or contentions should be granted
based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR
2.309(a)(1)(I)-(viii). Detailed information about the license
renewal process can be found under the Nuclear Reactors icon at
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html on
the NRC's Web site. Copies of the application to renew the
operating license for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station are
available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located
at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, First Floor,
Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738, and at
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati
ons.html , the NRC's Web site while the application is under
review. The NRC maintains an Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of
NRC's public documents. These documents may be accessed through
the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html under ADAMS accession
number ML052080172. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or
who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in
ADAMS may contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail
to pdr@nrc.gov. The staff has verified that a copy of the license
renewal application is also available to local residents near the
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station at the Lacey Public
Library, 10 East Lacey Road, Forked River, NJ 08731.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of September, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samson S. Lee, Acting Program Director, License Renewal and
Environmental Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement
Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-5024 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
29 People's Daily: Russia wants to build more units at Tianwan nuke plant
UPDATED: 09:18, September 15, 2005
Russia ia seeking to obtain the right to build the third and
fourth generating units of China's Tianwan nuclear plant though
this "is not so easy," Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency
(FAEA) chief Alexander Rumyantsev said on Wednesday.
The first generating unit at Tianwan, where Russian company
Atomstroyexport is the general contractor, is to be launched
late in 2005 or early in 2006, Rumyantsev was quoted by the
Interfax news agency as saying.
According to Rumyantsev, given its fast economic growth, China
would be able to develop its own nuclear technologies in seven
to 10 years' time. This would preclude long-term Russian
presence in the Chinese market, he hinted.
Russian companies intend to bid for all projects to build
nuclear power plants abroad, and it is Russia's strategic plan
to build up exports of nuclear fuel, the Interfax quoted the
FAEA chief as saying.
Russia is building two generating units in , which are going in
operation in 2007 or 2008.
But as India is not a signatory to the Treaty on the
Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons it is also questionable
whether Russia can expand its presence in the Indian nuclear
market, and so there are international restrictions on its
nuclear imports.
Meanwhile, Russia is bidding for a nuclear power plant to be
built in , Rumyantsev said.
Source: Xinhua
Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved
*****************************************************************
30 Reuters: FPL braces Florida nukes for Tropical Storm Katrina
Thu Aug 25, 2005 8:17 AM ET
NEW YORK, Aug 25 (Reuters) - FPL Group Inc.'s (FPL.N: Quote,
Profile, Research) Florida Power & Light Co. prepared its two
Florida nuclear power stations -- St Lucie and Turkey Point --
for the approach of Tropical Storm Katrina.
In a couple of reports to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, FPL declared an unusual event, the lowest of four
emergency classifications used by the NRC, due to the expectation
of hurricane-force winds within 24 hours.
Katrina, packing maximum sustained winds of 50 miles per hour,
is located about 90 miles east of Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The
U.S. National Hurricane Center forecast the storm, moving west at
about 8 mph, would strengthen over the next 24 hours and make
landfall in southern Florida late Thursday or early Friday.
To prepare a nuclear plant for a hurricane, the operator battens
down or removes anything that could become a projectile, tests
emergency diesel generators and prepares for heavy surf, among
other things.
All of the reactors were operating at full power early Thursday
but could be shut down if hurricane-force winds approach the
site. The wind could damage the transmission system and other
equipment outside the reactor buildings but not the reactors
themselves.
Separately, FPL said in a release it was bracing for numerous
power outages since Katrina, which has the potential of reaching
hurricane strength before making landfall, will likely strike an
urban area with significant electrical infrastructure exposure.
FPL, which serves 4.3 million customers in Florida, said it
already called upon thousands of additional utility workers who
are now traveling to Florida. Forecasters expect heavy rainfall
and winds that can cause a lot of tree debris and flooding that
could affect underground facilities, prolonging outages.
After the storm, the utility said it would start restoring
critical infrastructure first, followed by the largest number of
customers in the shortest time by working on the major lines.
The 1,678-megawatt St. Lucie station is located on Hutchinson
Island in St. Lucie County, about 120 miles north of Miami. There
are two 839 MW units 1 and 2 at St. Lucie.
The 2,205 MW Turkey Point station is located in Florida City in
Miami-Dade County, about 25 miles south of Miami. There are
several units at Turkey Point, including a 400 MW oil/natural
gas-fired unit 1, the 407 MW oil/gas-fired unit 2, two 693 MW
nuclear units 3 and 4, and a handful of 2 MW and 3 MW oil-fired
turbines.
FPL, which owns all of Turkey Point and St Lucie unit 1,
operates both stations. FPL (85.1 percent), Florida Municipal
Power Agency (8.8 percent) and Orlando Utilities Commission (6.1
percent) own unit 2.
FPL's subsidiaries own and operate more than 31,000 MW of
generating capacity across the United States, market energy
commodities, and transmit and distribute electricity to more than
4.3 million customers in Florida.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
31 Reuters: AEP gets license extensions for Michigan nuke
Tue Aug 30, 2005 1:35 PM ET
NEW YORK, Aug 30 (Reuters) - Utility operator American Electric
Power (AEP.N: Quote, Profile, Research) on Tuesday said the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved 20-year license renewals
for the two generating units at the Cook Nuclear Plant in
Bridgman, Michigan.
The two units went on-line in 1975 and 1978, respectively, with
40 years licenses.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
32 Reuters: Scana, Santee Cooper to consider new nuclear plant
Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:09 AM ET
NEW YORK, Aug 24 (Reuters) - Utility company Scana Corp. (SCG.N:
Quote, Profile, Research) on Wednesday said it and Santee Cooper
will consider extending an existing nuclear generation joint
ownership agreement so they can study construction of a new
nuclear generation facility.
The last license issued for a nuclear plant that actually led to
construction and operation of one was in 1973. The U.S. nuclear
industry has been virtually frozen since the Three Mile Island
accident in 1979.
Scana said it needed to begin the planning process now since it
can take eight to 10 years to get permits for and then build a
new major generation facility. Any plant would be intended to
meet forecast needs in 2015.
Scana's principal subsidiary is South Carolina Electric and Gas
Co., or SCE&G. Santee Cooper is South Carolina's state-owned
utility. SCE&G already works with Santee Cooper on nuclear
generation at the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station near Jenkinsville,
South Carolina.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
33 Las Vegas SUN: Study: Security lacking at Test Site
Today: September 15, 2005 at 11:28:57 PDT
Government officials say improvements already have been made
By Benjamin Grove <>
SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF
WASHINGTON -- Security is lacking at the nation's nuclear
weapons sites, including the Nevada Test Site, according to a
recent report, but government officials say many improvements
already have been made since the inspections that were the basis
for the report.
The study also backs a long-considered proposal that nuclear
weapons and materials should be consolidated at fewer, better
protected sites. It identifies the isolated, under-utilized
Nevada Test Site, 60 miles northwest of Las Vegas, and Idaho
National Laboratory as two logical choices for consolidation.
The Test Site is already accepting at its high-security Device
Assembly Facility some weapons-grade nuclear materials from the
Technical Area 18 site at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New
Mexico.
The 121-page report was commissioned by the Energy Department,
authored by retired U.S. Navy Adm. Richard Mies. It was made
public earlier this month.
Among the report's findings was that the National Nuclear
Security Administration, the semi-autonomous agency affiliated
with the Energy Department that runs the Test Site, is plagued
by cultural problems that hamper security. The report notes that
the problems include:
The lack of team approach to security.
An underappreciation of security, which is not fully embraced
by everyone as integral to the weapons sites' missions.
A bias against training.
A lack of trust in the security organization.
An absence of accountability.
Security at the Nevada Test Site has been faulted. Security
guards in a mock attack exercise in August 2004 rated poorly. In
another instance, an Energy Department audit noted that a guard
brought unauthorized handguns to the Test Site during a 2003
training event.
The security firm Wackenhut, which provides security for a
number of nuclear plants and other facilities nationwide, has
been the contracted security firm at the Test Site since 1965.
The firm is being paid $44 million this year.
Wackenhut's current contract expires Sept. 30, and bids are
under review, including a Wackenhut bid to continue work. But it
is not known when the job award will be announced, spokesman
Kevin Rohrer said.
NNSA officials have said the Test Site is secure and that
improvements have been made since last year.
The NNSA has already implemented 70 percent of the
recommendations from the Mies report, NNSA Administrator Linton
Brooks said. He commissioned the study in 2002.
"I believe that security oversight and execution are greatly
improved over where we were when I asked for this review,"
Brooks said in a written statement.
"Admiral Mies advised NNSA about his findings as the review was
under way and that has helped us get to where we are today."
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
34 NRC: NRC Officials to Meet with Officials from PA Hospital to Discuss Apparent Violation
of Requirements
News Release - Region I - 2005-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road,
King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 No. I-05-048
September 15, 2005 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil
A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail:
opa1@nrc.gov
Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials will meet with
representatives of Crozer-Chester Medical Center on Sept. 20 to
discuss an apparent violation of NRC requirements that was
identified during a routine NRC inspection at the Upland, Pa.,
facility in June of this year.
The meeting, called a predecisional enforcement conference, is
scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m., in the Public Meeting Room at
the NRC Region I Office, 475 Allendale Road, in King of Prussia.
While the meeting will be open to the public for observation,
portions could be closed to the public to discuss sensitive
security aspects of the apparent violation, if necessary. The
NRC staff will be available to answer questions before the
meeting is adjourned.
While reviewing records during the inspection, NRC inspectors
found that last November, the door to a high dose rate remote
afterloader (HDR) was left open and the device was left
unsecured and unattended. (HDRs are medical devices that use
radioactive sources -- in this case iridium-192 -- that are
placed near tumors to kill cancer cells.) The amount of time the
treatment room door was left open was estimated to be less than
15 minutes.
The decision to hold a predecisional enforcement conference does
not mean that the NRC has determined a violation has occurred or
that enforcement action will be taken. Rather, the purpose is to
discuss the apparent violation, including its causes and safety
significance; to provide the hospital with an opportunity to
point out any errors that may have been made in the NRC
inspection report; and to enable the hospital to outline its
proposed corrective action.
No decision on the apparent violation will be made at this
conference. That decision will be made by NRC officials at a
later time, after considering the information developed during
the inspection and the information provided by the hospital at
the conference.
Last revised Thursday, September 15, 2005
*****************************************************************
35 Deseret News: Stand on nuclear waste is helpful
[deseretnews.com]
Thursday, September 15, 2005
I would like to praise the actions of The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints for its stand against the proposed Skull
Valley nuclear-waste repository. It may seem odd to some people
to see the church take a stance on an issue like this. But by
taking a position, they make us aware that there may be
far-reaching consequences and dangers to our community that we
don't even realize.
From my own secular point of view as a student studying
community planning, this proposed nuclear-waste repository is
contrary to the core principles of planning: to protect the
health, welfare and safety of the citizens and community.
High-level radioactive waste coming through Utah is a threat to
the safety of our towns. Murphy's Law puts it perfectly. "If
anything can go wrong, it will."
Dallin D. Hutchinson
Provo
2005 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
36 Las Vegas RJ: DOE denies budget cuts single out Yucca geologists
Thursday, September 15, 2005
U.S. Geological Survey expects big work reduction at repository
By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- The Department of Energy is not singling out
federal geologists for budget cuts in its planned Yucca Mountain
spending for next year, a spokesman said Wednesday.
All contractors for the nuclear waste project are being
scrutinized as the DOE forms work goals, spokesman Allen Benson
said.
"There may be reductions for some and there may not be
reductions for some, it all depends on the scope of work,"
Benson said.
Officials at the U.S. Geological Survey said they have been told
to expect an 89 percent reduction in its work at the proposed
nuclear waste repository in the 2006 fiscal year. The cutbacks
would force layoffs and could drive the agency off the project,
they said.
The USGS supplies scientists to the Energy Department for
specific research and monitoring tasks. The agency has conducted
nuclear waste-related examinations at Yucca Mountain since 1979.
The deep reductions have drawn attention in part because they
have been proposed just months after the discovery of Yucca
Mountain e-mails written by several USGS hydrologists.
In the messages, composed between 1998 and 2000, the scientists
write of disgruntlement and frustration and mention the
possibility of falsifying quality assurance documentation of
their work.
The e-mails embarrassed DOE and USGS officials and have caused
frictions in the bureaucracies. A House subcommittee and
inspectors from the Energy Department and the Interior
Department continue to investigate the messages.
The episode also has contributed to Yucca Mountain delays. DOE
officials have said they will not seek a repository license
until the matter is closed.
Asked if there was a connection between the proposed USGS budget
cuts and the e-mails, Benson said, "No comment."
Benson said the Energy Department routinely reviews needs for
each budget, which affects all Yucca Mountain participants,
including national laboratories in California and New Mexico
that contribute to the repository effort.
"We are not singling out USGS. All our participants are
undergoing the same review," Benson said.
He wouldn't discuss internal numbers affecting other
contractors.
Since 1983, the Energy Department has funded USGS $379 million
for research, Benson said. Spending levels have decreased as the
project has shifted its focus from on-site studies to repository
licensing.
Congress has not set a Yucca Mountain budget level for the 2006
fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. The Bush administration has
requested $651 million, but lawmakers are not expected to pass
an Energy Department appropriation bill until later this fall.
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
37 Las Vegas RJ: Panel gets 4,980 documents in e-mail probe
Thursday, September 15, 2005
By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- The Department of Energy said it delivered 4,980
pages of information Wednesday to a congressional panel
investigating whether Yucca Mountain documents have been
falsified.
The documents include personnel records of three hydrologists
tied to e-mail messages that mention document falsification on
the nuclear waste project, a DOE official said.
The department produced additional records related to the
possible fabrications, as well as communications on the matter
between DOE and Bechtel SAIC, the project's management firm.
Lists of water infiltration research conducted by the
hydrologists and others at the Yucca site also were delivered,
according to DOE spokesman Craig Stevens.
Stevens said DOE officials sent the pages to Congress as they
continue to comply with a subpoena issued in July by the House
Government Reform Committee.
A subcommittee headed by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., is
investigating allegations raised by the e-mails that quality
assurance documentation of certain water infiltration research
may have been fudged.
Joseph Hevesi, a U.S. Geological Survey hydrologist who was a
primary author of the e-mails, testified before Congress in June
he did not falsify documents and any mention of it was not meant
to be taken seriously.
The Energy Department delivered personnel records for Hevesi and
for Alan and Lorraine Flint, married USGS hydrologists also
identified as authors of some messages.
Porter "is encouraged, but he is still waiting for the rest,"
spokesman T.J. Crawford said.
Porter and the Energy Department remain at loggerheads over a
subcommittee demand for a copy of a draft license application
for the proposed repository.
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
38 Las Vegas SUN: Porter committee gets 4,980 more pages in probe
Today: September 15, 2005 at 9:13:57 PDT
By Suzanne Struglinski
SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department delivered an additional
4,980 pages to Rep. Jon Porter's subcommittee Wednesday, to
fulfill requirements of a subpoena related to Porter's
investigation into possible falsified documents at the Yucca
Mountain project.
House Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va.,
issued the subpoena in Jury for 10 sets of documents. The Energy
Department delivered some documents by the July 22 deadline but
has sporadically turned over documents since then, including 700
pages Friday.
In March the department announced it discovered e-mails sent
between U.S. Geological Survey employees that suggest water
studies at Yucca may not be correct. Water flow studies are key
to determining the mountain's success in protecting people from
radiation.
Porter is chairman of the House Federal Workforce and Agency
Organization subcommittee, which is examining e-mails and
alleged mismanagement at the Energy Department's proposed
high-level nuclear waste repository.
Wednesday's compilation included documents involving the
potential falsification of documents the department did not
originally give the subcommittee and employee records on Joseph
Hevesi, Alan Flint and Lorraine Flint, the scientists who wrote
the bulk of the e-mails in question.
Porter also received a list of the water infiltration models
from 1997 to present and correspondence between the department
and the project's main contractor Bectel SAIC regarding the
e-mails.
The subcommittee has still not received the department's draft
license application that it must submit to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission for approval before construction of the
repository can begin. The draft is one of the 10 requested items.
Department spokesman Craig Stevens said the department will
make more documents available to the committee as it compiles
them.
Porter said the department is either not capable of finding the
draft application or is withholding documents.
"It actually scares me either way," Porter said.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
39 Las Vegas SUN: NRC: Casks would survive big blaze
Today: September 15, 2005 at 9:58:20 PDT
By Suzanne Struglinski <>
SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- Transportation casks carrying used nuclear fuel
would survive a fire similar to one in a Baltimore train tunnel
four years ago, according to additional analysis by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission that is to be published in the Federal
Register.
The 2001 train fire prompted critics of the proposed Yucca
Mountain nuclear waste dump to point to the potential dangers
associated with moving spent nuclear fuel by train across the
country to Yucca Mountain.
The train cars in the Baltimore tunnel carried hazardous
materials, but no nuclear waste.
Nevada officials and other Yucca critics believe a similar fire
could cause casks to break and lead to a release of high-level
radioactivity. They call for full-scale testing a casks used to
move the waste to Yucca, if it were to open, and tougher
regulations for casks to be approved suitable for shipping.
In an analysis completed earlier this month, the NRC found that
a fire similar to the Baltimore Tunnel fire would not cause a
release of spent nuclear fuel particles nor fission products
from a three types of shipping casks it studied.
The NRC found that one type of cask would release a small
amount of residue found on a fuel assembly, but nothing
significant.
The NRC report used data from the National Transportation
Safety Board and assistance from the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, the Center for Nuclear Waste
Regulatory Analysis and the Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory.
The 78-page draft will be available for public comment and a
final version will be released after the comments are evaluated,
the NRC says.
The commission released a report in January 2003 that analyzed
only one cask in certain scenarios and also found no radiation
would be released.
Commission regulations require a cask to be designed to
withstand a fully engulfing fire lasting no less than 30
minutes, with an average flame temperature of no less than 1,475
degrees, according to the report.
But in another 2001 study also completed for Nevada by Matthew
Lamb and Marvin Resnikoff of Radioactive Waste Management
Associates showed an analysis of a 1,600-degree fire burning for
five days would result in a radiological release.
Joe Strolin, of planning division administrator for the Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects, said the bottom line is that
full-scale tests need to be done on the casks that will be used
at Yucca to know for sure what they can withstand.
"This should not be just public relations tests either,"
Strolin said.
All other tests, for the state and for NRC, have been done with
computer models.
Resnikoff continues to work on updating the calculations used
in the report, and UNR Mechanical Engineering Department
Professor Miles Greiner is studying other "high intensity"
accidents and their effects on casks, Strolin said.
The nuclear industry says that more than 3,000 spent fuel
shipments have taken place in the last 40 years with no
radioactive releases, deaths or injuries.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
40 Salt Lake Tribune: Guv calls feds out on waste
Article Last Updated: 09/13/2005 12:24:55 AM
Huntsman won't let nuclear dump go in without a fight
By Rebecca Walsh and Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune
With the prospect of highly radioactive waste crossing Utah's
borders, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. talked tough Monday.
Huntsman plans to push federal legislation, pester President
Bush and his Cabinet and appeal to federal court over the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's license for a nuclear storage
site on an Indian reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake
City.
"This is the most reckless thing I have ever heard our
[federal] government wanting to do in this state," Huntsman said
in an interview. "If I have to stand in front of the train
coming across the border, I'm prepared to do that."
Two previous governors opposed a consortium of eight nuclear
power companies' plan to store up to 40,000 tons of spent nuclear
fuel on the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes reservation in Tooele
County. And after eight years of wrangling - in Congress and
before the commission - Huntsman faces the prospect of trying to
finish the fight.
The governor did not detail many specifics of his plan. He
has asked Interior Secretary Gale Norton to "unilaterally cancel
the lease." He supports U.S. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's
legislation requiring on-site storage of the waste at the
nuclear power plants that produce it. He has raised the possible
threat of a terrorist attack on the site with Homeland Security
Secretary Michael Chertoff. And he believes a court appeal will
"ensure that nothing happens imminently."
Huntsman has determined trainloads of used nuclear fuel rods
will not enter the state on his watch.
"There isn't [another] issue as important as this one as far
as I'm concerned," Huntsman said. "We need something that closes
this off other than just by legal means. We are talking about a
public-policy fix. But it is premature to say what that magic
bullet could be."
Right now, the most public sign of the state's fight likely
will be in court - with a challenge to the NRC's licensing
decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver or Washington.
Dianne Nielson, director of the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality, said the state is looking forward to
pressing its case in federal court, which is the next step for
challenging any final NRC decision.
"We think it will be a less biased forum," Nielson said.
"We're prepared and expected to be in court."
In addition to securing funding for the legal fight from the
Legislature, the state is continuing its work with the
public-private Nuclear Opposition (NO!) Coalition.
"They have not met for a long time, but they are still a
force," she said.
Private Fuel Storage spokeswoman Sue Martin said it was no
surprise the state would appeal the license. Martin said PFS was
surprised by the wording in The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints' statement last week that nuclear waste
storage "requires thorough scrutiny."
"The first thing that came to my mind is: 'What has the past
eight years been about, if it hasn't been about intense
scrutiny?' " she said.
"The state of Utah has represented its citizens well by
raising all of the tough questions that have been the topic of
many hours of hearings before the [NRC]. All of those questions
have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission."
But the governor figures the public opposition of LDS Church
leaders can't hurt the state's case. Still, he has no plans to
involve the church officially in the battle.
"Just the fact that they have taken a position on it will
resonate with many both in state and out," Huntsman said.
Jason Groenewold, director of the Health Environment
Alliance of Utah (HEAL), met with the governor to talk strategy
Monday.
He said Huntsman stressed the importance of building
alliances with the state of Nevada and others.
Keeping high-level nuclear waste out of Utah appears to be
one of the governor's top priorities, Groenewold said.
"He's not taking it lightly," he added. "Clearly he wants to
fight this thing with everything he's got."
---
Tribune reporter Matt Canham contributed to this report.
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
41 Salt Lake Tribune: It's now official: Radioactive refuse will be moved
Article Last Updated: 09/15/2005 12:48:13 AM
By Robert Gehrke and Lisa Church The Salt Lake Tribune
The U.S. Energy Department formally approved plans Wednesday
to move 11.9 million tons of tailings and radioactive debris
from the banks of the Colorado River, signaling the start of the
nearly half-billion-dollar cleanup.
"This is great news for Utah and the millions of people who
rely on the Colorado River for their water supply," Gov. Jon
Huntsman Jr. said.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in April that the
department would ship the waste from the former Atlas mill site
just outside Arches National Park by rail to Crescent Junction,
about 30 miles north of Moab.
"This decision demonstrates our commitment to fulfilling our
Cold War cleanup obligations as well as preserving the long-term
environmental health of the river and the many communities it
serves," said Jim Rispoli, assistant energy secretary, whose
signature made formal the previously announced decision.
Contaminants from the tailings pile have seeped into the
river, threatening endangered fish and alarming downstream water
users. An estimated 25 million residents in Nevada, Arizona and
California rely on the Colorado for water.
The Atlas pile spans about 130 acres on the 439-acre site.
The thick sludge in the pile contains remnants of Cold War
uranium production. Cleanup of the pile stalled when Atlas
Minerals Corp., which bought the mill in 1962, filed for
bankruptcy in 1998, leaving the pile with an interim cap and an
inadequate cleanup fund.
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
42 Whitehaven News: More US firms at Sellafield
Published on 15/09/2005
USA-BASED contract firms continue to make inroads into work at
the Sellafield complex.
British Nuclear Group (BNG) has this week announced that
California based Computer Science Corporation has been awarded a
74 million deal over five years to run IT computer services for
BNG.
The computer deal follows an earlier contract CSC ran for the
company. The new contract will give IT support to 12,000 users
across BNG.
John Wood Group PLC, a Houston and Aberdeen based multinational
company has won a $9million six-year gas turbine maintenance
contract at Fellside Heat and Power Ltd in Cumbria. Fellside Heat
and Power Ltd is owned by British Nuclear Group Limited.
The contract involves the provision of packaged maintenance
services for three General Electric Frame 6581 gas turbines.
*****************************************************************
43 Whitehaven News: Nuclear birds set a poser
Published on 15/09/2005
A STATE-of-the-art waste facility at Sellafield is set to receive
the carcasses of hundreds of gulls and pigeons which have been
culled on the nuclear site.
For the last few years the contaminated birds have had to be
stored on the site pending a "burial" solution.
The disposal route is to be Sellafield's new non-hazardous waste
facility once it receives final approval for operation by the
Environment Agency.
The birds will be buried with various wastes, including soil and
rubble from building and plant decommissioning on the site.
At present they are being kept in an industrial-type freezer
located near the new site.
"All are in bags, labelled and properly identified, so that we
know exactly where they came from," said Sellafield spokeswoman
Ali McKibben.
"The birds can represent a health and safety hazard because of
their sheer numbers, so we have had to carry out periodic culling
programmes over the years, but it is completely untrue to say we
have brought in marksmen to shoot them.
"What we have done is to inject eggs to prevent reproduction and
also to lay down poisoned bait," she pointed out.
*****************************************************************
44 Whitehaven News: Speculation over BNG sale
Published on 15/09/2005
By Alan Irving
SPECULATION is mounting that Sellafield will eventually be
controlled by foreign companies.
The Independent reported this week that the Government has
decided to sell off BNFL's subsidiary, British Nuclear Group,
which operates most of the Sellafield site for the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority.
Both BNG and the UK Atomic Energy Authority will continue to run
Sellafield until 2009 when they will face competition from
foreign firms under competitive tendering.
BNG said this week it could not comment on "speculation and
rumour" that the group was to be wound up in a sale expected to
raise 100 million for the government.
Sellafield unions are in the dark over any proposed sale of BNG,
which continues to employ around six thousand workers. Peter
Kane, convenor for the GMB, told The Whitehaven News: "We want to
know whether there is to be a sell-off and if so what's behind
it.
"I am not going to give any knee-jerk reaction until we get the
answers to the questions."
When Sellafield is "competed for" in 2009, the companies expected
to join the bidding include the Americans Bechtel, Washington and
Fluor, and the French operators Cogema.
*****************************************************************
45 Paducah Sun: USEC delays Piketon centrifuge demonstration
Paducah, Kentucky
Staff & Wire report
Thursday, September 15, 2005
USEC Inc. has delayed demonstrating gas centrifuge technology by
several months, but that doesn't jeopardize plans to have a new
plant fully operating in Piketon, Ohio, by early in the next
decade, the company says.
The $1.7-billion, 500-job Ohio plant is slated to gradually
replace the 1,270-worker Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant and its
outdated, expensive technology.
USEC planned to show investors its energy-efficient centrifuge
technology in Piketon by the end of the year, but now says that
wont happen until the first half of 2006. In an earnings report
last month, the company said some parts being tested arent
ready, and the permitting process is taking longer than
expected.
"In the testing phase, you will find things that you have to
fine-tune and thats what were doing," USEC spokeswoman
Elizabeth Stuckle said.
USEC also needs to work out a long-term lease with the
Department of Energy, which owns the Piketon site. The firm
wants to begin operating the plant in 2008 and be in full
production of uranium for nuclear-power plants by 2010.
USEC officials need to have a successful demonstration "if they
are going to get investors in the plant," said George Lobsenz,
editor of The Energy Daily, a trade publication. "Anything that
delays that demonstration is trouble. They dont have the deep
pockets to develop the plant on their own."
Ohio won a bidding war with Paducah for the American Centrifuge
project, which will produce fuel for nuclear power plants. USEC
closed a gaseous diffusion operation in Piketon in 2001. Workers
remain on the job there doing maintenance, cleanup and other
functions for the energy department.
State and Pike County, Ohio, officials offered USEC an incentive
package worth $125 million to lure the centrifuge project to
Piketon, about 65 miles south of Columbus.
Paul Clegg, an analyst with Natexis Bleichroeder in New York,
wrote in a recent research note that USEC is unlikely to abandon
the Piketon project.
"If the company believes centrifuge is necessary for long-term
survival, it has a big incentive to do whatever is necessary to
make ACP work," he wrote.
USEC is eliminating a third of the 132 people that work at its
Bethesda, Md., headquarters. Stuckle said the cuts are through
retirements, eliminating some jobs, moving others to Paducah and
creating a smaller senior management team focused on enrichment
and the new gas centrifuge program.
Energy Daily, citing industry sources, reported that the
headquarters layoffs could mean USEC is positioning itself to be
sold. "Thats absolutely not true," Stuckle said.
USEC also is offering voluntary reductions of at least 50
salaried jobs at the Paducah plant to try to offset rising
production costs, notably tens of millions of dollars in
electricity. The cuts will start Sept. 30.
*****************************************************************
46 India: PIB: URANIUM INDUSTRY TO CONTINUE AS A PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Ministry of Labour &Employment
The Uranium industry will continue as a public utility service
under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for another six months
with effect from September 15, 2005. The Labour Ministry in a
notification issued here said that this has been done by the
Central Government in public interest. The services in the said
industry were earlier declared as a public utility for six months
from September 15, 2004 and subsequently extended for another six
months from March this year.
The employees in this establishment, as a result, would among
other things be required to give notice to their employer six
weeks in advance of proceeding on strike so that conciliatory
proceedings could be started. During the conciliatory proceedings
and seven days after their completion, the employees cannot go on
strike.
MLD/LK: L-116(PU-Uranium) Sept. 15
Site Content Administered by : Manoj Panday, Director(A) Press
Information Bureau "A" - Wing, Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra
Prasad Road, New Delhi - 110 001
*****************************************************************
47 Sentinel: Lockheed talks safety with concerned residents
By ROSY WEISER
SENTINEL CORRESPONDENT September 15, 2005
[Santa Cruz Sentinel
By ROSY WEISER
Sentinel Correspondent
BONNY DOON It took more than a year to happen, but a small
group of local residents Wednesday finally had the meeting they
sought with representatives of Lockheed Martin to discuss a list
of concerns about the companys Santa Cruz Mountains facility.
Members of Community Concerned About Lockheed Martin (CCALM), a
group formed specifically to investigate environmental and
health issues relating to the local site, met for two hours with
company officials who had to go through a lengthy process to get
security clearance to host the gathering.
Among the groups questions: What products are made and tested
at the site? What are disposal procedures for hazardous
materials? Is the surrounding water table contaminated? Who
would respond to an on-site fire or other accident and how?
In a point-by-point presentation, facility manager Tom Dygert
roughly described the engineering principles behind a collection
of detonating devices manufactured at the plant. The hardware is
eventually used in rocket launches and missile detonation. He
emphasized the low-level explosives involved in the
manufacturing process are relatively benign and are used in very
small quantities.
"We make sure we use the least amount of powder to perform
operations. We keep our quantities very small, often in
milligrams," he said.
No hazardous materials are disposed of on site, said Dygert,
and no weapons-grade radioactive material has ever been used at
the facility.
"Theres less propellant here than you would find in a Fourth
of July fireworks stand. Theres less paint, alcohol and other
solvents than youd find at Home Depot. Theres more energy at a
gas station than here," said Charles Manor, Lockheed
communications director. "We operate under a very, very
stringent safety code."
In fact, the local facilitys safety record is exemplary. There
have been no major employee injuries in its history, and no
significant breeches of environmental laws and standards since
rigorous documentation of hazardous material use, storage and
disposal was put in place in 1984.
But its the years before modern environmental regulations
dictated such safety standards thats worried CCALM members and
other residents. And while Lockheed representatives confirmed
perchlorate, a potentially contaminating chemical used in the
production of rocket fuel, was used in manufacturing operations
decades ago, documentation of the plants disposal practices
wasnt legally required at the time.
"There is no record," said Dygert.
CCALM representative Lynda Marin, whos campaigned for two
years to find out as much as possible about the local Lockheed
Martin site, suggested the company find out more about these
"lost years" by sinking test wells in strategic locations and
analyzing water samples.
"It would be an act of good faith," she told the officials.
Lockheed said it would explore the idea of extensive water
testing.
"We think we are good stewards of this beautiful property,"
Dygert said. "None of us want to work in a dangerous area and we
dont want to hurt this beautiful spot in any way."
Both parties agreed the meeting represented an important first
step in opening up dialogue between the facility and the
community.
CCALM members said theyll seek a follow-up meeting. They also
want to tour the Bonny Doon facility, a site that has always
been closed to the general public.
Contact Rosy Weiser at rosyweiser@sbcglobal.net
207 Church Street, Santa Cruz CA 95060 USA (831) 423-4242
Copyright 1999-2005 Santa Cruz Sentinel.
Ottaway Newspaper, Inc.
kcooper@santacruzsentinel.com
*****************************************************************
48 Whitehaven News: Nuclear waste ‘not fit to dump or send overseas
Published on 15/09/2005
By David Siddall
UP TO a third of drums of high-level nuclear waste are not safe
enough to go into a dump or be returned to their foreign owners,
according to internal BNFL documents seen by The Whitehaven
News.
The drums of glassified waste produced from the Sellafield
Vitrification Plant are the company’s only way to make lethal
liquid waste easier to store for thousands of years.
The documents allege that “up to a third of filled drums are
not fit to return to foreign customers. As of January 2002, 519
drums had each been filled with about 400 kgms of waste glass
for overseas customers. 254 of 266 drums were found to have
deficiencies in their clerical records. Most worryingly out of
171 drums audited, 52 were found to be non-compliant with the
process specification.”
Because they are so radioactive there is no way the customer can
open them to check on their quality.
But BNFL said this week such problems were “historic” and
“after a period of difficulties in the early 2000s the Vit
plant adopted a ten-point improvement plan.”
They said senior managers “did not recognise some of the
alleged claims”. They add that the safety body Lloyds Register
acts as auditors for overseas customers and “in 2004/5 the Vit
plant produced a record 478 containers, all of which were
certified by Lloyds Register”.
“Over the lifetime of the Vit Plant, approximately 20% of the
glass produced in the plant will be returned to Thorp customers
overseas (in Europe and Japan) and we remain confident that all
containers being returned overseas will be qualified against the
stringent quality assurance customer requirements.”
The documents seen by the News also reveal that the
vitrification produces nuggets of soluble radioactivity that
would be a future issue for any repository. The nuggets are
radioactive yellow phase material which cannot be turned into
glass. BNF responded: “Our plants are operated to reduce the
potential for yellow-phase formation, which is not expected to
pose problems for long-term storage of the waste in a deep
underground repository.”
The documents also show that BNFL has still not finalised its
knowledge of how radioactive ruthenium gas was discharged from
the Vit plant in 1997, spreading a fine dust over Seascale. BNFL
has spent millions on research into what to do about the
ruthenium gas escaping past filters at the Vit Plant.
Because of the potential safety issues from the current liquid
waste silos, BNFL has been set targets by the Nuclear
Installations Inspectorate for the vitrification of the waste.
BNFL must produce 525 drums this year and 560 next year. Failure
to meet these targets could lead to the NII halting reprocessing
at THORP.
BNFL confirmed that point this week. Only one of three
production lines is currently working inside the Vit plant.
The reports also reveal that BNFL had to issue assurances to
Lloyds Register to explain why records showed more high-level
waste flowing into the Vit plant than was actually emerging as
drummed and glassified waste at the other end.
The problem confronting BNFL is that if the Vit plant cannot
safely turn the silos full of highly active liquid waste into
glass then all reprocessing would eventually be halted on the
orders of the NII.
The leaked papers also show that all the production and safety
concerns at Vit are sometimes the subject of secret “black
file” meetings, where no records are ever made. But the
company said: “The vitrification plant does not have any
‘secret black file meetings’. There are however some
meetings with no minutes – but for reasons of bureaucracy
avoidance, not secrecy. All formally constituted meetings have
minutes and actions/actionees are held to account.”.
*****************************************************************
49 Deseret News: Utah to file appeal of nuclear repository ruling
[deseretnews.com]
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Critics hail statement of opposition by LDS Church
By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News
Utah will file a federal appeal of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission's granting a license to build a high-level nuclear
repository in Tooele County.
That was the word Monday from Mike Lee, general counsel
to Gov. Jon M. Huntsman. Last week, the NRC granted a license
allowing construction of the facility by Private Fuel Storage.
PFS intends to build it on land owned by the Goshute Indians in
Skull Valley and store casks of radioactive nuclear power plant
fuel rods.
Altogether, 40,000 tons of the dangerous material would
be shipped to the site and stored there for up to 40 years.
Over the weekend, The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints said it opposed the NRC decision, and that has
energized some of the plant's critics.
"I was really pleased to see the church's statement," Lee
said. "It states something that I certainly agree with, that the
governor certainly agrees with ...
"This is indicative of how strongly people feel about
this thing."
Two lines of appeal are open to the state in federal
court: through the U.S. 10th Circuit of Appeals, based in
Denver, or the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. The
action would not be a new lawsuit but an appeal to a decision by
a federal administrative body.
"We will file a petition for review on that sometime
fairly soon in one of those two courts," he said. But which one,
he was not prepared to say. Lee would only say the choice has
been the subject of a lot of discussion.
"We'll take it to one of those two courts and raise
arguments that we think highlight the reasons why this is a bad
plan and why the NRC's decisions should be reversed by the
court."
He called the NRC ruling flawed, dangerous and
irresponsible. "It's bad public policy," Lee said.
The commission did not take sufficient notice of serious
safety considerations, such as the fact that 7,000 F-16 flights
between Hill Air Force Base and the Utah Test and Training
Range take place every year over Skull Valley, he said.
"This is not the end of the road," Lee vowed. "The NRC
decision far from signals the imminent arrival of spent nuclear
fuel in the state of Utah." At the earliest, that would happen
years from now. Meanwhile, the state will continue to fight the
license in other forums, such as the Bureau of Indian Affairs
and the Bureau of Land Management, both of which need to give
approval before the plant is built.
"This is not the end or even the beginning of the end,
but only the end of the beginning."
Lee also said the state also is pursuing legislation in
Congress to make it difficult or impossible for PFS to carry out
its plans.
Jason Groenewold, director of the Health Environment
Alliance of Utah, met with the governor on the issue Monday. He
said Huntsman is "clearly concerned about the license that was
issued."
Huntsman was not surprised by the NRC action, he added,
"but very much committed to fighting it."
He believes Huntsman feels it is an important part of his
work as governor to oppose the project, "and that a key strategy
is to build alliances with other Western states, starting with
Nevada, so we work together to keep nuclear wastes from being
dumped here."
Groenewold welcomed the church statement.
"We need everyone and every resource available to fight
this," he said, "and the church has tremendous credibility, not
only within the state but throughout the country."
The church concern "helps leverage opposition in other
key areas," he said.
Steve Erickson, director of the watchdog group Citizens
Education Project, also welcomed the church statement. He said
he hopes it "might spur our senators, especially, to reassess
their position" concerning the permanent repository proposed for
Yucca Mountain, Nev.
"We need to stick with Nevada in this fight," he said.
Utah should join with Nevadans, such as Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.,
to find a way to protect "the entire Great Basin and the
nation," said Erickson.
A method of storing the spent fuel rods in dry casks at
the nuclear power plants that used them has been working for the
industry, he said. "It will continue working for the industry."
Erickson warned that the Yucca Mountain project seems to
be in serious trouble. If it were to collapse, that could leave
PFS as the only site for such a national storage facility.
E-mail: bau@desnews.com
2005 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
50 Whitehaven News: The nuclear legacy that demands straight answers
Published on 15/09/2005
FOR five decades, nuclear reprocessing has produced a growing
pool of liquid and highly radioactive waste. This has the catchy
title of HAL.
This most lethal of cocktails has had to be stored in carefully
cooled and stirred silos at Sellafield.
When the industry came up with the technology to dry this
high-level waste and mix it with molten glass, there was
widespread relief that the lethal legacy would be much easier to
look after for our children and our children's children.
The vitrification process does nothing to destroy the
radioactivity of the HAL waste, but common sense dictates it is
far better to have it in this form than have the waste in a
nitric acid solution (as is the case with the liquid).
So our safety watchdog, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate,
sees it as vital that the backlog of liquid waste - several
decades' worth - is made safer. That is why they have put tight
guidelines on the plant's operators to reduce these HAL stocks
and turn them to glass.
So far so good.
But working with such high radiation and such high temperatures
as 1100 degrees C is at the cutting edge of industry. And the
only way the company can tell it is getting it right is by strict
audit and control of the process. You can't go and open up the
finished stainless steel drums holding the solid glass waste. If
you did, to put it bluntly, you would die.
And although we should all be pleased at BNFL's progress in the
challenging task of making this high-level waste safer, we should
also be concerned if there are any question marks over the
quality of these drums of waste. This is for the simple reason
that the industry is hoping to be able to persuade us all that
they can safely place the drums in a future "repository". And the
other likelihood taken as read (in the industry at least, if not
necessarily in the wider community) is that this repository will
be at, or under, West Cumbria.
So the issue of water soluble radiation in these drums is not one
to be dismissed as in a BNFL response to The Whitehaven News this
week. They said of this rogue radiation: "It is not expected to
pose problems for long-term storage of the waste in a deep
underground repository."
Ten years ago the industry said it had no intention of putting
high level waste underground. Now it seems to be seen as the
answer to the problem of HAL waste.
Looking after this legacy safely is going to be West Cumbria's
task for the future, but it has to be carried out with clinical
control and accuracy. We all have to hope that BNFL's problems at
vitrification are all as "historic" as the company concedes.
*****************************************************************
51 Deseret News: DOE signs decision to move Moab mill tailings
[deseretnews.com]
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Action announced earlier this year to protect the Colorado
By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News
The U.S. Department of Energy has signed the official decision to
move Moab's nearly 12 million tons of radioactive uranium mill
tailings from near the Colorado River to Crescent Junction, 30
miles away.
Samuel W. Bodman, DOE secretary, announced Wednesday that
the project's Record of Decision has been signed. According to
Utah's two senators, the official signing was by Jim Rispoli,
DOE assistant secretary for environmental management.
According to DOE, the site covers 400 acres, including a
130-acre uranium mill tailings pile. A uranium ore processing
facility once stood there, about three miles northwest of Moab.
Wednesday's action was simply the formalizing of
decisions announced earlier this year. DOE issued its final
environmental impact statement on the project in July, saying
the tailings should be moved. The DOE considered potential
environmental impact, costs and other implications of both
leaving the tailings on site and moving them, according to the
agency.
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. said it was great news for Utah and
millions of others who rely on the Colorado for their water
supply. "We commend the work of the entire Utah congressional
delegation for their tireless dedication to this effort," he
said in a statement e-mailed to the Deseret Morning News.
Bodman commented in a press release that the signing
shows great progress can be made through hard work and
cooperation.
Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, said, "Today's decision is a
hard-won victory for the people of Moab, the water users
downstream and the ecology of one of the nation's great rivers
the Colorado." The tailings are in the 2nd Congressional
District, Matheson's district.
Many people have waited a long time for the announcement,
he added. "It's a big step towards removing a major threat to
the health and safety of millions of Westerners. I will continue
to make the removal of the pile one of my highest priorities."
The state's Republican U.S. senators were on the same
side of the issue as Democrat Matheson.
"This process will take many years," Sen. Bob Bennett
noted in a release. The release said Bennett obtained about $50
million in federal funding for the project. "But we remain
committed to the effort and will continue to seek funding to
ensure it moves forward in a timely manner."
Sen. Orrin Hatch added, "We've fought hard for this for a
long time, and we worked closely with officials in Moab and the
Department of Energy to get this done."
E-mail: bau@desnews.com
2005 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
52 Las Vegas RJ: NEVADA TEST SITE: Plan to 'accelerate closure'
Thursday, September 15, 2005
But critics say unlined pit would accept hazardous waste for
another five years
By KEITH ROGERS
REVIEW-JOURNAL
Graphic by Mike Johnson.
A plan by state environmental officials to "accelerate closure"
of an unlined pit at the Nevada Test Site where
radioactive-laced hazardous waste has been dumped since 1987 is
being billed as a win-win situation.
But critics who are trying to keep nuclear waste out of Nevada
said Wednesday the plan is a trick to allow the unpermitted
disposal site to receive waste for up to five more years, or
until it's filled with another 20,000 cubic meters of mixed
waste from out-of-state Department of Energy facilities.
The pit, which can hold 60,000 cubic meters of waste, or 78,000
cubic yards, is two-thirds full after operating under "interim
status" with no state permit for 18 years.
At capacity, it would hold enough solid, mixed waste to cover a
100-yard-long football field 10 yards deep and 78 yards wide.
The waste includes rags containing treated solvents,
radioactive-laced sludges, lead bricks and laboratory gear that
contains hazardous components.
"I don't understand the logic of keeping it open and letting
out-of-state waste come in, if they have the authority to close
it down," said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada
Nuclear Projects Agency.
The agency has no jurisdiction over the low-level radioactive
waste components of the waste, but Loux said he is observing the
situation.
"We're kind of concerned about letting more waste into the state
in general. Most of us are working hard to keep waste out," he
said.
He was referring to the state's long-standing fight against the
federal government's plans to entomb the nation's spent nuclear
fuel and highly radioactive defense wastes in Yucca Mountain,
100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Peggy Maze Johnson, executive director of Citizen Alert, a
statewide environmental watchdog group agreed.
"This is nuts," Johnson said. "It seems to me the legislation is
really clear. Closing means closing it, not putting out an alert
to all DOE facilities to say, 'Send us your waste.' "
This year, state lawmakers passed Senate Bill No. 396 at the
urging of Leo Drozdoff, administrator of the Environmental
Protection Division.
After a 20-0 vote in the Senate and 30-11 in the Assembly, the
bill was signed by Gov. Kenny Guinn. It takes effect Oct. 1 and
prevents the State Environmental Commission from permitting or
granting a variance for hazardous waste disposal facilities or
landfills that don't have at least one liner to prevent toxic
materials from contaminating soils, groundwater and surface
water.
Jeff Denison, with the Nevada Environmental Protection
Division's Bureau of Waste Management, said the plan for closing
the mixed waste pit was negotiated with Department of Energy
officials during discussions on renewing five-year permits for
disposing of explosive ordnance at the test site and for
temporarily storing hazardous waste in containers for off-site
shipment.
He said a notice for public review of those draft permits will
be posted next week or by the end of the month, triggering a
45-day comment period.
In addition, the division will accept comments on Pit No. 3 and
a staging facility for mixed waste described as "additional
units" in a draft document.
"The remaining capacity of (Pit No. 3) is about 20,000 cubic
meters, and the issuance of the draft permit will accelerate
closure and installation of a final cover system for the unit,"
according to the division's fact sheet for the draft permit.
In a telephone interview this week, Denison said, "We felt the
best environmental remedy is to permit closure and accelerate
construction of a final cap."
He noted that the state law requiring liners on hazardous waste
pits doesn't apply "to an existing landfill that undergoes or
commences closure on or before December 31."
In an e-mail, Denison explained that Pit No. 3 "will undergo
closure" rather than seek an operating permit.
Although it might take five years to actually complete closure,
it will commence closure in keeping with the statutory intent.
Michael Giblin, mixed waste project manager for the Department
of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration office in
North Las Vegas, said the state was asked to develop a method to
verify that out-of-state waste shipped to the test site will
meet requirements for land disposal.
"They've decided to go ahead and accept out-of-state waste
that's generated by DOE," he said. "The bottom line is we've met
the requirement under interim status to receive off-site mixed
waste."
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
53 kgw.com: Costs up for Hanford K Basin cleanup
News for Oregon and SW Washington | AP Wire
Report:
09/15/2005
Associated Press
Work to clean up two leak-prone pools of water that once held
spent nuclear fuel at the Hanford nuclear reservation will cost
significantly more than expected, according to an audit by the
U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General.
In addition, the Energy Department does not expect the work to
be completed by a legal deadline. The agency, which manages
cleanup at the south-central Washington site, is required to
have the pools emptied and their concrete walls and floors
removed in 2009.
The audit blamed some of the rising cost and delay on technical
difficulties removing radioactive sludge from the basins, but
also faulted the Energy Department and its contractor, Fluor
Hanford, for not paying adequate attention to sludge removal
during planning for the basin cleanup.
"Resources were concentrated primarily on fuel removal with
little emphasis on key project actions, such as the development
of a risk mitigation plan," the audit said.
The so-called K East and K West basins were built in the 1950s
to hold irradiated fuel from the site's nuclear reactors. They
later stored excess spent fuel from the N Reactor, which was
used to make plutonium for nuclear weapons during the Cold War.
Last fall, workers celebrated completion of a project to remove
all the spent nuclear fuel from both pools a project that was
deemed a critical cleanup problem at Hanford to reduce risk to
the public and the environment. But removing the residual
radioactive sludge has proven to be a more difficult task than
originally thought.
The Energy Department's current cost estimate is $145.9 million,
but the actual cost of sludge removal from October 202 to June
2005 exceeded the budget by about $34 million, according to the
audit.
In the first nine months of the current fiscal year, costs were
almost $25 million, or 68 percent, greater than anticipated, the
audit found.
The deadline to place sludge in the K-East basin in underwater
containers was March 1. The basin contains about 80 percent of
the sludge and is known to have leaked.
About 80 percent of the basin's sludge has been moved to
containers, but the work could continue until March 2006, said
Paul Pak, project manager for the Energy Department.
About 17 feet of water remains in the basins to shield workers
from radiation.
The inspector general's audit found that better project
management could have reduced schedule delays and cost overruns
on the project.
The Energy Department said it has been working to address
weaknesses found in the report, according to the audit. That
includes a new approach to project management designed to
provide more control of schedules and to ensure the project has
the resources it needs.
The Environmental Protection Agency is concerned that if work to
empty and then remove the basins is delayed, it will in turn
delay cleaning up the reactor area along the Columbia River. The
Energy Department faces a legal deadline of 2012 for that work.
For 40 years, the 586-square-mile site produced plutonium for
the nation's nuclear weapons program. Today, it is the nation's
most contaminated site, with cleanup costs expected to total $50
billion to $60 billion.
___
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************