***************************************************************** 09/22/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.220 ***************************************************************** 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 IPS-English DISARMAMENT: Iran's Nuclear Dispute Sparks 2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Gets Reprieve in Nuclear Standoff 3 Guardian Unlimited: EU Slows Down Drive to Refer Iran to U.N. 4 Guardian Unlimited: Europeans Drop Harsher Stance on Iran 5 Xinhua: China calls for talks on Iran nuclear issue 6 Reuters: Key excerpts from EU nuclear draft on Iran 7 AFP: Iran invites UN nuclear watchdog to visit 8 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy Wants More N. Korea Discussions 9 Sidney Morning News: Temperatures rise in a new nuclear showdown - O 10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Mixed Sentiments Over Future Course of Nu 11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: S.Korean Energy Aid to N.Korea May Top $1 12 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Next round of talks must not be a dance 13 Korea Times: Nuke Agreement Set to Remove ¡®Korea Discount¡¯ 14 US: OpEd Intl Herald Trib: Nuke Proliferation & CTBT 15 Guardian Unlimited: Annan Urges Nations to Ratify Nuke Treaty 16 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear nuances 17 Morning Sentinel: LePage signs anti-nuclear weapons statement NUCLEAR REACTORS 18 US: Some stuff that's in the current path of Rita... 19 US: TEXAS REACTORS GOING FOR BROKE IN FACE OF HURRICANE RITA 20 US: NRC: NRC Dispatches Inspectors in Preparation for Hurricane Rita 21 US: Las Vegas SUN: Proposed Sites Narrowed for Nuclear Plant 22 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting Notice 23 US: TheState.com: SRS out of the running for nuke plant 24 AU ABC: Safety breached at nuclear reactor site 25 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: KEDO to Discuss Nuclear Reactors Early Ne 26 US: Chattanoogan: Nuclear License To Be Sought At TVA's Belefonte Pl 27 Mos News: Russia Plays Down Chernobyl Threat, Says Ready to Particip 28 US: NRC: AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generatin 29 US: Valley Advocate: The "Nuke" York Times 30 US: NRC: Omaha Public Power District; Notice of Withdrawal of Applic 31 Edmonton Journal: Klein cool to nuclear heat 32 NewsRoom Finland: Health minister supports Finnish nuclear power sta 33 Ottawa Citizen: Ont. needs nuclear, coal power - union 34 US: NRC: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Pow NUCLEAR SECURITY 35 [NukeNet] Book: Biowarfare and Terrorism / Francis A. Boyle NUCLEAR SAFETY 36 Guardian Unlimited: Lithuanians Resume Search for Russian Jet 37 ITAR-TASS: Results of inquest into Su-27 accident analysed in Vilniu 38 US: Las Vegas SUN: No link seen between arsenic and leukemia cluster NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 39 Re: [NukeNet] Calls Needed To Stop Yucca N-Waste Dump 40 US: Deseret News: Hatch's bill aims to block nuclear waste 41 Guardian Unlimited: Empty Nuclear Waste Container Tips Over 42 US: Courier-Mail: Union wants uranium ban lifted 43 US: Modesto Bee: Environmental agencies say Castle cleanup is going 44 Sidney Morning News:Nuclear waste dump tenders sought soon - 45 US: AP Wire: Boeing settles Rocketdyne-related lawsuit 46 US: AU ABC: Politics to determine uranium exploration 47 US: NRC: Spent Fuel Casks 48 Las Vegas RJ: Workers on Yucca project face layoffs 49 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Better late than never 50 Salt Lake Tribune: Hatch is sticking with White House on Yucca 51 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Opinion: Dispose of it 52 US: Paducah Sun: PACRO has offer to refine old nickel 53 US: Newsday.com: DOE: Empty nuke waste container not damaged in trai 54 UK: News & Star: Fears over N-waste expansion 55 UK: News & Star: Fears over N-waste dump being washed away 56 US: NRC: Portland General Electric Independent Spent Fuel Storage PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 57 AP Wire: S.C. county sues Energy Department over SRS plant 58 lamonitor.com: Lab bidders set up shop in LA 59 lamonitor.com: LANL tests fell behind schedule 60 DOE: Office of Science; Biological and Environmental Research ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 IPS-English DISARMAMENT: Iran's Nuclear Dispute Sparks Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:33:10 -0700 version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com ROMAIPS AP MM WD IP SC=20 DISARMAMENT: Iran's Nuclear Dispute Sparks East-West Rivalry Thalif Deen UNITED NATIONS, Sep 22 (IPS) - At the height of the Cold War in the 1950= s and 1960s, the United States and the former Soviet Union jealously safe= guarded their own global political and military interests by vetoing each= other's resolutions in the most powerful body at the United Nations: the= Security Council. =94We will soon see the same cat-and-mouse game,=94 predicts one Asian di= plomat, =94only the players, and the power alignments, may be different.=94 The issue that has triggered a new political battle is Iran's attempt at = developing what it calls =94peaceful nuclear energy=94 -- not nuclear wea= pons, as the Western world contends. But the United States and the 25-member European Union (EU) are refusing = to buy the Iranian argument. Collectively, they are threatening to punish= Iran -- on charges that it may be on the verge of developing nuclear wea= pons -- by referring the matter to the Security Council, and possibly cal= ling for military and economic sanctions against Tehran. However, their attempts are being thwarted by two veto-wielding permanent= members of the Council, namely China and Russia, who are opposed to any = immediate action against Iran. The two key players in the new game are the EU, on the side of the United= States, and China on the side of Russia. India, another nuclear power, i= s backing Iran despite pressure from the United States. =94This dispute has given definition to a new East vs. West rivalry, with= the Eastern nuclear powers Russia, China, and India forming a bloc again= st the interests of the Western nuclear powers,=94 Michael Spies, program= me associate at the New York-based Lawyer's Committee on Nuclear Policy, = told IPS. Both the United States and the EU are trying to persuade the 35-member In= ternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna to adopt a consensus re= solution singling out Iran for censure by the Security Council in New Yor= k. But with at least 10 countries opposed to such a move, the IAEA is in dan= ger of splitting. A consensus resolution is unlikely to be a reality. =94Russia and China in particular have remained steadfast in their opposi= tion to Iran's referral to the Security Council by the IAEA Board,=94 Spi= es said. He pointed out that even India, also an IAEA Board member, has c= ome out in opposition to a Security Council referral. =94Russia has specifically stated that this matter is still at the stage = where it is most appropriately addressed by the IAEA and through negotiat= ions. Russia and China have also indicated they would likely veto any act= ion taken by the Security Council,=94 Spies said. The speculation at the United Nations is that all three countries, namely= Russia, China and India, have been pushing forward with their own curren= t or planned economic and military projects with Iran -- despite warnings= from the United States that they halt nuclear cooperation with the gover= nment in Tehran. Iran has also been seeking to expand military and security cooperation wi= th all three states, prompting them to protect their own national interes= ts. Spies predicted that a Security Council referral would certainly harden I= ran's position. =94In the event of referral, Iran has threatened to resum= e uranium enrichment, which is still suspended, and to cease cooperation = under the Additional Protocol, which it has to ratify,=94 he said. He said that the involvement of the Security Council would mean the end o= f the diplomatic path, which requires all sides to make concessions on th= eir current position in order to reach a mutually acceptable outcome. Iran's concessions to date have included both the suspension of certain a= ctivities and an intrusive inspection regimen, above and beyond the requi= rements of the Additional Protocol. All this would certainly come to an e= nd if the IAEA Board votes to refer, Spies warned. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was quoted as saying: =94I am qu= ite certain that at some point in time Iran is going to be referred to th= e Security Council, particularly if Iran continues to demonstrate that it= is not prepared to give the international community assurances that is n= ot going to try to build nuclear weapons under cover of civil power.=94 She also said that Iran's referral for possible sanctions is =94nearly ce= rtain=94, but only the timing is not. Addressing the U.N. General Assembly last week, Iranian President Mahmoud= Ahmadinejad took a defiant stand, stressing his country's =94inalienable= right=94 to develop nuclear energy. He also accused the United States and its allies of nuclear =94apartheid=94= for their double standards in ignoring the development of nuclear weapon= s by Israel. He said that a proposal for a nuclear weapons-free zone in t= he Middle East is being thwarted by Israel. Both the United States and the EU have expressed disappointment over the = hard line taken by the Iranian president. German Foreign Minister Joschka= Fischer said the speech was =94anything but helpful=94. Jack Straw, Fore= ign Secretary of Britain, the current EU chair, also described the statem= ent as =94unhelpful=94. Spies of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy said that while it seem= s plausible that Iran is striving for the capability to produce fissile m= aterials, there is no evidence one way or the other that its current prog= ramme goes beyond the role of supporting its civilian reactor programme, = which has been under construction since the 1970s. =94Security Council referral and a more aggressive international posture = would certainly be perceived in Iran as a threat to its security, likely = providing impetus to those elements in Iranian society which call for it = to develop a nuclear weapon as the ultimate guarantor of its security,=94= he argued. In the broader geopolitical context, he said, the current Iranian regime = very quickly decided that political and economic integration with the Wes= t is not essential for its development. =94Hence in all spheres of its policy, Iran is looking to develop either = complete self-sufficiency or is looking to bolster its transnational rela= tions within its own region and with the major powers in Asia,=94 Spies s= aid. Backing from the larger states in particular has certainly emboldened Ira= n's posture in regards to this issue. Also, it should be noted that all t= he active players on both sides of this debate, with the exception of Ger= many, are nuclear powers, he added. ***** +International Atomic Energy Agency (http://www.iaea.org/) +Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy (http://www.lcnp.org/) +MIDEAST: Nuclear Heat Rises Over Iran (http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?id= news=3D27267) (END/IPS/WD/AP/MM/IP/SC/TD/KS/05) =20 =3D 09222004 ORP010 NNNN ***************************************************************** 2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Gets Reprieve in Nuclear Standoff From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday September 22, 2005 4:16 AM AP Photo VIE124 By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iran gained a reprieve in the standoff over its nuclear program Wednesday, with diplomats saying the European Union had decided to postpone its push to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council. The decision to delay a vote until a later board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency instead of demanding one this week appeared driven by concerns about strong opposition. More than a dozen of the 35 IAEA board member nations meeting in Vienna - including Security Council members Russia and China - are against the idea. Although a new EU draft motion does not mention Security Council sanctions, it still calls for reporting Iran to the council if it continues defying board demands, which include freezing activities related to uranium enrichment, said senior diplomats accredited to the IAEA. The text is expected to be introduced at this week's IAEA meeting, but any vote on referral would come only at a future session - at the earliest when the board meets again in November, said the diplomats, who demanded anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss EU strategy at the meeting. Just hours before the new draft was drawn up, the chief U.S. representative to the IAEA lobbied board members for action this week on the motion. The motion is formally a European Union initiative but is being orchestrated in close consultation with Washington and backed by Australia, Japan, Canada and others at the meeting. ``We agree with the European Union and a growing majority of the board that the time has come to report Iran's (nuclear) noncompliance to the Security Council,'' U.S. delegation head Gregory Schulte told the meeting. ``It is now time for the board to do our duty.'' Still, a diplomat familiar with U.S. thinking said the decision to postpone referral suited Washington, which was not interested in losing a Security Council battle against veto-carrying members Russia and China. ``Our goal is to build the broadest possible consensus,'' State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Wednesday. The threat of referral is not being withdrawn. ``It is a question of not if, but when'' the contentious issue will go to the council, Ereli said. The U.S. diplomatic mission dealing with the IAEA in Vienna declined comment when asked about the developments. A European official - who also demanded anonymity as a condition for discussing EU strategy - said China appeared rigid in its opposition but ``the key is to gain Russia, and we think we can gain Russia at a later date.'' In Moscow, the Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the U.S. and European initiative to refer Tehran to the Security Council as counterproductive, saying it ``will not contribute to the search for a solution to the Iranian problem through political and diplomatic means.'' Although it avoids any mention of U.N. sanctions, the new EU text proposes the Security Council consider ``making clear to Iran'' that the crisis can ``best be resolved'' by cooperating with IAEA investigators. Washington insists Iran has breached the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, as did North Korea, which unilaterally quit the pact two years ago but announced Monday that it would give up its nuclear weapons program. But Iran insists its nuclear activities have not violated the treaty. Iranian Vice President Gholmanreza Aghazadeh, the head of his country's nuclear program, told reporters in Vienna that ``leaving the NPT is not on the agenda of Iran.'' He spoke after meeting representatives from Russia, China and the Nonaligned Movement, which also overwhelmingly oppose the U.S.-European motion. Iran's top nuclear negotiator met Wednesday with ambassadors of the three European countries trying to curb Tehran's nuclear program, urging them to engage in ``forward-looking cooperation'' with the Persian state, state-run radio reported. Ali Larijani also told the envoys of Britain, France and Germany to reiterate to their leaders that Iran would not budge on its plans to pursue a nuclear program in line with the treaty. Tehran says its nuclear program is solely for energy production, despite U.S. and EU concerns that it can be used for nuclear weapons. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Wednesday that President Bush believes Iran needs to return to the negotiating table with the Europeans. ``We've expressed our concerns about Iran's behavior,'' McClellan said. ``They have a long history of deceiving the international community, of not abiding by their international obligations, and that's why we remain concerned about their true intentions.'' Tehran has warned that if referred to the Security Council, it could start uranium enrichment - a possible step toward making nuclear arms. On Tuesday, it said it could stop allowing unfettered IAEA inspections of its nuclear facilities and programs if the agency's board involves the Security Council. Aghazadeh repeated those warnings during Wednesday's closed meeting with the Russians, Chinese and nonaligned delegates, a diplomat familiar with the discussions said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the information is confidential. Aghazadeh, in Moscow on Monday, said Iran would welcome other nations in its ongoing talks with European negotiators, and the new Iranian government wants to increase its cooperation with Russia, whose role in helping build a nuclear reactor in Iran has added to U.S. concerns. --- On the Net: www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 3 Guardian Unlimited: EU Slows Down Drive to Refer Iran to U.N. From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday September 22, 2005 10:46 AM AP Photo VIE120 By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The European Union has backed away from a direct push to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council and is now only implicitly threatening Tehran with such action, according to a document obtained Thursday by The Associated Press. The document - a draft resolution drawn up for the current meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board - now says only that suspicions over Iran's nuclear program are ``within the competence of the Security Council.'' A previous draft had called for reporting of Tehran to the U.N. top decision-making body. The decision to tone down the text and indirectly delay the issue to a later board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency instead of demanding a vote on referral this week appeared driven by concerns about strong opposition. More than a dozen of the 35 IAEA board member nations meeting in Vienna - including Security Council members Russia and China - are against the idea. The new draft, however, was still expected to run into strong opposition because of its strong language. It accuses Iran of ``excessive concealment, misleading information and delays'' in giving IAEA experts probing its program information and access to nuclear materials as they look for signs that Tehran might be hiding a nuclear weapons program. It expresses serious concern that Iran has failed to ``re-establish full suspension of all enrichment-related activities,'' an allusion to international concerns over last month's resumption by Tehran of uranium conversion - a prelude to enrichment, which in turn is a possible pathway to nuclear arms. While not directly asking for Security Council referral, the text finds Iran in noncompliance of commitments to the IAEA that would normally warrant such action. It holds out the threat of future referral, saying that the next board meeting ``will address the timing and content'' of a new IAEA report on Iran's nuclear activities to see if it gives reason to decide that Iran is in violation of agency rules that mandate hauling IAEA members before the council. The draft is formally a European Union initiative but is being orchestrated in close consultation with Washington and backed by Australia, Japan, Canada and others. A diplomat familiar with U.S. thinking said the decision to postpone referral suited Washington, which was not interested in a Security Council battle it could not win against veto-wielding permanent members Russia and China - a view indirectly confirmed from Washington. ``Our goal is to build the broadest possible consensus,'' State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Wednesday. The threat of referral is not being withdrawn. ``It is a question of not if, but when'' the contentious issue will go to the council,'' Ereli said. A European official, who also requested anonymity as a condition for discussing EU strategy, said ``the key is to gain Russia, and we think we can gain Russia at a later date.'' In Moscow, the Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the U.S. and European Security Council initiative as counterproductive, saying it ``will not contribute to the search for a solution to the Iranian problem through political and diplomatic means.'' Like the earlier draft, the new EU text avoids any mention of U.N. sanctions in recognition that Russia and China would veto such a push, diplomats said. Washington insists Iran has breached the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. But Iran insists its nuclear activities have not violated the treaty and has warned that if referred to the Security Council, it could start uranium enrichment - a possible step toward making nuclear arms. It also said it could stop allowing unfettered IAEA inspections of its nuclear facilities and programs if the agency's board involves the Security Council. --- On the Net: www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 4 Guardian Unlimited: Europeans Drop Harsher Stance on Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday September 22, 2005 9:01 PM AP Photo VAH116 By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The European Union offered a slight compromise Thursday in its drive to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council, telling Russia, China and other Iranian allies it was prepared only to delay the initiative and not give it up. Backed by the United States, the Europeans said that if referral opponents did not accept the offer, the EU would push for an immediate vote on Security Council action, diplomats at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency said. The Europeans and Americans believed they could win a vote at the IAEA. But both China and Russia hold veto power on the Security Council and could block any action there against Iran - including possible sanctions - over its suspect nuclear program, so a delay would give the EU time to seek wider support. While the new offer backed off threats of forcing a vote on immediate referral, it implicitly would establish the basis for later Security Council involvement by asking the board to find Iran guilty of noncompliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. A previous EU draft resolution, which remained on the table, called on the 35 nations of the IAEA board to report Iran to the United Nations' highest decision-making body during this session. Both drafts formally were EU initiatives but were introduced in close consultation with Washington and had support from Australia, Japan, Canada and others on the IAEA board. More than a third of the nations on the board opposed putting Iran before the Security Council. The Europeans kept both options alive in hopes that even opponents of referral reluctantly would accept the toned-down draft, diplomats familiar with the West's strategy said. That would suit both the EU and Washington by giving them time to work on winning over Russia while keeping the pressure on Iran to comply with demands to again freeze uranium conversion activities and cooperate fully with IAEA inspectors. China was considered immovable in its opposition to referral, and Alexander Rumyantsev, Russia's atomic energy chief, on Thursday reiterated Moscow's opposition to referring Iran to the council. But a European official said that ``we think we can gain Russia at a later date.'' Like other diplomats, the official demanded anonymity in exchange for discussing confidential details of the behind-the-scenes negotiations. The U.S. government sought for years to take Iran before the Security Council because of Washington's suspicions it is trying to develop nuclear weapons, a charge the Iranians deny. Tehran maintains its intentions are to generate electricity. The EU got on board in August after Iran resumed uranium conversion - a precursor to enrichment, which produces material usable both for fueling nuclear reactors and for building atomic bombs. That led France, Britain and Germany to break off talks with Tehran on reducing suspicions about its nuclear program. Beyond establishing the grounds for Security Council action on Iran's noncompliance with the NPT, the latest EU draft resolution held the additional threat of future referral. It said the next board meeting would decide on the ``the timing and content'' of a report to the council on Iran's nuclear activities. Still, it was less direct than the other text, which would ask IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei to report to the council on ``Iran's many failures and breaches of its obligations to comply'' with the treaty. It also would ask the council to expand the IAEA's inspection powers in Iran. Neither text called for Security Council sanctions. But a senior diplomat from a nonaligned country opposed to referral said that even the milder draft - with its implicit referral threat and its strong language on Iran's nuclear program - likely would be unacceptable to Iran's allies on the board. A diplomat familiar with U.S. thinking said acceptance of the new draft would suit Washington, which was not interested in a Security Council battle it cannot win against veto-wielding permanent members Russia and China. Gregory Schulte, the chief U.S. representative to the IAEA, told reporters that while ``reporting Iran's noncompliance to the U.N. Security Council is long overdue ... we support the European Union's effort to continue to develop the broadest possible consensus.'' ^--- On the Net: International Atomic Energy Agency, http://www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 5 Xinhua: China calls for talks on Iran nuclear issue www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-22 19:44:51 BEIJING, Sept. 22 (Xinhuanet) -- China Thursday called for the early resumption of talks between Iran and the European Union (EU) to solve the Iran nuclear issue within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).   "The urgency at present is to resume negotiations between Iran and the EU at an early date," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang. "The negotiations will help the two sides bridge their differences and finally secure a solution acceptable to all sides," said Qin at a regular news briefing. Qin urged the parties concerned to take a long-term vision, exercise restraint and continue diplomatic negotiations and settle the nuclear issue within the framework of the IAEA. "This is conducive to the regional peace and stability and to maintaining the mechanism of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)," said Qin. Qin said "there is still room for resolving the Iran nuclear issue through dialogue," urging parties concerned to show flexibility and make efforts for an early resolution of the nuclear issue. "China will work with the international community to play a constructive role in solving the nuclear issue at an early date," Qin added. The EU on Tuesday circulated a draft resolution to the 35 members of the IAEA Board of Governors. The draft would refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council. But the EU has backed away from its demand on Thursday. Iran resumed uranium conversion work in August, after rejecting the EU offer to give up its nuclear fuel activities in return for economic and technical incentives. Iran insists that it would never give up legal rights to produce nuclear fuel for fully peaceful purposes. The United States and the EU suspect Iran of developing nuclear weapons under cover of a civilian nuclear program, a charge rejected by Tehran. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Reuters: Key excerpts from EU nuclear draft on Iran World Crises | Reuters.com Thu 22 Sep 2005 6:45 AM ET Sept 22 (Reuters) - Following are key excerpts from a revised draft resolution circulated by the European Union to members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors and obtained in full by Reuters. The new draft dropped an explicit threat in an earlier version calling on the IAEA to report Iran to the U.N. Security Council for its secretive nuclear programme. It was withdrawn due to opposition from Russia, China and at least a dozen other members of the IAEA board. The Board of Governors: * Finds that Iran's many failures and breaches of its obligations to comply with its NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) Safeguards Agreement ... constitute non-compliance in the context of Article XII.C of the Agency's Statute. * Finds also the history of concealment of Iran's nuclear activities referred to in the Director General's (Mohamed ElBaradei's) report, the nature of these activities, issues brought to light in the course of the Agency's verification of declarations made by Iran since September 2002 and the resulting absence of confidence that Iran's nuclear programme is exclusively for peaceful purposes have given rise to questions that are within the competence of the Security Council, as the organ bearing the main responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. * In order to help the Director General to resolve oustanding questions and provide the necessary assurances urges Iran to: (excerpts) - provide any access to location, personnel and information the Agency may request - to re-establish full and sustained suspension of all (uranium) enrichment related activity ... and (plutonium) reprocessing activity - to reconsider the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water. * Calls on Iran to observe fully its commitments and to return to the negotiating process that has made good progress in the last two years. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 AFP: Iran invites UN nuclear watchdog to visit Thursday September 22, 08:08 PM '); VIENNA (AFP) - Iran invited International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohammed ElBaradei to visit Tehran in a bid to clear up outstanding questions over its nuclear program, an Iranian diplomat said, although IAEA officials said there were no plans for such a trip. "My government has invited Dr. ElBaradei to go to Tehran. I think that would be his first visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran" since the election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last June, Iran's deputy ambassador to the IAEA, Mohammad Akhondzadeh, told reporters at an IAEA board of governors meeting. But IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said ElBaradei "has no plans to visit Tehran at this time." A diplomat attending the meeting of the board, which is considering an EU request to bring Iran before the UN Security Council for possible sanctions, said ElBaradei would not visit Tehran "unless the Iranians have something new to tell him." "Otherwise it will be a waste of his time and the Iranians will misuse his presence there" for propaganda, the diplomat said. ElBaradei said in a report earlier this month that the IAEA is "still not in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran" and that Tehran's full cooperation in clearing up questions is "overdue." Iran says its nuclear program is a peaceful effort to generate electricity but the United States charges that this civilian work is just a cover for secret atomic weapons development. Akhondzadeh said clearing up questions about Iran's nuclear activities "needs time and haste here can make terrible waste." "We can return to negotiations and we will save time to resolve this matter in peace," he said. Akhondzadeh did not say when the proposed ElBaradei visit might take place. Tensions over Iran's nuclear program worsened last month when Iran rejected demands from Britain, France, Germany that it abandon its uranium enrichment program in exchange for incentives. Iran also ended a freeze on enrichment-related work by resuming uranium conversion -- the first step in making enriched uranium, which can be fuel for nuclear power reactors or the raw material for atom bombs. The country insists its fuel cycle ambitions are a right as a signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. However, a number of Iranian MPs said they want to propose a bill that would suspend Iran's participation in the NPT's additional protocol, and thereby halt reinforced nuclear inspections. "Some deputies want to present a bill to make the government suspend application of the additional protocol," parliament speaker Gholam-Ali Hadad Adel told Iran's student news agency ISNA. Iran signed on to the NPT's additional protocol in 2003 after striking an agreement with Britain, France and Germany. The text has never been ratified by the Iranian parliament, but Iran agreed to apply the protocol as a goodwill gesture. On Tuesday, top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani threatened to suspend application of the additional protocol if Iran were referred to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions over its nuclear program. On Thursday European countries backed off from a bid to have Iran immediately called before the Security Council. However, Iran has said it would stop allowing the reinforced inspections if the EU pushed through any tough resolution that included a trigger for sending the case to the Security Council. - - - AFP ***************************************************************** 8 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy Wants More N. Korea Discussions From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday September 22, 2005 1:31 PM By JAE-SOON CHANG Associated Press Writer SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - The chief U.S. envoy to North Korean disarmament talks wants to visit the communist country for further discussions after Pyongyang agreed in a landmark accord this week to abandon its nuclear program, a South Korean official said Thursday. South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young said he relayed a message to the North about the U.S. envoy Christopher Hill's interest in visiting. He said he delivered the request during last week's inter-Korean Cabinet-level talks in Pyongyang. ``Should Hill's visit to the North be realized, it would serve an opportunity to further solidify the outcome of the six-party talks,'' Chung told a parliamentary committee. The latest six-party nuclear talks produced a landmark accord Monday in which North Korea agreed to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for economic aid, security assurances and improved ties with the United States. North Korea since has fallen back on some of its hardline rhetoric, raising questions about the sincerity of its commitment. The country said Tuesday it will not dismantle its nuclear program unless Washington gives it civilian nuclear reactors to generate power. Hill was in Seoul on Sept. 12 for last-minute strategy talks before flying to Beijing the following day for the latest round of six-party talks. At the time, he met Chung, who departed for the North the following day. After the Beijing talks ended, Hill said he was willing to visit North Korea to keep channels of communication open, but many factors would determine whether he would visit. The mass-circulation Chosun Ilbo newspaper reported Thursday that some U.S. officials with hard-line views on the North opposed a Hill visit. But if he can overcome those objections, his trip could come next month ahead of the next scheduled round of six-nation talks, it said. The paper, South Korea's largest, cited an unidentified South Korean government official as saying Hill showed a ``strong desire'' to visit the North and ``consult directly'' with Kim on U.S. efforts to get North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program. Washington has consistently refused one-on-one talks, saying efforts to get the North to renounce nuclear weapons are a regional issue for the talks involving the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. U.S. officials have met directly with North Koreans in connection with those talks. North Korea has long tried to engage the United States in bilateral talks in hopes that such meetings would boost its international status and help it win bigger concessions. However, there would be no guarantee the North Korean leader would not demand to meet with a higher-ranking official. In Washington, State Department spokeswoman Darla Jordan said only of the report: ``Nothing has changed.'' Monday's joint statement represented an about-face to Washington's long-held position of not ``rewarding bad behavior'' by North Korea. U.S. officials previously refused to discuss concessions for North Korea until it disarms. But Washington joined other parties in the talks Monday in expressing ``willingness to provide energy assistance'' to the North. South Korea estimates it will cost as much as $15 billion to finance the energy aid promised to North Korea, Chung said. The aid will come in three stages beginning with heavy oil supplies, electricity provision and finally reactor construction over a period of up to 13 years, he said. The United States assented to eventually discussing the provision of civilian nuclear reactors for North Korea, a demand Hill rejected a week earlier. The nuclear dispute flared in October 2002 after U.S. officials raised allegations North Korea was pursuing a secret nuclear arms program using highly enriched uranium in violation of earlier promises. In February, the North publicly claimed it had nuclear weapons, but it has not performed any known tests that would confirm it can make them. Experts have said they believe the North is capable of building about six bombs. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 9 Sidney Morning News: Temperatures rise in a new nuclear showdown - Opinion - smh.com.au September 22, 2005 In a world of haves and have-nots, Iran's hostility to UN inspections should be treated with care, writes Richard Butler. TEN days ago the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN's nuclear watchdog, was given a technical report on Iran's nuclear activities. It had taken more than two years to prepare and was the subject of intense scrutiny over the last nine months from scientists from the US, Japan, Britain and Russia. It was initiated following the detection of traces of nuclear weapons-grade uranium in Iran. The report found that the traces had come from contaminated equipment imported from Pakistan, which does have a nuclear weapons program. However, Iran's behaviour in relation to its nuclear activities and the IAEA inspections has given rise to doubts and ambiguities about the nature, content and aims of its nuclear program. Senior officials at the agency and in a number of member governments have said it is a credible report that removes one possible piece of evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. US officials have rejected that interpretation of the report, even though three years of investigations by the agency in Iran have also provided no proof of a weapons program. The agency's board is meeting to consider the Iran issue this week. A draft resolution drawn up by the US in consultation with the three European states that have been negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program (Britain, France and Germany) is expected to propose that Iran be reported to the UN Security Council. What the exact nature of that report might be and what action might then be contemplated is still under negotiation. The US/European determination to press on against Iran was reportedly given impetus by last Saturday's speech at the UN summit by Iran's new President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which US and British officials characterised as providing further evidence for their position. But even though the speech was tough and included hostile language, as was Iran's attitude to the agency report, this Western view confuses wish with reality. Much of what Ahmadinejad said was factual: Iran has the right, under existing treaties and arrangements, to all of the benefits of nuclear science and technology. It is also true that US and some western European policies are seeking to impose a new layer of control over some countries' access to nuclear technology, going beyond what is found in the treaties. As Ahmadinejad pointed out, this is being pursued on a discriminatory basis, leading to what he chose to call a "nuclear apartheid". And it is true that major steps are still required by the nuclear weapon powers towards their own disarmament. The usually restrained UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, was scathing in his criticism of the UN summit's failure to address the urgent need for progress in nuclear disarmament, following the collapse, three months earlier, of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review. He held the nuclear weapon states responsible for this "unacceptable" situation. Interestingly, Australia's Prime Minister, John Howard, echoed Annan's general sentiment but not his view on who is responsible. In fact, Howard has signalled that he stands with the US on the Iran issue. It is not certain that the US/European push in the IAEA board will gain the necessary support. The Russian President, Vladimir Putin, has spoken strongly against reporting Iran to the Security Council, indicating a preference for further diplomacy with the country. India has expressed similar concerns. The Iran issue is complex and potentially very dangerous, and it must be seen with clear eyes. The country has not been as open as it is obliged to be on its nuclear programs, and its behaviour over the years has been consistent with a pattern of wanting to hide aspects of them. It would be better if it were more open. One reason for its apparent deceptiveness could be that it does in fact have a clandestine nuclear weapons program. This is the US position. But the shocking intelligence failures and fabrications in the Iraq case demand a high level of fastidiousness and scepticism in the testing of any intelligence claims about Iran's programs. There is also the basic compact of the non-proliferation treaty: all states have a right to nuclear technology provided they do not divert it to a weapons program and those with nuclear weapons should progressively eliminate them. Iran's President is right. The treaty does, at least for now, accept a world of nuclear haves and have-nots. That world needs to be eliminated, not extended. There are three other nuclear weapon states outside the treaty - India, Pakistan and Israel. What makes it acceptable to the US, for example, that they have such weapons while others may not? This is seen as the ultimate nuclear hypocrisy. Nuclear weapons are the problem; as long as they exist, access to them will spread. The only safe course is to eliminate them. What the West is contemplating about Iran this week is not only marginal to that effort but is almost certain to fail, which will have a counterproductive effect on nuclear arms control everywhere. Richard Butler was Ambassador for Disarmament, 1983-88, and to the United Nations 1992-97. 2005-09-22 Copyright © 2005. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Mixed Sentiments Over Future Course of Nuclear Talks Home> National/Politics Updated Sep.22,2005 14:09 KST North Korea may not return to the negotiating table when multilateral talks resume in November. Experts who have been reviewing the Beijing accord believe the issue of a light-water reactor is likely to negatively affect the course of the nuclear discussions. According to the New York Times, one such pundit, Charles Pritchard feels the agreement reached earlier this week has "kept the door open in a false matter." Pritchard, who negotiated with North Korea during U.S. President George W. Bush's first term, explains his view by casting doubts over the reality of Washington heeding such demands. He goes on to say that he "never believed the Bush administration would ever, as a matter of principle, provide a light-water reactor." Given the backdrop, Pritchard predicts North Korea will refuse to participate in the six-party exchange without firm assurances on the reactor. Yet despite these sentiments, Christopher Hill, the U.S. chief negotiator in the talks, has so far displayed a sense of optimism regarding the future of the multilateral contact, claiming that North Korea may make odd statements, but that the country was fully aware of its obligations to the deal sealed in China. And on the subject of odd statements, so to speak, in its latest hard-line rhetoric, North Korea is vowing to retaliate in the case of a preemptive nuclear attack by the United States. The North's daily Rodong Sinmun claimed the United States intended to disarm the country and then "crush it to death with nuclear weapons." Arirang News ***************************************************************** 11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: S.Korean Energy Aid to N.Korea May Top $12 Bln Home> National/Politics Updated Sep.22,2005 14:11 KST South Korea may need to spend about US$12 billion to supply 2 million kilowatts of electricity per year to North Korea for the next decade. This means the government in Seoul must spend about one percent of its annual budget for the power aid each year until 2018. On July 12, Unification Minister Chung Dong-young unveiled the so-called "significant proposal" to provide energy aid to North Korea if the communist country agrees to dismantle its nuclear weapons program. The South Korean government is reportedly considering raising the current US$633 million allocated for next year's inter-Korean cooperation projects to nearly US$1 billion. Arirang News ***************************************************************** 12 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Next round of talks must not be a dance September 23, 2005 KST 14:09 (GMT+9) In May 1814, Napoleon Bonaparte was exiled to the island of Elba. The countries that won the Napoleonic Wars, including Austria, England, Russia and Prussia, started to reorganize Europe. Starting from that September, a meeting was held in Vienna, Austria to divide the territory France had given up. A total of 90 kingdoms and 53 dukedoms participated in the meeting. The meeting place was the Schonbrunn Palace ¡ª then the Hamburg family's summer residence and a Baroque building as magnificent as the Versailles Palace in France. Legend says that Mozart performed there in 1762 for Queen Maria Theresa when he was only 6 years old. After the performance the child prodigy reportedly went up to Princess Antoinette and said "I will marry you." The delegates of each country gathered at this place of such history but the actual meeting hardly happened. Although it was multilateral talks, not once did all the country delegates meet together during the 10 month-long Congress of Vienna. However, the palace was always noisy because the Austrian Statesman Metternich held a dance every day. The diplomats indulged in a feast of waltzing. There were even sayings that "People are spending three quarters of their day in waltz and dance." Chateau Haut-Brion wine from Graves, France became more popular through the events because some 100 thousand people tasted the wine most days for 10 months. Thomas Jefferson, who served two terms as the 3rd president of the United States had previously praised the Chateau Haut-Brion as "the best wine." Austrian general Von Ligne had said "The Congress dances (Der Kongress tanzt)" after seeing the scene. It was a famous remark which criticized that the meeting had made no progress until Napoleon fled Elba in February 1815. After the six-party talks in Beijing agreed on a joint-statement, a government official rejoiced, saying, "The congress danced but we still reached our goal," comparing the talks to the Congress of Vienna. Since the talks had reached a peak after 2 years of tedious negotiations, some can applaud the result thinking of it as a "victory of Korean diplomacy." However, what is important is to ensure North Korea faithfully carries out what they have committed to do in the statement and completes the remaining negotiations. The point should not be whether North Korea gives up its nuclear weapons or decides to abolish them. Above all, we must make sure the fifth round of the six-party talks scheduled for early November do not become a dance. Opening the champagne can wait until after then. The writer is a deputy international news editor at the JoongAng Ilbo. by Lee Sang-il leesi@joongang.co.kr> 2005.09.21 Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use | ***************************************************************** 13 Korea Times: Nuke Agreement Set to Remove ¡®Korea Discount¡¯ Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Biz/Finance By Kim Jae-kyoung Staff Reporter North Korea¡¯s recent agreement to scrap its nuclear weapons program has allowed South Korea to gain a foothold in helping eliminate the so-called ``Korea Discount,¡¯¡¯ which has weighed heavily on local financial markets and the economy. The successful multinational negotiations are expected to ease tensions on the Korean Peninsula and further boost the financial market and revitalize the slumping economy, according to analysts. ``I believe that the North¡¯s commitment to abandoning its nuclear weapons program will help eliminate negative factors triggered by the North¡¯s nuclear brinkmanship,¡¯¡¯ Sungkyunkwan University economics professor Lee Chae-woong told The Korea Times. ``The move is highly expected to provide new momentum both for the local financial market and the economy, speeding up an economic recovery,¡¯¡¯ he added. ``Also, it will improve the economic outlook, thus attracting more investment from abroad.¡¯¡¯ Lee, who is also chairman of the Korea Economic Association, pointed out that the breakthrough on Pyongyang¡¯s nuclear programs will serve as a catalyst for boosting sluggish domestic demand _ private spending and facilities investment. ``North Korea¡¯s nuclear weapons program has long been a major obstacle to the growth of the local stock market. As it is now cleared off, the exchange has more room to grow¡¯¡¯ Lee Jong-woo, head of research at Hanwha Securities, said. In particular, he noted, foreigners who have remained cautious about the red-hot stock market are expected to come forward to invest in the bourse as their psychological concerns about the peninsula¡¯s instability will be lifted. ``As North Korea agreed to give up its nuclear programs and return to arms treaties in the six-way talks on Monday in Beijing, it¡¯s fair to say a major contributor to the `Korea Discount¡¯ will disappear,¡¯¡¯ Kim Se-jung, analyst of Korea Investment &Securities,¡¯¡¯ said. Korea Discount refers to risks involving North Korea along with other negative local corporate governance and transparency factors, and this has been keeping local stocks from being valued fairly compared to their foreign equivalents. On Monday, North Korea agreed to scrap all its nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs and rejoin an international non-proliferation regime in exchange for political and economic benefits. The North agreed to return to arms treaties and abandon its nuclear weapons programs at the six-party talks held in Beijing, ending the three-year nuclear deadlock. The agreement came after a week of tough negotiations involving the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. Credit Ratings Expected to Climb The breakthrough is also likely to strengthen economic growth potential by attracting more foreign investment and enhancing inter-Korean economic cooperation, clearing the way for global rating agencies to upgrade the sovereign ratings in the near future. The geopolitical risks triggered by the North¡¯s nuclear issue have been a major stumbling bock to foreign investment and a rating upgrade by international credit rating agencies. Three major international credit rating agencies have repeatedly said that a rating hike would be made if the North Korea¡¯s nuclear issue is resolved successfully. Following the announcement of the Nuke agreement on Monday, Fitch Ratings said that it is considering raising the sovereign rating on South Korea as geopolitical risks in the region has been eased greatly. The U.K-based agency has placed the Korea¡¯s long-term foreign currency `A¡¯ rating on ``rating watch positive,¡¯¡¯ heightening the hope that a rating hike will be made in the foreseeable future. The agency said that Korea¡¯s ratings could be upgraded following a review of the agreement announced at the six-party talks on Monday in which North Korea committed to ending its nuclear weapons program and re-entering the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. ``This is the first significant agreement to emerge from the six-party talks and it goes some way to addressing our concerns regarding the security threat posed by North Korea,¡¯¡¯ said James McCormack, head of Asia Sovereigns at Fitch. ``It effectively precludes any immediate referral of the issue to the United Nations Security Council, which could have resulted in the imposition of economic sanctions and a further heightening of tensions,¡¯¡¯ he added. Fitch kept Korea¡¯s national credit rating at ``A¡¯¡¯ with a stable outlook for three straight years since it last raised the rating to ``A¡¯¡¯ from ``BBB+¡¯¡¯ in June 2002. Standard &Poor's Ratings Services also said that the agreement should help regional stability, but does not directly affect its sovereign ratings on South Korea. S &P¡¯s credit analyst, Takahira Ogawa said that the six-party agreement is a good development for regional stability, as it could reduce the risk of the use of nuclear weapons in the region. In July, S raised Korea¡¯s sovereign credit rating by one notch to ``A¡¯¡¯ from ``A minus,¡¯¡¯ citing a stronger banking sector and a flexible monetary stance. It was the first time in three years that an international credit rating agency has raised the nation¡¯s sovereign rating. It had maintained the ``A-minus¡¯¡¯ rating for Korea since July 2002, when it upgraded the rating by one notch from ``BBB+.¡¯ The U.S.-based Moody¡¯s has kept Korea¡¯s rating at ``A3¡¯¡¯ since March 2002, when the agency raised the ratings by two notches from ``Baa2.¡¯¡¯ Still Long Way to Go Despite the marked improvement in the multinational talks to resolve the nuclear dispute, market experts have remained cautious about the future development of the North Korean nuclear issue. ``While the announcement itself was a positive development, many of the details have yet to be worked out and much will depend on North Korea¡¯s implementation, which has been unreliable following previous agreements,¡¯¡¯ McCormack of Fitch said. ``The fifth round of talks is scheduled for November, and we will be looking for clarification on the status of the North Korean civilian nuclear program and the sequencing for implementation of the new commitments made in the fourth round,¡¯¡¯ he added. ``We believe a number of other contentious issues will need to be addressed as well, requiring further difficult negotiations. S also said that the joint statement is quite loosely worded, and implementation is unlikely to be a smooth ride, nor does it exclude the risk of major backtracking. The Beijing agreement was the first-ever joint statement after more than two years of negotiations among the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. The nuclear dispute erupted in late 2002 when Washington accused Pyongyang of running a clandestine nuclear weapons program in violation of its 1994 agreement with the United States. kjk@koreatimes.co.kr 09-22-2005 15:57 ***************************************************************** 14 OpEd Intl Herald Trib: Nuke Proliferation & CTBT Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 13:23:47 EDT WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com International Herald Tribune Nuclear test ban treaty: U.S. goes missing Bennett Ramberg International Herald Tribune THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 LOS ANGELES As the Bush administration attempts to rally diplomatic support to suppress the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran, it continues to undermine one of the very foundations of nuclear nonproliferation, namely the nuclear test ban treaty. This week, the Conference on Facilitating the Entry Into Force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty will convene in New York to encourage all nations to become treaty parties. Unfortunately, the United States will not be among the attendees. To date, 123 nations have signed and ratified the test ban treaty. However, the covenant enters into force only upon the ratification of 44 states with nuclear power and research reactors. At this time, 11 of these countries have abstained, including the United States. Washington thus finds itself in the company of both Pyongyang and Tehran, an outcome doubly ironic considering America's historic leadership role in generating the treaty. The test ban treaty marks the culmination of efforts to halt nuclear weapons testing going back to the 1963 agreement negotiated by the Kennedy administration that banned atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. As the Cold War waned, momentum built to halt detonations entirely. In 1992 George W. Bush's father initiated a moratorium, and Congress directed the president to seek a comprehensive test ban. The Clinton administration complied, but under new political circumstances, the Senate failed to give its consent. The current President Bush opposed the test ban treaty from the start, and today this position is U.S. policy. The administration argues that the United States must reserve the right to test in the event the weapons laboratories cannot certify the reliability and safety of the arsenal because of manufacturing and design defects and component aging. Second, Bush's advisers do not have total confidence that laboratory work and computer simulation will compensate for actual testing. Finally, military planners want to explore the benefits of mini nuclear weapons to take out deep bunkers, which testing can assuredly confirm. These arguments do not stand up to scrutiny. For one thing, the American position flies in the face of weapons laboratories' use of other methods - disassembly of the weapons coupled to component inspection - to uncover defects. In 2002, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that while "it is prudent to expect that age-related defects affecting stockpile reliability may occur increasingly as the average age of weapons in the stockpile increases ... nuclear testing is not needed to discover these problems and is not likely to be needed to address them." Finally, the development of mini nuclear weapons, which Congress banned years ago, would actually lessen U.S. security by reducing the global nuclear taboo. Conventional weapons in the arsenal and under development can meet the bunker-busting requirements without the inevitable radiological consequences that even "small" nuclear detonations would pose. Contrast these risks with the benefits of the test ban treaty. It already constrains Russian nuclear development. Were the United States to tie its ratification to China's, it would serve to reduce the prowess of an emerging nuclear competitor. Washington's example would also reinforce India's commitment not to test, which in turn would reduce Pakistan's incentive. Ultimately, U.S. ratification would strengthen its political, moral and normative position to combat nuclear proliferation while providing a basis to mobilize international action against violators. That said, the test ban treaty is no panacea to nuclear proliferation. Rather it is a modest reinforcement. It promotes Bush's nonproliferation vision laid out at the National Defense University on Feb. 4, 2004. Then he called upon "all nations to strengthen the laws and international controls that govern proliferation." Bush added, "At the UN last fall, I proposed a new Security Council resolution requiring all states to criminalize proliferation, enact strict export controls and secure all sensitive materials within their borders." The president's failure to include the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in his recipe, while continuing to promote new nuclear weapons development, ill serves the nuclear peace that Washington has long sought to promote. (Bennett Ramberg served in the State Department in the administration of George H.W. Bush. ) Copyright © 2005 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com ***************************************************************** 15 Guardian Unlimited: Annan Urges Nations to Ratify Nuke Treaty From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday September 22, 2005 10:16 AM AP Photo NYJM113 By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged the United States and 10 other key countries to ratify the nuclear test-ban treaty so it can finally take effect, but like Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea, the U.S. administration refuses to do so. Opening a conference Wednesday to spur the treaty's entry into force, Annan said all countries should be gravely concerned that nine years after the treaty was opened for signatures, it still hasn't entered into force. ``The longer entry into force of the treaty is delayed, the greater the risk that someone, somewhere, will test nuclear weapons,'' he warned. ``That would be a major setback for the cause of non-proliferation and disarmament.'' Since the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty opened for signatures in September 1996, it has been signed by 175 countries and ratified by 123 countries. But it will only take effect when 44 countries that participated in the Conference on Disarmament in 1996 and possessed nuclear research and power reactors have ratified it. To date, 33 of the 44 countries have ratified the treaty, but there seems little prospects of getting all 11 holdouts to change their positions. The United States has signed the treaty, but President Bush's administration opposes it and is boycotting the three-day conference. Dutch Ambassador Jaap Ramaker, the special representative charged with promoting ratification, told the conference that Pakistan ``does not give priority'' to signing or ratifying the test ban treaty and India refused to see him. Of the other holdouts, he said, ratification by Israel, Egypt, Iran and North Korea ``is in one way or the other tied to wider regional security issues which complicate matters.'' But he said China and Vietnam appear headed to ratification and he is still hoping to visit Indonesia and Colombia. ``It is a little over seven years ago that the world witnessed for the last time nuclear weapon test explosions,'' Ramaker said. ``While this in itself is to be welcomed it goes without saying that a series of unilateral moratoria ... cannot take the place of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.'' Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, who was chosen as conference president, warned that ``the proliferation danger is now even more acute, given the known interest of terrorists in acquiring weapons of mass destruction.'' ``The time for excuses'' by the 11 countries that have not ratified is past, he said. ``It is time for them to act.'' British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, whose country holds the European Union presidency, also urged close ally the United States and the 10 other countries to ratify. ``Sixty years after the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasake this conference is an opportunity to reaffirm our common commitment to the CTBT,'' Straw said. Malaysia's Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar, whose country heads the Non-Aligned Movement, a bloc of 116 mostly developing countries, restated its longstanding support for the elimination of all nuclear testing. The nuclear weapon states - the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France - have ``a special responsibility'' to see the early entry into force, he said. Britain, France and Russia have already ratified. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 16 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear nuances Brian Whitaker (Middle East) New Delhi dispatch A blossoming relationship with Iran is rubbing India's friends in Washington the wrong way, writes Randeep Ramesh Thursday September 22, 2005 In New Delhi there are gripes about the price of American friendship. Just a few months ago, the Bush administration had promised "full civil nuclear energy co-operation" with India, even though the country had nuclear weapons and persistently refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. There was talk of an emerging strategic partnership between America and India, and a quietly spoken long-term view to contain China. But despite all the warm words, little has happened. The reason is Iran. In 2003, Delhi and Tehran signed a strategic pact, sealed by military and energy deals worth $20bn (£11bn). A few months later the two countries' navies held their first-ever joint exercises. Delhi is helping to build highways and a large port on the Persian Gulf - so that Indian goods can gain access to Central Asian markets. The Iranian route would bypass turbulent Afghanistan and Pakistan. For India, Iran is one of its recent foreign policy successes. The two were on opposite sides during the cold war, and later diplomacy was compromised by Iran's fraternal ties with Pakistan. In January 2003, a few months before the Iraq war began, Iran's then president, Mohammed Khatami, was guest of honour at India's Republic Day parade - a spot reserved only for close allies. From Iran's perspective, India is a big business opportunity. Not only will its insatiable appetite for hydrocarbons grow, but the Indian economy could yield important trade deals. Perhaps most important is that India's defence industry is largely impervious to American sanctions - providing Iran with a nearby pool of expertise and spare parts. In reaching out to each other, Teheran and Delhi are looking to put the past behind them and recast their relationship. But such bonhomie does not suit America, which sees Iran as part of the global "axis of evil". It was not always thus. In fact the United States built Iran's first nuclear plant at Amirabad, and knew that the Shah began a low-grade weapons research programme in 1967. History aside, Washington has already made clear its deep reservations about India's good relations with Iran. On Capitol Hill, politicians have been fuming at comments made by an Indian foreign delegation to Iran this month about expanding ties and withstanding foreign (read American) pressure. One congressman said that what the Indians were doing was "simply dense". The nuclear cooperation deal proposed by George Bush two months ago would not "fly", according to the disgruntled legislators, because the Indians were "incapable of comprehending that other countries have their important concerns". The White House is pushing to bring sanctions against Iran for a suspected "nuclear weapons programme" and has only been stopped by a coalition of China, Russia and India. All three have good reasons to maintain friendly relations with Iran: China, even more than India, needs oil; Russia is a key partner in Iran's nuclear programme, and Delhi has fingers in both pies. In South Asia, much more is at stake. A $4bn planned pipeline sending Iranian gas through Pakistan to India is under threat. Not only would the scheme mean greater energy security for India and Pakistan, but it would give Islamabad, Delhi and Tehran stakes in regional stability. In a rare show of unity, India and Pakistan appear ready to join hands and take on Washington over this project. At the moment, the key battleground is at the International Atomic Energy Agency, where the Bush administration has faced concerted opposition to its proposal to refer Iran's civilian nuclear programme to the UN security council. The reason for the flurry of attention is Iran's intention, made clear by the newly elected president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to produce nuclear power using homemade enriched uranium. It's the indigenous production that worries the White House. What's to stop Iran from acquiring bomb-grade uranium 235 and going nuclear, wonders a White House haunted by the sights and sounds of the Iranian revolution? Maybe an honourable way out for Washington and Tehran could be modelled on the deal offered to North Korea at the end of six-nation talks in Beijing this week. In it, Pyongyang initially agreed to abandon all nuclear weapons programmes and rejoin the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. In return, North Korea was offered electricity and an assurance that the US "has no intention to attack or invade [North Korea] with nuclear or conventional weapons". For India, the way out appears to be sheltering in the commitments that Iran has made under the non-proliferation treaty. This is bizarre, as India has never signed this document itself, calling it "nuclear apartheid". Ominously, Iran's president used the same phrase at the United Nations. India, and Pakistan both covertly produced weapons-grade uranium, designed weapons and got hold of missiles to launch them. Iran on the other hand has done none of this. But Tehran, depending on your viewpoint, has either been a rogue state or spent 20 years standing up to the Americans. Although Washington is talking tough, the debacle in Iraq and the Katrina-effect on the domestic polls may mean it has no stomach for a bloody fight with Iran. Perhaps a better bet would be for America to encourage the stabilising aspects of any Indo-Iranian deals while still looking to prevent nuclear proliferation in the region. That would mean Washington switching positions on the Indo-Pakistani pipeline. It would mean the US recognising that Iran plays a crucial role in securing Afghanistan's future and that an Indo-Pakistan-Iran grouping could be a gateway to developing Central Asia. Unfortunately it is unlikely President Bush will see things this way. The next few months are going to be difficult days for New Delhi. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 17 Morning Sentinel: LePage signs anti-nuclear weapons statement Thursday, September 22, 2005 By COLIN HICKEY Staff Writer WATERVILLE -- Mayor Paul R. LePage joined 1,000 mayors in 113 countries Wednesday in signing a statement that urges the nations of the world to strive for a planet free of nuclear weapons. LePage signed the document in Castonguay Square in a ceremony organized by members of Waterville Area Bridges for Peace and Justice. Bridges for Peace coupled the Mayors for Peace anti-nuclear initiative with its own observation of the United Nation's International Day of Peace. "This is not anti-nuclear," Bridges for Peace member Arne Springorum said. "It is anti-nuclear weapons." LePage said he agreed to sign the document as soon as Bridges for Peace contacted him about the matter. "There is no question that the elimination of nuclear weapons should be foremost in every government's mind, whether at the local, state or federal level," he said. Springorum said he believed that LePage is the first mayor in Maine to sign the statement. Colin Hickey -- 861-9205 chickey@centralmaine.com Copyright © 2005, Blethen Maine Newspapers, Inc. ***************************************************************** 18 Some stuff that's in the current path of Rita... Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:43:10 -0700 X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com September 21st, 2005 A WARNING TO CITIZENS OF THE TEXAS / LOUISIANA GULF COAST REGION: South Texas Project 1 and STP 2 are two nuclear power plants located just 90 miles SW of Houston. That's not very far if an accident occurs and radiation is released during 100+ MPH winds. There is no guarantee the plants can survive the conditions they are about to face. STP's two reactors, and all the spent radioactive fuel stored outside the reactor domes in pools at the site, could be subjected to a category 5 (strongest possible) hurricane (ie, BIGGER than Katrina). Swarms of tornados are also not unheard of during hurricanes. A fuel tank or truck could, for example, be picked up and lofted into the spent fuel pools. The plants will be off the grid (if they aren't already) and operating on emergency generators, but these could be knocked out as well. The intakes or outlets for the cooling systems could be damaged or plugged. All of these are possible, but none of them are considered credible by the authorities. Perhaps the most dangerous thing is the arrogance of the plant's operators. Local residents should simply NOT TRUST their lame assurances (see below). And they want to build MORE nuclear power plants in these poor, hurricane-stricken areas! Who knows if the workers at the plants will stay to try to prevent problems? After all, they didn't swear an oath to faithfully do their job, as the cops in New Orleans did -- many of whom WALKED OFF THE JOB during Katrina. But even if the nuclear power plant workers DO stay and try to keep things working, there may be NOTHING they can do, and they will just be committing suicide. Who knows what might crash into these power plants when Rita hurls its fury at them? Who knows what problems might occur, leading to a meltdown and MASSIVE radiation release? Details of the two plants are shown below, along with a CNN puff piece (or is it just a press release from the STP owners?). Russell Hoffman Concerned Citizen Carlsbad, CA ===================================================== South Texas Project LOCATION: Matagorda County (nearest major city: Galveston, TX; 90 miles SW of Houston, TX; 8 miles west of Wadsworth, TX, 12 miles SSW of Bay City, TX) South Texas Project Electric Generating Sta.: Unit 1 1,250 Mw PWR/Westinghouse “pressurized to 2,300 pounds per square inch to keep water liquid at 600º F” (Source: STP web site.) Spent fuel on site: 320 tons as of 1995. Commercial start-up date: Aug., 1988 Current Status: Making waste 1982 CRAC-2 est. “Worst Case” Casualties: 39,000; Property Damage: $112 Billion South Texas Project Electric Generating Sta.: Unit 2 1,250 Mw PWR/W (See Unit 1 for information.) Commercial start-up date: June, 1989 Current Status: Making waste 1982 CRAC-2 est. “Worst Case” Casualties: 39,000; Property Damage: $104 Billion The Reactor Containment Buildings are 200-foot domes. The plant site is an official wildlife area providing habitat for several threatened species, including bald eagles, peregrine falcons, white-tailed hawks and alligators. (Source: STP web site.) April 19th, 2003: "[A radioactive] powdery material was found April 12 on the outside of two instrument guide tubes where the tubes enter the bottom of the reactor". (Source: New York Times; Unit unknown.) May 8th, 1990: Pipe crack in reactor at South Texas (Source: Greenpeace; Unit unknown.) =================================================== List of nuclear power plants in America: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/nukelist.htm Visual display of nuclear activities in America: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/poifu/poifu.swf ==================================================== From: Molly Johnson Subject: Nuclear plant to shut down for Rita "Thanks Augie, the problem will not be with the containment, but with the Auxiliary building which houses the radioactive waste processing as well as the spent fuel pool. That building normally only has a metal siding. Interesting. We'll see how this plays out. Ernie Goitein - nuclear engineer" Nuclear plant to shut down for Rita 2 Texas reactors built to stand up to Category 5 storm (CNN) -- Officials at a Texas nuclear power plant in the path of Hurricane Rita prepared Wednesday to shut down two reactors. The South Texas Project plant serving 1 million customers is built on elevated ground in Bay City, 12 miles inland from the Texas coast. It is designed to withstand storm surges from Category 5 hurricanes. "We have a specific plan in place on what to do with a hurricane approaching," spokesman Alan Mikus said. "Our plan calls for the complete shutdown of the plant in advance of the storm's arrival." (Watch video of a strengthening Rita -- 1:53) The two reactor containment buildings are made of 4-foot-thick steel-reinforced concrete walls -- strong enough to withstand a Category 5 storm, or the direct impact of a Boeing 767. They are two of the strongest buildings in Texas. "The plant is designed to withstand tornadic force winds, which are higher than hurricane force winds," Mikus said. He added that the plant shutdown would likely occur about seven hours before landfall. If Rita maintains the forecast track, the hurricane would come ashore early Saturday somewhere between Corpus Christi and Galveston. Customers will not lose power during the shutdown because other power companies will pick up the load, the spokesman said. The nuclear plant itself will operate off power from other companies for cooling the fuel supply and spent fuel storage, he added. If the power grid fails, Mikus said, on-site diesel generators will provide back-up power to maintain the proper cooling. Asked his biggest concern with Rita headed toward the region, Mikus said, "I don't know if we have any." He said the plant has a "safe shutdown condition" and was designed "to protect the safety of the public." Bob Watts, the emergency management coordinator for Matagorda County, said he is confident the plant "will be on top of the situation." The South Texas Project is the largest employer in the county, with about 1,300 workers. "Non-essential" workers are being asked not to come to work, and about 300 "essential" workers will ride out the storm at the plant, Mikus said. Construction began at the plant in 1976, with the first reactor going into operation in 1988 and the second going online a year later. In addition to the 4-foot-thick walls of the containment buildings, each reactor is housed inside a carbon steel vessel with 6-inch-thick walls. Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/21/rita.nuclear/index.html ==================================================== ==================================================== ************************************************* ** THE ANIMATED SOFTWARE COMPANY ** Russell D. Hoffman, Owner and Chief Programmer ** P.O. Box 1936, Carlsbad CA 92018-1936 ** (800) 551-2726 ** (760) 720-7261 ** Fax: (760) 720-7394 ** Visit the world's most eclectic web site: ** http://www.animatedsoftware.com ************************************************* IF YOU RECEIVED THIS EMAIL IN ERROR AND/OR DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE ANY MORE EMAILS FROM US FOR ANY REASON, PLEASE CONTACT RUSSELL HOFFMAN AT: rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com MailTo:rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com?Subject=Unsubscribe-me-please . Please be sure that "Unsubscribe-me-please" appears in the subject line. ***************************************************************** 19 TEXAS REACTORS GOING FOR BROKE IN FACE OF HURRICANE RITA Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 16:56:42 -0700 version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Nukewatch PO Box 649 Luck, Wisc. 54853 Tel: (715) 472-4185 Sept. 22, 2005 TEXAS REACTORS GOING FOR BROKE IN FACE OF HURRICANE RITA The nation's largest nuclear power reactors are now directly in the path of hurricane Rita. The South Texas Project I and II reactors (STP I & II) , which produce 1,264 and 1,265 megawatts respectively, are operated by STP Operating Company in Bay City, Texas, 90 miles south of Houston. STP II is the largest commercial power reactor in the United States. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) announced on Sept. 21 that the two nuclear reactors would be shut down only "seven hours before Rita makes landfall," now expected around 7 a.m. Saturday. KGBT - Channel 4, television reported yesterday that, "The South Texas Project nuclear power plant near Bay City will shut down its two reactors before hurricane-force winds hit the complex. Plant spokesman Edward Conaway says workers there have started tying down any equipment that can't be brought indoors." "You have to wonder what exactly is driving this game of chicken that the operators are playing," said John LaForge, co-director of Nukewatch, an environmental group in Wisconsin. "Why not shut down earlier and double test back-up power systems necessary to circulate the water that cools waste fuel rods?" he asked. Waste fuel needs large quantities of cooling water to remove heat from the pool in which it is stored. The "spent" fuel is so hot that without cooling, it would quickly boil off pool water and melt, releasing large amounts of radiation. At 10 a.m. CDT, the National Hurricane Center (NHC) depicted the projected route of Hurricane Rita, now a Category Four hurricane with winds of 150 mph, issuing a map that showed the eye of the storm crossing directly over Bay City. (http://nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/ graphics_at3+shtml/145647.shtml?3day) STP's two reactors are about five miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico at Bay City. The Sept. 21 "NRC News" notice seemed to contradict itself regarding preparedness of the reactors. "Both plants are robust structures with watertight doors designed to withstand hurricane force winds," the NRC said. The same notice said that, "STP is required to shut down if winds in excess of 73 M.P.H. are projected at the site." (www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/ 2005/ 05-03-036iv.html) -- end -- Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\South Texas Project Playing Chicken-9-22-05.doc" ***************************************************************** 20 NRC: NRC Dispatches Inspectors in Preparation for Hurricane Rita News Release - Region IV - 2005-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV No. IV-05-036 September 21, 2005 CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov in the projected path of Hurricane Rita. As part of its preparations, three inspectors from the NRCs Region IV office in Arlington, Texas have been sent to South Texas Project near Bay City, Texas. Two more NRC inspectors have been dispatched to the Waterford nuclear plant about 20 miles west of New Orleans, La. The five will provide around the clock coverage at each of the plants, if needed. In accordance with NRC requirements, Waterford and South Texas Project are making the necessary preparations for Hurricane Rita, said Bruce S. Mallett, administrator of NRCs Region IV office. As we did with Hurricane Katrina, we are pre-positioning our people to monitor events and respond, if needed. NRC staff have been in close contact with both plants to ensure their safe and secure operation. Both plants are robust structures with watertight doors designed to withstand hurricane force winds and significant floods. The NRC requires that each nuclear plant shut down under weather conditions specific to each site. South Texas Project is required to shut down if winds in excess of 73 m.p.h. are projected at the site. Waterford has to shut down if winds in excess of 74 m.p.h. are projected at the site. South Texas Project plans to have both reactors shut down seven hours before Rita makes landfall, now expected to occur early Saturday morning. Entergy Nuclear, which shut down the Waterford plant as a precaution prior to the arrival of Hurricane Katrina, is closely monitoring Hurricane Ritas path. Last revised Thursday, September 22, 2005 ***************************************************************** 21 Las Vegas SUN: Proposed Sites Narrowed for Nuclear Plant Today: September 22, 2005 at 11:18:56 PDT By H. JOSEF HEBERT ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - A consortium of utilities narrowed the potential locations for what could be the first nuclear power plant built in the United States in more than three decades. The group chose sites of existing nuclear power plants in Mississippi and Alabama. The consortium emphasized that no decision had yet been made on whether to seek a license for a new plant from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The group is developing an application for advanced approval of the two sites, which would allow for quicker completion of the project if a go ahead is given. The group decided the new reactors would be built if a go ahead is given adjacent to the existing Grand Gulf power plant, operated by Entergy near Port Gibson, Miss. and at the site of the yet unfinished Bellefonte twin reactors, owned by the Tennessee Valley Authority near Scottsboro, Ala. The announcement by Nustart Energy Development, a consortium of eight utilities and two reactor manufacturers, is the latest development reflecting the intense interest by the electric power industry to build a new reactor to meet growing electricity needs. "Our country needs these advanced nuclear plants. We must reduce our dependence on imported foreign energy," said Marilyn Kray, president of Nustart and an executive of Exelon, the country's largest operator of nuclear power plants. No new nuclear power plant has been ordered in the United States since 1973 and interest soured after the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in Pennsylvania in 1979. But in recent years nuclear plants have become more efficient and more profitable. Congress also recently gave the industry new subsidies to promote new reactor construction including an "insurance" against financial losses caused by regulatory delays. At least eight utilities, including all the major operators of nuclear power plants, have been testing the regulatory environment to determine how fast a new reactor might get approved by the NRC. Though no final decision on a project has been announced, several companies have indicated they would like to build a new reactor by 2010. Three reactor vendors - Westinghouse, General Electric, and the French company AREVA - are competing with different new reactor designs. Under the Nustart plan, the reactor at Grand Gulf would be a GE designed reactor, while the one in Alabama would use a Westinghouse design. The Nustart consortium was created to develop an application for a construction and operating license for at least two new reactors. Once received from the NRC, any of the group's members or a combination of members could use the license if it finally decides to build a new reactor. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Return to the referring page. Las Vegas SUN main page ----------------------------------------------------------------- Questions or problems? Click here. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 22 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting Notice FR Doc 05-18913 [Federal Register: September 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 183)] [Notices] [Page 55637-55638] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22se05-61] In accordance with the purposes of Sections 29 and 182b. of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a meeting on October 6-8, 2005, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The date of this meeting was previously published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 (69 FR 68412). Thursday, October 6, 2005, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open)-- The ACRS Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. 8:35 a.m.-10 a.m.: Interim Review of the License Renewal Application for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the Tennessee Valley Authority and the NRC staff regarding the license renewal application for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3 and the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items. 10:15 a.m.-11:45 a.m.: Proposed Recommendations for Resolving Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-80, ``Pipe Break Effects on Control Rod Drive Hydraulic Lines in the Drywells of Boiling Water Reactor Mark I and II Containments'' (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the recommendations proposed by the NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research for resolving GSI-80. 12:45 p.m.-2:15 p.m.: Resolution of ACRS Comments on the Draft Final Regulatory Guide, ``Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection for Existing Light Water Nuclear Power Plants'' (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) regarding the changes made to this Guide and to NEI 04-02, ``Guidance for Implementing a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection Program Under 10 CFR 50.48(c),'' in response to the ACRS comments and recommendations included in its June 14, 2005 letter. 2:30 p.m.-4 p.m.: Davis-Besse Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Integrity Calculations (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the expert elicitation and calculations performed for the reactor pressure vessel head integrity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant. 4:15 p.m.-5:15 p.m.: Quality Assessment of the Selected NRC Research Program (Open)--The Committee will discuss the results of the cognizant ACRS panel's assessment of the quality of the NRC research projects on: Standardized Plant Analysis Risk (SPAR) Models Development Program; Steam Generator Tube Integrity Program at the Argonne National Laboratory; and the Thermal-Hydraulic Test Program at the Penn State University. 5:30 p.m.-7 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open)--The Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports on matters considered during this meeting. Friday, October 7, 2005, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open)-- The ACRS Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. 8:35 a.m.-10 a.m.: Licensees' Responses to the Bulletin on, ``Emergency Preparedness and Response Actions for Security-Based Events'' (Open/Closed)--The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding licensees' responses to the Bulletin related to Emergency Preparedness and Response Actions for Security-Based Events. 10:15 a.m.-11:15 a.m.: NRC Staff's Response to the ACRS Letter on the Proposed Revision 4 to Regulatory Guide 1.82, ``Water Sources for Long-Term Recirculation Cooling Following a Loss-of-Coolant Accident'' (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the staff's response to the ACRS letter on the Proposed Revision 4 to Regulatory Guide 1.82. 11:15 a.m.-12:15 p.m.: Format and Content of the NRC Safety Research Program Report to the Commission (Open)--The Committee will hear a report by and hold discussions with the Chairman of the ACRS Subcommittee on Safety Research Program regarding the format and content of the ACRS report to the Commission on the NRC Safety Research Program as well as assignments for the ACRS members. 1:15 p.m.-2:15 p.m.: Future ACRS Activities/Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee (Open)--The Committee will discuss the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future meetings. Also, it will hear a report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to the conduct of ACRS business, including anticipated workload and member assignments. 2:15 p.m.-2:30 p.m.: Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Open)--The Committee will discuss the responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to comments and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports and letters. 2:30 p.m.-3 p.m.: Subcommittee Report (Open)--The Committee will hear a report by and hold discussions with the Chairmen of the ACRS Subcommittees on Plant Operations and [[Page 55638]] Plant License Renewal regarding matters discussed at the September 21, 2005 Subcommittee meeting. 3:15 p.m.-7 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open)--The Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports. Saturday, October 8, 2005, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-12 Noon: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open)--The Committee will continue its discussion of proposed ACRS reports. 12 Noon-12:30 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open)--The Committee will discuss matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and matters and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit. Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2004 (69 FR 59620). In accordance with those procedures, oral or written views may be presented by members of the public, including representatives of the nuclear industry. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during the open portions of the meeting. Persons desiring to make oral statements should notify the Cognizant ACRS staff named below five days before the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made to allow necessary time during the meeting for such statements. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras during the meeting may be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined by the Chairman. Information regarding the time to be set aside for this purpose may be obtained by contacting the Cognizant ACRS staff prior to the meeting. In view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with the Cognizant ACRS staff if such rescheduling would result in major inconvenience. In accordance with Subsection 10(d) Public Law 92-463, I have determined that it is necessary to close portions of this meeting noted above to discuss and protect information classified as national security information and safeguards information pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and (3). Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, as well as the Chairman's ruling on requests for the opportunity to present oral statements and the time allotted therefor can be obtained by contacting Mr. Sam Duraiswamy, Cognizant ACRS staff (301-415-7364), between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., ET. ACRS meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room at pdr@nrc.gov, or by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ (ACRS & oc-collections/ (ACRS & ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas). Videoteleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use this service for observing ACRS meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m., ET, at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the videoteleconferencing link. The availability of videoteleconferencing services is not guaranteed. Dated: September 16, 2005. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 05-18913 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P b ***************************************************************** 23 TheState.com: SRS out of the running for nuke plant Posted on Thu, Sep. 22, 2005 By Lauren Markoe Washington Bureau WASHINGTON — The Savannah River Site was not chosen today as the potential site of the first new nuclear power plant in the U.S. in nearly 30 years. Two sources with knowledge of the decision have told The State that NuStart Energy — a consortium of 11 energy companies — will name Mississippi and Alabama as the two states with sites it believes are the best to pursue advanced nuclear plant licenses. The announcement will not mean that a plant will be built, but it is a big step in a process that could lead to a new generation nuclear facility in a few years. The group had been considering sites in six states, including SRS: + Bellefonte Nuclear Plant in northeast Alabama + Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant in Lusby, Md. + Grand Gulf Nuclear Power Plant near Gulfport, Miss. + Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station in Scriba, N.Y. + River Bend in St. Francisville, La. NuStart representatives met with officials in all six states. Officials were at SRS in August. The consortium is operating under a federal grant that would test new federal rules governing construction of reactors. The application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission would be filed by 2008, and the license would be received by 2010. The plant could open as early as 2014. Members of NuStart are: + Constellation Energy of Baltimore + Duke Energy of Charlotte + EDF International North America of Washington, D.C. It is the U.S. subsidiary of the French nuclear company AREVA. + Entergycq Nuclear of Jackson, Miss. + Exelon Generation of Philadelphia + Florida Power &Light of Juno Beach, Fla. + GE Energy of Atlanta + Progress Energy of Raleigh + Southern Co. of Atlanta + The Tennessee Valley Authority of Knoxville, Tenn. + Pittsburgh-based Westinghouse Electric Co. ***************************************************************** 24 AU ABC: Safety breached at nuclear reactor site (AEDT)Thursday, 22 September 2005. 15:18 (AWST) The federal nuclear watchdog has found that safety regulations have been breached during construction of the new research reactor in Sydney. The head of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, John Loy, says he was not informed that an extra hoist was being used at the site. He has ruled that this infringed two safety regulations and a section of the Nuclear Safety Act. But he has not imposed penalties, as efforts were made to remedy the breach and the hoist is no longer in use. ***************************************************************** 25 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: KEDO to Discuss Nuclear Reactors Early Next Week Home> National/Politics Updated Sep.22,2005 14:07 KST The two-day board meeting of Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) in New York from Monday is drawing much attention. This is because North Korea has yet to clarify whether the light-water reactors it is demanding refers to the KEDO project, a US$4.6 billion construction of two light-water reactors based on a 1994 deal under which North Korea agreed to freeze and ultimately dismantle its nuclear weapons program. The executive board members of the KEDO, the U.S., South Korea, Japan, and the European Union had decided to determine what to do about the KEDO project by this November, which marks two years since the project was stopped as tensions mounted over the North's nuclear weapons ambitions. The construction site is located some 30 kilometers north of Sinpo on North Korea's east coast. Although an outer shell of one reactor has been built, experts say it'll take ten more years to complete both reactors even if construction resumes. Light water reactors are a type less easily used for arms-related purposes. In any case, analysts agree resuming the KEDO project would be less costly than building new power-generating reactors. Arirang News ***************************************************************** 26 Chattanoogan: Nuclear License To Be Sought At TVA's Belefonte Plant - 9/22/2005 - [the chattanoogan.com Belefonte Plant posted September 22, 2005 HOLLYWOOD, Ala. – NuStart Energy Development LLC announced today that it has selected TVA’s Bellefonte Nuclear Plant as one of the two best sites in the country for a new nuclear plant and that it will seek a combined construction and operating license for the site. NuStart, the nation’s largest consortium of nuclear power companies, selected Bellefonte after a rigorous evaluation process involving nuclear plant sites across the country, officials said. NuStart will do the design and engineering work necessary to apply for a combined construction and operating license with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “The Bellefonte site is a superior choice for a new nuclear plant because of the existing infrastructure and its ideal location that supports partnering opportunities with other NuStart utilities,” said TVA Chairman Bill Baxter. ”We appreciate the strong support for Bellefonte from Sen. Jeff Sessions, Congressman Bud Cramer, and other members of Congress, the state of Alabama and the entire north Alabama community. We look forward to working with NuStart partners in pursuing a license from the NRC as the next step in this process.” NuStart would seek a license at Bellefonte for the new Advanced Passive 1000 reactor design by Westinghouse. “TVA’s primary nuclear focus today remains the restart of Browns Ferry Unit 1, but serious efforts are also being directed toward the exploration of future nuclear power as well as other forms of power generation,” said TVA Director Skila Harris. “The final decision on future power generation will depend on the projected demand in the Tennessee Valley and a careful analysis of the most cost-effective, efficient and smartest addition to TVA’s generation mix.” NuStart also announced the selection of Entergy’s Grand Gulf nuclear plant site in Mississippi as the site to pursue a license for the new Economic Simplified Boiling Water reactor design by General Electric. NuStart estimates design work for each of the two sites will cost about $400 million. This first-of-a kind engineering has never been done because no utility has ordered a new nuclear plant in three decades. According to NuStart’s proposal, the Department of Energy would pay 50 percent of the cost to develop the combined construction and operating license and complete the detailed engineering design as part of the government’s efforts to encourage nuclear investment. NuStart would pay the remaining costs. Pending NRC approval for a combined license, any NuStart member company or group of companies could use the NuStart license to build a reactor on the Bellefonte site. TVA prefers to have a partner or partners participate in any new plant, it was stated. “TVA projects a need in the Tennessee Valley for new baseload generation around 2015, and nuclear power provides a clean, reliable and efficient source of power to meet our customers’ demands,” said TVA President and Chief Operating Officer Tom Kilgore. “While TVA has not yet committed to build a new nuclear plant at Bellefonte, the NuStart work to develop a combined construction and operating license will provide the information we need to make a decision.” The NuStart Energy Development LLC consortium consists of 11 companies: Constellation Generation Group, Duke Energy, EDF International North America, Entergy Nuclear, Exelon Generation, Florida Power &Light Company, Progress Energy, Southern Company, TVA, and two nuclear reactor vendors, Westinghouse Electric and GE Energy’s nuclear operations. Rep. Zach Wamp said, "Having served as Chairman of the TVA Caucus in Congress, I am very pleased with the plan to move forward with construction of a next generation nuclear plant at the TVA Bellefonte site. For years, this has been one of our top priorities and this realization is a credit to the dynamic leadership of Chairman Bill Baxter, Director Skila Harris and the Alabama governmental leaders at the local, state and federal level. "This important source of energy production will be good for The NuStart National Nuclear Consortium and the nation. Labor and industry will work together to provide a high quality and productive source of clean energy for future generations and boost the regions economy along the way." U.S. Senators Bill Frist (R-TN) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) applauded the selection of the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant as one of the two sites selected by NuStart Energy Development LLC to construct a new advanced nuclear power plant. “Investing in domestic nuclear power plants will help produce clean, low-carbon sources of energy that modernize our nation’s electricity grid and break our dependence on foreign oil,” said Sen. Frist. “TVA’s highly skilled workforce and proven record of success make it one of the best nuclear power plant operators in the world, and I’m proud that they will continue leading the way in innovating new ways to produce clean and reliable energy.” “If someone favors lower natural gas prices, cleaning up the air, and being more independent of foreign oil, then nuclear power is the best alternative and TVA is at the leading edge of building modern, efficient, and safe nuclear power plants,” Sen. Alexander said. Sen. Sessions said, “I’m pleased that this rigorous selection process to determine the best nuclear sites in the country reinforces what the people of Jackson County and North Alabama have known for some time – TVA’s Bellefonte site is an ideal location for a nuclear plant. As we are faced with greater energy demands and more complex environmental challenges, we must pursue the nuclear power option in this country, and Bellefonte can become the proving ground for a new generation of nuclear technology to meet America’s needs.” Alabama Gov. Bob Riley said, “Selection of TVA’s Bellefonte Nuclear Plant as one of two sites for the possible construction of the first new nuclear plant in this country in 30 years is great news for the State of Alabama. We have worked with TVA and the local community to aggressively pursue this project and the economic investment and jobs it can bring to our state. If this plant becomes a reality, it would not only be a huge plus for the local economy, but it would also provide a source of secure, reliable energy for our nation.” Congressman Bud Cramer said, “The people of Jackson County and North Alabama deserve to have a fully operational facility at Bellefonte. Our community has worked for many years to position Bellefonte for a bright future, and I’m pleased that NuStart selected it today. The work that has already been completed and the strong support from our community and the state of Alabama give Bellefonte an advantage over other sites.” Dus Rogers, president and chief executive officer of the Jackson County Economic Development Agency, said, “Our community wholeheartedly supports nuclear energy and has been waiting patiently for many years for a nuclear plant to be finished at Bellefonte. We appreciate that TVA continues to pursue all the options for building a generating plant at the site. We’ve had good news before, but this time we hope it will mean completion of the plant, which would be a giant boost for the economy of Jackson County." (423) 266-2325 © 2004 Site designed and copyrighted by Three HD ***************************************************************** 27 Mos News: Russia Plays Down Chernobyl Threat, Says Ready to Participate in Reconstruction - NEWS - MOSNEWS.COM Photo from www.hangwire.com Created: 22.09.2005 13:14 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 13:14 MSK MosNews Russia is ready to participate in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant protective sarcophagus reconstruction, Itar Tass reported Thursday quoting the Federal Atomic Energy Agency Head Alexander Rumyantsev. In spite of Ukrainian present economy problems, the sarcophagus reconstruction works will hopefully continue, Rumyantsev said. “Russia is constantly ready to get involved in the works and provide all the assistance that we can,” he was quoted by Itar Tass as saying. However, the media is over-dramatic about the situation on the plant, Rumyantsev said. “Even if more leaks appear and the sarcophagus is partly collapses, there may be serious social consequences. However according to the experts, there cannot be any serious radiation consequences,” he said. The temporary sarcophagus over the exploded Chernobyl NPP, designed to last five years, was built 20 years ago to contain the radioactive debris. There have been repeated calls from the environmentalists to repair the leaking shield, and plans to repair the shelter were underway for several years, but it was only recently, with Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko elected in December, that the funding was found. Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM ***************************************************************** 28 NRC: AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating FR Doc 05-18915 [Federal Register: September 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 183)] [Notices] [Page 55635-55637] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22se05-60] Station; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct Scoping Process AmerGen Energy Company, LLC (AmerGen) has submitted an application for renewal of Facility Operating License DPR-16 for an additional 20 years of operation at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS). OCNGS is located along the western shore of Barnegat Bay between the South Branch of Forked River and Oyster Creek, in Ocean County, New Jersey. The operating license for OCNGS expires April 9, 2009. The application for renewal, submitted pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 (10 CFR Part 54), was received on July 22, 2005. A notice of receipt and availability of the application, which included the environmental report (ER), was published in the Federal Register on August 4, 2005 (70 FR 44940). A notice of acceptance for docketing of the application for renewal of the facility operating licenses was published in the Federal Register on September 15, 2005, (70 FR 54585). The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will be preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) in support of the review of the license renewal application and to provide the public an opportunity to participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in 10 CFR 51.29. In addition, as outlined in 36 CFR 800.8, ``Coordination with the National Environmental Policy Act,'' the NRC plans to coordinate compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in meeting the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In accordance with 10 CFR 51.53(c) and 10 CFR 54.23, AmerGen submitted the ER as part of the application. The ER was prepared pursuant to 10 CFR Part 51 and is available for public inspection at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at , which provides access through the Public Electronic Reading Room link. Persons [[Page 55636]] 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 at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to . The application may also be viewed on the Internet at . In addition, the Lacey Public Library, 10 East Lacey Road, Forked River, NJ 08731 has made the ER available for public inspection. This notice advises the public that the NRC intends to gather the information necessary to prepare a plant-specific supplement to the Commission's ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (NUREG-1437), in support of the review of the application for renewal of the OCNGS operating license for an additional 20 years. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. The NRC is required by 10 CFR 51.95 to prepare a supplement to the GEIS in connection with the renewal of an operating license. This notice is being published in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the NRC's regulations found in 10 CFR Part 51. The NRC will first conduct a scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS and, as soon as practicable thereafter, will prepare a draft supplement to the GEIS for public comment. Participation in the scoping process by members of the public and local, State, Tribal, and Federal government agencies is encouraged. The scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS will be used to accomplish the following: a. Define the proposed action which is to be the subject of the supplement to the GEIS. b. Determine the scope of the supplement to the GEIS and identify the significant issues to be analyzed in depth. c. Identify and eliminate from detailed study those issues that are peripheral or that are not significant. d. Identify any environmental assessments and other EISs that are being or will be prepared that are related to, but are not part of, the scope of the supplement to the GEIS being considered. e. Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements related to the proposed action. f. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of the environmental analyses and the Commission's tentative planning and decision-making schedule. g. Identify any cooperating agencies and, as appropriate, allocate assignments for preparation and schedules for completing the supplement to the GEIS to the NRC and any cooperating agencies. h. Describe how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared, and include any contractor assistance to be used. The NRC invites the following entities to participate in scoping: a. The applicant, AmerGen Energy Company, LLC. b. Any Federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved, or that is authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. c. Affected State and local government agencies, including those authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. d. Any affected Indian tribe. e. Any person who requests or has requested an opportunity to participate in the scoping process. f. Any person who has petitioned or intends to petition for leave to intervene. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.26, the scoping process for an EIS may include a public scoping meeting to help identify significant issues related to a proposed activity and to determine the scope of issues to be addressed in an EIS. The NRC has decided to hold public meetings for the OCNGS license renewal supplement to the GEIS. The scoping meetings will be held at the Quality Inn located at 815 Route 37 in Toms River, New Jersey, on Tuesday, November 1, 2005. There will be two sessions to accommodate interested parties. The first session will convene at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 4:30 p.m., as necessary. The second session will convene at 7 p.m. with a repeat of the overview portions of the meeting and will continue until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both meetings will be transcribed and will include: (1) An overview by the NRC staff of the NEPA environmental review process, the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS, and the proposed review schedule; and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to submit comments or suggestions on the environmental issues or the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS. Additionally, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour before the start of each session at the Quality Inn in Toms River. No formal comments on the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meetings or in writing, as discussed below. Persons may register to attend or present oral comments at the meetings on the scope of the NEPA review by contacting NRC Senior Environmental Project Manager, Dr. Michael Masnik, at 1-800-368-5642, extension 1191, or by e-mail to the NRC at no later than October 24, 2005. Members of the public may also register to speak at the meeting within 15 minutes of the start of each session. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. Members of the public who have not registered may also have an opportunity to speak, if time permits. Public comments will be considered in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS. Dr. Masnik will need to be contacted no later than October 24, 2005, if special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, so that the NRC staff can determine whether the request can be accommodated. Members of the public may send written comments on the environmental scope of the OCNGS license renewal review to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Comments may also be delivered to the NRC, Room T-6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. during Federal workdays. To be considered in the scoping process, written comments should be postmarked by November 25, 2005. Electronic comments may be sent by e-mail to the NRC at and should be sent no later than November 25, 2005, to be considered in the scoping process. Comments will be available electronically and accessible through ADAMS at . Participation in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS does not entitle participants to become parties to the proceeding to which the supplement to the GEIS relates. Notice of opportunity for a hearing regarding the renewal application was the subject of the aforementioned Federal Register notice (70 FR 54585). Matters related to participation in any hearing are outside [[Page 55637]] the scope of matters to be discussed at this public meeting. At the conclusion of the scoping process, the NRC will prepare a concise summary of the determination and conclusions reached, including the significant issues identified, and will send a copy of the summary to each participant in the scoping process. The summary will also be available for inspection in ADAMS at . The NRC staff will then prepare and issue for comment the draft supplement to the GEIS, which will be the subject of separate notices and separate public meetings at a later time. Copies will be available for public inspection at the above-mentioned addresses, and one copy per request will be provided free of charge. After receipt and consideration of the comments, the NRC will prepare a final supplement to the GEIS, which will also be available for public inspection. Information about the proposed action, the supplement to the GEIS, and the scoping process may be obtained from Dr. Masnik at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th 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. 05-18915 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 29 Valley Advocate: The "Nuke" York Times The nation's paper of record distorts remarks on conservation by a respected energy policy analyst. by Eesha Williams - September 22, 2005 [Feature] Energy-conserving light bulbs could help make nuclear plants unnecessary. On Sept. 14, the editors of the New York Times decided to publish an article about the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. The plant is three miles from Massachusetts and a stone's throw from New Hampshire. Did the Times editors decide to focus on Vermont Yankee because of the surprising success the plant's mostly-volunteer opponents have recently had fighting plans by the multi-billion dollar corporation that owns Yankee to ramp up power output at the plant? Did the Times choose Yankee because it represents the biggest chance of a Katrina-size disaster in western New England? Or could it have been to examine the proposal by plant owner Entergy Corp. to build a nuclear waste dump on the banks of the Connecticut River next to Vermont Yankee? The answer is, "none of the above." The nation's "newspaper of record" decided to focus on Vermont Yankee (and a nuke in New Jersey) as examples of why environmentalists who want to shut nukes are hurting efforts to stop global warming. The Sept. 14 article by staff writer Matthew Wald notes that hydropower's potential is already maxed out, and that solar panels and windmills can't keep up with the growing demand for electricity. Therefore, closing Vermont Yankee--an option when its license expires in 2012--would mean burning more coal or gas for electricity. What about using less electricity? The article quickly mentions that possibility, too--and just as quickly dismisses it, with a quote from an environmentalist. According to the article, Rob Sargent, senior energy policy analyst for the National Association of State Public Interest Research Groups in Boston, "said that rising electricity prices would make many new energy-saving technologies practical, but he acknowledged that simply saving money would not be enough to reduce power consumption by the required amount." In other words, consumers will have to pay more for electricity if increased air pollution is to be avoided when Vermont Yankee is shut. Interviewed by the Advocate on the day the Times article was published, Sargent insisted Wald misrepresented his position: "He called me and said, 'I have this angle for an article. What do you think?' I spent an hour trying to tell him his point was wrong, that his point was the nuclear industry's point, that in fact you absolutely can close Vermont Yankee and not contribute more to global warming--and save consumers money on their electric bills." Sargent has the studies to back up his utopian-sounding position: •A 2004 study by Synapse Energy Economics concluded that the U.S. could cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants nearly in half by 2025, while meeting expected growth in energy demand, saving consumers $36 billion a year, and closing half the nation's 103 nuclear reactors. •A 2005 study by Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships found that by 2013 the New England states--mostly by promoting the use of better light bulbs--could eliminate the need for an amount of electricity equal to the total amount of power now used by every household in Connecticut and New Hampshire combined-- without costing any more money. •In 2002, physicist David Goldstein won a $500,000 "genius award" from the MacArthur Foundation for his work creating efficient refrigerators and other appliances. Goldstein is co-director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's Energy Program; the NRDC estimates that his work is now saving as much energy every year as the total output of all the nuclear power plants in the United States combined. Ever since the nuclear power industry was born out of the atomic bomb technology of World War II, the New York Times has published far more articles promoting nukes than promoting energy conservation (the paper downplayed the health effects of radiation after the U.S. bombed Hiroshima, and promoted a now-closed nuclear power plant on Long Island in the face of mass protests). In May, the Times ran a front-page article about a supposed split among "prominent environmentalists" over nuclear power as a solution to global warming. In response, 274 environmental groups, including Sierra Club, Greenpeace and Public Citizen, said in a joint letter, "We flatly reject the argument that increased investment in nuclear capacity is an acceptable or necessary solution." Copyright © 1995-2005 New Mass Media. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 30 NRC: Omaha Public Power District; Notice of Withdrawal of Application FR Doc 05-18916 [Federal Register: September 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 183)] [Notices] [Page 55632-55633] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22se05-57] for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of Omaha Public Power District (the licensee) to withdraw its July 25, 2003, application for proposed amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-40 for the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1 (FCS), located in Washington County, Nebraska. The proposed amendment would have revised the facility technical specifications pertaining to FCS Technical Specification Section 3.0.2, Table 3-2, Table 3-5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, and the Definitions Section. This proposed change would have provided a risk-informed alternative to the existing surveillance interval for the integrated Engineered Safety Features (ESF) and Loss-of-Offsite Power testing required to be performed on each ESF equipment train during each outage. The proposed change would have modified the surveillance interval requirement for these refueling interval surveillance requirements to go to a staggered test basis scheme. Using a staggered test basis, only one train would be tested each refueling outage. Omaha Public Power District stated that this amendment was modeled after the Improved Standard Technical Specifications and is based on a study conducted by the Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC on behalf of the Combustion Engineering Owners Group in topical report WCAP-15830-P, ``Staggered Integrated ESF Testing,'' and Technical Specification Task Force 450. The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in the Federal Register on August 19, 2003 (68 FR 49818). However, by letter dated September 9, 2005, the licensee withdrew the proposed change. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated July 25, 2003, and the [[Page 55633]] licensee's letter dated September 9, 2005, which withdrew the application for the license amendment. Documents may be examined, and/ or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the internet at the NRC Web site, . 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 . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of September 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Alan B. Wang, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 05-18916 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 31 Edmonton Journal: Klein cool to nuclear heat canada.com network Thursday, September 22, 2005 Premier Ralph Klein is cool to the idea of using nuclear power to extract oil from northern Alberta's oil sands. Klein says he would consider nuclear power only after other options including wind, solar and hydroelectrical power are exhausted. A French oil company is considering building a nuclear reactor to extract oil from the oil sands. The nuclear plant would heat water to produce steam for separating bitumen from sand. Oil is removed from the sand using a hot water and steam process. Natural gas is primarily used to fuel the extraction. But a spike in natural gas prices is making that costly. The oil company, Total SA, is looking at building a nuclear reactor in Alberta to heat the water. But it would need federal and provincial approval before a nuclear reactor could be built. Klein doesn't seem keen on giving his support. The premier, attending a business conference in Banff organized by Alberta Economic Development, said today that "every other possible" option would have to be explored first. The Journal's James Baxter, attending the conference, says this represents a slight shift in the premier's position. Baxter: "He's decidedly cool to the idea but not closed. He has previously said he would never consider nuclear power but now he's saying we might to at least have to consider it." In the 1950s, U.S. scientists looked into the possibility of setting off a nuclear bomb deep below the earth's surface to heat the oil sands for separating the bitumen from the sand. They never pursued the idea. Klein is also planning a cross-Canada tour in November to explain why the rest of Canada shouldn't be envious of Alberta's oil wealth and that the province's good fortune helps the rest of the country. Baxter's full report on the Global Business Forum in Banff will appear in Friday's Journal. © Edmonton Journal 2005 ***************************************************************** 32 NewsRoom Finland: Health minister supports Finnish nuclear power station project 22.9.2005 at 10:15 Finland's departing social and health minister, Sinikka Mönkäre (soc dem), has voiced support for the construction of the country's sixth nuclear power station. Speaking on the Swedish language radio news of the national broadcaster Yle, Ms Mönkäre emphasised the fact that the construction of the station is solely dependent upon the decision of the financiers. The minister did not consider it likely that the project would be abandoned for political reasons. In Ms Mönkäre's opinion, the political climate has changed significantly since the last time a decision was made to build a nuclear power station in 2002. Parliament was relatively divided on the issue in 2002, and the project was approved by 107 votes to 92. /STT/ © Copyright STT 2005 © 1995 – 2005, Virtual Finland ***************************************************************** 33 Ottawa Citizen: Ont. needs nuclear, coal power - union canada.com network Steve Erwin Canadian Press Thursday, September 22, 2005 TORONTO -- Ontario's largest electricity union wants Premier Dalton McGuinty to break his election promise to close the province's coal-fired power plants, saying they'll be needed alongside new nuclear facilities to meet future demand. Don MacKinnon said his Power Workers' Union will launch a major media campaign next Tuesday that aims to win public support to keep the coal-fired plants open. MacKinnon argues coal-fired plants can be cleaned up and their usage reduced to help meet environmental targets as new nuclear power comes online a decade from now. But he said despite several meetings with McGuinty over the past two years, the premier is unwilling to budge from his stance that coal-fired facilities must close. "They didn't study it," MacKinnon said Wednesday of the Liberal's 2003 campaign promise to close Ontario's five coal-fired power plants. "Coal is cheap, we've got lots of it. We need to find a niche for it." Finding no support from the premier or Energy Minister Dwight Duncan, MacKinnon said he's moving to get the public's input. "We're telling everyone we can get an audience with to say, `look, let's revisit this before it's too late,' " MacKinnon said. Unions, associations and lobby groups are vying for the premier's attention since he gave a speech last week that said he'll give the green light to build more nuclear plants in Ontario if that's what's needed to meet future electricity demand. McGuinty is awaiting a review of Ontario's supply mix by the Ontario Power Authority due Dec. 1. The premier has already taken heat for reneging on a promise to close all five of the province's coal generating stations by 2007. The last of the five -- the giant Nanticoke generating station on Lake Erie, considered Ontario's worst polluter -- is now expected to run until 2009. McGuinty says building replacement nuclear facilities is an option because he's not convinced technology to reduce emissions from coal-fired plants is good enough. Some energy sector experts say it will be difficult to close all coal facilities because of potential supply shortages. The province has largely exhausted its hydroelectric potential, wind and solar don't generate enough capacity, and new nuclear plants, if given the go-ahead, could take a decade or more to get online. The province believes Ontarians can reduce demand through conservation. But Murray Elston, president of the Canadian Nuclear Association, says that won't be enough. "The warning is clear: Ontario needs new electricity generation capacity within the decade, even if aggressive conservation targets are attained," Elston, a cabinet minister under former Premier David Peterson, said in a speech to the Empire Club in Toronto. Elston said new nuclear reactors can be constructed and added to the electricity grid in less than five years. But he said it takes five more years just to get through environmental and regulatory processes. He said too much red tape bog down the process, and blamed delays over environmental debates for helping create past cost overruns. "Once the go-ahead is given for new reactors, the actual construction work occurs relatively quickly," he said. The association says a new nuclear plant would provide a job boom, estimating it takes about 27,000 person-years of work for a single reactor. According to Ontario's Independent Electricity System Operator, more than half of the province's electricity generation last year came from nuclear plants. Nearly one-quarter came from hydroelectric facilities, while coal accounted for 17.5 per cent and natural gas supplied 6.5 per cent. © Canadian Press 2005 Copyright © CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest ***************************************************************** 34 NRC: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power FR Doc 05-18918 [Federal Register: September 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 183)] [Notices] [Page 55633-55634] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22se05-58] Plant; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-18, issued to R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC (the licensee), for operation of the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna) located in Wayne County, New York. The proposed amendment would revise the facility operating license and technical specifications (TSs) to authorize an increase in the maximum steady-state thermal power level at Ginna from 1520 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 1775 MWt, which is a 16.8 percent increase. This increase in power level is generally referred to as an extended power uprate. Specifically, the proposed amendment would change the TSs to revise: (1) The Definition of Rated Thermal Power (RTP), (2) the RTP for the Required Action for Condition O in Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.3.1, ``Reactor Trip System,'' (3) the Power Range Neutron Flux--High Limiting Safety System Setting, (4) the Reactor Trip System Interlocks--Power Range Neutron Flux, P-8 Limiting Safety System Setting, (5) the RTP reference in Table 3.3.1-1, Footnote (h), (6) the Steam Line Isolation High Steam Flow Limiting Safety System Setting, (7) the Steam Line Isolation High--High Steam Flow Limiting Safety System Setting, (8) decrease the upper lift setting in LCO 3.4.10, ``Pressurizer Safety Valves,'' (9) the required volume in surveillance requirement (SR) 3.7.6.1 for TS 3.7.6, ``Condensate Storage Tanks (CSTs).'' In addition, the proposed amendment would change the TSs to provide margin improvement, but are not part of the extended power uprate (EPU), to revise: (1) The Safety Injection Pressurizer Pressure--Low Limiting Safety System Setting, (2) the Containment Spray Containment Pressure--High High Limiting Safety System Settings for narrow range and wide range, and (3) the Steam Line Isolation Coincident with Tavg-Low Limiting Safety System Setting. The proposed amendment also includes a change to the licensing basis for control room dose for the loss-of-coolant accident and the rod ejection accident dose consequences because of the EPU conditions. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license 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. 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, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, 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 and/or 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. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner/ requestor in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/ petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) 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 identify 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 petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the basis for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/requestor to relief. A petitioner/ requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. [[Page 55634]] 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. Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). 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. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should 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 Mr. Daniel F. Stenger, Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, LLP, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 1000 South, Washington, DC 20005, attorney for the licensee. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated July 7, 2005, as supplemented on August 15, 2005, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1- 800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of September 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Patrick D. Milano, Sr., Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 05-18918 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 35 [NukeNet] Book: Biowarfare and Terrorism / Francis A. Boyle Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:43:18 -0700 WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Clarity Press, Inc. [mailto:clarity@islandnet.com] Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 1:06 PM To: fboyle@law.uiuc.edu Subject: Book: Biowarfare and Terrorism / Francis A. Boyle 1200ff.jpg 12011d.jpg 120124.jpg Press Release / Book Announcement BIOWARFARE AND TERRORISM by Francis A. Boyle Foreword by Jonathan King This book outlines how and why the United States government initiated, sustained and then dramatically expanded an illegal biological arms buildup. Most significantly, U.S. expert Francis A. Boyle reveals how the new billion-dollar U.S. Chemical and Biological Defense Program has been reorientated to accord with the Neo-Conservative pre-emptive strike agenda--this time by biological and chemical warfare. 12012a.jpg Linking U.S. biowarfare development to the October 2001 anthrax attack on Congress--the most significant political attack on the constitutional functioning of democracy in the United States in recent history--Boyle sheds new light on the motives for the attack, the media black hole of silence into which it has fallen, and why the FBI may never apprehend the perpetrators of this seminal crime of the 21st century. Biowarfare and Terrorism should raise public concern at what the vastly expanded US biowarfare research and purported civilian preparedness programs hold in store for America--and the extent to which the Bush administration is prepared to pursue them, irrespective of their incitement to a global biowarfare arms race, and their likely exposure of the American people in the future to both accidents and reprisals. ABOUT FRANCIS A. BOYLE Francis A. Boyle is a leading American professor, practitioner and advocate of international law. He was responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. He served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International (1988-1992), and represented Bosnia- Herzegovina at the World Court. Professor Boyle teaches international law at the University of Illinois, Champaign. He holds a Doctor of Law Magna Cum Laude as well as a Ph.D. in Political Science, both from Harvard University JONATHAN KING is Professor of Molecular Biology at MIT and an authority on the genes and proteins of micro-organisms. Prof. King was a founder of the Council for Responsible Genetics and Co-Chair of its Committee on the Military Use of Biological Research. CLARITY PRESS, INC. http://www.claritypress.com ISBN: 0-932863-46-9 Paper $12.95 2005 Table of contents, synopsis and reviews available at: http://www.bookmasters.com/clarity/b0027.htm Available from: SCB Distributors,15608 South New Century Drive, Gardena, CA. 90248 victor@scbdistributors.com Toll-free 800-729-6423* Tel: 1-310-532-9400 * Fax: 1-310-532-7001 or through www.amazon.com or Ingram or Fernwood Books in Canada. Lindsay@fernwoodbooks.ca To remove: clarity@islandnet.com 12014d.jpg _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net Attachment Converted: 1200ff.jpg: 00000001,4c01b685,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: 12011d.jpg: 00000001,4c01b686,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: 120124.jpg: 00000001,4c01b687,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: 12012a.jpg: 00000001,4c01b688,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: 12014d.jpg: 00000001,4c01b689,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 36 Guardian Unlimited: Lithuanians Resume Search for Russian Jet From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday September 22, 2005 1:31 PM By LIUDAS DAPKUS Associated Press Writer VILNIUS, Lithuania (AP) - Lithuanian investigators resumed their search Thursday of a crashed Russian fighter jet, one day after halting the probe over concerns about a radioactive substance found in the wreckage, the chief investigator said. Investigators had not received a reply from Russia about what the substance could be, but they decided to resume sifting through the wreckage in the hopes of recovering a fourth air-to-air missile that remained missing, said Gen. Vitalijus Vaiksnoras, who is leading the investigation. ``We have decided to take maximum security measures and to resume digging,'' Vaiksnoras said. Radiation experts deemed a radioactive substance found in the wreckage to be no threat to human health, but were still waiting for an official response from Russia as to the exact nature of the substance, Vaiksnoras said. Investigators also repeated their plea to area residents to return scattered parts of the plane that they have been taking home as souvenirs. The Su-27 fighter bomber crashed last week in Lithuania while traveling from St. Petersburg to the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. The pilot, who ejected safely and was detained, is accused of violating Lithuanian airspace. The crash has worsened already tense relations between Russia and Lithuania, a former Soviet republic that joined NATO last year, with Lithuania rejecting Moscow's demands to release the pilot, Maj. Valery Troyanov. Lithuanian prosecutors say they will hand Troyanov back to Russia if the investigation finds the plane crashed due to technical failure. If charged and convicted, he could face up to two years in prison. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 37 ITAR-TASS: Results of inquest into Su-27 accident analysed in Vilnius 22.09.2005, 16.41 VILNIUS, September 22 (Itar-Tass) - The Lithuanian commission, which is looking into the reasons of the Russian Su-27 accident, will be meeting here throughout the day on Thursday, Press Attache of the Lithuanian Defence Ministry Ruta Puteikite told Itar-Tass. The commission members, she added, “will analyse the obtained data”. Excavations on the scene of the crash were temporarily suspended, she said. “Sappers found on Tuesday a 2-kilogram chunk of radioactive metal there , which may be dangerous for human beings and the environment,” Puteikite noted. Major General Vitalius Vaiksnoras, who head the investigation commission, “officially asked Major-General Sergei Bainetov, the plenipotentiary representative of Russia, to find out what this metal was and whether there were any other radioactive materials on the plane”. “The excavations will not be resumed” until he gets an answer to the request, Puteikite stated. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 38 Las Vegas SUN: No link seen between arsenic and leukemia cluster in Nevada town September 21, 2005 By BRENDAN RILEY ASSOCIATED PRESS FALLON, Nev. (AP) - Federal researchers said Wednesday a study of 905 long-term residents of this rural Nevada town revealed no unusually high cancer rates despite high levels of naturally occurring arsenic that had persisted for years. The Environmental Protection Agency researchers also said at a town hall meeting that their study had nothing to do with a baffling outbreak of leukemia. Since 1997, 17 children with ties to Fallon have been diagnosed with childhood acute lymphocytic leukemia, or ALL, and three of those children died. Dr. Rebecca Calderon of the EPA said arsenic, a known carcinogen, hit levels of up to 100 parts per billion before Fallon set up a costly arsenic-removal system in 2004. Now the city provides water that has arsenic levels below the standard of 10 parts per billion, she added. The EPA researchers took blood and urine samples from participants and asked questions regarding diet, water consumption, medical history and exposure to substances such as diesel, pesticides and solvents. The results will be valuable "even though we don't have any earth-shattering news to tell you about how bad arsenic is for you," Calderon said. About 20 percent of those surveyed had suffered from various types of cancer, but Calderon said that rate was "about what you'd expect" given an age spread of 45 to 85 among the study participants. She also said the cancers mentioned by the participants didn't have any known links to arsenic. The study also showed that people who installed devices in their homes to remove arsenic from their water had measurements only slightly different than tap water measurements. But arsenic levels dropped for people who drnak bottled water. "Well, they told us what some people have been saying for a long time," said Ernie Williams, 71, one of the surveyed residents, as he left the town hall meeting. "The (leukemia) problem is not because of the arsenic." "Not too much new has been discovered," added Chuck Terry, 55, who also was in the study group. But Terry added that if the study didn't bring anything new to light at least "it puts something to rest." Arsenic and heavy metals such as tungsten have been mentioned as possible causes of Fallon's ALL cluster in the past. University of Arizona scientists Paul Sheppard and Mark Witten have said their tests show that Fallon has up to 13 times more tungsten in its dust than other Nevada cities. Tests also have found elevated levels of tungsten in tree rings in Fallon and three other towns with leukemia clusters, they said. But other studies turned up no link to the tungsten levels or to high levels of arsenic in Fallon's water supply, a pipeline carrying jet fuel to the Fallon Naval Air Station where the Navy's Top Gun training program is located, local pesticide spraying or an underground nuclear test conducted 30 miles away about 40 years ago All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 39 Re: [NukeNet] Calls Needed To Stop Yucca N-Waste Dump Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:44:27 -0700 version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Bennett, while he may oppose Yucca, supports reprocessing. he deserves thanks for his Yucca stance but try to include something about how he needs to be aware that reprocessing is expensive and does not solve the waste problem. the best first step is to stop making the waste. Brendan Hoffman Organizer, Nuclear Energy & Waste Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program Public Citizen p: 202.454.5130 f: 202.547.7392 bhoffman@citizen.org www.citizen.org/cmep >>> "Bill Smirnow" 9/21/2005 8:01 PM >>> NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Please see bottom pf post for the two Senators to call. Please forward this e-mail to other lists and interested parties. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 7:55 PM Subject: [shundahaialert] YES! Utah Senator jumps ship on Yucca nuke dump Dear friends, Here is the latest on the fight against the high-level nuclear dump proposed for the Skull Valley Goshute Indian reservation in Utah One important development is that Utah senator Bob Bennett just announced yesterday that he will stand with Nevada in a united front against the nuclear waste dumps proposed for both Yucca Mountain, NV, on Western Shoshone land, and Skull Valley utah, on Goshute Indian land. This is a fantastic reversal from his previous position of supporting the Bush regime in it's attack on Yucca, in order to keep waste out of Utah. On the issue of nuclear waste, it has long been said that if Utah and Nevada interests "don't hang together, they will hang seperately." This critical need for solidarity is also something that has been demanded by both Shoshone and Goshutes from the beginning. It's good to see that the politicians are finally coming around. Unfortunately, Utah Senator Orrin Hatch is still stuck on supporting the Bush administration's commitment to the very dangerous, misguided, and environmentally racist Yucca Mountain nuclear dump. This is despite the rest of Utah's federal delegation and state government insisting that it is time Utah stands with Nevada, just as Goshute Indians stand with Western Shoshone Indians, to oppose high-level nuclear waste being shipped and dumped at either Skull Valley or Yucca Mountain. Give Senator Bennett a thanks: Senator Robert Bennett (R- UT) 431 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 Phone: (202) 224-5444 www.bennett.senate.gov/contact/emailmain.html Let Senator Hatch know that he'd better get over the Yucca Mountain fixation and get on board with proposals to keep high-level nuclear waste where it is, and not put communities all across the country in jeopardy just to dump America's deadly nuclear garbage on Indian country here in the Great Basin. Senator Orrin Hatch, (R- UT) 104 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 Phone:(202) 224-5251 www.hatch.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Offices. Contact We can stop both the skull Valley and yucca Mountain nuclear dumps. The momentum is shifting toward a better way to deal with America's nuclear problem. Feel free to contact our office for any reason. Also, you are welcome to send us copies of whatever correspondence you have with these or any other politicians. Peace and justice, Shundahai Network -------------------------------------------------- ------- Latest News 9-21-05 Bennett no longer supporting Yucca site- Ogden Standard Examiner http://www.shundahai.org/092105_OgdenSE_Bennett_Opposes_Yucca.htm 9-21-05 Bennett switches, opposes Yucca- Salt Lake Tribune http://www.shundahai.org/092105_SLTrib_Bennett_Opposes_Yucca.htm 9-20-05 Utah official switches gears against Yucca Mountain- Las Vegas Sun http://www.shundahai.org/092005LVSun_Bennett_Opposes_Yucca.htm You can also click on the following link for a full news listing of the Skull Valley high-level nuclear waste struggle! http://www.shundahai.org/skull_valley_info.htm -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Shundahai Network www.shundahai.org P.O. Box 1115 Salt Lake City, UT 84110 Phone- 801.533.0128 Fax- 801.533.0129 shundahai@shundahai.org Online Fundraising Store- www.cafepress.com/shundahainet If you are a Myspace user, you can now add us! www.Myspace.com/shundahai Shundahai is a Newe (Western Shoshone) word meaning "Peace and Harmony with all Creation" _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 40 Deseret News: Hatch's bill aims to block nuclear waste [deseretnews.com] Thursday, September 22, 2005 Measure would keep shipments out of Utah — but not Nevada By Jerry D. Spangler and Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News WASHINGTON — Sen. Orrin Hatch plans to reintroduce legislation today to block the shipment of nuclear waste to a private storage facility in Utah and has asked fellow Sen. Bob Bennett to be a co-sponsor. Hatch, unlike Bennett and other members of the Utah congressional delegation and the governor, has refused to support a bill that would ban shipments of spent nuclear fuel rods through the West. Such a measure would block both the proposed Yucca Mountain permanent repository in Nevada and the temporary Private Fuel Storage repository planned for Skull Valley in Utah's Tooele County. Bennett, who on Tuesday announced he was breaking ranks with Hatch, President Bush and other supporters of Yucca Mountain, said he is considering Hatch's request. Coloring Bennett's decision will be his support for a nuclear waste plan proposed by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. Reid and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., are calling for leaving the spent fuel rods at nuclear power plants and eventually reprocessing them. Hatch, R-Utah, made it clear he does not support that position. The Bush administration "strongly supports Yucca Mountain. So if I join with Sen. Reid right now, that would alienate the administration and others who can help us the most right now," he said. "We need to keep our options open," Hatch added Wednesday on the Doug Wright show, broadcast by KSL Radio. "Sen. Reid wants us to close off one of the only options open." When Wright asked him when Utah could expect help from the administration, he replied, "Well, we have to give them a chance." Now that the PFS licensing has been ordered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an independent board, the matter becomes more of a political issue, he indicated. Hatch's legislation calls on the secretary of energy to conduct a study into storage of spent nuclear fuel at Department of Energy sites around the country and into whether the federal government should take ownership of the wastes now being stored at more than 100 nuclear power plants. The measure, which was introduced earlier this year as an amendment to the Energy Bill but was not voted on, also calls on DOE to conduct a study into the development of facilities to reprocess nuclear waste. At the core of the legislation is a provision that "no spent nuclear fuel or related high-level material shall be deposited into, or transported to, a non-federally-owned, off-site facility." That is a direct shot at Private Fuel Storage, the consortium of utilities that wants to store up to 44,000 tons of spent fuel on Goshute tribal lands in Tooele County. PFS has secured the approval of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Because the PFS facility is privately owned and operated, it would be not be allowed to ship waste or store it in Utah, according to Hatch's language. But because Yucca Mountain is a federal facility, it would not be affected. Hatch defended his support for Yucca Mountain, saying he did not want to "kick the administration in the teeth right now when they're for Yucca Mountain." And unlike Bennett, he does not believe opponents of Yucca Mountain can carry the day. "Sen. Reid can't deliver. And that's the problem," Hatch said. Hatch said he thinks it's important for him to "hold tough and keep working, not give up." He said he is making headway with the White House, Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, Congress and even some members of the nuclear industry in working against Skull Valley. Like the rest of the Utah delegation, Hatch said he also supports reprocessing and leaving the waste on site, or at DOE facilities. But the waste issue is politically difficult, he said, adding the administration is "committed to Yucca Mountain." Hatch said he has had "innumerable meetings with top-level people" on the matter and will continue to have more. "We will do everything under the sun to stop it," he added, speaking of PFS. Jason Groenewold, director of the anti-nuclear group Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, said that eight years into the fight against the PFS repository, "it's good to see specific legislation being introduced to block nuclear waste storage in Skull Valley." Groenewold hoped Hatch would consider joining the rest of the Utah congressional delegation and the Nevada delegation in opposing the Yucca Mountain site by "saying the West should not be the nation's nuclear waste dumping ground." E-mail: spang@desnews.com; bau@desnews.com © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 41 Guardian Unlimited: Empty Nuclear Waste Container Tips Over From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday September 22, 2005 8:01 PM By CAROLYN THOMPSON Associated Press Writer BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) - An empty container used to store spent nuclear fuel tipped over Thursday while being hauled by train to a shipyard. The container was not damaged and there was no release of radiation, the Department of Energy said. The 320,000-pound container tipped when the train sideswiped another in the CSX Frontier Railyard in Buffalo, CSX spokesman Gary Sease said. No one was hurt. The container was being taken to the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, from the DOE's Naval Reactors Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory, where it had been emptied of used nuclear fuel from a Navy warship. The container had no visible damage, and testing confirmed no release of radioactivity, said Jim Carey, a spokesman for the DOE's Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Office. The cause of the collision was under investigation, Sease said. Part of the Buffalo railyard was shut down Thursday as crews and cranes arrived. Republican Rep. Tom Reynolds called for an investigation into, among other things, how close nuclear waste containers come to other rail traffic and whether operational or security procedures were violated. Carey called the mishap highly unusually, saying about 750 containers have been shipped without a problem. ^--- On the Net: Naval Reactors Facility: http://cleanup.inel.gov/otherareas/nrf CSX: http://www.csx.com Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 42 Courier-Mail: Union wants uranium ban lifted 23 September 2005 Source: AAP ONE of Australia's biggest unions has urged the Labor Party to dump its ban on new uranium mines. Bill Ludwig, national president of the Australian Workers' Union (AWU), has called on Queensland Premier Peter Beattie to lift his state's ban on uranium mining, The Australian newspaper reported today. The AWU would take a proposal to the next federal Labor conference in 2007 calling on the party to scrap its 20-year-old "three mines" policy, the paper said. "I think we should have a practical debate about this and not an emotional one," Mr Ludwig said. "We've got no in-principle opposition to nuclear power, provided it is done in a responsible way." Mr Ludwig's remarks were expected to reopen hostilities in the labour movement, with other major unions such as the CFMEU and AMWU bitterly opposed to nuclear power, the newspaper reported. © Queensland Newspapers ***************************************************************** 43 Modesto Bee: Environmental agencies say Castle cleanup is going well Modbee.com | By ADAM ASHTON MERCED SUN-STAR Last Updated: September 22, 2005, 05:18:53 AM PDT CASTLE — The 10-year cleanup of toxic substances left here by the Air Force is on track, according to an agreement signed by the military and three environmental monitoring agencies. The document marks the last phase of the military's environmental remediation at the former Air Force base, a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund site. Two landfills, a fire training area, two skeet ranges and six other areas still must be cleaned by the Air Force, according to the agreement. California's Department of Toxic Substance Control, the U.S. EPA and the state EPA all signed off on the most recent agreement. After the last remediation, the Air Force can turn over the last 683 acres in its control to Merced County, which runs the remainder of the former base's 2,777 acres. "It's very gratifying to be nearing completion of the site," said Paul Brunner, senior representative at the Air Force agency charged with the base's cleanup. City Councilman Ed Abercrombie, Atwater's liaison to a community group that monitors the base's cleanup, said the most recent agreement changes little at Castle. The Air Force still is responsible for monitoring groundwater and landfills, and the county still retains development authority there. He said, however, that it shows the Air Force's steady work to make the site safe for business. "The Air Force has done a pretty good job," Abercrombie said. "Whenever there's been an area of concern, they go out and dig and get the answers." The Air Force Real Property Agency has managed Castle's cleanup since the Air Force left Atwater in 1995. The agency has treated more than 12 billion gallons of groundwater to scrub clean remnants of cleaning solvents and fuels. This summer, the agency conducted its third search in two years for the radioactive remnants of nuclear weapons at Castle. The search turned up clean. The agency also is in the early stages of a search for dioxin, a chemical that can cause birth defects. Dioxin has turned up in samples of treated wastewater in Atwater's sewage plant over the past year. Atwater officials have traced dioxin to Castle, but the chemical's origin remains unclear. The EPA says dioxin likely will not seep into groundwater if it collects at the surface, but Atwater officials say the chemical reaches their sewage plant as storm runoff. Dioxin can leave the plant in treated wastewater, which is used to irrigate some farms from the Atwater drain. Copyright © 2005 The Modesto Bee. ***************************************************************** 44 Sidney Morning News:Nuclear waste dump tenders sought soon - [www.smh.com.au] September 22, 2005 - 1:39PM Tenders will soon be sought for contractors to study the suitability of three Northern Territory sites for a national nuclear waste dump, the federal government has said. Science Minister Brendan Nelson said the process for choosing a new location had started on July 14 when Prime Minister John Howard announced he had abandoned plans for a waste dump at Woomera, in South Australia. He said the final decision on the suitability of a site would rest with the chief executive of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, before being referred to the environment minister. The three NT sites being considered are Mount Everard, 27km north-west of Alice Springs; Harts Range, 165km north-east of Alice Springs; and Fishers Ridge, 42km south-east of Katherine. All are commonwealth-owned land currently used for defence purposes. Dr Nelson, answering questions on notice from Labor resources spokesman Martin Ferguson, said it was estimated that low-level nuclear waste was currently stored at more than 100 locations around Australia. These included Woomera and the Lucas Heights facility in Sydney, as well as at defence facilities in or near Melbourne, Ipswich, Wodonga, Adelaide, Newcastle, Darwin, Sydney and Nowra, and CSIRO facilities in Canberra, Sydney, Adelaide, Mt Gambier, Brisbane and Melbourne. He said the low-level waste included items such as contaminated laboratory equipment such as protective clothing and rubber gloves, lightly contaminated soil, smoke detectors and exit signs. Intermediate level waste includes residues from overseas processing of Australian spent research reactor fuel, radiopharmaceutical production residues and disused radioactive sources from industry, medicine and research. © 2005 AAP smh.com.au to your rss feeds Copyright © 2005. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 45 AP Wire: Boeing settles Rocketdyne-related lawsuit Posted on Thu, Sep. 22, 2005 Associated Press LOS ANGELES - The Boeing Co. settled an 8-year-old Rocketdyne lawsuit filed by more than 100 Santa Susana Field Lab neighbors who blamed cancers and other ailments on the rocket-engine manufacturing and testing facility. The personal injury allegations were settled Wednesday, the scheduled start of jury selection. Terms weren't disclosed. "Plaintiffs and defendants are both satisfied with the settlement and settled these claims to avoid the high costs and delays of litigation," both sides said in a statement read by Boeing spokesman Dan Beck. Boeing has denied Rocketdyne operations harmed the plaintiffs, who filed suit in March 1997 claiming hazardous and radioactive substances caused cancers, thyroid and autoimmune disorders in residents who lived near Rocketdyne in the western San Fernando Valley. Boeing tested rocket engines and developed nuclear power systems at the Rocketdyne site. There was a partial meltdown of the facility's nuclear reactor in 1959. Boeing sold its Rocketdyne unit to Pratt & Whitney in August, but retained the field lab and all environmental responsibilities. ***************************************************************** 46 AU ABC: Politics to determine uranium exploration (AEDT)Thursday, 22 September 2005. 09:01 (AWST) A Western Australian mining company says exploration of its uranium tenements in the Pilbara, in the state's north-west, will depend on the political situation. Polaris Metals has added three exploration licences at Wallal to its portfolio - the licences are close to its Goldsworthy iron ore prospect in the Pilbara. Polaris is among several companies, including Redport and Contact Resources, that plan to explore for uranium in WA in the hope the Government will lift its ban on mining. Managing director Kevin Schultz says Goldsworthy and the company's projects in the Southern Cross area will remain the priority, but Polaris will continue to assess the prospects for uranium exploration. "[It] will be a measured process and I mean by that we'll keep an eye on the politics of the situation, for one thing, and the investor interest in exploring for uranium in Australia, it is growing but it hasn't really got off the ground yet," he said. ***************************************************************** 47 NRC: Spent Fuel Casks FR Doc 05-18914 [Federal Register: September 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 183)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 55513] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22se05-1] Rules and Regulations Federal Register This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week. [[Page 55513]] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 72 RIN 3150-AH75 List of Approved Fuel Storage Casks: NAC-UMS Revision 4, Confirmation of Effective Date AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Direct final rule: Confirmation of effective date. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is confirming the effective date of October 11, 2005, for the direct final rule that was published in the Federal Register on July 25, 2005 (70 FR 42485). This direct final rule amended the NRC's regulations to revise the NAC-UMS cask system listing to include Amendment No. 4 to Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1015. EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of October 11, 2005, is confirmed for this direct final rule. ADDRESSES: Documents related to this rulemaking, including comments received, may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. These same documents may also be viewed and downloaded electronically via the rulemaking Web site (http://ruleforum.llnl.gov). For information about the interactive rulemaking website, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 415-6219, e-mail jmm2@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 25, 2005 (70 FR 42485), the NRC published a direct final rule amending its regulations in 10 CFR part 72 to revise the NAC-UMS cask system listing within the ``List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks'' to include Amendment No. 4 to CoC No. 1015. This amendment replaces the term ``zircaloy'' with the more generic term ``zirconium alloy'; revises the definitions of ``operable'' and ``site specific fuel''; revises vacuum drying pressure and time limits; revises short-term temperature limits and completion times for the heat removal system; clarifies the surface dose rate surveillance; adds a dissolved boron concentration option; deletes a redundant boron concentration administrative control; adds an alternate site-specific design basis earthquake analysis; and incorporates editorial and administrative changes. In the direct final rule, NRC stated that if no significant adverse comments were received, the direct final rule would become final on October 11, 2005. The NRC did not receive any comments that warranted withdrawal of the direct final rule. Therefore, this rule will become effective as scheduled. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of September, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration. [FR Doc. 05-18914 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 48 Las Vegas RJ: Workers on Yucca project face layoffs Thursday, September 22, 2005 By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL Contractors for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project are bracing for possible layoffs in anticipation of budget cuts that could be as much as 30 percent, government and company sources confirmed Wednesday. A spokesman for Bechtel SAIC Co., the prime contractor for the project, said the company's 1,400 employees were notified by President and General Manager Ted Feigenbaum that the Department of Energy had sent out "planning guidance" memos that will lead to final decisions in October. "I'm not sure reductions are avoidable, and the employees know that," Bechtel spokesman Jason Bohne said. He said contractors were asked to analyze how a 25 percent to 30 percent funding reduction would affect the project and its schedule for submitting a license application for the planned repository for review by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Asked if the impacts would include layoffs, Bohne said, "My guess is it's going to have to." If that's the case, the project to entomb 77,000 tons of the nation's spent nuclear fuel and highly radioactive waste in the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, would face another setback. DOE officials already have delayed submitting the license application that was expected last year and that now has no target date. The repository, once touted to open in 2010, is not expected to be ready until 2012 at the earliest, barring any delays that could result from the license review and from legal actions. Allen Benson, a spokesman for the department's Office of Repository Development in Las Vegas, said contractors were sent internal guidance documents last week as part of an annual review. This time, Paul Golan, acting director of DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, "is demanding a high level of analysis to make sure everything is necessary," Benson said. "There's nothing unusual going on here," he said, noting later that "this is give and take, and also allows DOE flexibility to put dollars where we think we need them." Benson said the memos "simply instruct the contractors what they should be looking at for the coming year and come back to us with what their plans are." Bohne said Bechtel was asked to look at where money is allocated for activities that are priorities. "They basically gave us a priority list that says this stuff has to happen. The letter says they will give us opportunities to request funding. ... The letter doesn't say reduce the work force," Bohne said. This year, the Yucca Mountain Project operated with a $573 million budget, of which Bechtel received about $325 million. The company's five-year contract for the project expires in March but can be renewed. 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. Benson said it's possible the project could operate under a continuing resolution for the entire year. Besides Bechtel SAIC, its subcontractors and affiliates at the national laboratories, there are 33 more contractors whose employees total about 600. Most of those contracts are for technical, support and administrative services. They include one to Opportunity Village for custodial services. DOE employees on the project account for roughly another 100 workers. "Everybody gets different guidance depending on what their function is," Benson said. Confirmation of DOE's internal financial planning guidance instructions to contractors comes a week after officials at the U.S. Geological Survey said they were told to expect an 89 percent reduction next year in work it does for the Yucca Mountain Project. At the time, USGS officials speculated the cutbacks would result in layoffs and drive the agency off the project. The USGS supplies scientists to the Energy Department for research and monitoring tasks and has conducted nuclear waste studies at the site since 1979. Benson on Wednesday wouldn't respond to questions about any possible link between the proposed USGS budget cuts and e-mails that USGS scientists wrote between 1998 and 2000 expressing frustration with the project and discussing falsifying quality assurance documentation of their work. He has said, however, that the USGS wasn't being singled out. Instead, all parties on the Yucca Mountain Project team are undergoing the same scrutiny. Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault contributed to this report. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 49 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Better late than never Today: September 22, 2005 at 9:19:51 PDT LAS VEGAS SUN Sen. Robert Bennett has been a reliable supporter of the nuclear power industry, including backing the controversial construction of a high-level nuclear waste dump in Nevada. While Bennett says that he still believes in the value of nuclear power, the Republican senator from Utah has made a major break with the industry. In a speech on the Senate floor this week, Bennett said that he now opposes storing nuclear waste in Nevada. "However much the idea of a single repository may have made sense some decades ago, it's now clear that it does not make sense and we need to move in some future direction," he said. Bennett said he will team up with Nevada's congressional delegation, which is supporting efforts in Congress that would allow nuclear waste to be stored on site where it is generated. That would remove the option of shipping the waste thousands of mile s cross-country to Nevada's Yucca Mountain, which has been hobbled by regulatory and legal issues that could prevent it fro! m ever opening. Bennett's epiphany undoubtedly occurred on Sept. 9 when the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved the construction of a temporary above-ground nuclear waste repository on Indian tribal land about 45 miles away from Salt Lake City. The specter of 44,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste, in what the nuclear power industry has said would be a staging area to eventually ship man's deadliest waste to Nevada, finally made Bennett see the light. Ironically, in 2002 the Bush White House secured votes in favor of Yucca Mountain from Bennett and Utah's other senator, Orrin Hatch, with the guarantee that the administration would work to stop a temporary dump from happening there. Apparently, Bush's word to Utah's senators was just as good as the promise he made to Nevadans in 2000, when he pledged that "sound science" would guide him on Yucca Mountain. Shortly after being sworn in as president, Bush pushed approval of the Yucca Mountain project through Congress -- despite nearly 300 unanswered scientific questions about Yucca Mountain's suitability. It's also worth noting today that, in light of real doubts about Yucca Mountain ever opening, residents of Utah fear that their state could be a fallback option for the federal government, transforming the temporary dump into a permanent one. Of course, Bennett's opposition to Yucca Mountain would have been more welcome three years ago, when Nevada had the best opportunity to forever block Yucca Mountain. But rather than dwelling on the past, we hope that Bennett's change of heart results in others finding the courage to oppose Yucca Mountain, too. In particular, it would be encouraging to see the seeds of opposition take root among all Western members of Congress, especially since the West tends to be Washington's choice as a dumping ground for the nation's hazardous wastes. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 Salt Lake Tribune: Hatch is sticking with White House on Yucca Article Last Updated: 09/22/2005 07:51:00 AM Opposed: Huntsman Jr., Bennett, Matheson and Bishop align with Sen. Reid By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune Orrin Hatch Ship waste to Nevada Although it isolates him from Utah's governor and the rest of the congressional delegation, Sen. Orrin Hatch says he'll stick with the Bush administration in its effort to store nuclear waste in Nevada. He argues that remains the best bet to keep nuclear waste out of Utah's Skull Valley. "The future of Skull Valley is largely in the hands of the administration right now, so I don't believe kicking them in the teeth is in our best interest," Hatch said Wednesday. "It's the only real hope I see right now, because [Nevada Sen.] Harry Reid can't help us." Hatch's comments cemented his position a day after Utah Sen. Bob Bennett said that he erred in backing the White House push to bury the waste beneath Yucca Mountain in Nevada and endorsed Reid's proposal to leave the nuclear material at the reactors that produced it. Reid's plan, if it succeeds, would block a nuclear dump in Nevada and an effort by Private Fuel Storage to build a temporary storage site on the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation, 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. Hatch plans to introduce a bill today that would declare a moratorium on shipping nuclear waste to private storage sites such as Skull Valley. But it would leave open the door to Yucca Mountain. Efforts to store 77,000 tons of nuclear waste beneath Yucca Mountain are mired in legal and regulatory challenges and are years behind schedule. Until Yucca is built, PFS proposes storing 44,000 tons of waste above ground in steel casks on the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation. In 2002, Hatch and Bennett voted with the Bush administration to build Yucca Mountain after meeting with White House officials and being given assurances the federal government would not reimburse PFS for costs associated with its project. PFS, however, said it never planned to seek any such compensation. Members of Utah's delegation have said Reid was angered by the vote and has opposed Utah's efforts to block the PFS site out of spite for the Utah senators. "I do not feel good about Yucca Mountain, either," Hatch said, "but anybody who doesn't think Bob [Bennett] and I should've voted for Yucca Mountain just doesn't know the facts because we would have become the sole target here." Bennett said Tuesday that his vote for Yucca Mountain was based on good intentions, but that he made a mistake and he now believes the waste dump will never be built. He endorsed Reid's plan to keep the used nuclear fuel at reactors and reprocess it. Bennett joined a growing chorus of Utahns, including Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., Rep. Rob Bishop and Rep. Jim Matheson, who have embraced Reid's proposal. Rep. Chris Cannon also has warmed to the idea. "I'm not going to second-guess my colleagues, but one of us has to stay neutral on this and hopefully give the administration enough ammunition to resolve this process," Hatch said. Indeed, the Bush administration could intervene at several points to stop the PFS site: by vetoing a lease agreement between PFS and the tribe; by refusing to grant a right-of-way for a rail line to the site; or through Energy Department or Homeland Security actions. "Our only chance of getting rid of this is with the administration. It isn't with the Senate. It isn't with Harry," Hatch said. © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 51 Salt Lake Tribune: Opinion: Dispose of it Article Last Updated: 09/22/2005 01:24:01 AM We keep hearing of the need for nuclear storage to be made safe for at least the half-life of the material - some 10,000 years. What we need is a system to keep it safe for the next several years until science can find a way to dispose of it safely. We should focus on devising a safe and permanent disposal method. Even at 10,000 years the material is still extremely lethal. It would only cease to be lethal in approximately 250,000 years. Do we really believe Homo sapiens will still be around in 10,000 years, much less 250,000 years? Joel C. Everts Holladay © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 52 Paducah Sun: PACRO has offer to refine old nickel Paducah, Kentucky The refining and recycling of radioactive nickel has been banned by DOE, but a Canadian firm says it can remove all traces of radioactivity. By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656 Thursday, September 22, 2005 The American subsidiary of a Canadian firm wants to build a 50- to 100-job factory here to clean and recycle 9,700 tons of radiologically contaminated scrap nickel at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Tests verified by three independent labs have proven that Chemical Vapour Metal Refining USA can remove all traces of radioactive isotopes, said President Mike Hargett. CVMR is owned by a Toronto company called Chemical Vapour Deposition Manufacturing. The next big step is convincing the U.S. Department of Energy to lift a five-year, safety-related ban on removing contaminated scrap metal at any of its plants, Hargett said. DOE imposed the ban partly in response to those worried about contaminated nickel winding up in consumer products. "The resistance has basically been if it's contaminated at all, I don't want it,´" Hargett said, adding that CVMR nickel is purer than commercial nickel containing natural radiation. During a visit to the Paducah plant in August, Charles Anderson, principal deputy assistant secretary for DOE´s Office of Environmental Management, said a time frame had not been set on deciding the ban issue. But DOE has factored scrap metal recycling into its scope of work for a new cleanup contractor that will replace Bechtel Jacobs on Nov. 1. The new firm has not been named. Hargett said he expects DOE to eventually lift the ban and perhaps at first restrict nickel use to the nuclear industry. To reassure the public, CVMR wants to track products in which the nickel is used, he said. Hargett reviewed test results Wednesday with members of the Paducah Area Community Reuse Organization (PACRO), established by DOE to create jobs to offset those lost at the Paducah plant. PACRO director John Anderson said other recycling firms are interested in the nickel, but PACRO has been talking with CVMR for several years. The Paducah factory would have two small buildings, each about the size of the Paducah City Commission chambers where the PACRO meeting took place, Hargett said. One operation would grind the nickel small enough to be cleaned; the other would convert it into "ultra pure" metal more versatile than regular nickel, he said. Among the many potential industrial uses are for making lightweight, long-lasting nickel batteries and for nickel plating molds used in the automotive industry. Hargett said the Toronto plant is plating $20 bill molds for the U.S. Treasury to make them more durable. Although the chemistry is not new, CVMR has refined engineering and computerization to better control the process, Hargett said. The factory would recycle 1,000 to 2,000 tons of nickel a year, recovering 98 percent of the metal. The process also is effective for 34 different metals, so it could be used to recycle at least 38,000 tons of other scrap metal at DOE plants nationwide, including a large amount at Paducah, he said. The nickel alone has been valued at $8 million to $10 million. Hargett said markets for the clean metal are significant because the U.S. consumes 40 percent of the nickel worldwide but produces only 10 percent. ***************************************************************** 53 Newsday.com: DOE: Empty nuke waste container not damaged in train derailment By CAROLYN THOMPSON Associated Press Writer September 22, 2005, 2:16 PM EDT BUFFALO, N.Y. -- A rail car hauling a container used to transport used nuclear fuel derailed and tipped over Thursday during a collision involving two trains. The empty container was not damaged and there was no release of radiation, the Department of Energy said. The 320,000-pound container was en route to the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, from the DOE's Naval Reactors Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory, where it had been emptied of spent nuclear fuel from a Navy warship. The accident occurred about 1 a.m. in the CSX Frontier Railyard in Buffalo. Jim Carey, a spokesman for the DOE's Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Office, said the container had no visible damage and testing confirmed there was no release of radioactivity. "The rail car turned over and the container was with it and turned over, too," Carey said. "The container, which is kind of attached to the rail car, turned on its side." The cause of the collision was under investigation, CSX spokesman Gary Sease said. "The two trains were operating in the yard at Buffalo, one sideswiped another and led to the government car derailing and turning over on its side," Sease said. Both trains were moving at the time, he said. No one was hurt. Part of the Buffalo railyard was shut down Thursday as crews and cranes arrived. Representatives from the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory in Pittsburgh, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory in Schenectady and the Portsmouth shipyard were assisting CSX. Federal and state officials also were called. "The big thing now is to get the container righted and back on the rail car," Carey said. U.S. Rep. Tom Reynolds called for an immediate investigation by DOE, the National Nuclear Security Administration and CSX, and sought assurances that such an accident would not happen again. "Proper steps must be taken to ensure the safety of all hazardous cargo, especially in a heavily populated area such as Buffalo," Reynolds, R-N.Y., said. Reynolds said the investigation should address, among other things, the proximity of other rail traffic to nuclear waste containers and whether operational or security procedures were violated. The large tubular container has walls of 14-inch stainless steel and was built to withstand collisions, falls from bridges, fire and immersion in water, authorities said. "The massive container provides extensive shielding so the radiation levels outside the shipping container are extremely low, a very small fraction of the Department of Transportation limit," a DOE press release said. The Naval Reactors Facility receives about 20 shipments of spent fuel per year from five shipyards, according to Carey. "These shipments are essential to defueling and refueling the U.S. Navy's nuclear-powered warships," the DOE release said. About 750 containers have been shipped without a problem, said Carey, who called Thursday's mishap highly unusual. On the Net: Naval Reactors Facility: http://cleanup.inel.gov/otherareas/nrf/ Portsmouth Naval Shipyard: http://www.ports.navy.mil/ CSX: http://www.csx.com Copyright 2005 Newsday Inc. ***************************************************************** 54 UK: News & Star: Fears over N-waste expansion Published on 22/09/2005 BRITISH Nuclear Group may be stopped from burying more low-level nuclear waste at Drigg in West Cumbria. Cumbria County Council is worried that rising sea levels could wash the site away, perhaps within 500 years. And it says nobody is sure what radioactive material has been buried there. Councillors are being asked to block any planning applications to expand Drigg until these concerns are satisfied. A report from the council’s environmental planning manager, John Hetherington, quotes Environment Agency findings that the site is at risk from rising sea levels caused by global warming. The Agency says: “The destruction of the depository by coastal erosion means that disposal of long-lived low-level waste [there] might be creating undue burdens for future generations.†Mr Hetherington also says that, in the early years of its operation, record keeping at Drigg was “inadequateâ€. From the 1950s until the 1980s, waste was buried in open trenches. His report says: “Anecdotal evidence suggests that wastes inappropriate for disposal as short-term low-level waste are present. Remediation of [radioactive] hot spots may be needed if new disposals are to be authorised.†Drigg is Britain’s only low-level radioactive waste dump. It takes material not only from Sellafield and the nuclear industry but from hospitals, universities and defence establishments. British Nuclear Group, which runs the site, wants to open new storage vaults to increase capacity. The state-owned company argues that the threat from rising sea levels has been over stated. It wants to continue using Drigg until 2050. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, however, says that Drigg will be unable to cope with the two million cubic metres of low-level radioactive material created by decommissioning old nuclear facilities. The Government has started a review to find new sites for low-level waste. The first is likely to be at Dounreay in the far north of Scotland. ***************************************************************** 55 UK: News & Star: Fears over N-waste dump being washed away Published on 22/09/2005 By Julian Whittle BRITISH Nuclear Group may be stopped from burying more low-level nuclear waste at Drigg in West Cumbria. Cumbria County Council is worried that rising sea levels could wash the site away – perhaps within 500 years. And it says nobody is sure what radioactive material has been buried there. Councillors are being asked to block any planning applications to expand Drigg until these concerns are satisfied. A report from the council’s environmental planning manager, John Hetherington, quotes Environment Agency findings that the site is at risk from rising sea levels caused by global warming. The agency says: “The destruction of the depository by coastal erosion means that disposal of long-lived low-level waste [there] might be creating undue burdens for future generations.†Mr Hetherington also says that, in the early years of its operation, record keeping at Drigg was “inadequateâ€. From the Fifties until the Eighties, waste was buried in open trenches. His report says: “Anecdotal evidence suggests that wastes inappropriate for disposal as short-term low-level waste are present. Remediation of [radioactive] hot spots may be needed if new disposals are to be authorised.†Drigg is Britain’s only low-level radioactive waste dump. It takes material not only from Sellafield and the nuclear industry but from hospitals, universities and defence establishments. British Nuclear Group, which runs the site, wants to open new storage vaults to increase capacity. The state-owned company argues that the threat from rising sea levels has been over stated. It wants to continue using Drigg until 2050. ***************************************************************** 56 NRC: Portland General Electric Independent Spent Fuel Storage FR Doc 05-18919 [Federal Register: September 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 183)] [Notices] [Page 55634-55635] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22se05-59] Installation Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding a Proposed Exemption AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-1179; Fax number: (301) 415-8555; E-mail: . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from the provisions of 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3), to the Portland General Electric Company (PGE, or the licensee). The requested exemption (in conjunction with a conforming license amendment) would relieve PGE from the requirement to submit an annual radioactive effluent report for the Trojan Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). PGE submitted the exemption request by letter dated July 6, 2005, in which it also requested an amendment to the Trojan ISFSI license. Specifically, the amendment requested the deletion of item c. and last sentence of item b., Section 5.5.2 of Technical Specification; ``Radioactive Effluent Control Program'' (Appendix A to License No. SNM-2509). The licensee is currently storing spent nuclear fuel at the Trojan ISFSI on the site of the decommissioned Trojan Nuclear Power Plant in Rainier, Oregon. Environmental Assessment (EA) I. Identification of Proposed Action Portland General Electric (PGE) has requested an exemption and a conforming license amendment to obtain relief from the requirement to submit an annual radioactive effluent release report for the Trojan ISFSI in accordance with 10 CFR 72.44(d). The regulation requires a licensee to include Technical Specifications (TS) regarding radioactive effluents. Specifically, 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) requires that an annual report be submitted to the NRC specifying the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to the environment in liquid and in gaseous effluents during the previous 12 months of ISFSI operation. The proposed action before the NRC is whether to grant the exemption. In addition to the exemption, PGE has requested a conforming license amendment which will make two deletions from the Trojan ISFSI TS, Appendix A to the Special Nuclear Material License No. 2509 (SNM- 2509). Section 5.5.2, Radioactive Effluent Control Program, item c., requires an annual report to be submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3). Section 5.5.2, item b., in the last sentence, of the Appendix A to the License No. SNM-2509 states: ``The Trojan ISFSI may be included in the environmental monitoring program for the Trojan Nuclear Plant.'' The amendment would delete these two TS. The license amendment request is categorically excluded from the need for environmental review under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10)(ii) and 10 CFR 51.22(c)(11). II. Need for the Proposed Action The requirements of 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) impose certain regulatory obligations, with associated costs, on the licensee. Granting the requested exemption will relieve the licensee from the requirement to submit an annual radioactive effluent release report pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3). The requirement to submit an annual radioactive effluent monitoring report is not needed for this facility in its current configuration and is an unnecessary administrative burden. Thus, the licensee will not have to incur the costs associated with preparing and submitting an annual radioactive effluent release report. III. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action In its Safety Evaluation Report related to the ISFSI license (Safety Evaluation [[Page 55635]] Report Amendment No. 2 to the SNM-2509 License, October 23, 2002), the staff found that there are no credible scenarios by which liquid or gaseous effluents could be released from the dry shielded canister. The licensee further stated that any concerns over small quantities of gaseous or liquid effluent that may be produced during cask loading and transfer decontamination activities are no longer relevant, since all the spent fuel has been transferred to the ISFSI, and that the Holtec International (Holtec) Multi-Purpose Canister (MPC) used at the Trojan ISFSI is a passive system which, by design, produces no gaseous or liquid effluent. The staff has determined that the proposed action would not endanger life or property. Further, the staff concludes that there is reasonable assurance that the proposed exemption will have no impact on off-site doses. The proposed action would not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes would be made to the passive system design resulting in the generation of effluents during fuel storage, and there would be no increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Additionally, the proposed action would have no significant non- radiological impacts. IV. Alternative to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the exemption (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Approval or denial of the exemption would result in no change in the environmental impacts. Therefore, the environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. V. Agencies and Persons Consulted The NRC staff prepared this environmental assessment (EA); no other sources were used. On August 29, 2005, the staff discussed the EA by phone call with Mr. Adam Bless of the State of Oregon Department of Energy. The State of Oregon stated to the NRC that they had no comments related to the EA or the Finding of no Significant Impact. The NRC staff has determined that consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not required for this specific exemption, which will not affect listed species or critical habitat. The NRC staff has also determined that the proposed action is not a type of activity having the potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. VI. Conclusions The staff has reviewed the exemption request submitted by PGE and has determined that relieving the licensee from the requirement to submit an annual radioactive effluent release report pursuant to 10 CFR 72.44(d)(3) would have no significant impact on the environment. Finding of No Significant Impact The environmental impacts of the proposed action have been reviewed in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based upon the foregoing EA, the NRC finds that the proposed action of granting the exemption will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption is not warranted. Further Information In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of NRC's ``Rules of Practice,'' final NRC records and documents regarding this proposed action, including the exemption request dated July 6, 2005, are publically available in the records component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). These documents may be inspected at NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room at . These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. 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 . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of September 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert J. Lewis, Chief, Licensing Section, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 05-18919 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P b ***************************************************************** 57 AP Wire: S.C. county sues Energy Department over SRS plant Posted on Thu, Sep. 22, 2005 JACOB JORDAN Associated Press COLUMBIA, S.C. - Aiken County has sued Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman claiming his agency failed to comply with federal law in the construction of a plant that would convert weapons-grade plutonium into fuel for commercial nuclear reactors. A defense spending bill in 2003 put the Energy Department on a strict timetable to have a mixed-oxide (MOX) plant operational by 2009 at the Savannah River Site, which is partly located in Aiken County. But construction of the plant has been held up because of complications that have delayed construction of a facility in Russia. "If that's the case, then they shouldn't have started moving the plutonium in here," said Aiken County Councilman Chuck Smith, who is concerned the material is being stored at the Savannah River Site with no plan to move it out. "We're not trying to take them (Energy officials) on, we're asking them to do what they said they were going to do." The conversion to mixed-oxide fuel is a key part of the Bush administration's effort to safeguard excess weapons-grade plutonium held by both the United States and Russia. Under an agreement with Russia, the United States would blend 34 tons of U.S. plutonium no longer needed for warheads with depleted uranium. "If the project is more than 12 months behind the original 2003 construction schedule, the DOE secretary must submit to Congress a corrective action plan by August 15 that will get the project back on track," according to a statement released by the county. "The secretary's 2005 report did not state whether construction was more than 12 months late, but it is clear from the report and the original plan that the project is more than 12 months behind." The lawsuit, filed Wednesday, asks the Energy Department to send Congress a plan that would ensure the MOX plant is operating by 2009 and said plutonium shipments to the site should be suspended until construction is back on track. The lawsuit also asks the secretary to send Congress a list of options for removing plutonium shipped to SRS after April 15, 2002. National Nuclear Security Administration spokesman Bryan Wilkes said he hadn't seen the lawsuit and couldn't talk about it, but the agency would comply with federal law. Previous litigation against the Energy Department has had little effect. Former Gov. Jim Hodges sued the agency unsuccessfully in 2002 to block plutonium shipments because he was concerned the material would be permanently stored at the site. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. and a steadfast MOX supporter, said this summer that a tentative agreement had been reached between the United States and Russia and he looked forward to the program getting back on track. Graham "wants to see the program fully funded, construction started and the MOX plant up and running at full capacity as soon as possible," his spokesman Kevin Bishop said in a statement. "It's a point that he has made clear to DOE." The lawsuit came as a surprise to some people because of the area's reliance on SRS as an economic engine. Some environmentalists and nuclear nonproliferation have opposed the MOX plan, but the county's lawsuit is a rare move. Mal McKibben, the executive director of the Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness in Aiken, said the site has had local support since it was built in the 1950s. "I think the lawsuit is a wasted effort. DOE is doing everything they can do to proceed with the MOX plan," McKibben said. "It's kind of like biting the hand that feeds you." ***************************************************************** 58 lamonitor.com: Lab bidders set up shop in LA The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor The two finalists bidding to run Los Alamos National Laboratory are opening offices on the Hill to oversee the transition to new management next year. University of California officials said they would announce the board members of their new limited liability partnership with Bechtel Corporation at a meeting in Los Alamos on Oct. 6. At a board of regents meeting in San Francisco on Wednesday, UC President Robert C. Dynes said, "We will do everything we can to make (the transition) as smooth as possible." And if the UC-Bechtel team wins the contract, he said, they would do everything they could within the letter of the law to mirror UC pensions for the new entity's employees. Speaking by phone from Albuquerque, Rod Geer, a spokesman for the Los Alamos Alliance, LLC, said the team led by Lockheed-Martin and the University of Texas team has also obtained office space in the downtown area of Los Alamos. "The area of emphasis right now is working hard to prepare for a smooth transition period at the lab, if we are selected," he said. "A smooth transition is very important for the employees of LANL and the northern New Mexico community." Three board members were named at the UC regents meeting for the UC-Bechtel limited liability corporation, known as Los Alamos National Security, LLC. Gerald L. Parsky, current chair of the UC Board of Regents, will be the chairman of the board of LANS. Parsky heads the Aurora Capital Group in Los Angeles. He was an assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury during the '70s and serves on a number of civic and academic boards. Joe Mullinix, UC senior vice president of business and finance, and UC San Diego Chancellor Marye Anne Fox were also named as members of the board of LANS. The board of regents will have power of approval over UC's appointments to LANS, according to discussion during the meeting. Both teams underwent daylong presentations earlier this month, called the "orals." The tests included evaluation by the National Nuclear Security Administration procurement board, based on real-time communication and problem-solving skills of the proposed senior management rosters of the two contending groups. "DOE and NNSA did a very good job of organizing and running the day-long event. Geer said. "The questions were described as piercing and very professional." Parsky, who participated in the exercise with the LANS group, said they had tried to communicate on behalf of the university the important contributions that it has made to national security in the last 60 years. "We recognized that things need to change," he said. "I think we are prepared to take the management of this lab to a new level." Jeff Berger, a Bechtel employee and spokesperson for LANS, said this morning that the entity has an office in the Research Park, a website (lansllc.com), and a telephone number, 663-5340. NNSA expects to announce the award on or before Dec. 1, and the new management team is supposed to take over before June 1. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 59 lamonitor.com: LANL tests fell behind schedule The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor A report by the Inspector General of the Department of Energy has revisited the subject of a nuclear test facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, finding once again that the hydrodynamic test program has not been making schedule. The review found that only six of 15 hydrotests scheduled from October 2002 through the end of September 2004 were completed on time, that six of them had been delayed up to two years, and that three were not completed as of April 2005. A reply by the National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees the weapons complex, said that the report understates the progress that has been made and that the number of experiments was not the most important measure. A prepared statement by the laboratory expressed appreciation for the reports' recommendations as well as NNSA's endorsement of the program contained in the reply. "The laboratory, in full cooperation with the NNSA Los Alamos and Albuquerque site offices, has been implementing these recommendations over the past two years," said LANL spokesperson Kevin Roark in a prepared statement, pointing to several recent tests that were considered successful. The hydrotest program is part of the national Stockpile Stewardship Program. Experiments at the still-unfinished Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test Facility (DARHT) at LANL provide diagnostic information on weapons codes and the effects of aging on the nuclear stockpile. A previous report in May 2003 disclosed that despite the laboratory's formal dedication on April 22, 2003, the opening was still 15 months in the future. The IG explained then that the lab's definition of "completion" did not include a lengthy period of commissioning and criticized budgeting maneuvers that the laboratory strongly denied at the time. After that report, NNSA acknowledged that resources had not been well allocated or managed and created a National Hydrotest Program to improve the overall management. A new issue raised in the current IG audit concerned the "mitigation strategy" for containing and cleaning up the test site, which the IG called "not the most efficient." A tent structure is constructed over the firing pad and filled with aqueous foam to limit dispersal of materials such as beryllium, depleted uranium and lead into the environment, and cleaning all this up takes about two months between tests, the report said. NNSA agreed that the containment techniques "may not be the most ideal," adding that "new concepts that promise easier cleanup and faster turnaround are being explored." © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 60 DOE: Office of Science; Biological and Environmental Research FR Doc 05-18942 [Federal Register: September 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 183)] [Notices] [Page 55619-55620] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22se05-38] Advisory Committee AGENCY: Department of Energy, (DOE). ACTION: Notice of open teleconference meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference meeting of the Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee. Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Friday, October 7, 2005, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. E.D.T. ADDRESSES: Participants may call Ms. Joanne Corcoran at (301) 903-6488 to receive a call-in number by October 5, 2005. Public participation is welcomed; however, the number of teleconference lines is limited and available on a first come basis. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. David Thomassen, Designated Federal Official, Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, SC-23/Germantown Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-1290, (301) 903-9817 or david.thomassen@science.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Meeting: To provide advice on a [[Page 55620]] continuing basis to the Director, Office of Science of the Department of Energy, on the many complex scientific and technical issues that arise in the development and implementation of the Biological and Environmental Research Program. Tentative Agenda: Discussion of BERAC subcommittee report on the review of the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory. See complete BERAC Charge dated November 18, 2004. Discussion of BERAC subcommittee report on the value of the Genomics: GTL Facility for the Production of Proteins and Molecular Tags. See complete BERAC Charge dated August 15, 2005. Discussion of BERAC subcommittee report on the advantages and disadvantages of establishing more than one program in a particular technology at one of the Department's light sources and in particular the potential rationale for supporting the further development of the X4A and X4C beam lines at the National Synchrotron Light Source. See complete BERAC Charge dated January 14, 2005. New business Public Comment Copies of the Charge letters may be found at http://www.sc.doe.gov/ober/berac/charges.html. All BERAC reports, once approved, are posted on the BERAC Web site at http://www.science.doe.gov/ober/berac/Reports.html . Public Participation: The teleconference meeting is open to the public. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact David Thomassen at the address or telephone number listed above. You must make your request for an oral statement at least five business days before the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10- minute rule. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying within 30 days at the Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, IE-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Issued in Washington, DC on September 16, 2005. Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee, Management Officer. [FR Doc. 05-18942 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************