*****************************************************************
12/22/05 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 13.297
*****************************************************************
   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 NY Newsday: NATO: Russia resisting efforts to secure WMD
2 IPS-English MIDDLE EAST-NUKE PROGRAMME: EU dialogue should
3 IRNA: Iran, EU3 determined to settle nuclear crisis - Akhoundzadeh -
4 AFP: Iran sees 'diplomatic victory' in nuclear talks - 
5 AFP: EU and Iran restart nuclear talks and agree to more 
6 Xinhua: S. Korean FM urges DPRK to implement joint statement   
7 Japan Times: Pyongyang talks to push three topics
8 US: Beaver County Times: Editorial - Lap dog
9 Crisscross: Yokosuka mayor urges Pentagon to give up plan to 
10 Xinhua: Tax breaks offered for energy industry   
11 Japan Times: China posing a threat: Aso Buildup of military said wor
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
12 US: NRC: NRC Determined Potential Flooding at Kewaunee Nuclear Plant
13 Helsingin Sanomat: Energy report: no need for sixth nuclear plant
14 US: Duluth News Tribune: Wisconsin PSC releases documents on contact
15 HindustanTimes.com: No favours to US firms in N-contracts 
16 Daily Yomiuri: Snow knocks out power in Niigata, Kansai area
17 BBC: Incident at nuclear power station
18 US: NRC: Proposed Generic Communication Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Circ
19 US: NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Edwin I. Hatch Nu
20 US: NRC: DPR-66 and NPF-73, NPF-3 and NPF-58]
21 Scotsman.com: Blair urged to drop nuclear option
22 US: Times Herald-Record: More radioactive water found near Indian Po
23 AU ABC: Study 'exposes flaws' in anti-nuclear energy debate. 
24 US: PR: NRC Grants License Renewal for We Energies' Point Beach Nucl
25 US: Independent Weekly: Nuke plant guards under investigation
26 Guardian Unlimited: Blair faces organised rebellion on nuclear issue
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
27 US: [NYTr] Growing Depleted Uranium Scandal; Heads Roll at VA
28 MSNBC.com: What 'Mrs. Anthrax' Told Me - 
29 US: WHO TV: Most plant workers receive compensation
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
30 US: Gallup Independent: Company increases uranium leases
31 US: Columbian: Opinion - Hanford Funded
32 US: Bradenton Herald: Tallevast teaches us importance of medical his
33 RGJ.com: Anti-Yucca tactics raising project costs
34 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Kudos to Bishop, Huntsman
35 US: Deseret News: Nuclear waste shift may aid PFS 
36 US: Sify: Govt proposes to set up uranium plant                 
37 Whitehaven News: Sellafield strike threat put on hold
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
38 [NukeNet] Business as Usual: Nuclear Watch and Tri-Valley
39 Santa Fe New Mexican: The new LANL contract     
40 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Energy Department opposes elk hunts on H
41 Hanford News: PNNL gets 15 more months for move; Deadline to vacate 
42 Hanford News: Gregoire's proposal includes science lab; Pullman work
43 Hanford News: No elk hunts, DOE insists
44 Hanford News: Ecology chief says state may use 'big hammer'; Officia
45 CorpWatch: Bechtel Fox in the Nuclear Henhouse
46 SF Chronicle: Rocky 63-year relationship for UC and Los Alamos conti
47 SF Chron: UC WINS FIGHT FOR LOS ALAMOS / REACTION / Opinions split o
48 SF Chron: UC WINS FIGHT FOR LOS ALAMOS / THE DEAL / University beats
49 SF Chronicle: Los Alamos employees seek improvements from new bosses
50 SF Chron: UC WINS FIGHT FOR LOS ALAMOS / THE IMPLICATIONS / Bechtel
51 Rocky Mountain News: Deer, coyotes, owls outnumber people at former 
52 lamonitor.com: Details scarce on contract decision 
53 lamonitor.com: Contract award long process 
54 Rocky Mountain News: Landfill plan gets state's OK 
55 Albuquerque Tribune: Some ask whether UC deserves trust for Los Alam
56 Albuquerque Tribune: It's a new day for Los Alamos
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 NY Newsday: NATO: Russia resisting efforts to secure WMD

Newsday.com   
                        		     
From the Chicago Tribune                
 
By Alex Rodriguez Tribune foreign correspondent
 	 	
 	December 22, 2005

MOSCOW --        

Russia's reluctance to allow the U.S. access to nuclear and 
biological weapons sites severely hinders efforts to secure 
weapons-grade nuclear material and biological pathogens from 
terrorists and rogue states, according to a new report released 
by NATO.

 The U.S. and other Western governments have poured billions of 
dollars into safeguarding Russia's nuclear, chemical and 
biological weapons stockpiles from terrorists and corrupt 
insiders.

The effort has met with some success; more than 6,500 Russian 
strategic nuclear warheads have been secured, the country's first 
chemical-weapons disposal site is working, and three others are 
under construction, wrote NATO General Rapporteur Pierre Claude 
Nolin in his report to the organization's Parliamentary Assembly.

 `Cold War mind-sets'

 However, the Russian government continues to deny U.S. officials 
access to many nuclear warhead stockpiles, weapons-grade nuclear 
material storage sites and biological facilities, preventing the 
U.S. from devising security upgrades, according to the report, 
released last week.

 "Russia's reluctance to allow full access to a number of 
facilities can only be explained as a relic of Cold War 
mind-sets," Nolin wrote.

 Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the U.S. and
Russia have been working together to safeguard Russia's
stockpiles of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin discussed
the topic at their summit in the Slovakian capital, Bratislava,
in February, pledging to "bear a special responsibility for the
security of nuclear weapons and fissile material, in order to
ensure that there is no possibility such weapons or materials
would fall into terrorist hands."

 But the summit failed to address Russia's reluctance to grant
U.S. inspectors access to sites where nuclear weapons,
weapons-grade nuclear material and biological weapons are
stored. During the summit, Russian Defense Minister Sergei
Ivanov flatly stated that "inspections are out of the question."

 As a result, security at Russian military sites where plutonium
and weapons-grade uranium is stored has yet to be evaluated by
American inspection teams, Nolin said. Of the estimated 185 tons
of plutonium and 1,100 tons of weapons-grade uranium stored in
Russia, only half have received security upgrades.

 Defense analysts say weapons-grade nuclear material is highly
coveted by terrorists and criminal groups, because amounts as
small as 17 pounds of plutonium or 55 pounds of weapons-grade
uranium can be used to build a nuclear bomb.

 Russian authorities also have been reluctant to allow U.S.
inspectors to size up security at many of the country's research
laboratories once part of the Soviet Union's vast biological
weapons complex, Nolin wrote. At its peak, the program employed
more than 60,000 workers at 55 sites that produced a range of
weaponized pathogens that cause diseases, including anthrax,
smallpox, brucellosis and glanders.

 Aware of how lax security is at many former biological weapons
sites, Russian authorities worry that U.S. inspections of those
sites could produce information leaks that ultimately could help
terrorists target those locations, said Vladimir Orlov, a
nuclear security expert with the PIR Center, a Moscow think tank.

 "The Russian government feels uncertain and vulnerable about
its biological complex facilities," Orlov said. "But the [NATO]
report is right in saying that Russian authorities haven't put a
high enough priority on securing biological sites."

 The U.S., Russia and other members of the Group of 8 leading
industrialized countries have fared better when it comes to
destruction of Russia's stockpile of 40,000 metric tons of
chemical weapons--the world's largest. Work has started at a
disposal plant in the south-central city of Gorny to destroy
mustard gas and lewisite, both blistering agents.

 Construction at three other disposal plants has begun,
including a facility at Shchuchye that will destroy Russia's
vast nerve-gas stockpile. Russia has 32,500 metric tons of
sarin, VX and soman nerve gas stored in shells, rockets and
bombs at five sites across the country. This disposal plant is
expected to go into operation in 2008.

 Worrisome question

 However, Russia the U.S. and other Western governments have not
tackled the question of tactical nuclear weapons, which are
worrisome because of their small size and portability, according
to the report.

 "Tactical nuclear weapons could cause destruction far more
severe than the Sept. 11, 2001, assault," Nolin wrote.

 Nolin quoted estimates from the Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists that put the number of tactical nuclear warheads at
3,400, with several thousand more warehoused in reserved or
retired status. Last year, Russian authorities said they had
destroyed more than half their tactical nuclear weapons but they
have not provided any concrete data on the reductions or on
numbers of existing tactical nuclear arms, Nolin said. Likewise,
the U.S. has not formally declared the number and location of
its tactical nuclear weapons.

 "Both sides should exchange data on the number of tactical
nuclear weapons and the places they are deployed," said Vladimir
Dvorkin, a nuclear security expert at the Russian Academy of
Sciences' Center for International Security.

 Nolin suggested that Russia might be more willing to cooperate
if the U.S. and European governments ratcheted up Moscow's
involvement in the creation and planning of nuclear security
initiatives. In turn, Russia could help its case by assuming a
larger share of the cost of nuclear security, he said.

 Dvorkin agreed, adding that Russian authorities should devote a
portion of windfall oil profits to securing nuclear, chemical
and biological weapons sites.

 "Russia is acting like a patient, with a lot of doctors
hustling around it," Dvorkin said. "The government's decision to
allocate $200 million a year is virtually nothing compared to
the billions of dollars allocated by the Global Partnership [a
G8 coalition aimed at improving nuclear security]. One cannot
call this situation a real partnership."

 ajrodriguez@tribune.com

 Copyright Newsday Inc.
*****************************************************************
 2 IPS-English MIDDLE EAST-NUKE PROGRAMME: EU dialogue should
 
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:32:02 -0800

<x-flowed>
  AF WD EN KP IF MD YE
MIDDLE EAST-NUKE PROGRAMME: EU dialogue should also include Israel
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)

ABU DHABI, Dec. 22 (WAM) - A United Arab Emirates (UAE) newspaper today
called for the enlargement of the dialogue's scope on nuclear programmes to
include Israel. It is the only way to turn the Middle East into a nuclear
free- zone, it said.

    Commenting editorially on the issue, the Sharjah-based 'The Gulf Today'
said: Closely on the heels of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) call that
the Middle East should be made a nuclear-free zone, the European Union has
begun re-engaging Iran in nuclear talks.

    While the six-nation grouping expressed concern over radiation
contamination of the Gulf coast by Iran's Bushehr reactor, the EU worry is
about nuclear proliferation in the volatile region.

    While the EU is not demonstrating the same concern over Israel's nuclear
arsenal -- the only country in the region to have weapons of mass
destruction -- it is nevertheless important Tehran agrees to accept norms on
inspection of its nuclear facilities. Such scrutiny by the International
Atomic Energy Agency would help address some of the concerns of the Gulf
countries.

    The EU is not optimistic that Tehran would readily agree to enrichment of
its uranium in Russia. But the negotiators are willing to continue the talks
as engaging Iran is crucial to ensure the security and safety of the region
from possible nuclear fallout.

    Even if there are differences, shutting Iran out of the dialogue is no
solution to the current problem.

    With patience the EU should persevere with both the carrot and stick so
that the international community would have confidence that Tehran would
accept the IAEA norms. Hence the importance of sticking with the dialogue
after it was called off in August.

    Now Iran is under pressure to fulfil the IAEA stipulations on uranium
conversion. It should join the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and pledge
on the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme.

    If the Iran-EU dialogue were to fail, the issue would be referred to the
UN Security Council for sanctions. To avert a showdown Tehran should address
concerns that it is secretly developing nuclear bombs. The IAEA and the EU-3
of Britain, France and Germany are worried about Iran's purported plans to
enrich uranium to arms-grade level.

    Tehran insists on complete nuclear fuel cycle and began uranium ore
processing at its Isfahan plant that led the EU to call off the talks. Now
the resumed dialogue can succeed only if Tehran is willing to climb down
from its rigid stand. Referral to the Security Council could complicate the
situation if that were to be followed by sanctions.

    Russia, which is constructing a $1billion nuclear facility in Iran,
should join China to leverage their diplomatic clout with Tehran to avoid a
collision course. As the GCC said, Iran should unequivocally commit to
peaceful uses of nuclear energy. For that it should allow its facilities to
be inspected by the IAEA and sign the NPT.

    For the talks to succeed, Israel should be taken on board and enlarge the
dialogue's scope. The Jewish state should abandon its nuclear ambiguity. It
is the only way to turn the Middle East into a nuclear free zone, the paper
concluded. (WAM)





  

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 3 IRNA: Iran, EU3 determined to settle nuclear crisis - Akhoundzadeh -
      
 Dec 22, IRNA                                                                                                           

Iran's Permanent Representative to the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohammad-Mehdi Akhoundzadeh said that Iran
and Europe were both determined to settle the Iran nuclear issue.

 In an exclusive interview with IRNA here Wednesday night after
the conclusion of two rounds of talks between Iran and the
European troika, he said that both sides in the talks clearly
manifested their strong determination to continue the
negotiations next month so that the issue can finally be laid to
rest.

 He said the new framework for talks and procedure for
interaction by the two sides will be determined during the next
round of talks to be held in January.

 He said the new negotiating team had a fresh message to the EU3
negotiators that calls on them to act on the preposition that
uranium enrichment activities will be conducted inside Iran and
at the same time avoid collateral issues during the talks.

 Describing the talks on Wednesday as "positive," he further
said that both sides endeavored to avoid raising issues which
could exacerbate tensions and instead concentrated on creating a
positive atmosphere for talks.

 According to Akhoundzadeh, the Iranian delegation found the EU3
proposal last summer "unacceptable" and an "insult" to the
Iranian nation. The proposal was for Iran to conduct the final
stage of its uranium enrichment in foreign soil.

 The Iranian negotiating team is headed by the Supreme National
Security Council Deputy for International Affairs Javad Vaeedi.

 SNSC Deputy for Economic Affairs Mohammad Nahavandian, Iran
Atomic Energy Organization (IAEO) Deputy for International
Affairs Mohammad Saeedi, Iranian Permanent Representative to the
Int'l Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohammad-Mehdi Akhoundzadeh
and Deputy Director-General for Political and International
Affairs of the Foreign Ministry Ali-Asghar Soltaniyeh are the
members of the team.

 On the other hand, the European team is made up of 12 senior
experts and managers from the foreign ministries of Britain,
France and Germany.

 Nuclear talks between Iran and Europe were suspended in August
by the European side following Iran's announcement that it was
resuming uranium enrichment at its uranium conversion facility
in Isfahan.

 The second and final round of nuclear negotiations between Iran
and the EU3 started behind closed doors at Iran's representative
office in the Vienna-based International Center at 15:30 hours
local time (18:00 hours Tehran time) on Wednesday.

*****************************************************************
 4 AFP: Iran sees 'diplomatic victory' in nuclear talks - 

 Thu Dec 22,10:48 AM ET 		 	 

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranhas voiced satisfaction at the
revival of talks with the European Union" /> European Unionover
its controversial nuclear activities, saying the deadlock has
been broken without Tehran being called on to suspend sensitive
fuel work. 

 However, EU and Iranian officials maintained that the two sides
remain far apart, with Iran insisting on its right to make
nuclear fuel and the West fearful that this could be used to
manufacture atom bombs. 

"The impasse over the nuclear file has been broken" and "from
now on we sense a clear perspective for arriving at a
compromise," said Hossein Entezami, spokesman for the Supreme
National Security Council which is in charge of Iran's nuclear
projects. 

"The very fact that the dangerous process, which began with the
resolution of September 24th, has stopped constitutes a
diplomatic victory," Entezami said in comments published
Thursday by the moderate daily newspaper Shargh. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic
Energy Agencyhad on September 24 adopted a resolution leaving
the door open to sending Iran before the UN Security Council
over its refusal to keep up a freeze on uranium conversion
activities, which it resumed in August. 

Also in August, European negotiators from Britain, France and
Germany -- the EU-3 -- decided to break off negotiations with
Iran, but a fresh round of talks resumed Wednesday with the
parties agreeing to continue discussions next month in Vienna. 

Earlier negotiations had failed over Iran's refusal to accept
European offers of trade and economic incentives in exchange for
a halt to enrichment activities. 

As the fresh talks opened, Tehran reiterated what it described
as its right to uranium enrichment, which it had suspended as a
goodwill gesture in October 2003, under the provisions of the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

"The message of the Iranian delegation is to insist on the need
for a precise calendar for resuming enrichment inside Iran,"
Iranian negotiator Mohammad Mehdi Akundzadeh told the official
state news agency IRNA. 

Iran's Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki also apparently
rejected a Russian proposal that Iran to do some fuel work at
home while enriching uranium only on Russian territory to keep
this strategic activity out of Iran. 

"It is normal that when we speak of enrichment for the
fabrication of nuclear fuel that this means enrichment
activities and the nuclear fuel cycle on our own territory," the
foreign minister said Wednesday. 

If talks fail, the EU, backed by the United States, has said it
will take Iran to the UN Security Council for possible
sanctions. Iran has threatened to retaliate against such a move. 

Western members of the UN nuclear watchdog held off from
demanding that Iran be sent before the Security Council in
November, in order to leave negotiators another chance. 

Entezami, in his remarks published Thursday, cited another
example of what he described as evidence that Iran's stance had
shown results. 

"On the eve of the November meeting, some politicians advised us
to stop uranium conversion at Isfahan (nuclear facility) to
avoid a harsh reaction from the international community,"
Entezami said. 

"But our principled position gave results and the Europeans
agreed to return to the negotiating table without any
preconditions. This constitutes a diplomatic success." 

Copyright � 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 5 AFP: EU and Iran restart nuclear talks and agree to more 

 Thu Dec 22, 3:36 AM ET 		 	 

VIENNA (AFP) - The European Union" /> European Unionand Iran" />
Iranrestarted talks over Western concerns that Tehran seeks
nuclear weapons and agreed to meet again in January but
acknowledged that wide differences remained. 

 With Iran insisting on its right to make nuclear fuel, and the
West fearful that this could be used to manufacture atom bombs,
the two sides are far apart, EU and Iranian officials said after
five hours of talks geared towards resuming formal negotiations
that broke off in August. 

The EU had in those negotiations offered trade and security
incentives for Iran to abandon uranium enrichment. Enrichment
makes fuel for power reactors but also the raw material for atom
bombs. 

French foreign ministry political director Stanislas de
Laboulaye told AFP that the Iranian and EU positions enunciated
Wednesday in Vienna "are not the same. We repeated our positions
and the Iranians repeated theirs." 

An EU diplomat said negotiators from Britain, France and
Germany, the so-called EU-3, warned the Iranians not to take any
steps "between now and January" which are considered enrichment
work, even if they fall short of actual enrichment. 

Iran is reported to be considering taking such steps. 

There should be no movement "in the manufacturing of centrifuge
components and research on centrifuges," the machines that
enrich uranium, the diplomat said. 

Wednesday's meeting came at a time of growing tension. Iran's
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has raised an international outcry
through a series of statements against Israel" /> Israel,
notably his remark in October that the Jewish state should be
wiped off the map. 

The EU-3 are threatening to take Iran before the UN Security
Council for possible sanctions but the new effort towards
dialogue was greeted by one European diplomat as a sign that "at
least it looks like the Iranians want negotiations." 

"Both sides agreed to consult their respective leaderships with
the view of holding another round of talks in January with the
aim of agreeing on a framework for (formal) negotiations," De
Laboulaye told reporters. 

The White House said Wednesday that it backed the joint
diplomatic efforts. 

"Our position is that we support the European 3 in their
discussions with Iran. And we'll see where those discussions
go," spokesman Scott McClellan said. 

But one State Department official in Washington voiced
exasperation about interrupting talks until January. 

"Remember, the objective of this diplomatic exercise is not
'talk to talk,' it is negotiations to achieve an end. On that,
everybody is unified," the official said, asking not to be
named. 

He said the Iranians "are going to have to overcome the
presumption that they are not interested in negotiations. ...
They have not give any indication to date that they are
interested in resuming the talks in a serious manner." 

The United States charges that Iran is hiding the development of
nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian atomic program
that Tehran says is peaceful. 

In Vienna, Iranian negotiator Javad Vaidi said the new talks
would also be in the Austrian capital. He said he hoped the two
sides would have "more opportunity" to move towards agreement. 

Wednesday's talks were the first contact between the EU and Iran
since August, when Iran resumed uranium conversion, thus
torpedoing the EU-Iran negotiations. 

Conversion is the first step in making enriched uranium. 

Tehran claims it has the right to enrich under the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, even if it is currently suspending
enrichment as a confidence-building measure. 

Iran insists on the right to enrich uranium on its own soil,
Iran's Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki said in Tehran,
apparently rejecting a Russian proposal that Iran to do some
fuel work at home while enriching uranium only on Russian
territory to keep this strategic activity out of Iran. 

An EU diplomat said the divide between the West and Iran was so
great that it "was unclear how there could be a compromise." 

De Laboulaye said the talks were "open and frank." A diplomat
said this meant the discussion was "heated." 

"The Iranians said they wanted to pursue their nuclear program.
The Europeans said they could do this in Russia but then the
Iranians said foreign countries could do joint ventures in Iran
in order to make sure that Iranian enrichment was not
dangerous," the diplomat said. 

"The real diplomatic work at the moment is trying to bring the
Russians on board so we can take this to the Security Council,"
another EU-3 diplomat said. 

But Russia, which has a veto on the Council, is building Iran's
first nuclear reactor and says there is no sign Iran seeks
atomic weapons. 	 		 			
 							 				 					 					 					 					 					 					 					 					
Copyright � 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 6 Xinhua: S. Korean FM urges DPRK to implement joint statement   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-12-21 16:25:24   

    SEOUL, Dec. 21 (Xinhuanet) -- South Korea's foreign minister
urged Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) Wednesday to
carry out its commitment to abandoning its nuclear program. 

    Ban Ki-moon said in his weekly press briefing that
Pyongyang's announcement of a plan to build light-water reactors
to meet energy demands goes counter to the spirit of the joint
statement adopted at the end of six-party nuclear talks in
September. 

    The DPRK on Tuesday said it would boost its nuclear
capability itself as the US is pushing for the end of a project
by the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO)
to construct two nuclear light-water reactors in the DPRK. 

    The DPRK agreed to abandon its nuclear program and return to
the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency at an
early date in the Sept. 19 statement. 

    "North Korea (DPRK) should implement measures needed for
dismantling its nuclear program," Ban added. 

    China, the DPRK, the US, Russia, South Korea and Japan have
held five rounds of negotiations aiming to resolve the nuclear
issue on the Korean Peninsula. 

    The six parties agreed to hold the second stage of the fifth
round of the talks in early 2006. However, no exact date has
been fixed. Enditem   

  Copyright �2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 7 Japan Times: Pyongyang talks to push three topics

Friday, December 23, 2005   
  
 By KANAKO TAKAHARA Staff writer

Tokyo will try to get Pyongyang to commit to "three-track talks"
on the abductions, security and settlement of Japan's past harsh
rule during their weekend bilateral meeting, Foreign Minister
Taro Aso said Thursday.

 Aso said it was "natural" to believe North Korea has already
agreed to the three-track talks as Japan told North Korea it
would only attend the next bilateral meeting if Pyongyang did so.

 At the last bilateral talks held in Beijing in November, Japan
proposed the two sides hold separate talks on the abductions,
security and Japan's past rule.

 "It will be a progress if we can set up the three panels and
name the members," Aso said, adding he would appoint officials
versed in each of the fields to head the three panels.

 Akitaka Saiki, deputy director of the Foreign Ministry's Asian
Affairs Bureau, will head Japan's delegation over the weekend
and Song Il Ho, vice director of the North Korean Foreign
Ministry's Asian Affairs Department, will lead Pyongyang's side.

 Aso met later Thursday with kin of South Korean, Thai, Lebanese
and Japanese abductees to North Korea.

 Nuke envoy named The Foreign Ministry on Thursday gave
Tadamichi Yamamoto, who currently serves as government envoy on
antiterrorism and Iraq issues, the additional job of special
envoy on the North Korean nuclear threat.

 The Japan Times: Dec. 23, 2005
(C) All rights reserved 
*****************************************************************
 8 Beaver County Times: Editorial - Lap dog

Allegheny Times - News - 

12/22/2005 -

When it comes to oversight of the executive branch, the 
Republican-controlled Congress is little more than a lap dog for 
the Bush administration, doing whatever it can to please its 
master.                                                         

The Washington Post reported that U.S. Rep. Thomas M. Davis III, 
R-Va., chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, last 
week said "it's a fair comment" that the GOP-controlled Congress 
has done insufficient oversight and "ought to be" doing more.

No kidding.

 Consider this. Democrats on Davis's committee said the panel
issued 1,052 subpoenas to probe alleged misconduct by the
Clinton administration between 1997 and 2002, at a cost of more
than $35 million.

 The Post reported the committee under Davis has issued just
three subpoenas to the Bush administration, two to the Energy
Department over nuclear waste disposal at Yucca Mountain, Nev.,
and one last week to the Defense Department over Katrina
documents. 

Obviously, congressional Republicans have failed to fulfill
their role as watchdog over the executive branch of government.
It's no wonder the Bush administration thinks it can do anything
it wants. With this Congress, it knows it can. 

�Beaver County Times Allegheny Times 2005                                       
			
Copyright � 2006 Beaver Newspapers, Inc. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 9 Crisscross: Yokosuka mayor urges Pentagon to give up plan to 
deploy nuke carrier 

Thursday, December 22, 2005 at 09:49 EST

WASHINGTON � Visiting Yokosuka Mayor Ryoichi Kabaya directly
urged the U.S. Defense Department on Wednesday to abandon the
Navy's decision to deploy a nuclear-powered carrier in his city
to replace the retiring conventional flattop Kitty Hawk. 

After his meeting with acting U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary
Gordon England, Kabaya said, "I did not get any positive
response...and realized the Navy's solid stance" to proceed with
its decision made in October. But Kabaya said he will continue
to oppose the decision "as long as there is a possibility for a
conventional carrier to be deployed" at the Yokosuka naval base,
referring to the recent move in the U.S. Congress to keep the
only other remaining conventional flattop, the John F Kennedy,
on active duty.

� 2005 Kyodo News. All rights reserved. No reproduction or
republication without written permission.

*****************************************************************
 10 Xinhua: Tax breaks offered for energy industry   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-12-22 08:10:32   

    Beijing, Dec. 22 -- China's determination to remove energy
bottlenecks is reflected in tax breaks and incentives offered to
the industry yesterday. 

    Investors are encouraged to channel capital to building
hydro- and nuclear-power stations, improving electricity grids
around the country, and exploring for coal, oil, gas and
uranium. 

    "All the projects should enjoy preferential tax breaks and
loan guarantees as they are encouraged by the government," said
Liu Zhi, director of the industry department of the National
Development and Reform Commission (NDRC). 

    But he did not elaborate on what the benefits would be at
yesterday's press conference during which the government
unveiled an updated investment catalogue to channel capital into
sectors where investment is encouraged. 

    In addition to energy, the "encouraged" projects range from
improving productivity of barren farm land, airport
construction, used-steel treatment and research on vaccines
against contagious diseases to low-emission small-engine cars. 

    In the catalogue, the government also slammed the door in
some areas which are "energy-consuming, environmentally harmful
or technologically less advanced." 

    Liu said the catalogue is aimed to help China achieve stable
economic and social development at a minimum cost of resources
and to the environment. 

    "We will update the catalogue annually in line with ground
realities," Liu told China Daily. 

    The State Council yesterday also made public a regulation
governing industry restructuring objectives, processes and norms
which decided the "encouraged," "limited" and "forbidden"
sectors. 

    Liu said the final catalogue, which can be found at the
commission's official website www.ndrc.gov.cn, took shape after
factoring in inputs from various sectors, including private
businesses and foreign investors. 

    "Even in developed countries, it's common practice for the
government to guide industry investment," said Liu, adding that
such a catalogue is specially necessary in a country which is
redoubling its efforts to develop the economy but suffers from a
shortage of resources and energy. 

    Lin Yueqin, a researcher with the Institute of Economics
Research of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said the
rate of energy consumption was higher than economic growth in
recent years, which means there is still much potential for
saving energy and raising the efficiency of energy use. 

    Premier Wen Jiabao has warned that China's economy rides
excessively on investment and material input. The inefficient
growth pattern, in conflict with the environment, "can no longer
continue," the premier said. 

    (Source: China Daily.com)   

  Copyright �2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 11 Japan Times: China posing a threat: Aso Buildup of military said worrisome

Friday, December 23, 2005   
  
By KANAKO TAKAHARA Staff writer

China's military buildup poses a threat to Japan's security,
Foreign Minister Taro Aso said Thursday -- a remark that is
expected to further worsen already sour bilateral relations.

 China "possesses nuclear arms and its military budget has seen
double-digit growth for the past 17 years and its content is not
transparent," Aso told a news conference. "It is starting to
become a considerable threat."

 Aso said that if China's military spending were more
transparent, Beijing would not need to deny that its buildup
poses a threat.

 Aso's latest comment came on the heels of similar remarks by
Democratic Party of Japan leader Seiji Maehara that apparently
angered Beijing.

 Government officials have carefully avoided using the word
"threat" when describing China's buildup, saying Tokyo will "pay
attention" to China's military spending. Prime Minister
Junichiro Koizumi has said Japan does not consider China a
threat even though the country has nuclear weapons.

 But remarks from officials on Beijing's military budget have
irritated their Chinese counterparts.

 During a trip to the United States earlier this month, the DPJ
leader said China's military buildup poses a "realistic threat"
to Japan.

 Apparently angered by the remark, China canceled Maehara's
meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao when he later visited
Beijing.

 Maehara again said China poses a threat at the DPJ annual
convention late last week, citing its rapidly expanding military
outlays, as well as modernization of its missile capacity,
upgrades of its arms and its energy resource development in the
East China Sea.

 Chinese officials claim Japan outspends China on defense.
Tokyo's defense budget for fiscal 2004 was about $41.5 billion,
while China's official defense budget was $25.6 billion, Beijing
claims.

 Aso's remark comes at a time when China had begun to show signs
of wanting to mend fences. On Wednesday, State Councilor Tang
Jiaxuan, China's former foreign minister, told LDP Deputy
Secretary General Ichiro Aisawa the two nations should hold a
foreign ministers' meeting as soon as possible.

 China has refused to hold high-level meetings with Japan since
Koizumi visited Yasukuni Shrine in October. The shrine honors
Japan's war dead as well as a number of Class-A war criminals.

 Aso 'irresponsible' BEIJING (Kyodo) A Beijing spokesman
Thursday called remarks by Foreign Minister Taro Aso on China
posing a threat "highly irresponsible" and questioned his
intentions.

 Now is the wrong time for a meeting between Aso and his Chinese
counterpart, Li Zhaoxing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin
Gang also a press briefing.

 "For the Japanese foreign minister to make this kind of
statement is extremely irresponsible," he said. "We can't help
but ask, what does the Japanese foreign minister want to do this
time by stirring up groundless claims of a China threat?"

 At a news conference in Tokyo, Aso said China, a "neighbor with
1 billion people equipped with nuclear bombs," is beginning to
pose a "considerable threat."

 He noted that China "has expanded its military outlays by
double digits for 17 years in a row" and said he did not know
what China planned to do with its military and that a "lack of
transparency" fans distrust.

 Qin said China's ascent contributes to world and regional peace
and stability. It also gives the region, including Japan, "huge
development opportunities," Qin said.

 Because of the "severe" conditions between China and Japan,
China sees no merit in a meeting now between the two countries'
foreign ministers, Qin added.

 "We assert that dialogue, exchanges, communication and
cooperation between Japan and China should be increased," he
said. "But for that kind of exchange to take place requires a
suitable atmosphere and conditions."

 He blamed the current conditions on Japan.

 Aso, appointed foreign minister in October, has previously
criticized China's military spending and defended Prime Minister
Koizumi's visits to Tokyo's Yasukuni Shrine.

 The Japan Times: Dec. 23, 2005
(C) All rights reserved 

*****************************************************************
 12 NRC: NRC Determined Potential Flooding at Kewaunee Nuclear Plant to Be of
Substantial Importance to Safety

News Release - Region III - 2005-04
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region III No. III-05-047           
December 22, 2005 CONTACT:     Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 
Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662     E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov  
  

identified in a 2004 NRC inspection, was of substantial
importance to safety. The plant, operated by Dominion Generation
Co., is located at Kewaunee, Wis. 

The issue was determined to be a yellow inspection finding in
the NRCs classification of safety significance which ranges from
green, through white and yellow, to red. Yellow inspection
findings  those of substantial importance to safety  result in
additional NRC inspections and meetings with the utility to
address the issue. 

The NRC staff met with Dominion officials on Nov. 8 to discuss
the safety significance of the issue, and, after reviewing
information submitted by the utility, issued the yellow
determination on Dec. 21. 

An NRC inspection in September 2004 found that portions of the
turbine building could become flooded as a result of seismic
conditions or equipment failures. This flooding could lead to a
malfunction of safety equipment needed for safe shutdown of the
plant. 

The plant was subsequently shut down in February to make
extensive system and structural modifications to address the
potential flooding problem. 

The Kewaunee plant took extensive corrective measures, including
work performed in a four-month outage earlier this year, said
James Caldwell, NRC Regional Administrator. However, the plant
missed an opportunity to discover and correct this issue in 2003
when minor flooding in the turbine building showed the potential
to challenge the function of certain safety equipment. 

The NRC will continue to focus on the plants engineering and
corrective action programs to assure that the plant staff
effectively identifies and resolves problems that may affect
safety systems, he added. 

The NRC also issued a Notice of Violation to the company for
failing to address the design issues involved in the potential
flooding problem. The company must respond to the Notice by Jan.
20, describing their planned and completed corrective actions. 

NRC Inspection Report 05-11, issued Oct. 6, covering the
flooding issues, is available in the NRCs online document
library, known as ADAMS:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html. Use
accession number ML052800430 to locate the report. The notice to
the company on the yellow significance determination will also
be available in the ADAMS library. In addition, both documents
are available from the Region III Office of Public Affairs.   



  


 	Last revised Thursday, December 22, 2005 	   
*****************************************************************
 13 Helsingin Sanomat: Energy report: no need for sixth nuclear plant

International Edition - Business &Finance 

Friday 23.12.2005 	 	 

Emissions trade is seen as powerful regulatory method 

Mikko Kara, the writer of a report on the electricity 
market in Finland and the Nordic region, feels that speculation 
of a sixth commercial nuclear reactor for Finland is unnecessary.

In his study, presented to Minister for Trade and Industry 
Mauri Pekkarinen (Centre) on Wednesday, Kara says that he does 
not believe that industry will increase its use of electricity 
in Finland. 

He believes that Finland's fifth plant, which is being 
built in Olkiluoto on the west coast, will be the last such 
facility in Finland, and that it will also be the last major 
investment in power plants of any kind. 

Trade in emissions is seen as such a severe means of regulating 
the energy market, that Kara predicts that it will have 
far-reaching consequences. 

One of the expected consequences is that industries that 
use much energy will increasingly move to countries outside the 
realm of emissions trade. 

This also applies to Finland, and there are indications of 
such a trend among certain forest industry companies. 

Energy is not the only factor driving industry to other 
countries. Other factors working in the same direction include 
high costs and growth prospects in the market. 

"The rising price of electricity is turning the structures 
of our society to the post-industrial age, partly without 
control. The share of industry in GDP is decreasing", Kara says. 

The development is not expected to be even. Several factors are 
involved, which are partly contradictory and occasionally cancel 
each other out. 

If and when the forest industry and other heavy industry 
move their production elsewhere, it will decrease the use of 
electricity in Finland. The reduced consumption and lower 
emissions will bring down the price of electricity, which is a 
competitive factor, and which keeps companies here. 

Overall, there are pressures for a rise in the price of 
electricity, but price variations are also increasing. This is a 
negative factor for industrial investments. 

Kara feels that Finnish energy policy goals are partially 
unrealistic - especially with respect to self-sufficiency. 

Possibilities of the state to influence the matter have 
been reduced significantly, as energy markets and companies are 
influenced by market forces more than they were before. 

In spite of this, the energy supply, sufficient 
investments in the field, and responsibility for 
self-sufficiency are the legal obligation of the state. 
*****************************************************************
 14 Duluth News Tribune: Wisconsin PSC releases documents on contacts

| 12/22/2005 | 

ENERGY DEAL: The attorney general will review records of
meetings over sale of a power plant.

 BY JR ROSS ASSOCIATED PRESS 

MADISON - Top aides to Wisconsin's utility regulators met
numerous times with representatives of two utilities seeking
approval to sell a Kewaunee nuclear power plant, a practice that
was allowed at the time but has since been dropped, according to
records turned over to the attorney general at her request. 

A spokesman for Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager would not
say Wednesday whether her review of the meetings has expanded to
include questions about the more than $41,550 that executives of
Wisconsin Public Service Corp. and Alliant Energy Corp. gave
Gov. Jim Doyle's campaign in the six months after the Public
Service Commission rejected the sale in November 2004. 

The three-member PSC, which included two Doyle appointees,
reversed its decision last March 17 and allowed the sale to go
through. 

Officials with both utilities and the PSC said Wednesday they
have not been contacted by Lautenschlager's office or other
investigators about the donations. 

A spokesman for Doyle said the Democrat has not been contacted,
and the governor continues to maintain he had nothing to do with
the PSC decision to allow the sale. 

"The Public Service Commission is a completely independent body.
It makes decisions based on the record," Doyle said. "I do not
make decisions for the Public Service Commission. They make the
decisions." 

Lautenschlager, the U.S. attorney's office in Milwaukee and the
Dane County district attorney have been reviewing a state travel
contract given to a company whose executives made $10,000
donations to Doyle's campaign before and after winning the deal
to do the work. The contract could be worth up to $750,000. 

Earlier this month, the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which
tracks campaign contributions and lobbies for reforms, released
details on the contributions from the utility executives. 

Lautenschlager announced shortly afterward that her office was
reviewing a citizen complaint about contacts between top PSC
aides and the utilities. She said prosecutors would "jointly
investigate any campaign finance related matters that are
brought to our attention," but she would not confirm the
existence of any specific investigation. 

Justice Department spokesman Kelly Kennedy would only confirm
Wednesday the attorney general's review of the contracts
continues. 

Contacts between PSC executive assistants -- the top aides to
the three commissioners -- were common practice until the
Justice Department received a complaint in a separate case. 

In that case, PSC officials shared documents with a utility
without allowing a citizens group the same access. The PSC
admitted it was wrong to withhold the document from others while
sharing it with the utilities. It agreed to stop the practice of
executive assistants meeting with groups that have business
before PSC. 

Dan Schoof, executive assistant for PSC chairman Dan Ebert, said
the meetings with Wisconsin Public Service and Alliant Energy
occurred before the agreement was struck with the Justice
Department. He said the donations had nothing to do with the PSC
decision to reopen the case and eventually approve it.

*****************************************************************
 15 HindustanTimes.com: No favours to US firms in N-contracts 

S Rajagopalan

Washington, December 22, 2005
   
India has sought to scotch speculation in some quarters that it
will favour US companies with nuclear contracts over rival
foreign firms in return for US help in clearing the decks for
civilian nuclear cooperation.

The watchword here will be "level playing field", according to
Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran. "Once the market is open,
there would be a level playing field for all potential
suppliers," he said during a Q&A at the Carnegie Endowment.

Asked if US firms will get the first shot on nuclear contracts,
he explained that India was talking to all major partners,
including Russia and France, besides the US, over plans for "a
very major expansion in our nuclear energy programme". Russia,
in fact, is already building two 1,000 MW reactors in
Koodankulam in Tamil Nadu, he pointed out.

Saran estimated that once the current restrictions on technology
transfer are removed, the share of nuclear power in India's
overall energy supply will move into double digits from the
present lowly three per cent.

Facing renewed questions over India keeping the fissile material
issue "off the table", Saran said India nonetheless was
committed to "negotiations for a multilateral and verifiable
Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty".

On the Iran nuclear issue, he talked of India's "very
consistent" position and said: "We have said we expect countries
to honour commitments they have made...And we have also said
that we do not wish to see another nuclear state in our
neighbourhood." In the same breath, he stressed that India was
for resolving the issue within the IAEA instead of referring it
to the UN Security Council.

Saran disagreed with a questioner that Volcker committee's
report on the Iraq oil-for-food scam has created a "friction"
between India and the US. "There is no friction at all....
Investigations are taking place and we have received very good
cooperation from the Volcker Commission and the United Nations,"
he said.   
    
*****************************************************************
 16 Daily Yomiuri: Snow knocks out power in Niigata, Kansai area

The Yomiuri Shimbun [ class=] 

Shin-Midosuji highway in Suita, Osaka Prefecture, which runs
along the Kita-Osaka Kyuko Railway Co. line, was jammed with
traffic due to heavy snow Thursday morning. 

Unusually cold temperatures hit Japan on Thursday, bringing
heavy snow to areas along the Sea of Japan and knocking out
power in 650,000 households in Niigata Prefecture and 700,000
households in the Kansai region. 

The snow and strong winds in Kansai caused widespread
disruptions to transportation, including services on the Japan
Railway and Osaka municipal subway lines. 

Tohoku Electric Power Co. and the Niigata prefectural government
reported that the prefecture's Kaetsu and Chuetsu regions began
losing power at about 8:10 a.m. Power to the cities of Niigata,
Shibata, Gosen and Kamo was cut off, while parts of Nagaoka,
Kashiwazaki and Sanjo also suffered power outages. 

As of 7 p.m., 36,000 households were without power. Tohoku
Electric's Niigata office was investigating the power outages,
believing the severe snowstorm may have been responsible. 

Due to the loss of power, up to 1,220 traffic lights in Niigata,
Nagaoka and other areas were inoperative, and police officers
were deployed to control the traffic flow. 

Operations were suspended on all train lines in the prefecture,
including JR Echigo and Shinetsu lines. Three trains were
stranded between stations for as long as four hours. 

The Joetsu Shinkansen line also suspended services between
Echigoyuzawa and Niigata stations until after 4 p.m. Phone lines
were jammed in the prefecture since about 9 a.m., and some
hospitals were distributing blankets to patients as there was no
heat. 

At about 8:50 a.m., power lines running from Kansai Electric
Power Co.'s Oi Nuclear Power Plant in Oicho, Fukui Prefecture,
to Kyoto Prefecture were damaged, automatically shutting down
four power plants. 

KEPCO resumed the service at 9:31 a.m. using power from other
power plants. The incident nevertheless caused power outages in
parts of Osaka, Kyoto, Shiga and Nara prefectures. The company
suspects the outages occurred when the combination of strong
winds and the weight of snow and ice short-circuited the lines. 

Due to the downed power lines, some sections of the Tokaido Line
in Shiga Prefecture and the Fukuchiyama Line in Hyogo Prefecture
suspended train operations for about 30 minutes. A number of
trains carrying passengers were stranded. 

The Osaka municipal subway also temporarily shut the entire
Tanimachi, Chuo and Nagahori-Tsurumi-Ryokuchi lines. Services on
each of the lines resumed 20 to 30 minutes later. A total of
153,000 people using JR and other lines were inconvenienced. 

Trains on the Tokaido Shinkansen and Sanyo Shinkansen lines
slowed between Shizuoka and Hakata stations due to the snow,
causing delays of up to two hours. 

At about 7:55 a.m. at Kochi Airport in Nankoku, Kochi
Prefecture, a Japan Airlines jet bound for Haneda Airport ran
onto the grass along the taxiway while trying to make a left
turn. None of the passengers and crew, 93 in total, were
injured. The airport closed its runway until 10:14 a.m. 

As of 5 p.m., Ono in Fukui Prefecture had 193 centimeters of
snow; Kita-Hiroshimacho, Hiroshima Prefecture, 161 centimeters;
Yogocho, Shiga Prefecture, 158 centimeters; and Iinancho,
Shimane Prefecture, 133 centimeters. (Dec. 23, 2005) 


  [DAILY YOMIURI ONLINE | THE DAILY YOMIURI]     Page Top   
*****************************************************************
 17 BBC: Incident at nuclear power station
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 22 December 2005
 
[Torness]                               

The incident happened at Torness power station                                                                 

Emergency services were called to the Torness nuclear power 
station after an incident at the East Lothian plant. 

A spokeswoman for Torness said that a fuel element had moved 
within the pond where spent fuel is stored. 

The emergency services were alerted as the incident took place in 
a radioactive controlled area. 

But the spokeswoman said no-one was injured or at risk during the 
incident and said the plant was continuing to generate power as 
normal. 

Lothian and Borders Fire and Rescue were alerted at about 2050 
GMT on Thursday. 

No-one was in any danger at a time and there was no release of 
radioactivity to anyone in the area Torness spokeswoman     

The service said that it sent its standard response of six normal 
pump fire engines and four specialist units to the site. 

A spokeswoman for Torness stressed that the incident had been 
contained to the fuel pond. 

"No-one was in any danger at any time and there was no release of 
radioactivity to anyone in the area," said the spokeswoman. 

She said the alert had had no effect on electricity generation at 
Torness and that the 38 staff on the late shift were checked and 
accounted for and were continuing with their normal work. 
*****************************************************************
 18 NRC: Proposed Generic Communication Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Circuit 
 
                         FR Doc E5-7702 
[Federal Register: December 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 245)] 
[Notices] [Page 76083] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22de05-96]                         
 
Analysis Spurious Actuations AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC).
 
ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public comment. Reopening of 
comment period.
 
SUMMARY: On October 19, 2005 (70 FR 60859), the NRC published for 
public comment a generic letter (GL) to: (1) Request addressees 
to review their fire protection program to confirm compliance 
with existing applicable regulatory requirements regarding their 
assumptions of the phrase ``one-at-a-time'' in light of the 
information provided in this GL and, if appropriate, take 
additional actions to return to compliance. Specifically, 
although some licensees have performed their post-fire, 
safe-shutdown circuit analyses based on an assumption of only a 
single spurious actuation per fire event or that spurious 
actuations will occur ``one-at-a-time,'' recent industry cable 
fire test results demonstrated that these assumptions are not 
valid.
 
(2) Require addressees to submit a written response to the NRC in 
accordance with NRC regulations in Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.54(f). The Nuclear Energy 
Institute (NEI) has requested a 45-day extension of the comment 
period. NEI believes that additional time will be needed to 
provide appropriate comments on the draft GL. NEI based its 
request on the time needed to perform an assessment of the safety 
significance of multiple sequential and cumulative failures; an 
evaluation of the industry test results and interviews with the 
industry project team; an evaluation of the NUREG/CR-6776, and an 
assessment of the NRC/licensee documentation associated with the 
prior NRC staff positions and practices related to safe-shutdown 
circuit analysis. The NRC has decided to reopen the comment 
period for an additional 45 days.
 
This Federal Register notice is available through the NRC's 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under 
accession number ML051650017.
 
 
DATES: The comment period has been extended and now expires 
February 6, 2006. Comments submitted after this date will be 
considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of 
consideration cannot be given except for comments received on or 
before this date.
 
ADDRESSEES: Submit written comments to the Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop 
T6-D59, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and cite the publication date 
and page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments 
may also be delivered to NRC Headquarters, 11545 Rockville Pike 
(Room T-6D59), Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm 
on Federal workdays.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Wolfgang at 301-415-1624 
or by e-mail: rjw1@nrc.gov. Documents may be examined, and/or 
copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room at One White 
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible 
electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. If you do not have 
access to ADAMS or if you have problems in accessing the 
documents in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) 
reference staff at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to 
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this Friday the 16th 
day of December 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Christopher I. Grimes, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office 
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E5-7702 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 19 NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear 
 
                         FR Doc E5-7704 
[Federal Register: December 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 245)] 
[Notices] [Page 76082-76083] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22de05-95]                         
 
Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of 
No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, section 
50.55a(b)(2)(ix)(G), for Facility Operating License Nos. DRP-57 
and NPF-5, issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. 
(the licensee), for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear 
Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Hatch), located in Appling County, 
Georgia. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is 
issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no 
significant impact.
 
Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action 
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(ix)(G) and allow the licensee 
to perform a general visual examination of the accessible surface 
areas of the containment vessel pressure retaining vent system, 
in lieu of the VT-3 examination required by 10 CFR.
 
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated March 30, 2005, as supplemented by letters 
dated August 2 and 24, 2005.
 
The Need for the Proposed Action During the 3rd 10-year inservice 
inspection (ISI) interval, which ends December 31, 2005, the 
licensee's code of record, the 1992 American Society of 
Mechanical Engineers, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME 
Code), including the 1992 addenda, required a VT-3 examination of 
the accessible surface areas of the boiling water reactor (BWR) 
vent system. For the 3rd 10-year ISI interval, by letter dated 
July 19, 2000, the licensee requested in Relief Request RR-MC-9 
to perform a general visual examination in lieu of the VT-3 
examination. The licensee explained that the proposed alternative 
was sufficient to detect the types of corrosion expected in the 
BWR vent system. This request was approved by the NRC by letter 
dated October 4, 2000.
 
For the 4th 10-year ISI interval, the licensee's code of record 
will be the 2001 edition through the 2003 addenda of the ASME 
Code. Modifications to the ASME Code and 10 CFR 50.55a have 
relocated the requirement to perform the VT-3 examination from 
the ASME Code to 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(ix)(G). The licensee 
believes that the examination provisions previously authorized 
through Relief Request RR-MC-9 have proven to be sufficient to 
maintain the structural integrity and leak-tightness of the 
containment surfaces, and, therefore, serve the underlying 
purpose of the rule. The licensee is requesting to continue the 
use of similar provisions during the 4th ISI interval through an 
exemption.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has 
completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that performing a general visual examination as part of 
maintaining the integrity of the coating system will ensure the 
integrity of the coated vent system components, providing an 
acceptable level of quality and safety.
 
The details of the NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided 
in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the 
licensee approving the exemption from the regulation.
 
The proposed action will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being 
made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. 
There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent 
released off site. There is no significant increase in 
occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are 
no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed action.
 
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites.
 
It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no 
other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant 
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed action.
 
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action 
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' 
alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change 
in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of 
the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
 
Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use 
of any different resources than those
 
[[Page 76083]] previously considered in the ``Final Environmental 
Statement Related to the Operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear 
Plant, Unit 1 and Unit 2,'' dated October 1972, and NUREG-0417, 
``Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of the 
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2,'' dated March 1978.
 
Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated 
policy, on November 30, 2005, the staff consulted with the 
Georgia State official, James Hardeman, of the Department of 
Natural Resources, regarding the environmental impact of the 
proposed action for Hatch. The State official had no comments.
 
Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the 
environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed 
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the 
human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to 
prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed 
action.
 
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated March 30, 2005, as supplemented by 
letters dated August 2 and 24, 2005. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be 
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access 
and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on 
the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference 
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an 
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th 
day of December 2004.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Christopher Gratton, Sr. Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 
II-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E5-7704 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 20 NRC: DPR-66 and NPF-73, NPF-3 and NPF-58]
 
                         FR Doc E5-7723 
[Federal Register: December 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 245)] 
[Notices] [Page 76080-76082] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22de05-94]                         
 

Pennsylvania Power Company, Ohio Edison Company, OES Nuclear, 
Inc., The Cleveland Electric, Illuminating Company, The Toledo 
Edison Company, Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, (Beaver 
Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2), (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 
Station, Unit 1), (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1); Order 
Superceding Order of November 15, 2005 Approving Transfer of 
Licenses and Conforming Amendments FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating 
Company (FENOC) and Pennsylvania Power Company (Penn Power), Ohio 
Edison Company (Ohio Edison), OES Nuclear, Inc. (OES Nuclear), 
the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (Cleveland Electric), 
and the Toledo Edison Company (Toledo Edison), are holders of 
Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-66, NPF- 73, NPF-3 and 
NPF-58, which authorize the possession, use, and operation of 
Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 (BVPS 1) and 2 (BVPS 2; 
together with BVPS 1, BVPS), Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, 
Unit 1 (Davis-Besse), and Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 
(Perry), respectively. FENOC is licensed by the U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) to operate BVPS, 
Davis-Besse, and Perry (the facilities). The facilities are 
located at the licensees' sites in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, 
Ottawa County, Ohio, and Lake County, Ohio, respectively.
 
By letter dated May 18, 2005, FENOC submitted an application 
requesting approval of direct license transfers that would be 
necessary in connection with the following proposed transfers to 
FirstEnergy Nuclear Generation Corporation (FENGenCo), a new 
nuclear generation subsidiary of FirstEnergy: Penn Power's 
65-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 1, 13.74-percent 
undivided ownership interest in BVPS 2, and 5.24-percent 
undivided ownership interest in Perry. By letter dated June 1, 
2005, FENOC submitted a second application requesting approval of 
direct license transfers that would be necessary in connection 
with the following proposed transfers to FENGenCo: Ohio Edison's 
35-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 1 and 20.22- 
percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 2; OES Nuclear's 
17.42- percent undivided ownership interest in Perry; Cleveland 
Electric's 24.47-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 2, 
44.85-percent undivided ownership interest in Perry, and 
51.38-percent undivided ownership interest in Davis-Besse; and, 
Toledo Edison's 1.65-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 
2, 19.91-percent undivided ownership interest in Perry, and 
48.62-percent undivided ownership interest in Davis-Besse.
 
Supplemental information was provided by letters dated July 15 
and October 31, 2005, (hereinafter, the May 18 and June 1, 2005, 
applications and supplemental information will be referred to 
collectively as the ``applications''). FENOC also requested 
approval of conforming license amendments that would reflect the 
proposed transfer of ownership of Penn Power's interests in BVPS 
and Perry to FENGenCo; delete the references to Penn Power in the 
licenses; authorize FENGenCo to possess the respective ownership 
interests in BVPS and Perry; reflect the proposed transfer of 
ownership interests in BVPS, Davis- Besse, and Perry from Ohio 
Edison, OES Nuclear, Cleveland Electric, and Toledo Edison (Ohio 
Companies) to FENGenCo; delete the Ohio Companies from the 
licenses except those continuing to hold
 
[[Page 76081]] leased interests; and, authorize FENGenCo to 
possess the respective ownership interests in BVPS, Davis-Besse, 
and Perry being transferred by the Ohio Companies. Ohio Edison's 
21.66-percent leased interest in BVPS 2, Toledo Edison's 
18.26-percent leased interest in BVPS 2, and Ohio Edison's 
12.58-percent leased interest in Perry would not be changed. No 
physical changes to the facilities or operational changes were 
proposed in the applications. After completion of the proposed 
transfers, the role of FENOC would be unchanged.
 
Approval of the transfer of the facility operating licenses and 
conforming license amendments is requested by FENOC pursuant to 
Sec. Sec.  50.80 and 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR). Notices of the requests for approval and 
opportunity for a hearing were published in the Federal Register 
on August 2, 2005 (70 FR 44390-44395). No comments were received. 
Two petitions for leave to intervene pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309 
were received on August 22, 2005, from the City of Cleveland, 
Ohio, and American Municipal Power-Ohio, Inc. A joint motion to 
lodge by the City of Cleveland, Ohio and Municipal Power Ohio, 
Inc., was received on September 12, 2005. The petitions and 
motion are under consideration by the Commission.
 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, no license, or any right thereunder, 
shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of 
control of the license, unless the Commission shall give its 
consent in writing. Upon review of the information in the 
application and other information before the Commission, and 
relying upon the representations and agreements contained in the 
application, the NRC staff has determined that FENGenCo is 
qualified to hold the ownership interests in the facilities 
previously held by Penn Power and the Ohio Companies, and that 
the transfers of undivided ownership interests in the facilities 
to FENGenCo described in the applications are otherwise 
consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and 
orders issued by the Commission, subject to the conditions set 
forth below. The NRC staff has further found that the 
applications for the proposed license amendments comply with the 
standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set 
forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; the facilities will operate in 
conformity with the applications, the provisions of the Act and 
the rules and regulations of the Commission; there is reasonable 
assurance that the activities authorized by the proposed license 
amendments can be conducted without endangering the health and 
safety of the public and that such activities will be conducted 
in compliance with the Commission's regulations; the issuance of 
the proposed license amendments will not be inimical to the 
common defense and security or to the health and safety of the 
public; and the issuance of the proposed amendments will be in 
accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations 
and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
 
On November 15, 2005, the Commission issued, ``Order Approving 
Transfer of Licenses and Conforming Amendments Relating to Beaver 
Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 
Station, Unit 1, and Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1.'' 
Subsequently, the NRC staff determined that corrections were 
needed to the cover letter, Order, conforming amendments and 
safety evaluations. This Order contains the correction and 
supercedes the Order issued on November 15, 2005.
 
The findings set forth above are supported by a corrected NRC 
safety evaluation dated December 16, 2005.
 
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 161b, 161i, 161o, and 184 of 
the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2201(b), 2201(i), 2201(o), and 2234; and 10 
CFR 50.80, it is hereby ordered that the direct transfers of the 
licenses, as described herein, to FENGenCo are approved, subject 
to the following conditions: (1) On the closing date(s) of the 
transfers to FENGenCo of their interests in BVPS 1, BVPS 2, 
Davis-Besse, and Perry, Penn Power, Cleveland Electric, Ohio 
Edison, OES Nuclear, and Toledo Edison shall transfer to FENGenCo 
all of each transferor's respective accumulated decommissioning 
funds for BVPS 1, BVPS 2, Davis-Besse, and Perry, except for 
funds associated with the leased portions of Perry and BVPS 2, 
and tender to FENGenCo additional amounts equal to remaining 
funds expected to be collected in 2005, as represented in the 
application dated June 1, 2005, but not yet collected by the time 
of closing. All of the funds shall be deposited in separate 
external trust funds for each of these four reactors in the same 
amounts as received with respect to each unit; to be segregated 
from other assets of FENGenCo and outside its administrative 
control, as required by NRC regulations, and FENGenCo shall take 
all necessary steps to ensure that these external trust funds are 
maintained in accordance with the requirements of this Order 
approving the transfer of the licenses and consistent with the 
safety evaluation supporting the order and in accordance with the 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.75, ``Reporting and recordkeeping for 
decommissioning planning.'' (2) By the date of closing of the 
transfer of the ownership interests in BVPS 1, BVPS 2, and Perry, 
from Penn Power to FENGenCo, FENGenCo shall obtain a parent 
company guarantee from FirstEnergy in an initial amount of at 
least $80 million (in 2005 dollars) to provide additional 
decommissioning funding assurance regarding such ownership 
interests. Required funding levels shall be recalculated annually 
and, as necessary, FENGenCo shall either obtain appropriate 
adjustments to the parent company guarantee or otherwise provide 
any additional decommissioning funding assurance necessary for 
FENGenCo to meet NRC requirements under 10 CFR 50.75. (3) The 
Support Agreements described in the applications dated May 18, 
2005 (up to $80 million), and June 1, 2005 (up to $400 million), 
shall be effective consistent with the representations contained 
in the applications. FENGenCo shall take no action to cause 
FirstEnergy, or its successors and assigns, to void, cancel, or 
modify the Support Agreements without the prior written consent 
of the NRC staff, except, however, the $80 million Support 
Agreement in connection with the transfer of the Penn Power 
interests may be revoked or rescinded if and when the $400 
million support agreement described in the June 1, 2005 
application becomes effective. FENGenCo shall inform the Director 
of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, in writing, no later 
than 10 days after any funds are provided to FENGenCo by 
FirstEnergy under either Support Agreement.
 
(4) Prior to completion of the transfers of the licenses, 
FENGenCo shall provide the Director of the Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation satisfactory documentary evidence that it has 
obtained the appropriate amount of insurance required of 
licensees under 10 CFR part 140 of the Commission's regulations.
 
It is further ordered that, consistent with 10 CFR 2.1315(b), 
license amendments that make changes, as indicated in Enclosures 
2 through 5 to the cover letter forwarding this Order, to conform 
the licenses to reflect the subject direct license transfers are 
approved. FirstEnergy has indicated that the Pennsylvania 
transfers described in the May 18, 2005, application and the Ohio 
transfers described in the June 1, 2005, application, will take 
place at the
 
[[Page 76082]] same time. The amendments shall be issued and made 
effective at the time the proposed direct license transfers are 
completed.
 
It is further ordered that FENOC shall inform the Director of the 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in writing of the date of 
closing of the transfer of the Penn Power, Cleveland Electric, 
Ohio Edison, OES Nuclear, and Toledo Edison interests in BVPS 1, 
BVPS 2, Davis-Besse, and Perry no later than 5 business days 
prior to closing. Should the transfer of the licenses not be 
completed by December 31, 2006, this Order shall become null and 
void, provided; however, that upon written application and for 
good cause shown, such date may be extended by order.
 
This Order supercedes the Order issued on November 15, 2005, and 
is effective as of December 16, 2005.
 
For further details with respect to this Order, see the initial 
applications dated May 18 and June 1, 2005, as supplemented by 
letters dated July 15 and October 31, 2005, and the revised 
non-proprietary safety evaluation dated December 16, 2005, which 
are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public 
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public 
File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland and accessible electronically from the Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference 
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail 
to

 
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 16th day of 
December 2005.
 
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
J.E. Dyer, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E5-7723 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 21 Scotsman.com: Blair urged to drop nuclear option
 
The Press Association" 

Thu 22 Dec 2005 

Labour MPs are mounting a campaign to persuade Tony Blair not to
go ahead with a new generation of nuclear power stations. 

A group of backbenchers are drawing up a manifesto setting out
the case for continued investment in renewable energy rather
than taking "a dangerous leap with nuclear". 

They say the Government will have to subsidise the nuclear
industry massively to make new stations viable. 

The move mirrors a backbench campaign to change the Government's
schools plans, where MPs have published their own proposals
designed to steer policy rather than oppose it outright. 

The anti-nuclear group is being led by former minister Alan
Whitehead, who is also one of the key figures behind the
education campaign. 

Mr Whitehead said: "If there was a free market in energy, ie no
assistance for new nuclear build, no long-term promise of a
guaranteed market and no minimum price for nuclear, no-one would
build a new nuclear station. 

"Nuclear is not carbon-free, nor is it renewable. We have been
promised by government that there is a debate to be had and that
no decisions have been made. 

"But there is a change in attitude in government. Only three
years ago, a white paper pretty well ruled out nuclear. But it
is now at centre stage." 

Mr Blair launched a review of UK energy needs last month, which
could pave the way for new nuclear stations. 

He said that renewable sources could fill some but not all
energy gaps. Many Labour MPs fear the Prime Minister privately
favours renewing investment in nuclear energy as the most secure
way of combating global warming. 

© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2005, All Rights Reserved. 

�2005 Scotsman.com| contact
*****************************************************************
 22 Times Herald-Record: More radioactive water found near Indian Point

December 22, 2005 

By Greg Bruno gbruno@th-record.com    

Buchanan - Radioactive water possibly from an Indian Point
spent-fuel pool has been found in storm drains and three newly
dug wells surrounding the Westchester County nuclear plant,
federal officials confirmed yesterday.

 The storm drains discharge into a canal that eventually dumps
into the Hudson River, though no contamination has been found in
the river. 

One testing well, drilled as part of this study and near a
leaking pool for storing radioactive fuel rods at Indian Point
2, had levels measuring seven times the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's threshold for safe drinking water, federal
officials confirmed yesterday.

"This is all part of the effort to paint a picture of the scope
of the contamination," said Neil Sheehan, a Nuclear Regulatory
Commission spokesman. "There's no one drinking this water." 

Even so, environmental groups say they are troubled by the
government's handling of the investigation. 

Lisa Rainwater of Riverkeeper said she fears the health effects
of the leak are being underplayed and that Entergy Nuclear
Northeast, the plant owner, and the NRC are keeping the public
in the dark.

"It's the corporate line," Rainwater charged. "They want to make
whatever they are doing as benign as possible.

Hairline cracks in the concrete pool were discovered in August,
and a series of follow-up studies found tritium in groundwater.
Tritium, a by-product of nuclear power production, is a
radioactive isotope that can increase the risk of cancer if
ingested. 

Plant officials have said the leak and groundwater contamination
pose no health risk to workers or the public, but the source of
the tritium is unclear.     
    
Times Herald-Record

   Record Online is brought to you by the Times Herald-Record, 
serving New York's Hudson Valley and the Catskills.
                                 
     40 Mulberry Street * PO Box 2046 * Middletown, NY 10940 
Telephone 845-341-1100 or 800-295-2181 outside the Middletown, 
N.Y., area.
                                 
Orange County Publications. All rights reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 23 AU ABC: Study 'exposes flaws' in anti-nuclear energy debate. 

22/12/2005. 

By Nick McKenzie for AM 

A new study by a group of Melbourne scientists endorses the use 
of nuclear energy and attacks some of the data used by 
anti-nuclear campaigners. 

The scientists from the University of Melbourne say their 
research shows that the benefits of nuclear energy have been 
underestimated and concerns about nuclear waste overplayed. 

Associate Professor Martin Sevior of Melbourne University's 
school of physics leads a small team of scientists and students 
researching nuclear energy. 
He says the team's latest study strengthens the case for 
Australia to invest more in nuclear energy for both economic and 
environmental reasons. 

"I hope people will take our study, and look at it, and look at 
the numbers, and see what's real and what isn't," he said. 
"Part of what isn't real is this idea that there's not enough 
uranium in the world and it's not worth the effort because even 
if we built all these nuclear power plants we'd run out of 
uranium very shortly. 
"I mean, there's a lot of energy in uranium." 

Associate Professor Sevior says his research into nuclear waste 
disposal should help dispel many environmentalists' fears. 

"One thing that's perhaps not always realised is that the 
amount of waste that comes out of a typical plant is around 30 
tonnes a year," he said. 
"The amount of waste that comes out of a coal-fired power plant 
is around 1,000 tonnes a day. 

"So the actual volume of waste that comes out of a nuclear 
power plant is actually rather small. And there have been very 
well-developed proposals to bury it deep underground in the 
Nordic countries. I think it's entirely feasible to bury it very 
safely." 

Associate Professor Sevior says his study has exposed serious 
flaws in an often-quoted European study into the limits of the 
uranium industry. 

But while he says nuclear energy investment would be more 
beneficial than investment in sustainable energy sources, he 
also acknowledges that debate about nuclear energy has some way 
to go. 

"Part of the reason � we're not all-out saying yes, we must do 
this, is that part of that credible case depends on nuclear 
power industry living up to its promises, and one of the 
promises it makes is that the next generation of power plants 
that it has on the boards and are touting around the world, live 
up to their expectations," he said. 

Several members of the coalition are open to increasing the 
nation's nuclear power industry. 
Some in the Opposition are also open to more debate about the 
issue, although Labor Party policy opposes any new uranium mines.

The Australian Conservation Foundation's nuclear campaigner, 
Dave Sweeney, says the Melbourne University study appears flawed 
and does not provide a sound argument for the use of nuclear 
energy. 

"It glances over some really key concerns of proliferation, key 
areas of reactor safety are not delved into too deeply and they 
have direct links to industry websites for further information," 
he said. 
"I'm not sure it's altogether appropriate or altogether balanced 
to be referring people to the nuclear industry's own websites 
for further information on such matters as radioactive waste, 
nuclear weapons and nuclear reactor safety." 

[Audio] Related Audio 

A new study by a group of Melbourne scientists endorses the use 
of nuclear energy and attacks some of the data used by 
anti-nuclear campaigners. [] [] [] 
*****************************************************************
 24 PR: NRC Grants License Renewal for We Energies' Point Beach Nuclear
Power Plant 

Company Snapshot: WEC 

www.WisconsinEnergy.com" 

MILWAUKEE, Dec. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) announced today that the agency has 
renewed the operating licenses of the two units at We Energies' 
Point Beach Nuclear Plant for an additional 20 years. 

"We appreciate the conscientious work of the NRC and the 
extensive evaluation conducted by the regulatory agency to grant 
this renewal," said Rick Kuester, president and chief executive 
officer of We Generation, Wisconsin Energy's generation group. 

In February 2004, Nuclear Management Company (NMC), which 
operates the Point Beach Nuclear Plant for We Energies, submitted 
to the NRC the 1,606-page application which included 
environmental, safety, and technical analysis demonstrating the 
continued need for Point Beach. The review process included 
numerous opportunities for public input, plant inspections, and 
technical and environmental reviews. 

"Point Beach continues to strengthen our diverse fuel mix and 
provide safe, efficient and affordable energy to meet the growing 
needs of our customers and Wisconsin's economy," said Kuester. 

Point Beach, located near Two Rivers, Wis., is owned by We 
Energies and operated by NMC. The plant has 1,036 MW of 
electrical generating capacity between two units. Unit 1 began 
operation in 1970 and is currently licensed by the NRC until 
2010. Unit 2 began operation in 1973 and is licensed by the NRC 
until 2013. 

We Energies serves more than 1.1 million electric customers in 
Wisconsin and Michigan's Upper Peninsula and more than one 
million natural gas customers in Wisconsin. Its energy prices are 
approximately 10 percent below the average for major U.S. cities. 
We Energies is the trade name of Wisconsin Electric Power Company 
and Wisconsin Gas LLC, the principal utility subsidiaries of 
Wisconsin Energy Corporation (NYSE: WEC). Visit the We Energies 
Web site at http://www.we-energies.com . Learn more about 
Wisconsin Energy Corporation by visiting 
http://www.WisconsinEnergy.com . 

	 SOURCE We Energies 

Web Site: http://www.we-energies.com 
http://www.WisconsinEnergy.com 

        Copyright � 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights 
Reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 25 Independent Weekly: Nuke plant guards under investigation

As Progress Energy investigates guards for releasing
information, security staff say vital doors still malfunction.
And the NRC can't ensure that other problems have been resolved.
	 	
B Y S U E � S T U R G I S       

 When a guard at the Shearon Harris nuclear power plant blew the 
whistle on security problems at the Progress Energy facility near 
Raleigh, he hoped regulators would step in and force the company 
to fix the problems, such as malfunctioning doors to vital parts 
of the operation. Instead, guards say, the company has focused 
its attention on finding out who spoke up. 

  December 21, 2005
   
  T R I A N G L E S 
  
Soon after nuclear watchdogs Union of Concerned Scientists of
Cambridge, Mass. and the Durham-based N.C. Waste Awareness and
Reduction Network sent a complaint detailing the allegations to
federal and state regulators and law enforcement agencies,
Progress Energy and its security contractor announced at the
guards' shift briefings that they were investigating the
improper release of sensitive security information, the guards
say. 

Meanwhile, guards report that critical security doors are still
malfunctioning. Furthermore, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
told the watchdog groups in a Dec. 19 meeting it had confirmed
that at least one vital door at the plant was broken--but that
it did not know whether the door had been fixed. The agency said
it had already been investigating about half of the watchdogs'
allegations but could not say whether any have been resolved. 

Other security concerns cited by the guards, who insisted on
anonymity, included orders to save time by not searching
incoming vehicles, widespread cheating on state security
certification tests, and weapons violations in protected areas.
Guards also say the company discourages them from reporting
on-the-job injuries, resulting in security staff working at less
than full physical capacity. 

While the guard on whom the complaint is based remained
anonymous even to UCS and N.C. WARN, the groups said they were
convinced of his reliability after extensive interviews of the
guard's positions at the plant. 

The NRC, FBI and state Attorney General's office say they are
looking into the complaint filed with them Dec. 13 by UCS and
N.C. WARN. The 10-page document details numerous security flaws
at Shearon Harris as well as external threats such as a guard
being fired on from the woods near the facility and sabotage at
the Brunswick nuclear plant outside Wilmington. It calls on the
agencies not only to investigate the allegations but also to
take immediate action to secure all doors and gates. 

Mike Saylor of the FBI's Raleigh office says his agency's
authority is limited to investigating external threats to the
plant. But the NRC Inspector General told nuclear safety expert
David Lochbaum of UCS that it is open to getting involved due to
allegations of NRC misconduct and would offer confidentiality to
guards willing to help. 

The watchdogs' complaint is based on 15 hours of interviews with
a Shearon Harris security guard who contacted N.C. WARN after
reporting problems to the NRC and its Inspector General but
seeing no action taken. Another guard interviewed separately by
The Independent confirmed the problems detailed in the
complaint. His name is being withheld to protect him from
possible retaliation. 

Days after the complaint was filed, Raleigh-based Progress still
had not repaired malfunctioning doors to vital parts of the
operation, according to two armed guards interviewed separately
by The Independent. But the company did launch an immediate
investigation into the possible release of protected security
information by the whistleblowers, the guards say--which
Progress spokesperson Rick Kimble confirms. 

"We have to clear up the release of safeguards information
first," Kimble says. If the company finds such information was
released, it would pass the details on to the NRC and FBI for
further investigation and possible prosecution, he says. 

Safeguards information includes details about methods of
protecting commercial nuclear power plants, explains NRC
spokesperson Scott Burnell. It can also include details about
the location and composition of security. 

If an individual or corporation is found to have willfully
violated safeguards regulations, the U.S. Department of Justice
can pursue criminal charges with a fine of up to $5,000 and/or a
prison term of up to two years, Burnell says. The NRC also can
impose civil sanctions, including a fine of as much as $100,000. 

Kimble also says a team of Progress managers is "looking into
every one" of the complaint's allegations. But even after the
complaint's filing, one of the guards reports opening several
critical doors without a key--something that's never supposed to
happen. 

"These are all places where it's crazy for doors not to be
secured," the guard says. 

While doors at Shearon Harris were still reportedly
malfunctioning, Progress and its security contractor began
probing the allegedly improper release of security details by
the whistleblowers. Securitas Security Services USA Inc. --the
U.S. subsidiary of Sweden-based Securitas AB, the world's
largest security firm--provides guard services at the plant. 

In a briefing of guards held soon after the complaint was
released, a Securitas supervisor announced that the company was
looking into the leak of safeguards information, a guard
reports. Guards also report being subjected to individual
interviews by Progress management in which they were asked about
the watchdogs' complaint, among other things. Securitas could
not be reached for comment. 

Concerns about the possibly improper release of security
information arise because parts of the complaint were redacted,
Kimble says. The complaint blacks out names of certain doors,
gates, buildings and persons. 

But UCS and N.C. WARN say they went beyond legal requirements to
protect security when they blacked-out sensitive details. Warren
reports that Glenn Tracy, chief of the NRC's reactor licensing
section, assured him that even the unredacted version of the
complaint did not contain safeguards information. Tracy did not
return a request for comment. 

The watchdog groups view Progress's concern about improper
disclosures as a red herring distracting from security
concerns--and as a way to intimidate guards from speaking up
about problems. N.C. WARN and UCS on Dec. 14 sent a letter to
Progress Energy Chairman and CEO Bob McGehee asking him to
prevent retaliation against the guards. 

The atmosphere of fear among the guards has led Steve Maritas,
organizing director for the Security, Police and Fire
Professionals of America, to pull plans for a union election
among guards that he was hoping to hold as soon as this month. 

"There's no way I can win now," Maritas says. 

The watchdog groups are also disturbed by state law enforcement
authorities' inaction regarding the complaint. Among the
allegations in the document was widespread cheating on state
security certification exams, which fall under the aegis of N.C.
Attorney General Roy Cooper. Spokesperson Noelle Talley says
Cooper's office passed the complaint to the Private Protective
Services Board, which directly oversees the exams, on Dec. 20. 

The attorney general should already have assured the public that
the plant has been secured--particularly the doors and gates,
says N.C. WARN Executive Director Jim Warren. In the absence of
such assurances, he says he infers that such measures have not
been taken. 

"The public deserves a lot better," Warren says. "Somebody, by
God, ought to be taking action." 

*****************************************************************
 26 Guardian Unlimited: Blair faces organised rebellion on nuclear issue
 
Patrick Wintour, chief political correspondent

Thursday December 22, 2005
The Guardian 		
 		
[Sellafield nuclear plant, where the Thorp reprocessing
plant has been closed] 

Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant. Photograph: Christopher
Furlong/Getty
 

 A group of Labour MPs are organising to prevent Tony Blair
pressing ahead with a new generation of nuclear power stations,
claiming that ministers will have to subsidise the nuclear
industry massively to make it viable. It is the first sign of
parliamentary opposition to nuclear power since the prime
minister announced an energy review in the autumn, and is backed
by the environment minister Elliot Morley.

The group, brought together by a former minister, Alan
Whitehead, is using the same tactic as the backbench opponents
of government plans to establish semi-independent state
secondary schools, publishing their own proposals in an effort
to steer policy, rather than oppose it outright. Mr Whitehead is
one of the authors of the alternative education white paper,
which set out the terms on which the rebels would accept Downing
Street's reforms.

The new 9,000 word manifesto being drafted by the backbenchers 
will set out the case for continued investment in renewable 
energy, rather than taking "a dangerous leap with nuclear". It 
will be published in February, as the government's energy review 
gets under way with a consultation document in January.

Many Labour MPs fear that Mr Blair privately favours renewing
investment in nuclear energy as the most secure way of combating
climate change, in the face of evidence that global warming is
speeding up and that domestic programmes to cut carbon emissions
are failing. Ministers believe the economics of nuclear energy
are improving as gas and oil prices rise.

The manifesto is being drawn up by Labour backbenchers with a
background in green politics who have traditionally supported
the government's reforms, and who cannot be dismissed as serial
rebels. Those involved include two members of the environmental
audit select committee, David Chaytor and Colin Challen, who
hope to use the committee's imminent report to press the
government to spell out the costs of nuclear power to consumers.
They will also press for a pledge that no decision on nuclear
power will be taken without a vote in parliament.

The group claims the indirect support of the environment
minister Elliot Morley, who in previously unreported remarks
told a seminar organised by the socialist environmentalist group
Sera: "I don't think nuclear development is economically viable,
and since no one is offering to pay, it would certainly need to
have financial support from the government. Is it the right time
for that? Should we not be putting this money into renewables
and other efficiency measures? I would prefer to see investment
in carbon-capture technologies."

The manifesto will set out a timescale showing how the
contribution to the UK's energy supply of the current nuclear
power stations could be run down over the next 20 years while
renewables, including micro-generation and wind power, could be
built up. A section will also argue that uranium provides no
greater long-term security of supply than renewables or gas.

Mr Whitehead said yesterday: "If there was a free market in
energy, ie no assistance for new nuclear build, no long term
promise of a guaranteed market and no minimum price for nuclear,
no one would build a new nuclear station. Nuclear is not
carbon-free, nor is it renewable. We have been promised by
government that there is a debate to be had, and no decisions
have been made. But there is a change in attitude in government.
Only three years ago a white paper pretty well ruled out
nuclear, but it is now centre stage."

In a speech this week, the energy minister Malcolm Wicks
suggested that the status quo in the energy market was not an
option, saying: "By 2020 we may be importing over 80% of our
annual gas requirements - last year it was around 10%. We need
to ask ourselves now if we are comfortable with this scenario as
investment decisions that will shape much of our energy mix for
the next two or three decades ahead will be made in the next 10
years or so. Government needs to give the market the clarity it
requires to ensure that these investment decisions reflect our
goals for reducing carbon emissions and achieving reasonable
energy security."
 	 	
Useful links

British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
HSE nuclear glossary
Come Clean WMD awareness programme
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute

[UP] 

      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
 		 		 		 	 	 		 		 		 	 	 		 	 	 		 	 	 	 		 	 	 	 		 		 		 	 	 
*****************************************************************
 27 [NYTr] Growing Depleted Uranium Scandal; Heads Roll at VA
 
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:21:49 -0600 (CST)

X-Fingerprint: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu-69.50

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
sent by Don Stacey - Dec 22, 2005

San Francisco Bay View  (no date supplied)
http://www.sfbayview.com/012605/headsroll012605.shtml

Heads roll at Veterans Administration 

Mushrooming depleted uranium (DU) scandal blamed

by Bob Nichols
Project Censored Award Winner

Considering the tons of depleted uranium used by the U.S., the Iraq war can
truly be called a nuclear war.  Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter charged
Monday that the reason Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi stepped
down earlier this month was the growing scandal surrounding the use of
uranium munitions in the Iraq War.

Writing in Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter No. 169, Arthur N. Bernklau,
executive director of Veterans for Constitutional Law in New York, stated,
"The real reason for Mr. Principi's departure was really never given,
however a special report published by eminent scientist Leuren Moret naming
depleted uranium as the definitive cause of the 'Gulf War Syndrome' has fed
a growing scandal about the continued use of uranium munitions by the US
Military."

Bernklau continued, "This malady (from uranium munitions), that thousands of
our military have suffered and died from, has finally been identified as the
cause of this sickness, eliminating the guessing. The terrible truth is now
being revealed."

He added, "Out of the 580,400 soldiers who served in GW1 (the first Gulf
War), of them, 11,000 are now dead! By the year 2000, there were 325,000 on
Permanent Medical Disability. This astounding number of 'Disabled Vets'
means that a decade later, 56% of those soldiers who served have some form
of permanent medical problems!" The disability rate for the wars of the last
century was 5 percent; it was higher, 10 percent, in Viet Nam.

"The VA Secretary (Principi) was aware of this fact as far back as 2000,"
wrote Bernklau. "He, and the Bush administration have been hiding these
facts, but now, thanks to Moret's report, (it) ... is far too big to hide or
to cover up!"

"Terry Jamison, Public Affairs Specialist, Office of the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Public Affairs, Department of Veterans Affairs, at the VA
Central Office, recently reported that 'Gulf Era Veterans' now on medical
disability, since 1991, number 518,739 Veterans," said Berklau.

"The long-term effects have revealed that DU (uranium oxide) is a virtual
death sentence," stated Berklau. "Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist,
who retired from the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, and was also
involved with the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid
malignancies in the soldiers (from the 2003 Iraq War) as 'spectacular . and
a matter of concern!'"

When asked if the main purpose of using DU was for "destroying things and
killing people," Fulk was more specific: "I would say it is the perfect
weapon for killing lots of people!"

Principi could not be reached for comment prior to deadline.

References

1. Depleted uranium: "Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets: A death
sentence here and abroad" by Leuren Moret,
http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml.

2. Veterans for Constitutional Law, 112 Jefferson Ave., Port Jefferson NY
11777, Arthur N. Bernklau, executive director, (516) 474-4261, fax
516-474-1968.

3. Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter. Email Gary Kohls,
gkohls@cpinternet.com, with "Subscribe" in the subject line.

Email Bob Nichols at bobnichols@cox.net.
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 28 MSNBC.com: What 'Mrs. Anthrax' Told Me - 

Newsweek The War on Iraq -
                            
Saddam Hussein's top aides just released from prison may have
stories to tell. But when it comes to Iraq, who should we trust?
  
  [Amash, saluting during the Iraqi national anthem in 2002]   
  Ali Haider / AP

Amash, saluting during the Iraqi national anthem in 2002

WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARYBy By Melinda LiuNewsweek

Dec. 22, 2005 - Shortly before the Iraq war began in March 2003,
I didn't believe Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash when she insisted, in
an interview, that Saddam Hussein's regime was not developing
biological weapons. Dubbed by Washington "Mrs. Anthrax" or
"Chemical Sally," Ammash was then Iraq's most powerful woman.
She'd been accused by U.S. investigators of heading a program,
into the mid-'90s, that involved the attempted weaponization of
anthrax, smallpox and botulin toxin. 

On Monday, her Baghdad lawyer confirmed that Ammash was one of
around two dozen Saddam-era officials released from jail without
charges. A U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad confirmed a number
of so-called "high-value detainees" had been released because
"they were not considered to be a security threat, and they were
not wanted on charges under Iraqi law. So we no longer had any
reason to continue detaining them."� 

Ammash and another woman, Dr. Rihab Rashid Taha, a
British-educated biological-weapons expert that American
officials called "Dr. Germ," were among Saddam's most notorious
scientists. They were believed to have run the Baathist regime's
biological-weapons programs. When Ammash was detained in early
May 2003, I simply assumed she would go on trial for war crimes
as one of the masterminds of a WMD program that was, after all,
the reason why the U.S. and British governments had insisted on
regime change in Baghdad.

When I interviewed Ammash, it was early March 2003 and Saddam
was still in power. Ammash was tastefully dressed in Western
clothes and jewelry-in contrast with the stern, headscarved
image that later appeared as the Five of Hearts among the
U.S.-issued deck of cards showing the 55 regime officials "most
wanted" by the American-led Coalition. Ammash was the only woman
in the deck, reflecting the fact that she was the only female on
the ruling Revolutionary Command Council, Iraq's top
decision-making body. 

During the interview, she declared: "To end one's career in
defense of Iraq is an honor." Ammash laughed while recounting
the anonymous phone calls that were bombarding her and other
Saddam aides, urging them to defect and abandon the regime for
the sake of their families. She said she'd received e-mails
filled with computer viruses, as many as 18 in a single day. "It
doesn't fit the image of the U.S.," she complained, evoking the
notion that gentlemen don't mess with a lady's e-mail. 

Articulate and well-mannered, Ammash had been educated in the
United States; she received a masters from Texas Woman's
University in Denton and a doctorate in microbiology from the
University of Missouri. She was said to have been a key figure
in Saddam's biotech and genetic research programs and to have
been trained by Nassir al-Hindawi, the alleged father of Iraq's
biological weapons efforts. However Ammash told me her
scientific work focused on the what she called the carcinogenic
effects of depleted uranium, which had been present in some U.S.
bombs and missiles during the 1991 war to liberate Kuwait from
Iraqi occupation.

Of course, I didn't believe everything she said (and she
probably didn't believe I was a journalist acting in good faith,
either). Although we talked for nearly two and a half hours over
tea, this was hardly a normal interview. It was a chat on the
eve of war. Ammash and I both knew that bombs would soon be
falling on Baghdad and that Saddam's regime was, most likely, in
its last days. 

One thing Ammash said did stick in my memory. She stressed that
Iraqis remained fiercely proud of their civilization despite
decades of violence and deprivation. "This country is
Mesopotamia. Ninety-nine percent of the American people don't
know the country they'll soon be bombing is Mesopotamia," she
said. "This nation has been serving civilization for 6,000
years. We invented the first alphabet . every American who
enjoys education owes that to us."� 

To be sure, the "Mesopotamia card" was part of a spiel that
Saddam's aides had propagated before the war in an effort to
stir up international sympathies. But pride in their history is
also one reason why even Iraqis who opposed Saddam remain so
resentful of what they see as foreign occupation. When I was in
Iraq on assignment for a couple of months this past summer, some
Baghdad friends who'd welcomed the sight of American Marines in
2003 now nurtured a festering and deep-seated ambivalence about
the U.S.-led occupation. Some said they actually preferred the
yoke of an Iraqi autocrat such as Saddam to the rule of an
American conqueror, even a benign one. 

Today it's obvious that many aspects of the U.S. presence in
Iraq have been far from benign. When Ammash's husband, Ahmed
Makki Mohammed Saeed, told me in 2004 that he'd been "tortured"
while being detained by U.S. authorities, I wasn't sure whether
to believe him. Revelations about U.S. abuses at Abu Ghraib
prison had not yet surfaced. And his accounts sounded bizarre:
being subjected to hours and hours of earsplitting American rap
music laced with profanity and being doused with cold water,
then forced to stand for hours in front of a freezing
air-conditioner turned up full blast.

Still, the sheer weight of detail suggested to me that he wasn't
making it up. And subsequent tales of torture from other former
detainees indicated that he might actually have been one of the
luckier ones among them. 

The Saddam-era officials who are now suddenly free will 
undoubtedly have their own stories to tell-assuming they feel 
safe enough to talk. (Some officials in the current 
Shiite-dominated government have already vowed to track them 
down.) Ammash's husband earlier claimed that she had changed 
dramatically during detention. A petite woman to begin with, 
she'd lost nearly 20 pounds, and her once jet-black hair had 
turned white "nearly overnight," he said. Her lawyer had argued 
for leniency on medical grounds because he said her detention 
brought on a recurrence of breast cancer.

A number of those freed were reported to have been flown out of 
Iraq aboard U.S. military aircraft out of concern that their 
lives are in danger. In addition to Ammash and Taha, the 
detainees released include former education minister Humam Abd 
al-Khaliq, whom United Nations weapons inspectors accused of 
trying to coverup Iraq's nuclear weapons program before the 1991 
war; Hossam Mohammed Amin, who'd headed the weapons inspections 
directorate, and Aseel Tabra, a former Iraqi Olympic Committee 
official and secretary to Saddam's late son Uday.

Why now? In the wake of Iraq's elections, U.S. officials hope to 
indicate to hard-line Sunnis and some former Saddam loyalists 
that they too have a stake in the new Iraq. Sunni insurgents 
often have demanded prisoner releases as a condition for ending 
their violent rebellion. A particularly ruthless group of Sunni 
kidnappers specifically demanded that Iraqi women 
detainees-Ammash and Taha key among them-be freed last year after 
Briton Kenneth Bigley was taken hostage. He was killed in 
September 2004 after the kidnappers' deadline passed.

It'll take more than a few prisoner releases to convince Sunni 
insurgents to lay down their arms. On Monday, an extremist group 
calling itself the Islamic Army of Iraq posted video on a Web 
site purporting to show a man being shot in the back of the head. 
It was impossible to identify the victim, though the video also 
showed an identity card belonging to American contractor Ronald 
Allen Schulz. Eleven days earlier, the group had claimed to have 
killed Shultz.

The timing of the gestures of leniency also came just a few days 
after President George W. Bush conceded that 2003 intelligence 
reports on Iraq's purported WMD programs were flawed. Now we're 
being told by media quoting a former Western arms inspector, that 
Ammash was cooperative in detention and provided U.S. 
interrogators with credible evidence that Saddam did not have an 
active WMD program before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. When 
Saddam was still in power, most of us journalists reporting in 
Iraq simply assumed it was impossible to get a straight story out 
of his officials. Now we know Saddam's aides weren't the only 
ones spinning the truth. It's hard to know what to believe any 
more.

c 2005 Newsweek, Inc.

MSNBC.com  
*****************************************************************
 29 WHO TV: Most plant workers receive compensation

Des Moines: 

MIDDLETOWN, Iowa Most of the former workers at the Iowa Army 
Ammunition Plant in Middletown entitled to compensation for 
work-related illnesses have been paid -- but have kept it secret.

One former worker says he didn't want to release the news 
"because of gold diggers."

About two-thirds of the 350 former workers who were approved to 
receive 150-thousand dollars have gotten the money. 

That's according to Iowa Senator Tom Harkin's office.

Spokeswoman Allison Dobson says the remaining claims are waiting 
approval from the U-S Labor Department.

The ammo plant in southeast Iowa produced nuclear weapons during 
the Cold War.

A program created by Congress aims to compensate the former 
workers who say they contracted cancer or other serious 
illnesses.                                                      

Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This 
material may not be published, broadcast,
*****************************************************************
 30 Gallup Independent: Company increases uranium leases

December 20, 2005: 

By Kathy Helms Staff Writer 

GRANTS � While the Navajo Nation has been focused on preventing
in-situ leach mining of uranium by Hydro Resources Inc., a
Canadian firm, Strathmore Minerals Corp., has tripled its leases
and claims in the Grants Uranium District. 

According to press information from Strathmore, the company has
acquired 13 State of New Mexico uranium leases totaling 6,766
acres and 186 mining claims totaling 4,178 acres, for a combined
total of 10,944 acres. Strathmore will pay $30,000 to acquire
the lands. 

Many of the properties had prior exploration which identified
significant amounts of uranium, Strathmore said. The Grants
Uranium District is considered one of the premier uranium mining
districts in the world. Past production exceeds 340 million
pounds of Uranium-308 or yellowcake, which is used as a
feedstock for uranium fuel enrichment and fuel pellet
fabrication. 

U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., has invited Louisiana
Enrichment Services (LES) to build a gas-centrifuge uranium
enrichment facility in the Hobbs/Eunice, N.M. area. LES's
National Enrichment Facility is currently undergoing the
permitting process. 

On Sept. 1, Strathmore announced that its Santa Fe uranium mine
development office had commissioned a Cultural Resource
Clearance Survey of its Church Rock in-situ uranium property in
McKinley County. Gallup water board officials have said they
believe in-situ leach mining of uranium is safe. 

Jurisdiction blurred
 At the same time, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is
now seeking comment on the possible Indian Country status of
land to be used for Hydro Resources Inc.'s (HRI) Church Rock
in-situ leach mine. 

EPA must determine whether any of the approximately 160 acres of
land located in the southeast portion of Section 8 is part of a
dependent Indian community under U.S. Code and thus considered
to be "Indian Country." 

The area historically has been part of the Eastern Agency of the
Navajo Nation. 

EPA must determine whether it or the New Mexico Environment
Department is the appropriate agency to issue an underground
injection control permit under the Safe Drinking Water Act. This
would set a precedent for other future in-situ operations within
Eastern Agency. 

Comments or requests for a public hearing must be received by
Jan. 3, 2006. Details can be found in the Nov. 2 edition of the
Federal Register (Volume 70, Number 211, p. 66402-66403). 

On July 20, 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board issued a decision reducing HRI's
proposed groundwater cleanup standard from 0.44 mg/L to 0.03
mg/L, or equal to the EPA standard. 

The decision stemmed from a challenge by Eastern Navajo Din�
Against Uranium Mining (ENDAUM) one of the grassroots
organizations advising Dine Bidziil and Southwest Research
Information Center. 

As a result of the NRC board's decision, HRI was directed to
reduce its cleanup standard to the recommended EPA level and to
revise its Restoration Action Plan to include a cost estimate
for expenses associated with decontamination. 

Homestake Mine also is seeking a less stringent groundwater
cleanup standard from New Mexico Department of Environment. 

Beware: Mines ahead
 Strathmore says one 640-acre section in the Grants District
located south of the company's Roco Honda uranium deposit, has
had more than 50 drill holes completed, one of which ran into an
18 foot uranium deposit and another that intersected 10 feet of
U308. 

The company said it believes these are representative of the
southern extensions of the Roco Honda deposit, which has a
historical resource estimate of 11,481,000 pounds of uranium.
The resource estimate was completed by Kerr-McGee in 1995 and is
considered reliable, Strathmore said. 

Several of the claim groups and leases are located south and
west of Strathmore's Nose Rock project. Other leases and claims
are located in Dalton Pass, Church Rock, Borrego Pass and
Ambrosia Lake areas. 

Strathmore said in August that it had chosen to pursue permits
for its Church Rock and Roco Honda properties based on the
extensive drilling that already had been performed. 

Updated resource calculations for the Church Rock and Roco Honda
properties Strathmore's first two projects to be considered for
production have been going through the review process. 

The company said it already has met with New Mexico Gov. Bill
Richardson and the governor of Wyoming, and was to meet with
appropriate state regulatory personnel in Santa Fe and Cheyenne. 

Strathmore acquired approximately 15,000 acres in March
consisting of State of Wyoming uranium leases in the Shirley
Basin, Great Divide Basin, Powder River and Wind River basins.
In July, it acquired 165 unpatented mining claims on 3,300 acres
in Wyoming's Powder River Basin. 

The company apparently is confident in its future in-situ leach
mining of uranium in New Mexico. Strathmore said it went ahead
and retained several subcontractors while still preparing
documents for submission as part of the various permit
applications requiring approval before the company can begin
producing uranium. Baseline studies are scheduled to begin in
spring 2006. 

Going around Navajo?
 Strathmore's Sept. 1 announcement that it plans to develop its
mineral resource at Church Rock using in-situ extraction
techniques presents an interesting legal question in light of
the Din� Protection Act of 2005 passed in April which banned
uranium mining and processing in Navajo Indian Country. 

The company's Church Rock property consists of mineral rights
owned by virtue of the mining laws of the United States,
according to Strathmore, and is located on land owned by the
federal government and administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land
Management (BLM). 

The Church Rock property is located south of the Navajo
Reservation and immediately northeast of HRI's uranium property. 

Strathmore has retained the services of Lone Mountain
Archaeological Services Inc., a New Mexico cultural resources
consulting firm under contract with BLM to provide on-call
archaeological services to the federal government in the
southwestern United States, the company said. 

Sources familiar with the project said that since all of the
property Strathmore would seek to develop is located on BLM
land, the company doesn't believe it needs permission from the
Navajo Nation to develop the mine. All they presumably would
need is the mine permit and the reclamation plans. 

The property is located within the boundaries of the State of
New Mexico. Navajo's position has been that it's within the
boundaries of the Navajo Nation. 

Legally, that could be quite a stretch, sources say; however,
where there is a definite question of Navajo law is in regard to
Navajo trust land because the access road to bring the uranium
to market would be across Navajo trust land within the
boundaries of the reservation. 

Sources say the protection act makes it clear that even
transporting the uranium across Navajoland would raise an issue
of getting permission from the tribe; however, Strathmore
reportedly is focusing its attention on obtaining federal
permissions and will not be engaging the Navajo Nation unless
it's to apply for a right of way across trust land. 

Strathmore announced in March 2004 that it had acquired a 100
percent interest in the Ram Claims located in the Church Rock
Mining District near the western end of the Grants Uranium Belt;
and a 100 percent interest in the Roco Honda deposit located
between Ambrosia Lake and Mt. Taylor in the central district. 

Both deposits are located within the Jurassic Westwater Canyon
Formation and may be amenable to in-situ leach mining,
Strathmore said.     

Tuesday
 December 20, 2005
 
Gallup Independent. 
Send questions or comments to gallpind@cia-g.com  
*****************************************************************
 31 Columbian: Opinion - Hanford Funded

Columbian.com - 

Serving Clark County, Washington

				
[Opinion]                                                                                                                                                                 
					     					     					   					
Thursday, December 22, 2005            

Columbian editorial writers                             

If nuclear waste ever leaks into the Columbia River from the
Hanford plant in the Tri-Cities area, guess whose doorstep is
most threatened. The correct answer is Vancouver, largest city
directly on the banks of the Columbia River. 

That's why continued funding by Congress of the nuclear cleanup
at Hanford should be received with great relief in our
downstream community. To make up for Hurricane Katrina costs,
the administration had proposed reducing Hanford funds from $690
million to $626 million. In addition, the Bush administration
wanted to peel off $100 million from 2005 construction funds
earmarked but not yet spent, citing the halt of construction of
a cleanup plant due to seismic worries and cost overruns. 

Washington state's delegation reacted with bipartisan anger and
effectiveness. Gov. Christine Gregoire threatened to sue if
reductions were approved. 

A quick primer: Hanford, a super-secret plant during World War
II, produced plutonium for the first nuclear bombs. In the 1980s
and the Cold War, it made nuclear weapons materials. Nine
nuclear reactors once operated on the site. The 560-acre Hanford
Nuclear Reservation contains 177 underground tanks holding 50
million gallons of nuclear waste, and two large underground
water basins that enclose spent nuclear fuel rods. The
underground tanks have leaked in the past. 

A vitrification plant to convert nuclear waste into glass logs
for permanent storage is considered the ultimate safeguard. The
Energy Department, which manages the cleanup, temporarily halted
work on the plant. Cleanup cost is estimated at $50 billion to
$60 billion. Cleanup efforts are expected to be active until
2035. 

Sen. Patty Murray's office published a Hanford report indicating
the plant converting waste to glass should be operating by 2007. 

U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, a Republican whose district includes
Hanford, told Associated Press the proposal deserved the
bi-partisan opposition it received. 

Strong support of cleanup efforts is critical to the well-being
of Washingtonians. Cleanup efforts must be aggressively pursued
until the menace at Hanford has been overcome and eliminated. 		

  ©2005 Columbian.com. All Rights Reserved - Use of this site
*****************************************************************
 32 Bradenton Herald: Tallevast teaches us importance of medical history 

| 12/22/2005 | 

Posted on Thu, Dec. 22, 2005 

Roots run deep in the historic community of Tallevast. 

Several core families - among them the Bryants, the Jeffersons,
the Wards, the Smiths, the Colemans and the Shaws - form the
backbone of Tallevast's population. 

Of course, there were many other families that came to the
little village in southern Manatee County, but most residents
can trace their roots back to those original settlers. 

As an extended family, Tallevast residents hold much in common: 

� The land that they have called home for decades. 

� The traditions that they share, like celebrating Christmas
with a string of parties held in each others' homes, the
community center and the two churches where most of Tallevast
worships - Mt. Tabor Missionary Baptist Church and Bryant Chapel
- during the holidays. 

� The threat they face from the toxins that lie under their
homes, the industrial waste that has seeped from a broken sump
into a plume now known to cover more than 131 acres - and the
boundaries have yet to be found. 

Residents are also united by their need to find medical records
that will help paint a portrait of the community's health over
the years. 

That data may help to shed light on what health effects
Tallevast residents may have experienced and whether those
conditions or diseases may be related to the industrial waste in
the soil and water that has leaked from the former Loral
Beryllium Co. plant at 1600 Tallevast Road. 

There is a lesson here for all of us on the importance of
medical records, of knowing the generations that came before us
and keeping an account of the health histories of our forbearers
that may have some impact on our own wellbeing in years to come. 

In Tallevast, those connections branch out in all directions,
through the generations. 

The Bryant family is a good example. 

Eli Bryant was born on March 18, 1882 in Jasper in Hamilton
County. Upon moving to Tallevast he founded Bryant Chapel. 

His children were Stokes, Frank, Alberta, Sammy Joseph,
Vanester, Carletha, Walter, Essie Mae, Ida Bell, William and
Lora. 

Eli's brother, Walter, had seven sons: Arthur, Walter Jr.
Harnell, Fred , Carver, Ulysses and Howard. 

A third brother, Thomas, had eight children: Louise, James,
Carter, Omero, Ponzy, Bernice, Thomas Jr. and Cornelius. 

These children of the original Bryants of Tallevast went on to
have families of their own, just as the sons and daughters of
the other core families. 

The Bryant lineage is but one branch of Tallevast's extended
family tree. 

Today, because of the threat the plume poses to the residents of
Tallevast, it is vital to know how that extended family tree has
grown over the years. 

While stories and anecdotes can trace much of that history,
medical data and records are vital to that's history's accuracy. 

Covering the Tallevast story has made me aware of how much I do
not know about the health history of the generations that came
before me - despite the fact that on my mother's side we can
trace our roots back to 14th century France and on my father's
side we can go back several generations to Germany. 

Covering health issues - especially the medical miracles coming
out of cracking the genetic code - has made me aware of the
importance of the information stored in our individual DNA. 

Learning about the potential risks and health effects of widely
used chemicals and other pollutants has helped me realize how
important it is to know about places where one lives and works,
from childhood through adulthood. 

Putting together that health history of one's family tree will
provide answers not only for today but for generations to come. 

I suggest taking on that task would be good New Year's
resolution for us all. 

Donna Wright, health and social services reporter, can be
reached at 745-7049 or at dwright@HeraldToday.com

*****************************************************************
 33 RGJ.com: Anti-Yucca tactics raising project costs
 
Reno, Nevada, USA  775-788-6200    December 22, 2005                                            
		 			 			 			RGJ.com 			Weather 			Calendar 			Jobs 			Cars
Regarding your Dec. 8 article on costs of the Yucca Mountain
project including the needed railroad, it is my firm opinion
that if the false propaganda agents of certain hydrocarbon
companies and countries would just go away and allow the nuclear
scientists and engineers alone, the cost of Yucca Mountain would
be greatly reduced.

These anti-Yucca Mountain tactics are exactly like the ones that
were used to try to stop the construction of our over-100
present-day-operating nuclear plants that have been operating
for decades without a serious accident, tactics that caused
undue much higher costs of our existing nuclear plants.

When the entire Yucca Mountain project is completed, we will
find that it was the best $60 billion ever spent. Cutting our
electric power costs in half, stopping pollution of the
atmosphere and the taking of our precious oxygen to create CO2,
plus the many other good reasons to "go nuclear" will show that
this money was well spent.

Art Johnston, Reno 

The Reno Gazette-Journal

*****************************************************************
 34 Salt Lake Tribune: Kudos to Bishop, Huntsman

Opinion 

Article Last Updated: 12/21/2005 11:58:33 PM                              
			 		
  Kudos to the Utah congressional delegation, especially U.S.
Rep. Rob Bishop, and to Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., who kept his
word, for designating wilderness in the Cedar Mountains and
blocking a Private Fuel Storage rail spur into Skull Valley. 

   They overcame their allergy to wilderness and the Southern
Utah Wilderness Alliance, made up with the Nevada delegation,
and persisted despite the odds against them to keep Utah from
becoming a sacrifice zone for nuclear utilities. 

   By making common cause with Nevada's leaders on Yucca
Mountain, we are also less likely to have nuclear rods shipped
through our neighborhoods. 	 	 	 	 	 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		
			 				 				 				 				 				 				 				 			 	 	 	 	 	 	 		
And, to top it off, our grandchildren will get to experience the 
wilderness that we enjoy and appreciate. I am grateful for their 
hard work. 
    
   Chip Ward 
   Grantsville 
    
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 35 Deseret News: Nuclear waste shift may aid PFS 

[deseretnews.com] 

Thursday, December 22, 2005 

Opposition to Yucca renews the focus on proposed Utah site 

By Suzanne Struglinski Deseret Morning News 

WASHINGTON � A new effort to keep nuclear waste at commercial 
power plants may help keep Private Fuel Storage alive, according 
to its chairman, but Utah lawmakers will continue to fight it. 

['Photo'] Deseret Morning News graphic 

John Parkyn, Private Fuel Storage chairman and chief executive 
officer, said by supporting a bill that "shuts Yucca down," Sen. 
Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has shifted sides in the nuclear waste 
debate. This could allow companies to renew their involvement 
with Private Fuel Storage in the future or encourage other ones 
to sign up that would need storage. 

"It's a question of where is the fuel going to go and is 
this country going to honor the 1982 vote," Parkyn said. "We 
have to have a place to put spent fuel." 

Congress voted in 1982 to take nuclear waste from power 
plants and store it in a federal geologic repository. Congress 
eventually approved Yucca Mountain in Nevada as the site but it 
did not open in 1998 as planned. Utilities have been waiting for 
the government to come through with a storage site, and eight 
companies created PFS, which planned to use the Goshute Skull 
Valley Land in Tooele County. 

Four of the eight original investors, making up about 68 
percent of the consortium, have written Hatch this month pulling 
their financial backing of PFS. All of them mentioned the 
government's progress on Yucca or any federal storage facility 
as a reason for their decision. 

"Everything is predicated on progress at Yucca Mountain," 
Parkyn said. 

Three of the companies that have changed their minds � 
Florida Power and Light, Southern Company and Entergy � were 
part of the six pledging to Hatch and Utah Republican Sen. Bob 
Bennett in 2002 that they would not put any money toward 
constructing PFS "so long as the Yucca Mountain project is 
approved by Congress and repository development proceeds in a 
timely fashion." 

"We want to emphasize that our clear preference is that 
Yucca Mountain licensing, construction and operation proceed in 
a timely manner," the six companies wrote in 2002. "We 
understand and respect your opposition to PFS, and want to make 
it clear that our support for PFS comes entirely from the past 
failures of the United States government to fulfill its 
obligations under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and concerns 
about the timely development of the Yucca Mountain facility." 

Xcel Energy, which held 33 percent of the consortium, was 
not on the 2002 letter but told Hatch on Dec. 8 it also would 
hold future investments. Entergy does not mention Yucca 
specifically in its letter but wants to see progress toward 
"federally sponsored away-from-reactor storage and disposal for 
the nation's spent nuclear fuel." 

Parkyn said the pledge was conditional on Hatch and 
Bennett's support of Yucca. Each voted in favor of Yucca in 
2002, but Bennett announced his opposition for the project in 
September and Hatch still supports Yucca. 

Hatch put his name on a bill introduced by Senate 
Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, 
R-Nev., and Bennett, that would allow companies to use federal 
money now slated to build Yucca to store waste in dry containers 
on site at commercial nuclear reactors. The Nevada and Utah 
House members introduced an identical bill in their chamber. 

"Read the letters then read the bill. See if you think 
its consistent," Parkyn said. "He (Hatch) no longer supports 
Yucca Mountain or he wouldn't have signed onto that bill." 

Hatch has been careful to make clear in his statements 
that he still supports Yucca Mountain and that his "overall 
strategy" is to find alternatives to the country's nuclear waste 
problem. 

Hatch does not see this as a "stop Yucca bill" or as a 
permanent solution, according to his office, which points out 
the bill does not saying anything about this being a permanent 
alternative to Yucca. He acknowledges the plants need to move 
their waste, and he is committed to keeping all options open 
except for PFS, which he calls a "lamebrained" plan. 

Parkyn said the "Reid-Hatch bill" is likely to start a 
national debate on the country's nuclear waste policy. He said 
it will be a question of whether to continue with Yucca 
Mountain, move to an interim site like PFS or leave the waste 
where it is. 

"We now have an honest-to-God bill that revises that 1982 
(Nuclear Waste) policy act," Parkyn said. "Believe me that is 
not going to die in some committee. This thing is going to get a 
floor debate." 

He said the combination of Reid's leadership position and 
Hatch's seniority in the senate, along with the amount of 
senators that have waste in their states that they want moved, 
will keep the issue alive. Hatch is up for re-election in 2006, 
as well as all the House members. Some may want the issue punted 
until 2007 but that could leave it open still for the 
presidential contest in 2008. 

"I don't think there is any chance the debate won't come 
up," Parkyn said. 

Parkyn said the outcome of any debate determines the 
future of PFS, he said. Companies that will need to use PFS will 
pay for it, as has always been the plan. Those opting to not 
invest in it right now are making their own financial decision. 
Future events could allow them to come back or other companies 
not even involved with the project now may opt to get involved. 
It will really be up to the individual companies with nuclear 
waste. 

Of the four remaining companies invested in PFS, only 
Genoa Fuel Tech, a subsidiary of Dairyland Power Cooperative 
with 11.8 percent interest in PFS, is the only original investor 
left that has not made any changes to its plans. It has a 
non-operating nuclear power plant along the Mississippi River 
that it wants to decommission, but it has no place to put the 
waste. 

Parkyn, who worked at Dairyland's decommissioned plant, 
said dry cask storage does not help him because it still keeps 
the waste sitting there as it has been for almost 19 years. 
Parkyn would not provide a specific breakdown of the companies 
interest in PFS, but Hatch's office did. 

First Energy, based in Akron, Ohio, has a 6.9 percent 
share. It will remain on through the licensing phase, and no 
decision has been made on whether it will still honor its pledge 
not to move on to construction. 

American Electric Power has a 10.5 percent share but is 
not contributing any more money at this point, Cook Nuclear plan 
spokesman Bill Schalk said. He said he was not aware of any 
letters going to Hatch at this point, but there are no plans to 
contribute toward construction. 

"We don't believe Private Fuel Storage will be available 
to meet storage needs for Cook Plant," Schalk said. AEP owns 
Cook Plant in southwestern Michigan. He said the plant has space 
in the fuel pool until 2012 and that dry cask storage is its 
best option. Southern California Edison, which has just a 3 
percent share in PFS does not have any immediate plans to store 
waste at PFS, according to spokesman Ray Golden. The company has 
not made any financial contributions to PFS since 1999. It has 
developed its own on-site storage, so the need for an interim 
site is not as great. 

E-mail: sstruglinski@desnews.com			 		 		 

� 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company 	 		 			 		 	 [ /] 
*****************************************************************
 36 Sify: Govt proposes to set up uranium plant                 

PTI                   
      
Thursday, 22 December , 2005, 17:10                   

New Delhi: Government is proposing to set up a uranium mining and 
processing plant at Nalgona in Andhra Pradesh, Rajya Sabha was 
informed on Thursday. 

In a written reply, Minister of State in Prime Minister's Office
Prithviraj Chavan said Uranium Corporation of India Ltd proposes
to set up an opencast mine and an underground mine at Lambapur
and two underground mines at Peddagattu in Nalgonda. |<font
color="#0033FF">Read more Finance news.</font>| 

UCIL also proposes to set up a uranium processing plant at
Seripally village, Devarakonda Mandal in Andhra Pradesh at
estimated cost of Rs 558.42 crore. 

Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) has given the site
clearance and an application has been submitted to MOEF for
environmental clearance in respect of setting up of mines. 		  
	 
  � Copyright Sify Ltd, 1998-2004. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 37 Whitehaven News: Sellafield strike threat put on hold

Published on 22/12/2005                                                                                                                                              
                                                        
By Alan Irving
 
UNIONS at Sellafield have made a “no strike pledge” during
the next three months while a new nuclear pensions deal is put
in the public spotlight.
 
The threat of industrial action has been looming over workers’
concerns that any new deal might fall short of existing civil
service pension rights.
 
Sellafield’s new owners, the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority, want Sellafield’s 8,000 British Nuclear Group
workers to accept an industry-wide pension scheme which would
cover them in any transfer to new employers once lucrative site
work has been put out to contract. 

It would probably mean the workforce moving on to the payroll of
major American or French companies, especially if British
Nuclear Group is sold off next year.
 
In the last week, the NDA has put the pension proposals out to
public consultation.
 
Peter Vaughan, the NDA’s head of pensions, said: “A key
feature of the proposed pension scheme is that staff
transferring from existing schemes will be entitled to the same
type and value of benefits they currently enjoy.”
 
But Peter Kane, convenor of the GMB, Sellafield’s biggest
industrial union, said: “People are still concerned and we
don’t see why our pension proposals should be put out to a
wide audience which gives anybody the chance to have a say. What
I can say is that over the next three months while the
consultations take place there will be no industrial action.
What happens after that remains to be seen.”
 
Brian Hough, for the NDA, said: “One of the things we are
charged with under the Energy Act is to be extremely open and
transparent in everything we do. A lot of people interested in
the nuclear industry use our website as a useful source of
information. As far as the pensions scheme is concerned we would
expect the vast majority of comments to come from groups or
organisations who have more of a detailed interest than members
of the general public.”
 
A special working group is being set up to allow national union
leaders, including specialist lawyers, the chance to have an
input.
 
*****************************************************************
 38 [NukeNet] Business as Usual: Nuclear Watch and Tri-Valley
 
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:36:22 -0800

<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

                 Nuclear Watch New Mexico * Tri-Valley CAREs

for more information, contact
Jay Coghlan, Executive Director, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico, 505.989-7342
Marylia Kelley, Executive Director, Tri-Valley CAREs, 925.443-7148

for immediate release, December 21, 2005

Nuclear Weapons Business as Usual:
Despite Past Performances Bechtel and UC Awarded Los Alamos Contract

Santa Fe, NM and Livermore, CA - Today, the Department of Energy (DOE)
awarded $512 million over seven years for the management contract of Los
Alamos National Laboratory to "Los Alamos National Security LLC," a
corporate consortium consisting of Bechtel, Inc. and the University of
California as the main partners. In verbal remarks while announcing the
award, DOE Secretary Samuel Bodman noted how Los Alamos created a new era
for mankind with the creation of nuclear weapons, comparable to the
invention of the printing press, all "in the highest ideals of peace and
civilization."

DOE officials repeatedly stressed that, in their view, a great strength of
the UC/Bechtel proposal is that it "provides a forum for the integration of
the nuclear weapons complex as a whole." Los Alamos is one of eight sites
in the complex, which is now at a turning point. Despite the investment of
$68 billion into the so-called Stockpile Stewardship Program, whose claimed
purpose was to ensure existing nuclear weapons reliability without
full-scale testing, all three design labs (including Los Alamos) are
claiming the Program is no longer sustainable. Instead, they are arguing
for new designs to ensure reliability, but their real concern appears to be
that the existing weapons are politically too big to use - - they want
smaller, more "usable" weapons, and nuclear "bunker-busters" to attack
buried targets, as per the Bush Administration's 2002 Nuclear Posture
Review. Additionally, new draft Pentagon doctrine proposed to give regional
commanders increased authority to call upon the President for authorization
to use nuclear weapons for a variety of reasons, including "rapid and
favorable war termination on U.S. terms."

The nuclear weapons complex exists to support these policies, which
Tri-Valley CAREs and Nuclear Watch New Mexico believe run counter to the
highest ideals of peace and civilization. Through its award apparently
Bechtel and UC seek to lead in the further integration of this growing
weapons complex, which is perhaps already well exemplified at Los Alamos.
The Lab is not only a premier nuclear weapons design facility, but also, in
the DOE's own words, the second largest production site, with increased
plutonium pit ("triggers") production on its way. Total Los Alamos Lab
funding is currently two-thirds for nuclear weapons research, development,
testing and production programs, with, for example, no current funding for
renewable energy technologies.

During the award announcement a DOE official noted that UC "has had
concerns with regards to past performance," a diplomatic reference to the
past decade of security, safety, and fiscal management problems and
scandals. In fact, DOE was so displeased with UC performance in 2004 that
it withheld two-thirds of the performance-based LANL management fee.
Nevertheless, DOE officials declared today that Lab operations will be
improved simply because the four corporate partners will bring "what they
do best" to LANL management, while giving no examples or details. The DOE
also asserted today that federal oversight would not be diminished during
the contract transition, perhaps true because it has already been so
reduced. The Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board, an independent safety board chartered by Congress, has
recently noted that federal oversight at LANL is only a third of what is 
needed.

Bechtel and its subsidiaries also have a long and checkered history with
DOE. In July 2003, a partnership of Bechtel and BWX Technologies refused to
release investigation reports on a nuclear accident at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory. Just this month, DOE released a report highly critical of
Bechtel's construction of the Hanford Vitrification Plant, designed to
glassify high-level radioactive waste, whose cost overruns and delays are
jeopardizing legally required milestones for cleanup of the country's most
contaminated site. In 2003 Bechtel was fined $192,500 for a series of
violations at Oak Ridge and Paducah, KY. In May 2005, BWXT and Bechtel were
fined $123,750 for nuclear safety violations associated with a procedure to
remove a cracked explosive component from a retired nuclear weapon at
Pantex, TX. Outside of DOE work, the EPA has identified Bechtel as
responsible for 730 incidents of hazardous waste spill and the Corporation
was fined $31 million dollars for cost overruns on the "Big Dig" in Boston.
Still, all is overlooked while DOE asserts that Bechtel's corporate
expertise will bring business excellence to LANL.

Jay Coghlan, Executive Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, commented,
"Most of all the award to the UC/Bechtel team smacks of being a political
decision to protect the privileged lifestyles of Los Alamos County, which
the census bureau just identified as the richest county in the country. I
think that DOE just didn't want to upset the UC gravy train. Given the
University's and Bechtel's past performances, I don't see how an objective
decision contract could have given them the contract award."

Marylia Kelley, Executive Director of the Livermore, California-based
Tri-Valley CAREs commented: "With this first ever competitively bid
contract process, DOE had an historic opportunity to bring a needed 'breath
of fresh air' to Los Alamos Lab's future - and by extension to the nation
and world. However, from the narrow requirements published in the Request
for Proposals onward, the Department sought instead to maintain 'business
as usual' for nuclear weapons programs. In this regard, neither of the
final two bidders offered a new vision for Los Alamos." Kelley added, "Here
in California, we will continue to advocate for civilian missions for
Livermore Lab in its upcoming contract process."

There were three declared bidding teams for the Los Alamos contract:
University of California/Bechtel Corporation; Lockheed Martin/University of
Texas; and Nuclear Watch New Mexico/Tri-Valley CAREs. The last team offered
a real alternative and proposed to subordinate LANL's aggressive nuclear
weapons programs under a Lab Office of Nonproliferation that would comply
with international treaties, such as the 1970 NonProliferation Treaty. This
would have provided solid leadership by example in countering the nation's
gravest security threat, recognized by both presidential candidates - - the
proliferation of nuclear weapons. Sadly, DOE summarily rejected that
proposal, and now the bid has been awarded to more business as usual.

###
The rejected NukeWatch/TVC contract bid is available at
www.trivalleycares.org and www.nukewatch.org.

Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551

<http://www.trivalleycares.org> - is our web site address. Please visit us
there!

(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax



_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 39 Santa Fe New Mexican: The new LANL contract     

 Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:25 pm   							 						

By THE NEW MEXICAN              

What: A new contract between the U.S. Department of Energy
and Los Alamos National Security LLC., which is a partnership
between the University of California, Bechtel National, BWX
Technologies Inc. and Washington Group International. 

Length: Seven years. Financial incentives: The company could
earn up to $79 million a year for good work and an extension of
the contract term. 

Takeover date: June 1. The University of California will manage
the lab until then. 

New boss: Michael Anastasio, currently the director at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, will take over as director of Los
Alamos. Employee status: Lab employees will become employees of
Los Alamos National Security after the takeover next year. The
contract requires all employees be rehired, except for some top
managers. 

Pensions and benefits: For retirees , their plans will
continue under the University of California system. Retiree
medical benefits will be provided by the new company. For
current employees, the pensions and benefits must be
substantially equivalent to what they have now with the
University of California. The details of the benefits package
have to be worked out between Los Alamos National Security and
the government in the coming months. However, New Mexicos
congressional delegation, in particular, has pushed for a strong
benefits package to attract and keep top scientists at the lab.
		 	   	 	 	 			
 		   			 		   	 		 						
Privacy Policy | �2005, Santa Fe New Mexican, all rights 
reserved. Opinions expressed by readers do
*****************************************************************
 40 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Energy Department opposes elk hunts on Hanford Reach

[seattlepi.com]     

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 � Last updated 11:00 p.m. PT 

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 	 		

RICHLAND, Wash. -- A proposal to include public or tribal
hunting in a plan for managing elk at the Hanford Reach National
Monument may be shelved after the U.S. Department of Energy says
it would be inconsistent with the site's overall management
plan. 		

The Energy Department issued its position late last week in a
written public comment to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
That agency manages Hanford Reach, a free-flowing stretch of the
Columbia River bordering the Hanford nuclear reservation. The
reach and the nuclear site are owned by the Energy Department. 		

Wildlife managers estimate the reach's elk population at close
to 800 animals - hundreds more than some scientists believe the
area can support. Area farmers complain that the elk are
damaging their crops. The state has paid more than $500,000 in
crop damages by the herd since 2000. 		

In November, the Fish and Wildlife Service released for public
comment three alternatives for managing the elk. The agency's
preferred alternative called for controlled public hunting, a
trap and relocation program and, if necessary, a government
cull, in which wildlife officers would reduce the size of the
herd. 		

Mike Ritter, Fish and Wildlife's deputy project leader for the
Hanford Reach, said the agency received about 60 comments on the
plan, which were fairly evenly divided on the hunting issue. 		

The comment with the most weight didn't arrive until late last
week. The Fish and Wildlife proposal was reviewed by the Energy
Department before it was released to the public, Ritter said,
but what the Energy Department says goes. 		

 [advertising] "They are the landowner. We just manage it under
permit," he said. "They have the final say." 		

Ritter said representatives of the two federal agencies and
state wildlife officials will soon meet to discuss other ideas
for elk control. 		

Former President Clinton created the Hanford Reach National
Monument by proclamation five years ago. The monument, an odd,
almost horseshoe-shaped property surrounding the Hanford nuclear
reservation, stretches along a stretch of the river known for
salmon runs, bird habitat and rare plant life. 		

The site includes land, known as the Arid Lands Ecology Reserve,
that is considered one of the few large blocks of shrub-steppe
habitat remaining in the Northwest. The reserve used to be part
of the nuclear reservation and has been closed to the public
since Hanford was created in the 1940s. 		

If the proposed management plan had been approved, about 42,000
acres of the 77,000-acre ALE would have been opened for
special-permit public hunts. The plan called for the herd to be
reduced by about 350 animals. 		

The plan did not mention hunting by American Indians, but
federal managers were negotiating with area tribes separately. 		

Ritter said the Energy Department comment likely would block
ceremonial hunting by tribal members. 		

E. Arlen Washines, Yakama Nation wildlife manager, said he was
disappointed the tribes were not included in the proposed plan.
Tribal members have respected the Energy Department's closure of
the area to create the Hanford nuclear reservation, he said, but
the tribe maintains it can hunt on the land. 		

"The treaty didn't give us the right, that was a God-given
right," he said. "When they established the Hanford reservation,
the Yakama tribe was never consulted. We respected that decision
to close it, but we didn't agree to give up our right to use
that area." 	                 

[Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 
101 Elliott Ave. W.
 Seattle, WA 98119
 (206) 448-8000
 
�1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
 41 Hanford News: PNNL gets 15 more months for move; Deadline to vacate from
Hanford's 300 Area extended until end of 2010
 
This story was published Wednesday, December 21st, 2005 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has been given an extra 15
months to move out of Hanford buildings just north of Richland
and into office and lab space yet to be built. 

Under a timeline adjusted by Clay Sell, Department of Energy
deputy secretary, PNNL's deadline to be out of Hanford's 300
Area has been extended from Sept. 30, 2009, to the end of 2010,
U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., announced Tuesday. 

"The additional 15 months will ensure adequate time for facility
construction and moves," said PNNL Director Len Peters in a
prepared statement. 

About 1,000 PNNL workers depend on space in 18 buildings in the
300 Area. Those buildings have about half the experimental
laboratory space used by PNNL scientists and engineers. 

They're among about 200 buildings in the 300 Area, all of which
DOE would like removed by the end of 2012 under an aggressive
cleanup schedule for Hanford's Columbia River Corridor. 

"We will be looking at what their extension does to us, and it
will take a little while to work out the schedule," said Todd
Nelson, spokesman for Washington Closure Hanford, DOE's new
river corridor contractor. 

Washington Closure will continue working toward the 2012 goal,
he said. 

"We have every expectation that Washington Closure will be able
to work around any potential delays," said Colleen French,
spokeswoman for DOE. 

PNNL is unlikely to need until the end of 2010 to vacate all of
its buildings in the 300 Area, she pointed out. 

"It's important to strike a balance between getting new labs
built and keeping river corridor closure on course - the sooner
both are done, the better for all," Hastings said in a prepared
statement. 

Although DOE has set an accelerated goal of finishing cleanup of
contaminated areas closest to the river in 2012, the legal
deadline is 2015. 

Most of the buildings in the 300 Area date from the 1950s when
it was used to manufacture the uranium fuel pieces needed for
Hanford reactors to produce plutonium for the nation's nuclear
weapons program. The area also was used for research, as it is
now. 

DOE plans to tear down all the buildings there in part to get to
a plume of uranium in the ground water beneath the 300 Area and
contaminated soil and underground utilities. 

In 2004 DOE had planned on PNNL being out of the 300 Area by
2007, but Hastings intervened to extend the deadline to 2009.
The further extension will ensure planning and construction
timelines can be reasonably met, according to Hastings' office. 

Sell also has agreed to the proposed acquisition strategy for
the four replacement facilities PNNL plans to have built on its
north Richland campus. 

"The deputy secretary's approval is a critical milestone and it
allows us to proceed with planning and funding based upon a
DOE-approved strategy and schedule," Peters said. 

PNNL now may select private developers to build a computational
sciences building and a biological sciences building that would
be leased to PNNL. It also can proceed with the design of a $210
million physical sciences building to be paid for by the federal
government. An existing life sciences building would be expanded
under a project paid for by Battelle, which holds the contract
to operate PNNL. 

"The replacement lab project is critical to the future of PNNL
and our community," Hastings said. "The deputy secretary's
approval will let the lab get busy putting to work the $18
million we just passed through Congress for this project."

� 2005 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 42 Hanford News: Gregoire's proposal includes science lab; Pullman work would
support efforts of WSU Tri-Cities lab
 
This story was published Wednesday, December 21st, 2005 

By Chris Mulick, Herald Olympia bureau 

OLYMPIA - A construction plan proposed Tuesday by Gov. Christine
Gregoire would allow Washington State University to build a
Pullman science lab that would support work at a bioproducts lab
already planned for WSU Tri-Cities. 

The university pressed the Legislature to include both projects
in the two-year construction budget it approved in April. But
while the $24 million bioproducts lab was included for WSU
Tri-Cities, the now $63 million biotechnology and life sciences
building slated for Pullman got passed over. 

Unwilling to wait until the next two-year construction budget is
written in 2007, WSU will ask lawmakers during their 2006
session beginning Jan. 9 to let it pay for the building itself. 

The university would use interest off the money it gets from the
harvesting and leasing of state trust lands it owns. 

Though it's not a preferred method of getting buildings
constructed, "this is a big enough deal to us," WSU lobbyist
Larry Ganders said. 

Gregoire, who pushed for the building during the 2005 session,
bought into the plan. 

"When it comes to agriculture in the eastern part of our state,
if we don't invest in safety and quality we will lose our niche
in the world," Gregoire said during a morning news conference,
specifically mentioning the role for the Richland bioproducts
facility. "All of this is, I think, the single greatest
investment we can make." 

The university is urgently pursuing construction of the Pullman
biotech lab in part because it wants to present a strong case
for getting research dollars offered by the state's new Life
Sciences Discovery Fund. 

That fund was created this year using a portion of annual
payments from the state's settlement with the tobacco industry
to pay for biomedical research. 

While the Richland bioproducts lab is to focus on identifying
ways to turnagricultural wastes into high-value chemicals, such
as fuel, the proposed Pullman lab would focus on using
agricultural products, such as barley, to develop new
pharmaceutical products. 

Much of the work would overlap and the two facilities likely
would share faculty. "The sciences are kind of coming together,"
Ganders said. "There are very clear links there." 

In addition, the new Pullman lab may attract the construction of
an additional research facility by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture in Pullman. Yet another federal partner, the Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory, already is collaborating with WSU
Tri-Cities on the bioproducts lab. 

The Pullman biotech project could be more politically palatable
this legislative session because of the alternative financing
scheme. 

The state simply issues bonds to pay for most projects included
in the state construction budget. But WSU is about to retire
debt on two older renovation projects in Pullman built using
interest earned off of its trust land proceeds. The university's
plan is to simply commit that suddenly available revenue to pay
for construction debt on the proposed lab. 

The plan would cost the state's general fund nothing, the lab
wouldn't have to compete with other construction projects,
political fights could be avoided and the facility would get
built sooner. 

"I think the fact there is even a capital budget eases a lot of
our concern," said Sen. Margarita Prentice, a Seattle Democrat
and chairwoman of the budget writing Senate Ways and Means
Committee. "I think (Gregoire's) goals there are really good."

� 2005 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 43 Hanford News: No elk hunts, DOE insists
 
This story was published Wednesday, December 21st, 2005 

By Anna King, Herald staff writer 

It appears there will be no public or tribal elk hunting on the
Hanford Reach National Monument because the Department of Energy
says it would be inconsistent with the area's management plan. 

The period for taking comments on a controversial U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service plan to manage the Reach's rapidly growing elk
herd ended Sunday. 

And the comment with the most weight came late last week, when
the Department of Energy called for no hunting on the Arid Lands
Ecology Reserve. Instead, the agency said elk should be
controlled either by a government culling program or trapping
and relocating. 

What DOE says goes, said Mike Ritter, Fish and Wildlife Service
deputy project leader for the Reach. "They are the landowner. We
just manage it under permit," he said. "They have the final
say." 

If the plan had been approved, about 42,000 acres of the
77,000-acre ALE would have been opened for special-permit public
hunts. 

The herd that uses the Reach as a winter and spring range has
grown to almost 800 animals and has caused increasing problems
on lands surrounding the monument. 

The proposed management plan called for the herd to be reduced
to about 350 animals largely by public hunting. The plan did not
mention Native American hunting, but Fish &Wildlife managers
were negotiating that with the tribes. 

Ritter said Fish and Wildlife received about 60 comments on the
plan, with comments for and against hunting equally matched. 

Hunters on private farmlands surrounding the Reach have killed
some animals, but the elk have no natural predators and the herd
continues to grow each year. State officials have been paying
farmers thousands of dollars for crop damage claims. 

Benton County and state officials, some Rattlesnake
Mountain-area farmers, tribes and hunting advocacy groups have
avidly supported hunting on the ALE. Other Rattlesnake
Mountain-area farmers, the Lower Columbia Basin Audubon Society
and environmentalists have opposed the measure. 

Ritter, the lead writer on the plan, said the proposal had been
reviewed by DOE before it was released to the public. 

DOE officials refused to comment or answer questions about their
written response to Fish and Wildlife. DOE spokeswoman Karen
Lutz said Tuesday that the agency's written comments explain its
position. 

DOE's response stated: "DOE does not support hunting at this
time, as hunting appears inconsistent with the current ALE
Management Plan and the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use
(Environmental Impact Statement). DOE can only support a
government cull and trap and relocate." 

DOE's general comments on the plan stated: "DOE's primary
objectives were to ensure preservation while continuing use of
ALE as a Research Natural Area, and DOE must approve proposed
land use changes and any changes to the existing 1993 management
plan (which does not allow hunting on ALE)." 

The 1993 management plan called for managers to make
recommendations on elk population control by working with state
officials and landowners to create a plan to reduce
wildlife-related crop damage, livestock or native habitats. 

Ritter said he and other Fish and Wildlife officials soon will
meet with DOE and state wildlife officials to discuss other
ideas for elk control. 

Mid-Columbia tribes were not included in the elk plan, but
Ritter had been discussing ceremonial hunting on ALE with tribal
leaders. The process was being negotiated independently. 

Ritter said DOE's recent comments likely would block native
ceremonial hunting. 

Arlen Washines, Yakama Nation wildlife manager, said he was
disappointed the tribes were not included in the proposed plan. 

If nongovernment hunts were allowed on ALE, Yakama Nation
members could claim treaty hunting rights on the same land since
it had been opened to public use. 

Still, Washines said the tribe maintains it can hunt on the
land, although tribal members have respected the DOE closure of
the Hanford nuclear reservation. 

"The treaty didn't give us the right, that was a God-given
right," he said. "When they established the Hanford reservation,
the Yakama tribe was never consulted. We respected that decision
to close it, but we didn't agree to give up our right to use
that area." 

Elk meat is an important resource for ceremonies and everyday
life of many Mid-Columbia Native Americans, he said. 

"It's not just for feasts," he said. "We don't buy beef at
Safeway. We rely on deer and elk. We eat it every day in our
home." 

The news that no public hunting will be allowed likely will
please and disappoint many, Ritter said. 

"The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has done all we can," he
said.

� 2005 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 44 Hanford News: Ecology chief says state may use 'big hammer'; Officials say
they may have to file lawsuit to start work at vitrification
plant
 
This story was published Wednesday, December 21st, 2005 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

The state of Washington would prefer not to file a lawsuit to
force a timely start to operations at Hanford's vitrification
plant, but may have no other option, said Jay Manning, the
director of Washington's Department of Ecology. 

"Desperate times call for desperate measures," he said duringa
visit Tuesday to the Tri-Cities, where he spoke to the Richland
Rotary Club and Herald editorial board. 

The state is concerned that the fiscal year 2006 budget for the
vitrification plant, added to other troubles at the project,
could delay the startup to 2018. 

"It might be worse than that," Manning said. 

The 2018 estimate is seven years past the deadline in the
legally binding Tri-Party Agreement. It's also 10 years past the
time the state believes Hanford's double-shell tanks will be
filled to capacity, which could end work to empty leak-prone
single shell tanks. 

Hanford has 149 single-shell tanks built starting in World War
II to temporarily hold radioactive waste left from the
production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons
program. 

All the pumpable liquid has been moved from those tanks to 28
newer double-shell tanks, but that does not eliminate the risk
of leaks of radioactive materials from the older tanks into the
soil above ground water moving toward the Columbia River,
Manning said. 

The single-shell tanks still hold substantial volumes of sludge
and, in some cases, liquid must be added to the tanks to remove
waste that cannot be pumped out. 

When the double-shell tanks are full in 2008, no more work can
be done to empty single-shell tanks until some of the waste in
the double-shell tanks is treated. 

The vitrification plant, or Waste Treatment Plant, is being
built as the primary plant to treat the waste, turning it into
glassified logs for permanent disposal. 

"There's no question in our minds that the Waste Treatment Plant
is the right technology," Manning said. "Let's get it done." 

Technical issues at the plant largely have been resolved,
although some management issues may remain, he said. The state
cannot let Congress use those issues to avoid spending money to
design and build the plant, he said. 

The new annual budget for the plant is $164 million below the
$690 million figure which the Department of Energy used to base
its plans for building the plant. 

Now the state is waiting to see what the Department of Energy
does this summer when new cost and schedule estimates are
available. Preliminary estimates show the cost could increase
from $5.8 billion to $9.6 billion. 

Equally important is the fiscal year 2007 budget for the
project. 

If the budget and DOE's plan based on the report due this summer
are encouraging, the state could choose to re-negotiate the
deadlines in the Tri-Party Agreement, Manning said. 

But "we're going to be hard on this one," Manning warned. 

The state could instead use "our big hammer" - a lawsuit to
attempt to force a timely start to operations at the plant,
Manning said. 

A federal court cannot force Congress to give DOE the money
needed for as timely a completion of construction at the plant
as is still possible, but it can order DOE to meet legal
deadlines, Manning said. 

One of the problems the state is facing is dwindling political
clout on nuclear waste issues. When cleanup of Hanford began,
Washington combined its political strength with Ohio and
Colorado to push Congress for cleanup funds, Manning said. 

But now the three nuclear sites in Ohio and the Rocky Flats site
in Colorado almost are clean, and congressional leaders in those
states are turning their attention to other issues. 

"It was hard then, and it's harder now," Manning said.

         
� 2005 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 45 CorpWatch: Bechtel Fox in the Nuclear Henhouse
 	 
by Brooke Shelby Biggson 

December 22nd, 2005
       
The news today that the federal government had awarded the Los
Alamos National Laboratory to the UC-Bechtel team should give us
all pause. 

After all, as CorpWatch noted when Bechtel was amassing huge
no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq (see ""), the company's is not
exactly sparkling: 

San Onofre, California, has a 950-ton radioactive problem: a
nuclear reactor built by Bechtel that nobody wants. The unit was
shut down over a decade ago in 1992 by its owners, Southern
California Edison, who preferred not to spend $125 million in
required safety upgrades. 

The only place that will accept the reactor is a dump in South
Carolina but railway officials refused to transport the cargo
across the country. The next suggestion was to ship it via the
Panama Canal but the canal operators said no. So did the
government of Chile when the power plant owners asked for
permission to take it around the Cape of Good Hope. 

The only option left is to ship it all the way around the world,
although even that is looking unlikely as harbor officials in
Charleston, South Carolina, are already suggesting that they may
deny the reactor entry. Edison officials are currently
desperately looking for a port that might accept the toxic cargo
before the dump shuts its doors in 2008. [...]

The local environmental costs continue to mount every day as the
plant sucks in huge quantities of plankton, fish and even seals
with the water to cool the reactors. It is destroying miles of
kelp on the seabed by discharging water that is 25 degrees
Fahrenheit warmer than ocean temperature, according to Mark
Massara, director of the Sierra Club's coastal program. [...]

Several former employees at the plant who have developed cancer
have also sued Bechtel and plant owner Southern California
Edison for exposure to radiation. It's a story that has become
depressingly familiar for dozens of communities living downwind
from nuclear plants that are seeing alarming increases in cancer.

Bechtel was also the contractor responsible for the biggest
construction boondoggle in American history: . Errors by Bechtel
in planning and execution lead to massive cost overruns. As the
at the time, "Yet, even as Bechtel's errors helped drive up the
Big Dig's cost, the company never paid for any of its mistakes.
Instead, it profited."

Is this really the kind of company we want watching over the
most sensitive and dangerous of projects? 

While the award of the Los Alamos contract to UC and Bechtel
surprised some, the company's long record of coziness with those
in high government places even outpaces its rival for the
contract, Lockheed Martin (which was to partner with the
University of Texas to run the lab). 


1611 Telegraph Avenue., #702 � Oakland, CA 94612 USA � 
510-271-8080      Design by Tumis.com � Powered by 
RadicalDesigns.org              
*****************************************************************
 46 SF Chronicle: Rocky 63-year relationship for UC and Los Alamos continues
 
By MICHELLE LOCKE, Associated Press Writer 

(12-22) 00:03 PST Berkeley, Calif. (AP) -- 

The relationship between the University of California and Los
Alamos National Laboratory began as a wartime affair conducted
against the tense backdrop of the race to finish an atomic bomb. 

The union has endured for 63 years, although lately many of them
have been rocky. 

Wednesday marked a new chapter as the government  apparently
forgiving a series of financial and security gaffes  asked UC
to continue managing the lab. The UC bid, made in partnership
with engineering giant Bechtel Corp., prevailed over a rival
team made up of the University of Texas and defense contractor
Lockheed Martin. 

The government contract, put out to bid this year for the first
time, is worth up to $512 million over seven years, with a
provision to extend it to 20 years. 

"This is a new contract with a new team, marking a new approach
to the management of Los Alamos," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman
said at a news conference in Washington. He said its goals
include seeking out the best practices in government, industry
and academia to make the laboratory operate more efficiently. 

UC's ties to Los Alamos go back to 1943. 

Many had little idea what physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer and
his team were working on in northern New Mexico. Even the man
who signed the first management contract, UC Board of Regents
Secretary Robert Underhill, wasn't told about the top-secret
Manhattan Project to build the A-bomb until months later. 

Having civilian control was important to scientists at Los
Alamos, some of whom balked at a plan to give them U.S. Army
commissions. 

After their nuclear weapons were deployed during World War II,
some UC leaders wanted out. President Robert C. Sproul told
regents he wanted to "get rid of bomb-making, plutonium and New
Mexico," said Gregg Herken, a UC Merced history professor and
author of "Brotherhood of the Bomb," an account of the men who
developed atomic weapons. 

Others argued in favor of keeping UC's ties to Los Alamos. 

"There's no question that the university was pressured by the
Army to continue that contract," said Herken. 

For years, the UC-Los Alamos relationship was relatively smooth. 

In 1999, in a case that proved a major embarrassment for the
government and the lab, Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee was
jailed amid an investigation into possible Chinese espionage.
The case proved to be weak, and Lee pleaded guilty to
mishandling classified information and was released with an
apology from a federal judge. 

The case raised questions about UC's management skills, which
only increased a year later when the lab shut down after reports
that two computer disks containing nuclear secrets vanished.
Investigators later concluded there was an inventory error, and
the disks never existed. 

"One could argue that leading up to the University of
California's problems at Los Alamos there wasn't a proper
balance  science got away with being a little cavalier about
security," said Sidney Drell, a physicist and member of a
commission that wrote a scathing report in 1999 on the lab's
security. 

Los Alamos has drawn criticism in recent years for security
lapses, credit card abuses, theft of equipment, and
mismanagement. 

UC worked in recent years to turn things around, taking a more
hands-on role, restructuring management ranks and implementing
stricter security. 

DOE officials on Wednesday emphasized that accountability on
security issues was a major part of the UC bid, but they
wouldn't release details, citing disclosure restrictions. 

UC President Robert C. Dynes said in a statement the contract
decision signaled the beginning of a new era. 

Others were less was less enthusiastic. 

"It's a blue Christmas for America," said former lab
investigator Glenn Walp, who was fired in 2002 after alleging
mismanagement, fraud and cover-up at the lab. Walp said UC
deserves praise for the work it has done in the past, "but in
the last 10 years, they're just incapable of running the lab
that's so important to American security." 

On the Net: 

<A
HREF="http://www.brotherhoodofthebomb.com">www.brotherhoodofthebo
mb.com/ 

<A
HREF="http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu">www.universityofcali
fornia.edu				
 			
The San Francisco Chronicle] 

*****************************************************************
 47 SF Chron: UC WINS FIGHT FOR LOS ALAMOS / REACTION / Opinions split over
contract / But decision bodes well for Livermore
 
[San Francisco Chronicle] 

Charles Burress, Demian Bulwa, Chronicle Staff Writers

Thursday, December 22, 2005

  [The Los Alamos National Laboratory, located in Los Alamos...]
[A Los Alamos Lab worker handles a 3-kilogram disc of plut...]
[In January 2003, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham warned ...]
[In July 2004, interim director Pete Nanos temporarily sus...]

The news that the University of California will keep a role in
managing the Los Alamos National Laboratory received mixed
reviews from close observers of the university's historic tie to
the nation's top nuclear weapons lab. 
"I think that's very good news," said UCLA Professor Clifford
Brunk, chair of the systemwide UC faculty senate, who
acknowledged the headaches UC has suffered because of recent
management lapses at the lab. 
UC has had exclusive management of the lab since the atomic bomb
was born there in World War II. But the management problems
prompted Congress to open up the contract renewal to outside
bidding. 
Opponents of UC's role in nuclear weapons work said they were
disappointed that federal officials announced Wednesday that a
partnership including UC and engineering giant Bechtel had won
the contract over a team including Lockheed Martin and the
University of Texas. 
"I was really hoping that Texas would get it," said UC Berkeley
Professor emeritus Robert Bellah, a longtime critic of UC's
role. "I joined with many other faculty members to urge the
regents to get out of the nuclear weapons business. It's not an
appropriate activity for a university." 
A UC faculty poll last year showed 67 percent in favor of UC's
competing for the contract renewal, while a 1990 poll found 64
percent opposed to UC management. 
UC Merced historian Gregg Herken, who chronicled the history of
the lab, said the new team utilized UC's scientific strength
while shifting administrative and management responsibilities to
Bechtel and the other two corporate partners, BWXT Technologies
and Washington Group International. 
Professor Per Peterson, former chair of nuclear engineering at
Cal, said the UC team's bid was superior because UC would have a
leadership role in the scientific and technical dimension of the
work, thus offering greater protection for academic freedom.
Under the Lockheed-Texas bid, he said, Texas would have had a
more subsidiary role. 
The Los Alamos Study Group, a pro-disarmament group in New
Mexico, said in a statement that the UC team was preferable and
that the combination of Lockheed Martin and "the relatively weak
University of Texas might well have been less objective than
(the UC team) in the annual certification of the U.S. nuclear
arsenal -- that is, in determining whether to ask the president
to conduct nuclear tests." 
At the same time, the group's director, Greg Mello, said UC "is
not the leader of this consortium," which he said would be run
on a day-to-day basis by the corporate partners. He predicted
more manufacturing of nuclear weapons components and less
research. 
In Livermore, home to another UC-managed national lab, the head
of the nonprofit Tri-Valley CAREs, or Communities Against a
Radioactive Environment, Marylia Kelley, said, "Given that
(UC's) proposal is to ramp up nuclear weapons design and
production at Los Alamos, the message is that it's business as
usual for the whole nuclear weapons complex." 
The 8,700-employee Livermore lab's contract expires in 2007 and
will soon go out to bid. UC is expected to join a partnership
bid there. 
Tom Reitter, a 32-year lab veteran who has served on Livermore's
City Council since 1989, said the federal government's decision
to retain UC at Los Alamos boded well for Livermore. 
"This increases the likelihood that (UC and its partners) will
win Livermore" and maintain stability for employees, said
Reitter, a mechanical engineer. "Most people here seem to be
happy with how it went." 
Reitter said employees were bracing for big changes either way,
because UC probably won't manage the lab alone. A new pension
system is expected, along with added bureaucracy, he said. 
E-mail the writers at cburress@sfchronicle.comand
dbulwa@sfchronicle.com. 				
Page A - 16
 			
The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 48 SF Chron: UC WINS FIGHT FOR LOS ALAMOS / THE DEAL / University beats
Lockheed Martin-Texas bid to manage nation's top nuclear weapons
lab

[San Francisco Chronicle] 
				 
Keay Davidson, Zachary Coile, Chronicle Staff Writers
Thursday, December 22, 2005

  [The Los Alamos National Laboratory, located in Los Alamos...]
[A Los Alamos Lab worker handles a 3-kilogram disc of plut...]
[In January 2003, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham warned ...]
[In July 2004, interim director Pete Nanos temporarily sus...]

The University of California, besieged by criticism over its
management of Los Alamos National Laboratory, beat back a strong
challenge Wednesday from a team headed by Lockheed Martin Corp.
and the University of Texas for control of the storied weapons
lab it has run for over six decades. 

The decision, announced by Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman in
Washington, D.C., allows UC to retain management of the lab it
has run since World War II, but now it will do so in partnership
with a larger consortium that includes corporate giant Bechtel
National of San Francisco. 

The partnership was formed earlier this year after the
government contract to run the nation's lab was put out to bid
for the first time in the lab's 62-year history because of a
string of security lapses and allegations of fraud and
mismanagement. 

Despite the missteps, the UC group managed to prevail not only
over a consortium led by aerospace titan Lockheed Martin that
included the huge University of Texas system and smaller
industrial partners, but the federal government's long-standing
discontent over the lab's management. 

The new contract, which begins June 1, runs for seven years and
is worth up to $512 million. Good performance could earn the UC
group an extension of up to 13 years. "I cannot stress enough
that this is a new contract, with a new team, marking a new
approach to management at Los Alamos," Bodman said in announcing
the decision. "It is not a continuation of the previous
contract." 

Loss of the contract by the UC group, officially known as Los
Alamos National Security LLC, could have hurt not only UC but
California's reputation as a world center of scientific and
technological excellence. 

The 13,200-employee lab is one of the nation's two nuclear
weapons design laboratories. The other is Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory, which is also run by UC. The first atomic
bomb was developed at Los Alamos in 1945. 

UC President Robert Dynes said in a statement that he was
pleased the Energy Department decided to stick with the
university system's team and said it began a new era. "I am
confident in the men and women who serve our nation at Los
Alamos, and I know that they will continue to chart new
frontiers and help solve some of the greatest scientific and
technological problems of our time," he said. 

The Lockheed-Texas consortium issued a statement wishing the
UC-Bechtel team every success, but a spokesman later expressed
disappointment. 

"Of course, we're very disappointed," said spokeswoman Wendy
Owen. "At this point... we still have more questions than
answers." 

She said the group had not decided yet whether to appeal the
decision. Under the new contract, UC will share central
responsibilities with Bechtel National, BWX Technologies,
Washington Group International and a smaller consortium of the
University of New Mexico, New Mexico State University and the
New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. 

Physicist Michael Anastasio, who until recently was head of
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and temporarily left that
post to run the UC-Bechtel competition, will serve as the lab's
new director. He will replace the Los Alamos interim director,
Robert Kuckuck. A permanent replacement for Anastasio at
Livermore has yet to be named. 

Energy Department officials declined to spell out Wednesday the
partners' relative responsibilities, including management of lab
security and safety, both long-standing problems at Los Alamos. 

The problems have included reported financial irregularities
that led to forced resignations of the former lab director and
top auditor; the apparent loss of computer disks that supposedly
contained weapons information, although officials later
concluded the disks had never existed; and safety problems such
as a staffer who injured her eye by gazing into a laser and
another who suffered lung damage after being ordered to work in
a room containing a noxious gas. 

In April 2003, the Energy Department and Congress ordered that
all future lab contracts be open to outside bidders. 

In making Wednesday's announcement, Bodman said he believed the
new contract would "relegate (the lab's) tumult to the past." 

UC's selection, nonetheless, angered Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas,
chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, who shot
off a letter to Bodman following the announcement. 

"As you know," he said, "over the past several years the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations has held numerous
hearings to investigate waste, fraud, and abuse of government
resources at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. 

"These hearings have also reviewed several security breaches
that have put our national security at risk. ... Based on the
track record by the University of California and the seemingly
invulnerable culture of mismanagement at Los Alamos, I am
surprised to learn that the current contractor has been invested
with new trust. I have minimal hope and no belief that UC can
reverse its record of consistent failure." 

The actual decision, Bodman said, was made by Tom D'Agostino,
assistant deputy administrator for defense programs at the
National Nuclear Security Administration, a quasi-independent
agency that oversees the nuclear weapons department for the
Energy Department. 

D'Agostino based his selection, Energy Department officials
said, partly on the competitors' formal proposals and partly on
a report developed by what the Energy Department identified as a
team of career civil servants from throughout the nuclear
weapons complex and chaired by the agency's former general
counsel Tyler Przybylek. 

"I can tell you with confidence that (UC's) proposal itself
really tightened up the accountability line significantly,"
Przybylek said. 

Energy Department officials said they would conduct a debriefing
with both bidding teams in the next 10 days to explain in detail
why the bid had gone to the UC group. 

In recent months, many Los Alamos staffers had predicted the
Lockheed team would get the contract because of what they regard
as UC mismanagement. 

John Jennings, a Los Alamos safety specialist who helped the FBI
expose financial corruption at the lab in 2002-03, said
Wednesday's decision worried him because he feared it would
"leave in a lot of the old problems and old managers and the
'good old boy' network we've had up there (at the lab) lately." 

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., the chairman of the Senate Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources, which oversees Energy
Department funding, later dismissed the concerns as coming from
crybabies. 

"Frankly, I heard more comment from (Los Alamos) people saying,
'Goodness I hope it (the winner) isn't Lockheed' as I did saying
the opposite," he said. 

Anti-nuclear groups were not among those favoring the UC team. 

Danielle Brian, head of the Washington-based Project on
Government Oversight, a frequent Energy Department critic,
asked: "What does it take for UC to suffer the consequences of
screwing up? Lockheed wasn't a great alternative, but it is hard
to see how UC could possibly have been given a vote of
confidence. We expect a continuation of the era of chaos at Los
Alamos." 

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said she, however, was very happy.
The lab offers "a continued prestige, drawing top scientists,
being on the cutting edge. It's important for the state." 

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also said he was pleased that the nod
had gone to the UC group. 

"Today is another great day for California," he said in a
statement. 

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, who had urged University of
Texas officials to join the competition, said Wednesday that
Bodman had told her the decision was based on the merits of two
bids, not on politics. 

"California has an advantage in continuity, and that was a
factor," Hutchison said. "Secretary Bodman assured me the
process was fair. In the end, I believe this has made the
California partnership stronger from a national security
standpoint, and that is positive for our nation." 

Chronicle staff writer Edward Epstein, reporting from
Washington, D.C., contributed to this report. E-mail the writers
at kdavidson@sfchronicle.comand zcoile@sfchronicle.com				
Page A - 1 			


The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 49 SF Chronicle: Los Alamos employees seek improvements from new bosses


By HEATHER CLARK, Associated Press Writer 
Thursday, December 22, 2005

(12-22) 00:19 PST Los Alamos, N.M. (AP) -- 

In a conference room at Los Alamos National Laboratory,
employees interrupted their Christmas party banter to listen to
the announcement that a new partner would join the University of
California in running the nuclear weapons lab. 

Then, without comment, they returned to the buffet for seconds
and dessert. 

But then the news started to sink in that UC and engineering
giant Bechtel Corp. had prevailed over a rival team made up of
the University of Texas and defense contractor Lockheed Martin
to win the management contract. 

Some employees began to demand change, while some said that
after waiting nearly two years for the bidding process to play
out, they were pleased that a new management team was named. 

"I'm happy that they've made a decision and are moving forward,"
said Bill Murray, an engineer in the physics division. 

Murray and others said they will be watching how UC will
participate in the new management team. 

Employees are also concerned about how the team will bridge a
sense of distrust that has developed between them and upper
managers and what benefits the team will offer employees who
will now work for a limited-liability corporation. 

Bernie Foy, a 16-year veteran who works in the chemistry
division, said he was "ambivalent" about who would manage the
lab ahead of Wednesday's announcement. But, he said, the
UC-Bechtel team has a lot of work to do to mend relations with
employees. 

"UC must fix the gulf in trust between the scientific staff and
the upper management at the lab," Foy said. 

The fissure came to a head last summer when former director Pete
Nanos shut down lab operations, a move that lasted seven months
before work returned to normal. Foy believes the shutdown was an
"extreme overreaction" to the loss of classified disks later
found never to have existed. 

"They (the new managers) need to emphasize very strongly that
they will not overreact to minor incidents," Foy said. 

Joe Ladish, a retired lab veteran and member of the Coalition
for LANL Excellence, said Wednesday's announcement did not bring
much relief to employees still worried about their benefits. 

"For the people at the lab, the anxiety is going to be there for
many months until they see in detail what it means to them
particularly," Ladish said. 

Early next year, UC and Bechtel must submit a pension plan and
benefits package to the National Nuclear Security Administration
for approval. The NNSA's evaluation board has said the new
manager would have to provide a compensation package that is
"substantially equivalent" to employees' current benefits. 

Ladish said the UC-Bechtel team seems open to listening to
concerns. 

"They really look like they've got a good handle on what they
want to do and how they want to do it," Ladish said. 

Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., whose district includes Los Alamos,
greeted patrons at the Hard Rocks Java Cafe across the street
from the main lab complex and encouraged them to voice their
concerns. 

One employee stopped by to tell Udall about another benefit of
the UC-Bechtel win. 

"At least we don't have to speak Texan now," joked Don
Berryhill, who works in computer network support. 				
 			
The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 50 SF Chron: UC WINS FIGHT FOR LOS ALAMOS / THE IMPLICATIONS / Bechtel
partnership will put lab on a more businesslike footing
 
[San Francisco Chronicle] 
				 
James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer 
Thursday, December 22, 2005

The Los Alamos National Laboratory unlocked the power of the
atom and solved some of the thorniest scientific conundrums of
the past 60 years. Now, the famed lab faces a challenge it has
long resisted: the need to change fundamentally -- from an
intellectual institution devoted to science, to a facility run
more like a business whose product is nuclear weapons. 

That is why the competition for the lab's management contract
has been so wrenching. No matter who is in charge, the clear
message has been that the lab is henceforth to become an arm of
the weapons manufacturing complex, focused on cost efficiencies,
production schedules and, not least, financial success. 

"It's a different world," said John Browne, who was the director
of Los Alamos from 1997 to 2003. "The new group will have to
operate differently. The industrial partners will play an
important role. If there's a product the government wants, they
will necessarily be focused on delivering that. A lot more money
will be at stake." 

Some Los Alamos employees expressed relief Wednesday that the
University of California, backed by Bechtel Corp., had won the
management contract, since it suggested some degree of
continuity. There were also feelings of resignation that science
might take a back seat to other concerns. 

"The academic and public service aura of 63 years of UC
affiliation with Los Alamos ... may ultimately be compromised to
some degree, as yet unknown, by the profit motive of a
corporation, to whose pockets will flow an extra load of
national debt from American taxpayers of the future," Brad Lee
Holian, a Los Alamos scientist, wrote in a popular employee
blog. 

But most inside the lab and outside understand that Washington
has embraced an approach to nuclear weapons that will have a
deep impact not only on Los Alamos but also on its sister
institution, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 

The Bush administration has pushed for the development of a new
weapons complex that can, on short notice, manufacture new
warheads, and new kinds of warheads. 

Congress has endorsed the approach by agreeing to finance what
are being called reliable replacement warheads -- seen as the
more flexible nuclear weapons of the future -- and retire the
Cold War stockpile that, for the past decade, Los Alamos has
been studying and maintaining. 

What could be seen as the UC labs' marching orders came this
summer with the release of a report by a Department of Energy
task force dismissing the labs as directionless, unresponsive
and largely obsolete. It recommended that the United States
spend billions of dollars rebuilding the nuclear weapons
manufacturing facilities and run them more like a business. 

"Strong leaders and healthy organizations have a commitment to
success, not perfection," the report said. "Successful
businesses know when products and services are good enough and
recognize that cost is one of the metrics for excellent
performance." 

Hugh Gusterson, an anthropology professor at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology who is writing a book on the Los Alamos
lab since the Cold War, said he was skeptical of how swiftly
they would adapt. 

"If this really does take place, it will be the biggest
revolution in the lab's history," said Gusterson. "It's a huge
change in who they are." He added that Los Alamos scientists
"have been socially demoted." 

But there were some observers who argued that the changes did
not go far enough. Glen Walp, a former senior security officer
at Los Alamos who first exposed widespread theft and
mismanagement in 2002, said he thought that a whole new
management team was needed to turn the lab around. 

"From my personal perspective, they made an error," said Walp.
"It was time for a change." 

Browne also noted how resistant Los Alamos had been. 

During the 1990s, he recalled, there was intense debate as to
whether Los Alamos should resume small-scale production of the
plutonium cores of nuclear warheads, known as pits. It took four
years of studies, debates, hearings and fights before Los Alamos
agreed, in principle, to begin a long process of gearing up to
produce no more than 50 pits a year. 

The fear, Browne said, was that even fabricating that small a
number could shift the lab's focus so much toward practical
engineering issues that the more purely scientific culture would
be harmed. 

That culture encompassed the entire New Mexico town. Ed Grothus,
83, was a machinist at the lab for years, before leaving to take
over an old Piggly Wiggly supermarket space and opening his own
business, the Black Hole. He buys discarded equipment from the
lab and resells it, often to schools and universities. 

Currently, he said, he has a fermenter from Los Alamos that can
be used to produce large quantities of anthrax, as well as one
of the first high-speed cameras used at the lab. 

"They are at the cutting edge of science, which means they use
things a few times then get better equipment," said Grothus.
"You can't believe what they get rid of." 

Holian, the blogger from Los Alamos, said his hope was that
Bechtel would shield the scientists and allow them to pursue
their work while taking care of the administrative chores in a
more efficient manner. 

Browne, the former director, said he understood the need for
changes, but he expressed nostalgia for an institution whose
culture he and some other scientist fear that Washington no
longer values. 

"I just don't want to see the labs inner self change so much
that they lose that old sense of mission, that they're just
turning the crank," said Browne. 

E-mail James Sterngold at . 				
Page A - 1 			

The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 51 Rocky Mountain News: Deer, coyotes, owls outnumber people at former nuclear trigger 
plant 

December 22, 2005

At first, there was just a slight movement of air in the hayloft 
overhead. Then a single swoosh betrayed a great horned owl 
sweeping in a circle before floating to a perch on the 
windowsill. 

Peering over his shoulder at the rare visitors below, the owl
made it clear that humans are interlopers now at Rocky Flats. 

People have become rarities at the now-defunct atom bomb plant,
vastly outnumbered by coyotes, deer and owls. 

Rocky Flats was once a sprawling complex where workers produced
70,000 nuclear weapons. In the past 10 years, thousands of
workers dismantled it building by building and hauled off
thousands of truckloads of radioactive waste. 

Demolition workers packed up and left in October, leaving the
6,000 acres of foothills prairie to the occasional environmental
regulator or researcher checking on the cleanup. 

Heavily armed guards protecting deadly plutonium have been
replaced by a 4-foot- tall wire fence that might stop a cow, but
little else. 

"It's kind of quiet out here," says Amy Thornburg of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, as the wind softens the distant
sounds of traffic. 

Although formal designation of Rocky Flats as a national
wildlife refuge is still a year away, nature already is taking
over the site 16 miles northwest of Denver. 

Roads have been plowed under and planted with native grasses. So
have places where chemical and metallurgical plants once stood
and across acres where contaminated soil was dug up and hauled
out of state. 

Views once blocked by concrete now stretch from the Flatirons to
downtown Denver. 

Yellow pipes mark the location of monitoring wells, which check
groundwater for contamination. But Thornburg can only vaguely
point to where two radioactive basements were buried. Officials
could find them again with GPS coordinates, she says. 

The basements are in the central part of the flat mesa, the
1,000 to 1,200 acres of former industrial area that will remain
in the hands of the Department of Energy when the rest of the
land becomes a wildlife refuge. Thornburg said she doubts DOE
will open that section to visitors. 

But overall, DOE says the surface has been cleaned up to a very
strict standard. "No postings for radiological hazards are
required," states the DOE safety disclaimer. 

Tests on 26 Rocky Flats deer found slight radioactive
contamination in three but they're still safe enough to eat. 

In the old industrial area, small dams line Walnut Creek to
catch any toxins that might show up in the water. Beyond that,
the factory's huge buffer zone was little touched by the bomb
makers. 

It is here that Thornburg and her colleagues plan to bring the
first visitors to the refuge, probably five years from now. 

Those hikers are likely to first set foot on a trail in the
northwest corner that heads toward the Lindsay Ranch, a
farmstead largely falling to the elements. But in the rebuilt
barn, the owl has found a refuge. 

In a pond below the barn, two types of native fish are thriving
after reintroduction. The infamous endangered Preble's meadow
jumping mouse - a 3 1/2-inch rodent with a 5-inch tail - has
been found creekside. 

And across the western section of the refuge-to-be is a swath of
rare tallgrass prairie, which Thornburg says will delight
visitors when it's pink and 5 feet tall. 

Thornburg and her colleagues will be working to ensure that all
of these species thrive. For her, the expected five-year wait
for money to open trails means five years of solitude for nature
to recover. 

Wildlife 

� Number of species found at Rocky Flats: 

Songbirds 108 

Raptors 23 

Upland game birds 2 

Waterfowl 49 

Mammals 38 

Reptiles, amphibians 14 

Fish 11 

imsea@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5438 				 				 	 site
 					 					 more � MOST VIEWED STORIES 	 Buy a Link &raquo;	
 Corrections    2005 � The E.W.
Scripps Co.
*****************************************************************
 52 lamonitor.com: Details scarce on contract decision 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor

Amid sighs of relief and of disappointment Wednesday, there were
a variety of reactions to the announcement that the University
of California had retained control of Los Alamos National
Laboratory, along with its industrial partners led by Bechtel. 
The details of the contract, particularly the governance
arrangement for sharing management responsibilities between UC
the three corporate partners, can't be disclosed said Tom
D'Agostino, the career civil servant at the National Nuclear
Security Administration, who made the decision.

D'Agostino said he had received the evaluations on Monday and
made his decision Wednesday morning. 

During a press conference in Washington, D.C., Wednesday, he
said, "Over the next few weeks, we will make a lot of
information available, but not much more on the proposals."

In a press conference after the announcement, Sen. Pete
Domenici, R-NM, observed that there were clearly defined lines
of responsibility for the UC-Bechtel team members. 
When asked about why the details are being kept so secret if the
team's responsibilities are so well defined Domenici said he did
not know.

"No one understands why the clearly defined responsibilities
have to be secret," he said. 
Tyler Przybylek, NNSA's former general counsel, who chaired the
Source Evaluation Board that graded the proposals, said
regulations and statutes precluded the release of the proposal
information or the "thought process" that went into the decision.

What would be available, he said, would be in the contract -
dollar figures for the transition period, promises made by the
contract bidder, and their long-term plans for overseeing
performance.

Community commitments will also be included in the contract, he
said. Current community programs will be continued, for now, but
the contract will make future commitments visible, "On how
they're going to be a good neighbor," Przybylek added.

Because the announcement was delayed - it was due on Dec. 1 -
some adjustment will be necessary in the transition schedule, as
LANL Director Bob Kuckuck warned employees in a memo after the
announcement.

Details of the proposed employee benefits package - the subject
of much concern during the run-up to the contract award - were
supposed to be worked out during the first two months, and then
be approved by NNSA.

Kuckuck alerted the staff that they might not learn the details
until the end of March.

Meanwhile, closed employee meetings were held by closed-circuit
video with Energy Secretary Bodman after the announcement, and
with Kuckuck after the session with Bodman. Ambassador Linton
Brooks was to meet with employees in another closed session this
morning.

After the announcement, Los Alamos Alliance, the other team in
the competition, led by Lockheed Martin, issued a statement
wishing the University of California-Bechtel team success.

"It almost goes without saying that we're disappointed, because
we thought we had a strong proposal," said Rod Geer, a spokesman
for LAA. "We're looking forward to better understanding the
decision criteria at the appropriate time."

Lockheed will have 10 days to file an appeal.

University of Texas System Chancellor Mark Yudof told the
Associated Press that at least for now, the UT System will not
appeal the decision.

Within minutes of the decision, House Energy and Commerce
Committee Chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, fired off a letter to
the Energy Secretary, expressing surprise at the decision, based
on several years of hearings and the costs and events
surrounding last year's shutdown.

He said the University of California's track record and "the
seemingly invulnerable culture of mismanagement at Los Alamos"
gave him little hope, "that UC can reverse its record of
consistent failure."

He has called for a detailed briefing by the department before
Jan. 6.

On a more positive note, two former laboratory directors were
contacted Wednesday shortly after the announcement.

Harold Agnew, who was director from 1970-79, had a lighthearted
suggestion about Michael Anastasio, director of Lawrence
Livermore, who is to become LANL director under the new contract.

"This decision will make poor Michael Anastasio unhappy," he
said in a telephone interview from southern California. "Michael
did a really good job at Lawrence Livermore and I don't think he
really wants to leave there. But I have a solution - Michael
should work at Los Alamos for a little while then get a doctor's
certificate that says at 7,600 feet he can't operate. Then he
goes back to Livermore and they hire Paul Robinson (Lockheed's
choice to be director) to take his place and everyone's happy."

"I'm very pleased that DOE chose a university lead team instead
of a defense contractor lead team," said Siegfried Hecker, LANL
director from 1986-97. "The principal reason why this is so
important is that we can continue to attract the best science
talent. In the end what matters most is to have really smart
people working on science here.

"I certainly hope that the team can live up to what's expected
of them and that the government also gives this new team a
chance to get the lab back on their feet," he added. "That's
going to require a different attitude and approach from
government just as they expect a different attitude and
approach."

Monitor Reporter Carol A. Clark and the AP contributed to this
story.   

  � 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 53 lamonitor.com: Contract award long process 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 

ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor

WINNING TEAM 
Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANC) is composed of the
University of California and Bechtel, which leads a group of
industrial partners that include BWXT and The Washington Group
International. UC has managed and operated Los Alamos National
Laboratory since 1943, when the laboratory was established to
build and test the first atomic weapons, but will now be an
equal co-manager with its corporate partner.

BRIEF HISTORY 

On April 30, 2003, then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham
announced that DOE would solicit competing bids for the contract
to manage and operate Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Over the next year, the National Nuclear Security Administration
began to define a process for choosing a new manager. 
In June, a formal contract committee, a Source Evaluation Board
was organized and Tyler Przybylek, NNSA general counsel, was
named as chair.

Interested parties included Lockheed-Martin, the manager of the
contract for Sandia National Laboratories, Bechtel Corp.,
Batelle Memorial Institute, Northrup Grumman, Halliburton Corp.,
Titan Corp. Honeywell and Computer Sciences Corp. 
Lockheed Martin and the University of Texas both decided to drop
out of the competition after the draft RFP was released.

Lockheed re-entered, shortly afterward, citing changes that had
been made, particularly the provision for setting up a separate
stand-alone company and separate pension plan.

The University of California withheld their decision until the
final request for proposals were released.

The proposals were submitted July 19, 2005, with oral
presentation given later that month.

The contract was scheduled to be awarded in Dec. 1, but delayed
until Wednesday.

BASICS

The contract for Los Alamos National Laboratory is a
cost-reimbursement management and operating contract for the $2
billion-plus annual budget of the laboratory. The award includes
fixed fees and a maximum available performance fee estimated at
$79 million dollars. The contract runs for 7-years with annual
extensions available up to 20 years.

The new contract is scheduled to begin June 1, 2006, with a
transition period to begin immediately.

MAJOR CHANGE

The contract manager is a dedicated corporate entitity, a
limited liability corporation, legally separate from any parent
entities, with its own stand-alone pension plan.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

The contract was evaluated to select the proposal that was
determined to provide the "best value" to the government.

A numerical system with 1000 available points were allotted in
major categories with the following relative relevance:


+  Science and Technology - 325 points


+  Laboratory Operation - 175 points


+  Business Operations - 75 points


+  Key Personnel and Oral Presentation - 250 points


+  Past Performance	 - 75 points

+  Transition plan - 25 points

COMPETITORS


+  Los Alamos National Security, LLC.

Designated Director: Michael Anastasio, director of Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory.

The University of California is the largest public educational
institution in the country with 10 campuses and 208,000
students. UC currently manages three national laboratories for
the Department of Energy, LANL, Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Bechtel, with headquarters are in San Francisco is a privately
owned engineering, construction and management corporation with
worldwide projects. UC and Bechtel National Inc., the company's
subsidiary for government programs would jointly manage the LANL
contract.

Bechtel's resume includes management of the Nevada Test Site,
the Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee and the Pantex
Plant in Amarillo, Texas, as well as the Savannah River Site in
South Carolina

Others: Other industrial partners include BWX Technologies, Inc,
a manager of nuclear and national security operations, including
the Pantex Plant, Y-12, and the Idaho National Laboratory; and
Washington Group International with DOE management contracts at
Savannah River, the Waste Isolation Pilot Project in New Mexico,
and Idaho National Laboratory. The company has technical support
and consulting contracts at all three nuclear weapons
laboratories, and throughout the nuclear complex.

+  Los Alamos Aliance, LLC.

Designated Director: C. Paul Robinson, former director of Sandia
National Laboratories.

Lockheed Martin currently manages contracts for Sandia National
Laboratories in Albuquerque and Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory
in New York State. The company is also a partner in the Atomic
Weapons Establishment.

The University of Texas is the second largest public university
in the country with nine academic campuses and almost 183,000
students. The University of Texas signed a memorandum of
understanding with SNL last year to provide peer review for the
laboratories research program among other programs and
collaborations.

Two other corporations are part of the LAA management team.
Flour Corporation is among the world's largest engineering,
procurement and construction operations.

CH2M Hill is an employee-owned firm, specializing in
environmental cleanup and restoration. Projects included the
cleanup and closure of Rocky Flats and part of a clean-up team
at the Hanford Site in Washington.   

  � 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 54 Rocky Mountain News: Landfill plan gets state's OK 

December 22, 2005

State health authorities issued a license Wednesday allowing a 
landfill operator to accept low-level radioactive waste at an 
eastern Adams County facility. 

The Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division also
renewed a hazardous waste permit that allows the landfill
operator, Clean Harbors Environmental Services Inc., to continue
to store, treat and dispose of hazardous waste at the facility
for another five years. 

The Clean Harbors Deer Trail landfill is the only site in
Colorado that is permitted to operate a hazardous waste disposal
facility. 

The action was not unexpected to opponents of the site,
including ranchers who own land near the landfill.
Environmentalists and Adams County commissioners also had
strongly criticized the plan. 

"We are basically disappointed they went forward," Commissioner
Larry Pace said. 

He declined to discuss the matter further until he could review
the final wording of the license and permit. 

Douglas Benevento, executive director of the Colorado Department
of Public Health and Environment, had indicated earlier this
week that approval of the license was "imminent." 

"This is not a surprise at all," said rancher Pam Wheldon, whose
husband's family has worked land about 2 1/2 miles north of the
landfill since 1909. "Our health department just doesn't know
how to say 'no.' " 

Landowners are worried that approval of a license to permit
low-level radioactive waste at the site eventually will open the
door to allowing Clean Harbors to store higher levels of
radioactive debris there. 

Wheldon's brother-in-law, Dwane, owns land about a mile and a
half north of the landfill, which sits along U.S. 36 a few miles
west of Last Chance and about 75 miles east of Denver. 

"Maybe in a couple of years, they'll want to bring in something
more," Wheldon said. "This is just a steppingstone to more
bigger things in the future." 

The Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division OK'd the
license after holding public hearings over a 60-day period.
Before giving their approval, department officials spent
considerable time reviewing the proposal to make sure property
owners' health and environment were going to be protected,
Benevento said. 

The license will permit the landfill to accept radium waste from
below Denver's streets and leftover sludge from drinking water
treatment that has been contaminated with radioactive materials
such as uranium. 

The state said disposing of the low-level radioactive waste at
the landfill would be safe and would save taxpayers thousands of
dollars by not having to ship it elsewhere. 				 				 	
 					 					 more � MOST VIEWED STORIES 	 	 Advertising Links 	
 | |     2005 � The E.W. Scripps Co.
*****************************************************************
 55 Albuquerque Tribune: Some ask whether UC deserves trust for Los Alamos work

By Scripps Howard News Service

December 22, 2005

WASHINGTON - Department of Energy and New Mexico officials are
proclaiming a new day at problem-plagued Los Alamos National
Laboratory, even if the University of California will continue
to play a lead role along with Bechtel and two other
corporations. 

"This is a new contract, with a new team, marking a new approach
to management at Los Alamos. It is not a continuation of the
previous contract," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said
Wednesday in announcing the choice of UC-Bechtel over a Lockheed
Martin-University of Texas proposal. 

"This means somebody is really in charge of management (Bechtel)
and in charge of the scientific performance standard (UC).
That's very different," said Sen. Pete Domenici, the Albuquerque
Republican who chairs the appropriations subcommittee that holds
the Energy Department's purse strings. 

Others aren't so sure it's much of a change. 

"What does it take for UC to suffer the consequence of screwing
up?" asked Danielle Brian, executive director of a watchdog
group, the Project on Government Oversight. "Lockheed wasn't a
great alternative, but it is hard to see how UC could possibly
have been a vote of confidence. We expect a continuation of the
era of chaos at Los Alamos." 

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton, the
Texas Republican who has overseen several hearings on problems
at the lab, fired off a letter to Bodman demanding copies of all
documents by Jan. 6. 

"Based on the track record by the University of California and
the seemingly invulnerable culture of mismanagement at Los
Alamos, I am surprised to learn that the current contractor has
been invested with new trust. I have minimal hope and no belief
that UC can reverse its record of consistent failure," said
Barton's letter. 

Domenici's response, "Oh, the University of Texas lost." 

Another Texas Republican, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, said Bodman
assured her the selection process, run entirely by civil
servants, was fair. 

"California has an advantage in continuity and that was a
factor, " Hutchison said. 

Said Sen. Jeff Bingaman, a Silver City Democrat: "The proposal
was judged on the merits. I think they will be able to withstand
any questions that members of Congress have." 

When former Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham announced in April
of 2003 that the Los Alamos contract would up for bid for the
first time in the 60-year-history of the nation's premier bomb
factory, it was widely assumed that the reason was to dump UC
over repeated security, safety and mismanagement concerns. 

Lockheed Martin, which already manages Sandia National
Laboratories in Albuquerque, emerged as the strongest
alternative by partnering with the University of Texas and
announcing that Sandia President C. Paul Robinson would step
down to head the Los Alamos effort. 

But UC, which at one point pondered whether even to bid, put
together its own strong team, headed by Michael Anastasio, a
physicist and director of the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, and as a deputy director, Bechtel's John Mitchell, a
nuclear weapons systems manger who had overseen the Energy
Department's Nevada Test Site, the Y-12 plant in Tennessee and
Yucca Mountain. 

BWX Technologies, which manages Y-12 and the Pantex Plant in
Texas, and the Washington Group, which has contracts at the
Waste Isolation Plant in southeast New Mexico and other energy
sites, rounded out the Los Alamos National Security team. 

Domenici said he gathered from what energy officials said "on
almost all counts, this was a better proposal." 

The actual selection was made Monday by Thomas P. D'Agostino, a
career civil servant at Energy and acting deputy administrator
for defense programs. The decision was based on the
recommendation of an eight-member selection board headed by
former energy general counsel Tyler Przybylek. 

D'Agostino and Przybylek said UC-Bechtel and Lockheed-UT can
still appeal the contract decision. 

D'Agostino said the UC-Bechtel team proposed a unique
interdisciplinary approach that would allow "operational
excellence" to permeate across Los Alamos Lab. 

The structure also will allow the lab director to look across
the department and focus not just on what is good for Los Alamos
but all the nuclear weapons production sites, D'Agostino said. 

Neither Energy Department officials, UT-Bechtel, nor New Mexico
officials could say precisely Wednesday what that would mean for
the other weapons labs, like Sandia. 

Some critics of the Energy Department say there is too much
duplication and competition between the labs. 

D'Agostino said the new Los Alamos contract "presents a forum"
where questions about integration and consolidation can be
addressed. He did not elaborate. 

The contract will total $512 million over seven years with an
Energy Department option to extend the contract another 13 years
with no competitive bidding. 
  

2005 � The Albuquerque Tribune | | 
*****************************************************************
 56 Albuquerque Tribune: It's a new day for Los Alamos

By Tribune Reporter

December 22, 2005

LOS ALAMOS - Change is about to creep over Los Alamos National
Laboratory. Not all at once, but it's coming, a spokesman for
Los Alamos National Security LLC said. 

The National Nuclear Security Administration on Wednesday
selected the LLC - a consortium of the University of California,
Bechtel Corp., BWX Technologies Inc. and Washington Group
International - to run Los Alamos for the next seven years. 

What comes next is a six-month transition from the old
contractor, the University of California, to a mix of the new
partners, said spokesman Jeff Berger. 

Some workers may be shuffled around, but on Wednesday, it was
too early to give details, he said. 

It's a new day for Los Alamos 

TALKING POINTS 

What's new: A consortium called the Los Alamos National Security
LLC will run Los Alamos National Laboratory for the next seven
years, starting June 1. The group is made up of the University
of California, Bechtel Corp., BWX Technologies Inc. and
Washington Group International. 

What's next: An estimated six-month transition period. 

What's at issue: Workers are wondering about benefits and job
security. So far, there's no reason to expect firings or
layoffs, the consortium says, although there are also no
details. 

Who wanted the job: Lockheed Martin, the world's largest
military contractor, competed against the UC team. 
How much it's worth: $79 million annually. 
Why the bid: The National Nuclear Security Administration
decided in 2003 to put the lab's operation up for bid for the
first time in six decades. Run solely by the University of
California, the lab was the focus of safety, management and
security problems.  

So far, there's no reason to believe there will be firings or
layoffs, Berger added. 

"We're not getting into real specifics, at least not yet,"
Berger said. "That will come in time." 

Officials with the Department of Energy, the UC consortium and
the NSA will meet during the upcoming weeks. They will review
the relationships between different operations, the condition of
each facility and how each part of the lab is run, Berger said. 

The UC team's competitor for the job, Lockheed Martin, which
manages Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, opened
offices in Los Alamos and Espa?ola in mid-October. By 5 p.m.
Wednesday, both offices were closed. 

C. Paul Robinson, who stepped down as director of Sandia
National Laboratories to run the Lockheed bid team, on Wednesday
couldn't be reached for comment on his future. 

But John Seabrooks, one of two staffers in Lockheed's Los Alamos
office, called the decision a disappointment. 

"We had what I believe was a good transition plan, but we were
up against some good competition," Seabrooks said. "The
important thing is that the employees have a decision." 

Just knowing the government's decision was welcome news, several
employees said Wednesday. The announcement was originally
scheduled for Dec. 1, then delayed. 

Changes will also be welcome, said Steven Brumby, 34, a lab
computer scientist for seven years. 

The science has always been good, but Brumby said he thinks
outdated business operations and accounting problems led to
scandals over missing classified materials and stolen purchase
cards. 

Many problems were blown out of proportion in the media, he
said. 

Still, he said, "I think there has to be a stronger emphasis on
efficiency of services, keeping down the cost of services, that
accounting is excellently managed so we don't have to worry
about how people account for things." 

Experienced managers, like those coming from Bechtel, should
improve the situation, he said, adding that academics don't
always make the best managers. 

Not everyone is happy with the government's choice. 

Doug Roberts, a retired lab scientist who operates a popular
blog about the lab at www.lanl-the-real-story.blogspot.com,
hoped that Lockheed would win the contract. 

"I'm deeply disappointed because I felt Lockheed Martin and its
associates were the better choice," Roberts said. "I say that
because the management problems were so highly visible in the
last year and a half." 

The blog's traffic peaked on Tuesday and Wednesday, hitting
25,000 page views Tuesday and cresting that number by 2:30 p.m.
on Wednesday. At that time, comments were coming in with about
four people to one feeling disappointed, Roberts said. 

Employees have expressed concerns about how their benefits and
retirement packages will change, Roberts said. 

They will have options to choose from with the change in
leadership. Those options will differ from what they have now,
officials said. 

At the Hot Rocks Java Cafe across the street from the lab, the
mood seemed upbeat as people learned of the UC-led team winning
the contract. 

Dean Peterson, 64, who has worked at Los Alamos for 33 years,
said he thinks the lab will experience less turnover with UC
remaining part of the management mix. 

His children took advantage of one UC benefit: in-state tuition
at its campuses. One of his children attends UC-Santa Barbara. 

"They've managed the lab well for many years now," Peterson
said. "It's less likely that people will leave with UC." 

Paul Graham, 36, an electrical engineer at the lab for the past
four years, said he was surprised that the UC-led team won. 

UC, he said, "had a lot going against them. They had to have a
good proposal in." 

"I think a lot of the operations, day-to-day business things,
will change, since they'll be run by Bechtel," Graham said. "I'm
sure they'll want to do the right thing." 

There's certainly room for improvement in the areas that caused
scandals and spurred the administration to open the contract for
competition, he said. 

"There's been a lot of upheaval in the last couple years,"
Graham said. "Hopefully there's not more upheaval because of
this." 

Brumby said he, too, is glad the process is over and life in
this northern New Mexico town can move forward. 

"The community has been under incredible stress for the last
several years," Brumby said. "You see that in the way people buy
things for Christmas - for everything." 

He found it symbolic that the decision was announced shortly
after noon on the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year. 

"It feels like the old year is gone and longer days and happier
times are ahead," Brumby said. 

2005 � The Albuquerque Tribune | | 
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************