*****************************************************************
12/28/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.301
*****************************************************************
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 BBC: US penalty for Iran sales 'wrong'
2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says It's Studying Russian Proposal
3 Japan Times: Bilateral talks still on: Pyongyang official
4 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Group sees little hope of nuclear pact in 200
5 Rediff: Pakistan notifies ban on nuclear exports
6 BBC: Pakistan launches nuclear project
7 AFP: India tests nuclear-capable missile
8 UPI: India asks U.S. to lift sanctions
NUCLEAR REACTORS
9 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
10 Crisscross: Suspended Miyagi nuclear plant to resume partial operati
11 Typically Spanish News: Nuclear power station fined for 3 serious fa
12 US: APP.com: Nuclear's not the answer; combining hydrogen, wind and
13 US: SciAm: A New Breed of Nuclear Reactors?
14 US: Cincinnati Enquirer: Bunning Helps Secure Gaseous Diffusion Plan
15 Xinhua: Pakistani PM hails Chashma nuclear power project
16 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collecti
17 US: NRC: [Docket No. PRM-34-06]
18 Pakistan News: More nuclear plants to be set up for meeting growing
19 US: MyWestTexas.com: Public meeting planned on test reactor |
20 AFP: Pakistan starts work on second Chinese-made nuclear power stati
21 Asian Tribune: Pakistan, China agree to further enhance nuclear coop
22 Sunday Times: Britain's nuclear power industry should act its age
23 US: WKYT 27: Firm awarded $191 million contract to do cleanup at nuc
24 US: SanLuisObispo.com: Meeting on Diablo safety
NUCLEAR SECURITY
25 US: Guardian Unlimited: N.Y. Hospitals to Get 'Dirty Bomb' Devices
26 US: Post-Star: Spy case spooks neighbors of Milton nuclear facility
NUCLEAR SAFETY
27 US: Sioux City Journal: Advocate says more needs to be done for
28 US: WCPO: Three-fifths Of Fernald Worker Claims Rejected So Far
29 US: lamonitor.com: Chromium found in aquifer
30 US: UCWisc: Radiation studies key to nuclear reactor life, recycling
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
31 US: PittsburghLIVE.com: Landfill fined for odors -
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
32 [NukeNet] More plutonium exposures at Livermore Lab
33 New Mexican: Los Alamos lab blog site to shut down
34 DOE: Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology; Nuclear Energ
35 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho
36 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Hanford
37 KTVB.COM: Watchdog group says records show INL reactor unsafe
38 Paducah Sun: DOE plant site gets new cleanup firm -
39 AP Wire: Audit shows cost of SRS nuclear fuel facility soaring
40 Tracy Press: UC's Los Alamos win will impact Livermore
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 BBC: US penalty for Iran sales 'wrong'
Last Updated: Wednesday, 28 December 2005
[Steyr-Mannlicher building in Austria]
Austria says the sale of rifles by Steyr-Mannlicher was entirely
legal
China, India and Austria have condemned a US decision to impose
sanctions on nine firms which it believes have supplied Iran with
military equipment.
China, which is home to six of the firms concerned, has demanded
that the US State Department lift the sanctions.
The Austrian interior ministry defended the sale of about 800
sniper rifles to Iran by an Austrian arms manufacturer as
"unimpeachable".
India criticised the sanctions imposed on two of its firms as
unjustifiable.
The measures - which will remain in place for two years - ban the
firms from trading with the US government and prevent them
obtaining export licences needed to buy certain kinds of
technology from US companies.
Announcing the action, the US State Department said it was based
on "credible evidence" and described the firms involved as
"serial offenders".
It was taken under the US Iran Non-proliferation Act, which aims
to deter international support for Iran's nuclear, chemical and
missile-based weapons programmes.
The US and EU suspect Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons, but
Tehran says its nuclear programme is for civilian energy use.
'Responsible attitude'
China's foreign ministry said the US must reverse its "mistaken
action" against six Chinese firms, warning it could damage
cooperation between the countries.
"We are strongly dissatisfied with and firmly opposed to the US
government sanctioning Chinese companies," it said.
"The Chinese government has always adopted a responsible attitude
on the anti-proliferation issue."
[Two technicians carry a box containing yellowcake at the Iranian
nuclear facility at Isfahan]
The US fears Iran wants nuclear and other weapons programmes
Indian foreign ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna said neither of
the two India-based companies accused of supplying chemical
weapons material had breached national laws or regulations.
He said Delhi was working with the US to prevent weapons
proliferation.
Austrian interior ministry spokesman Johannes Rauch said the sale
of sniper rifles to Iran by arms manufacturer Steyr-Mannlicher
had been approved and controlled by the government before it was
completed in August.
The guns had been supplied for the use of Iran's elite anti-drugs
operatives, he said.
State Department spokesman Adam Ereli acknowledged that
cooperation from Austria had been excellent, suggesting the
matter may soon be resolved, the AFP news agency says.
The Chinese companies involved are: China Aerotechnology Import
Export Corporation, China North Industries Corporation, Zibo
Chemet Equipment Company, Hongdu Aviation Industry Group, Ounion
International Economic and Technical Cooperative Limited and the
Limmt Metallurgy and Minerals Company.
The two Indian companies are Sabero Organics Chemical and Sandhya
Organics Chemical.
*****************************************************************
2 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says It's Studying Russian Proposal
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Wednesday December 28, 2005 5:47 PM
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran said it was studying a Russian proposal
that the two nations enrich uranium in Russian territory in its
most conciliatory remarks yet on the offer, though it insisted
Wednesday on its right to carry out enrichment at home.
The Russian proposal, backed by the Europeans and the United
States, is aimed at getting Iran to move uranium enrichment
completely out of its territory to ensure that its nuclear
program cannot produce weapons. Enrichment can produce either
fuel for a nuclear reactor or the material needed for a warhead.
``Russia's proposal is to set up a joint Iranian-Russian company
to enrich uranium in Russian territory,'' said Javad Vaidi,
Iran's top nuclear negotiator.
The Russian proposal puts Iran in a difficult position, since it
has repeatedly refused to give up enrichment but is reluctant to
directly reject an offer from Moscow, a longtime ally that is
putting the finishing touches on the first nuclear power plant
in southern Iran.
The Europeans are hoping the compromise can bring a breakthrough
in deadlocked negotiations aimed at ensuring Iran cannot produce
nuclear weapons. Talks between Iran and Britain, France and
Germany resumed earlier this month, making little progress, and
are to continue in January.
Washington is pushing for Tehran to be brought before the United
Nations Security Council, where it could face economic sanctions
over the dispute. Russia and China, which have vetoes on the
council, oppose referral and the West has stopped short of
forcing the matter.
Vaidi said the Russian proposal has to be seen in the context of
an exchange of nuclear technology between countries that have
signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. ``An important
factor will be the amount of Iranian share in the project,''
Vaidi said in a written interview Wednesday with the reliable
semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency, ISNA. A copy of the
written interview was made available to The Associated Press.
He insisted that the Russian proposal cannot deny Iran its
rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the
right to carry out its own uranium enrichment.
``Whatever meaning the Russian proposal may have, it won't mean
... denying Iran its treaty rights,'' he said.
Vaidi is deputy head of Iran's Supreme National Security
Council, the country's top security decision-making body, which
handles the nuclear negotiations.
Saeed Aboutaleb, a hard-line lawmaker, denounced Russia's
proposal as a ``dirty trick.''
``Russia is in close coordination with Europeans ... This
(Russian) proposal is unacceptable,'' Aboutaleb said.
He said there was no reason for Iran to move its uranium
enrichment facilities to Russian territory while it had the
scientific ability to do it at home.
``If we give up this (uranium enrichment), we will have no
response to future generations,'' he said.
The nuclear program is regarded as a source of national pride in
Iran, and any government abandoning enrichment likely would lose
support. Iran also says its nuclear program has the sole aim of
making fuel for atomic reactors that would generate electricity
and denies U.S. charges it is trying to develop nuclear weapons.
Foreign Minister Manouhehr Mottaki said last week that it was
wrong to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear technology because
Iran has already achieved proficiency in the cycle of nuclear
fuel - from extracting uranium ore to enriching it.
The Russian proposal followed the resumption this month of
negotiations between Iran and Germany, France and Britain, which
negotiate on behalf of the 25-nation European Union. The talks
are to continue in January.
On Tuesday, the Bush administration sanctioned nine foreign
companies, six of them in China, for selling missile goods and
chemical arms material to Iran. In making the announcement
Tuesday, State Department spokesman Aam Ereli said the sanctions
were based on ``credible evidence,'' which he did not disclose.
Two of the companies are Indian and the other is Austrian.
As a result, Ereli said, the United States will not provide
export licenses to the companies for doing business here and
will ban U.S. government purchases from the companies.
The governments of all three countries criticized the decision
on Wednesday.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
3 Japan Times: Bilateral talks still on: Pyongyang official
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
BEIJING (Kyodo) Pyongyang will hold talks with Tokyo in January
as planned, regardless of whether the six-party talks on defusing
the North's nuclear threat resume in the near future, a North
Korean Foreign Ministry official said Tuesday.
[News photo]
Song Il Ho, North Korean team leader at weekend talks with
Japan, speaks to reporters in Beijing
"The six-party meeting is the six-party meeting, and DPRK-Japan
talks are the DPRK-Japan talks," Song Il Ho, who headed the
country's delegation to working-level talks last weekend with
Japan, said at Beijing's international airport before leaving
for Pyongyang.
DPRK is the acronym for North Korea's official name, the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Song, vice director of North Korea's Asian Affairs Department,
had been asked by reporters about possible connections between
the schedules for the two sets of negotiations.
Japan and North Korea agreed Sunday on a three-track format for
bilateral negotiations, paving the way for talks on normalizing
diplomatic relations to restart as early as January.
The countries will establish three working groups -- one to
address diplomatic normalization, another to look into North
Korea's past abductions of Japanese nationals and the third to
take up Pyongyang's nuclear arms and missile threat.
The six-party talks aimed at curbing the North's nuclear
ambitions involve the two Koreas, the United States, China,
Japan and Russia.
The Japan Times: Dec. 28, 2005
(C) All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
4 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Group sees little hope of nuclear pact in 2006
December 29, 2005 KST 13:54 (GMT+9)
December 29, 2005 ¤Ñ The North Korean nuclear issue probably
will not be resolved next year and nuclear negotiations are
unlikely to resume before March, the Korea Institute for
National Unification predicted in a report on Korean Peninsula
issues in 2006.
The institute said that Washington's insistence that the North
must first give up nuclear weapons and Pyongyang's stance that
it wants a nuclear power reactor are one stumbling block to
further negotiations. It predicted that the North could respond
to the pressure from Washington by test-firing another missile
or even by conducting a nuclear weapons test. Either step, but
the latter in particular, the institute said, would trigger a
strong reaction from the United States.
Nevertheless, the institute continued, Pyongyang would find it
very difficult to walk away from the six-party talks despite
Washington's pressure on issues such as human rights conditions
in the North.
The long-awaited visit to the South by Kim Jong-il is a
non-starter, the institute said, citing Washington's pressure on
Seoul to keep its enthusiasm for North Korea under control and
domestic antipathy from many South Koreans about receiving the
North Korean leader. But the group said that after former
President Kim Dae-jung pays his second visit to North Korea,
especially if there is an unexpected breakthrough in the nuclear
talks, another meeting between the two Koreas' leaders might be
possible on neutral soil.
The unification institute is a government-funded body that
nonetheless has occasionally expressed its unease with
government policy toward the North.
It predicted in its report that the Pyongyang regime would not
begin to groom a successor to Kim Jong-il until at least 2007.
The paper seemed to rule out the idea of another dynastic
succession in the North, saying that the criteria for the
North's next boss would be his loyalty to Mr. Kim and his
father, Kim Il Sung, who ruled there until his death in 1994. It
said the successor would probably be from the ranks of the
military and someone with good economic credentials, a
combination perhaps hard to find.
Inter-Korean relations will continue next year much as they did
in 2005, the institute said, predicting more calls from the
North for Seoul to abolish its National Security Law and to
expel U.S. troops. It also said it expected North Korea to
expand the scope of tourism projects targeted at South Koreans
and try to increase investment by southern companies in the
Kaesong industrial complex.
by Ko Soo-suk africanu@joongang.co.kr>
*****************************************************************
5 Rediff: Pakistan notifies ban on nuclear exports
December 28, 2005 19:28 IST
Pakistan has notified the control lists of goods, technologies,
materials and equipment related to nuclear and biological
weapons and their delivery systems, which will be subject to
strict export controls.
The control lists have been notified pursuant to the 'Export
Control Act on Goods, Technologies, Materials and Equipment
related to Nuclear and Biological Weapons and their Delivery
Systems', which was adopted by Parliament in September 2004, a
Foreign Office statement said.
The control lists adopted by Pakistan encompass the lists and
scope of export controls maintained by the Nuclear Suppliers
Group, the Australia Group that relates to biological agents and
toxins and the Missile Technology Control Regime.
The classification system is based on the European Union's
integrated list, which constitutes the latest international
standard in this regard, said the statement.
+ 'Nuclear Pakistan more dangerous to US than Iraq'
Lists controlling the exports of chemical weapons-related agents
and their delivery system are already being maintained by
Pakistan pursuant to the Chemical Weapons Convention
Implementation Ordinance 2000.
The statement added that notification of the control lists
further highlights Pakistan's policy to implement its national
and international non-proliferation commitments as a responsible
nuclear weapons state.
The lists are being notified to all concerned, including
manufacturers of such goods and technologies as well as to the
enforcement agencies for effective controls at the borders.
Pakistan, in view of growing energy needs for development and
scarcity of natural fossil fuel reserves, under its national
energy plan, plans to generate 8800 MW of nuclear power by 2025
through the setting up of additional nuclear power plants, under
International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.
+ Admiral Nadkarni: Playing the nuclear game
All of Pakistan's existing nuclear power generation plants are
under IAEA safeguards. Effective and robust export controls
should also facilitate international cooperation in the area of
civilian nuclear technology under safeguards.
UNI
Copyright © 2005 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
6 BBC: Pakistan launches nuclear project
Last Updated: Wednesday, 28 December 2005
[Abdul Qadeer Khan]
AQ Khan sparked concern with his nuclear confession
Pakistan has begun building a new nuclear power plant in Punjab
province.
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz launched work on the 325-megawatt
plant in Chashma, which is the second to be built at the site
with Chinese help.
It was "a milestone" in the history of nuclear technology in
Pakistan, Mr Aziz told officials from both countries.
The construction follows concern aroused by the confession of a
leading Pakistani last year that he leaked nuclear secrets.
Dr AQ Khan shocked the nation and sparked international alarm
when he publicly confessed to sharing nuclear technology with
North Korea, Libya and Iran.
Tests
Officials say Chashma-2, south of the capital Islamabad, is for
peaceful purposes and will follow International Atomic Energy
Agency safeguards.
Pakistan has a parallel nuclear establishment, which runs its
nuclear-weapon and missile technology programme.
Pakistan's first nuclear power plant was built in 1972 in Karachi
with Canadian assistance.
Western nations later ceased nuclear co-operation with Islamabad,
after it was alleged Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons.
Pakistan conducted nuclear weapons tests in 1998. Its rival India
launched its first nuclear weapon more than a decade earlier.
*****************************************************************
7 AFP: India tests nuclear-capable missile
Wed Dec 28, 7:59 AM ET
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India successfully tested its nuclear-capable,
short-range Dhanush ballistic missile, defence officials said.
The locally-developed missile, a naval version of the
surface-to-surface Prithvi, was tested on Wednesday from a ship
in the Bay of Bengal off the east coast of Orissa state, the
Press Trust of India said, quoting official sources.
Dhanush -- which means bow in Hindi -- has a range of 250
kilometres (156 miles) and can carry a payload of 500 kilograms
(1,100 pounds), the news agency said.
India, which conducted a series of nuclear tests in 1998, has
already developed and deployed two ballistic missiles and a
surface missile.
It hopes to cap the programme with a 5,000-kilometre
(3,125-mile) range ballistic missile to give it the capability
of striking beyond South Asia.
Nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan frequently test-fire
missiles but as part of a slow-moving peace process have agreed
to inform each other in advance.
Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
8 UPI: India asks U.S. to lift sanctions
United Press International -
12/28/2005 12:30:00 PM -0500
NEW DELHI, Dec. 28 (UPI) -- India Wednesday asked the United
States to lift sanctions on two Indian firms penalized under the
Iran non-proliferation act.
"Since the imposition of sanctions in September 2004, the
government maintained that this had no justification.
Accordingly, we had urged the U.S. government to review the
issue and withdraw the sanctions," said Navtej Sarna, Indian
foreign office spokesman.
He said the removal of sanctions on Dr. C. Surender vindicated
India's position on the matter. Sarna said the government also
reiterated sanctions against Dr. Y.S.R. Prasad should be
removed.
The United States placed sanctions against Indian, Chinese and
Australian chemical firms for selling prohibited materials to
Iran's nuclear program.
The Indian firms are Sabero Organics Gujarat Limited and Sandhya
Organics Ltd.
The sanctions were imposed under the U.S.-Iran nonproliferation
act passed by the U.S. Congress in 2000.
Prohibited firms are barred from doing business with the United
States, and are not granted licenses to buy sensitive products.
The sanctions were imposed to deny international support to
Tehran's nuclear program.
Sarna said the U.S. sanctions relate to the transfer of some
chemicals to Iran.
"Our preliminary assessment is that the transfer of such
chemicals is not in violation of our regulations or our
international obligations," Sarna said.
He said India's commitment to prevent onward proliferation is
second to none.
"We have instituted a rigorous system of export controls and our
track record in this regard is well known," he said.
The spokesman said India is working with international
community, including the United States, against proliferation.
"In this context the imposition of sanctions on our firms, which
in our view have not acted in violation of our laws or
regulation, is not justified," Sarna asserted.
Surender and Prasad, both retired nuclear scientists, denied
charges they helped Iran develop its nuclear program. The two
scientists headed the prestigious Nuclear Power Corporation of
India.
© Copyright 2005 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
9 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
FR Doc 05-24628
[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Notices] [Page 76894-76895] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28de05-162]
Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Date: Weeks of December 26, 2005, January 2, 9, 16, 23, 30, 2006.
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
Status: Public and Closed.
Matters to be Considered Week of December 26, 2005 Friday,
December 30, 2005 12 noon--Affirmation Session (Public Meeting)
(Tentative). a. Final Rule--AP1000 Design Certification
(Tentative). (Contact: Michelle Schroll, 301-415-1662) Week of
January 2, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for
the Week of January 2, 2006.
[[Page 76895]] Week of January 9, 2006--Tentative Tuesday,
January 10, 2006 9:30 a.m.--Briefing on International Research
and Bilateral Agreements (Public Meeting). (Contact: Roman
Shaffer, 301-415-7606) This meeting will be webcast live at the
Web address http://www.nrc.govWednesday , January 11, 2006 1:55
p.m.--Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. Hydro
Resources, Inc. (Crownpoint, New Mexico) Petition for Review of
LBP-05- 17 (Groundwater Issues) (Tentative) 2:00 p.m.--Meeting
with Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) (Public Meeting).
(Contact: John Larkins, 301-415-7360) This meeting will be
webcast live at the Web address http://www.nrc.gov .
Thursday, January 12, 2006 9:30 a.m.--Discussion of Security
Issues (closed--ex. 2 & 3). Week of January 16, 2006--Tentative
Tuesday, January 17, 2006 1:30 p.m.--Discussion of Security
Issues (closed--ex. 1 & 3). Week of January 23, 2006--Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of January 23, 2006.
Week of January 30, 2006--Tentative Tuesday, January 31, 2006
9:30 a.m.--Briefing on Strategic WorkForce Planning and Human
Capital Initiatives (closed--ex. 2). Wednesday, February 1, 2006
9:30 a.m.--Discussion of Security Issues (closed--ex. 1 & 3).
*The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on
short notice. To verify the status of meetings call
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more
information: Michelle Scroll, (301) 415- 1662.
* * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the
Internet at:
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html* * * *
* The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable
accommodation to participate in these public mergings, or need
this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from
the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large
print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator,
August Spector, at 301-415-7080, TDD: 301-415- 2100, or by e-mail
at aks@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like
to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition,
distribution of this meeting notice over the Interned system is
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic
message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: December 22, 2005.
R. Michelle Scroll, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-24628 Filed 12-23-05; 3:06 pm] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
*****************************************************************
10 Crisscross: Suspended Miyagi nuclear plant to resume partial operations
Thursday, December 29, 2005 at 05:00 EST
SENDAI — An nuclear power plant in Miyagi Prefecture will resume
partial operations as early as January after its three reactors
shut down automatically after a large earthquake in August,
officials at Tohoku Electric Power Co said Wednesday.
The comments came after Miyagi Gov Yoshihiro Murai allowed the
company to restart operating the No. 2 reactor, one of the
suspended three, at the Onagawa nuclear power plant. Operations
of all three nuclear reactors were halted on Aug 16 when the
earthquake with an estimated magnitude of 7.2 occurred in the
Pacific off Miyagi Prefecture.
© 2005 Kyodo News. All rights reserved. No reproduction or
*****************************************************************
11 Typically Spanish News: Nuclear power station fined for 3 serious faults -
www.typicallyspanish.com
Dec 28th, 2005 - 23:22:32
The nuclear power station Vandellós II in Tarragona. Photo – EFE.
A meeting of the Nuclear Safety Commitee, the
CSN, on Wednesday, has ratified a proposal from its regulatory
committee to fine the nuclear power station Vandellos II for
three serious faults.
The faults refer to the response by management to an incident in
2004 when a leak of coolant sea water was detected in a pipe in
one of the plant’s redundant systems.
The leak and its effects caused the plant to be off line for
five and a half months.
The amount of the fine has yet to be determined, but it could be
as much as 1,800,000 euros, as each serious fault has a maximum
fine of 600,000 euros.
typicallyspanish.com
*****************************************************************
12 APP.com: Nuclear's not the answer; combining hydrogen, wind and solar is
| Asbury Park Press Online
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Posted by the Asbury Park Press
I agree with the premise of the writer of the Dec. 16 letter
"Hydrogen, nuclear best alternatives" that we are too dependent
on foreign oil for our energy needs, but I propose an alternative
to nuclear. Nuclear power has a serious downside: the long-term
storage of high-level radioactive waste from the recovery
process. These wastes are toxic to life, continue to generate
low-level heat and remain radioactive for up to 10,000 years.
If the cost of this radioactive storage (now borne by the
government, not private utilities) is added to the cost of power
generated by nuclear, we'd all be paying much more for
electricity. And the cost of the storage of these wastes goes on
for millennia.
So far, we have stored these nuclear wastes for about 60 years,
a short period of time compared to that required. What materials
will stand up this long? And what state in the union wants a
nuclear repository? Why foist this trash on future generations?
Why tempt terrorists to steal it and wreak havoc?
Now to the question of hydrogen: Hydrogen is abundant in water,
but hydrogen as fuel must be produced from water by electrolysis
— that is, the use of electrical power to produce hydrogen gas,
which would then be burned as fuel. This electrolysis requires
more electrical energy than is obtained from the subsequent
combustion. From where will this electrical energy come?
If a hydrogen fuel system has merit, then the
hydrogen/wind/solar combination has even more merit. Although
Mother Nature can't be compelled to generate energy in
consonance with our daily peak demands and storing power in
large banks of lead-acid batteries is impractical, by the
combined system, the off-peak power would be used to produce
hydrogen. Voila, no electricity storage. Without the use of wind
and solar, hydrogen fuel would have to be produced from
electrical power generated from the combustion of fossil fuels,
and does nothing to alleviate our dependence on foreign oil.
Solar and wind power are custom-made for the new hydrogen
technology.
The "ugliness per kilowatt" used by the writer regarding
windmills and solar panels is a relative term. Have we banned
ugly highway billboards? It's all conditioning — billboards seem
to blend into the background. However, seeing the far-off masts
of a wind farm would warm the souls of many citizens who realize
that this technology is reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
John Dabrowski
Copyright © 2005 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
13 SciAm: A New Breed of Nuclear Reactors?
BLOG: SciAm Observations: A blog from the editors of Scientific
American
December 28, 2005
questions? Send them to editorsblog@sciam.com
Does the world need a new kind of nuclear reactor? Does it want
one? Those are the questions Matthew Wald addressed in his
New York Times article(Dec. 27) about the proposal by
some scientists to resuscitate the idea of breeder reactors,
ones based on an electrorefining process for stripping the
degraded fission products from nuclear waste and leaving the
still-usable uranium and plutonium in a more concentrated form.
Readers may recognize this as the technology that William H.
Hannum, Gerald E. Marsh and George S. Stanford of Argonne
National Laboratorydescribed in their December Scientific
American article, "Smarter Use of Nuclear Waste."
That article focused primarily on the "how it would work"
aspects of the technology, while also laying out the rationale
for it. Briefly, here's the pitch: If we're to produce adequate
energy for the future while curbing global warming, we might
need to rely more on nuclear fission. But conventional fission
plants have two liabilities. First, they leave behind 95 percent
of the fissionable energy in their fuel. Second, as a
consequence of the first, their voluminous wastes are highly
radioactive for thousands of years. A new type of breeder
reactor, however, could make more efficient use of the fuel and
reduce the waste stream to a more manageable level. Moreover,
unlike older breeder reactors, the new ones would not be
attractive to terrorists or rogue states seeking plutonium for
bombs.
Here's one description from Hannum et al. of the new reactors:
© 1996-2005 Scientific American, Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
14 Cincinnati Enquirer: Bunning Helps Secure Gaseous Diffusion Plant Contract
CINCINNATI.COM
Reported by: A.P. Web produced by: Neil Relyea Photographed by:
9News First Posted: 12/27/2005 11:07:59 PM
PADUCAH, Ky. (AP) -- A Paducah company has been awarded a $190
million contract for work at the Gaseous Diffusion Plant there.
The company -- Paducah Remediation Services -- will perform
environmental and waste management work at the nuclear plant
over the next three-and-a-half years.
The contract expires in September 2009.
Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning helped secure the contract.
He has a seat on the senate's Committee on Energy.
He says he pushed hard to get the contract approved by the
Department of Energy.
Paducah Remediation Services takes over the work at the nuclear
plant from Bechtel Jacobs in April.
[ border=]
[Cincinnati.Com]
All material © 2005 WCPO-TV Scripps Howard Broadcasting
*****************************************************************
15 Xinhua: Pakistani PM hails Chashma nuclear power project
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-12-29 02:07:18
CHASHMA, Pakistan, Dec. 28 (Xinhuanet) -- Pakistan's Prime
Minister Shaukat Aziz on Wednesday hailed the Chashma nuclear
power project as a milestone in the country's history of nuclear
technology and an important step toward energy security.
Speaking at the Concrete Pouring ceremony of Chashma-2, some
280 kilometers southwest of the Pakistani capital of Islamabad,
he termed the project as yet another landmark in Pakistan-China
relations.
"There can be no better gift for the Pakistan Atomic Energy
Commission as it sets to celebrate its 50th anniversary and the
two countries, Pakistan and China, prepare to commemorate the
55th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations in
2006,"he said.
Aziz said the Chashma project was an important step forward
toward energy security, adding that Pakistan was planning to
produce 8,800 MWs of nuclear power in the next 25 years.
"Our nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. We have
established an effective command and control authority to ensure
the safety and security of our nuclear installations," he
stressed.Chairman of the China Atomic Energy Authority Sun Qin,
President of the China National Nuclear Corporation Kang Rixin,
Pakistan's Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Ehsan ul
Haq and Chairman of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission Parvez
Butt also attended the ceremony.
Before inviting Aziz to press the button to start pouring the
first concrete, Butt said that the Chashma-1 was a good example
of the cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy between
Pakistan and China. He said that the success of the Chashma-1
proved that China had designed and built a good nuclear power
plant.
In his speech, Sun said that the Chashma nuclear power plant
1 had become a successful model of "south-south cooperation."
"It has brought about substantial economic and social effects
and done due contribution to the sustainable development and
improvement of people's living standard of Pakistan," he added.
Kang expressed the hope that the new project would be
completed in schedule and with good quality to be "another
symbolic project of the successful cooperation between China and
Pakistan in the field of nuclear power."
The contract concerning the Chashma-1 was signed in 1991 and
the nuclear power plant was connected to the grid in June 2000
and put into commercial operation in September that year.
Following the successful operation of the Chashma-1, the
Chashma-2 contract was signed in May 2004. Enditem
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
FR Doc E5-7966
[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Notices] [Page 76894] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28de05-161]
Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to submit an information
collection request to OMB and solicitation of public comment.
SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a submittal to OMB for review of
continued approval of information collections under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). Information pertaining to the requirement to be
submitted: 1. The title of the information collection: Request
Non-Agreement States Information for the State Agreements
Program, as authorized by Section 274(a) of the Atomic Energy
Act.
2. Current OMB approval number: 3150-0200. 3. How often the
collection is required: 6 times per year. 4. Who is required or
asked to report: The 19 States and territories (17 Non-Agreement
States and the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico) that have not signed 274(b) Agreement with NRC.
5. The number of annual respondents: 19. 6. The number of hours
needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 941.
7. Abstract: Requests may be made of Non-Agreement States that
are similar to those of Agreement States to provide a more
complete overview of the national program for regulating
radioactive materials. This information would be used in the
decision-making of the Commission. With Agreement States and as
part of the NRC cooperative post-agreement program with the
States pursuant to Section 274(b), information on licensing and
inspection practices, and/or incidents, and other technical and
statistical information are exchanged.
Agreement State comments are also solicited in the areas of
proposed implementing procedures relative to NRC Agreement State
program policies. With the enactment of the Energy Policy Act of
2005, specifically Section 651(e), NRC now has regulatory
authority over use of accelerator-produced radioactive materials
and discrete sources of radium-226 and other naturally occurring
radioactive material as specified by the Commission. Therefore,
information requests sought may take the form of surveys, e.g.,
telephonic and electronic surveys/polls and facsimiles.
Submit, by February 27, 2006, comments that address the following
questions: 1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary
for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the
information have practical utility? 2. Is the burden estimate
accurate? 3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected? 4. How can the burden
of the information collection be minimized, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology? A copy of the draft supporting statement may be
viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC
worldwide Web site:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The
document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days
after the signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions about the information collection
requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Brenda
Jo. Shelton (T-5 F53), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, by telephone at 301-415-7233, or by
Internet electronic mail to infocollects@nrc.gov. Dated at
Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of December 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chieft
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E5-7966 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
17 NRC: [Docket No. PRM-34-06]
FR Doc E5-7974
[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Proposed Rules] [Page 76724-76728] From the Federal Register
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28de05-22]
Organization of Agreement States; Receipt of Petition for
Rulemaking AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; notice of receipt.
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing
for public comment a notice of receipt of a petition for
rulemaking, dated November 3, 2005, which was filed with the
Commission by Barbara Hamrick, Chair, Organization of Agreement
States (OAS). The petition was docketed by the NRC on November
16, 2005, and has been assigned Docket No. PRM-34-06. The
petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations to require
that an individual receive at least 40 hours of radiation safety
training before using sources of radiation for industrial
radiography, by clarifying the requirements for at least two
individuals to be present at a temporary job site, and by
clarifying how many individuals are required to meet surveillance
requirements. The petitioner also requests that NUREG-1556,
Volume 2, be revised to reflect the performance-based changes in
the proposed amendments.
DATES: Submit comments by March 13, 2006. Comments received after
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the
Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments
received on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following
methods. Please include PRM-34-06 in the subject line of your
comments.
Comments on petitions submitted in writing or in electronic form
will be made available for public inspection. Because your
comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact
information, the NRC cautions you against including any
information in your submission that you do not want to be
publicly disclosed.
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications
Staff.
E-mail comments to: SECY@nrc.gov. If you do not receive a reply
e- mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact
us directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via
the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
Address questions about our rulemaking Web site to Carol
Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail cag@nrc.gov. Comments can also
be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal
http://www.regulations.gov. Hand deliver comments to: 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. (Telephone (301) 415-1966).
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at
(301) 415-1101.
Publicly available documents related to this petition may be
viewed electronically on the public computers located at the
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Room O1 F21, One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Selected
documents, including comments, may be viewed and downloaded
electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at
http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Publicly available documents created
or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are available
electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, the
public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access
and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image
files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to
ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located
in ADAMS, contact the PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209,
301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules and Directives Branch,
Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,
Telephone: 301-415-7163 or Toll Free: 800-368-5642.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Petitioner's Interest The OAS is a
non-profit, voluntary, scientific and professional society
[[Page 76725]] incorporated in the District of Columbia. The
membership of OAS consists of State radiation control program
directors and staff from the 33 Agreement States who are
responsible for implementation of their respective radioactive
material programs. The purpose of the OAS is to provide a
mechanism for the Agreement States to work with each other and
with the NRC on regulatory issues associated with their
respective agreements.
The petitioner states that Agreement States are those States that
have entered into an effective regulatory discontinuance
agreement with the NRC under section 274b. of the Atomic Energy
Act (Act). The Agreement States regulate most types of
radioactive material, including reactor fission byproducts,
source material (uranium and thorium) and special nuclear
materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass,
in accordance with the compatibility requirements of the Act. The
petitioner notes that NRC periodically reviews the performance of
each Agreement State to assure compatibility with NRC's
regulatory requirements.
The petitioner states that Agreement States issue radioactive
material licenses and regulations, and enforce these regulations
under the authority of each individual State's laws. The
Agreement States exercise their licensing and enforcement
programs under direction of their governors in a manner that is
compatible with the licensing and enforcement programs of the
NRC. The 33 existing Agreement States currently license and
regulate approximately 16,800 radioactive material licenses,
whereas the NRC regulates approximately 4,400 licensees.
The petitioner states that in the report of the NRC/State Working
Group on the National Materials Program, the concept of ``Centers
of Expertise'' was introduced. The concept optimizes resources of
Federal, State, professional, and industrial organizations and
reduces duplicate efforts. The petitioner states that some
Agreement States and NRC regions have, over time, developed
considerable experience and expertise with specific uses of
radioactive materials. Examples of areas of expertise include
well logging, industrial radiography, positron emission
tomography, and intravascular brachytherapy.
The petitioner believes that Agreement States and NRC regions
that have developed expertise in specific uses should be
identified and used as a resource by other regulatory programs.
The petitioner further states that the Centers of Expertise
concerning industrial radiography regulation are the States,
specifically those States with a large oil and gas industry
because industrial radiography is closely tied to that industry.
Texas is one of those States and was a leader in promulgating
comprehensive industrial radiography requirements in 1986.
Background Section 34.41(a) (the ``two-person rule''), published
on May 28, 1997 (62 FR 28948), became effective on June 27, 1998.
The petitioner states that when this rule was developed, there
was strong and sustained support from the States, licensees, and
industry for the concept of having at least two qualified
individuals present whenever radiography is performed at
temporary job sites. The petitioner states that Texas has had a
requirement for a two-person crew since 1986, which was adopted
at that time along with specific training requirements. The
petitioner states that by the effective date of the NRC final
rule, seven States were already nationally recognized as having
comparable industrial radiography program components and were
issuing industrial radiographer certifications.
The petitioner states that NRC's regulations require that ``the
additional qualified individual shall observe the operations and
be capable of providing immediate assistance to prevent
unauthorized entry.'' The petitioner believes that the
expectation of the two-person rule, as expressed in the May 28,
1997 final rule, is that at a temporary job site the second
qualified individual would be able to secure the restricted area
and the source, and provide aid as needed. The petitioner states
that in the final rule, the Commission stressed that having a
second qualified individual is particularly important when
radiography is performed where a radiographer alone may not be
able to control access to the restricted area. The petitioner
also states that, additionally, the second person should be
trained to provide a safe working environment for radiography
personnel, workers, and other members of the public at a
temporary job site.
The petitioner states that safety was the basis for having two
individuals at a job site. The petitioner believes that requiring
a trainee/assistant to have more extensive training (e.g.,
completion of a 40-hour radiation safety training course) before
handling radiographic equipment increases the probability that he
or she would be able to observe the area and provide assistance
if needed.
The petitioner states that while there were many comments on the
desirability of the trainer/trainee or radiographer/assistant
crew combination as opposed to the two radiographer crew, and an
acceptance of the requirement that the trainee/assistant be under
the direct supervision of the trainer/radiographer, the issue
regarding whether both individuals of a two radiographer crew had
to be physically present during actual exposures was never
addressed by the NRC.
The petitioner states that in several States, if a two-person
crew consists of two radiographers, one may be in the darkroom
while the other is exposing film, provided the surveillance
requirement is met.
The petitioner states that during the NRC's 2001 Integrated
Materials Performance Evaluation Program (IMPEP) review of the
Texas radioactive materials program, the draft IMPEP Report
concluded that the Texas implementation of its two-person rule in
its Title 25 Sec. 289.255(v)(7)(G), was not compatible with the
NRC's two-person rule in Sec. 34.41(a), which is designated as a
Category B for compatibility purposes.
The petitioner states that Texas indicated in its response to the
IMPEP Report that its rules were a comprehensive set of
requirements implemented to directly and prescriptively address
the identified root causes of the large number of over exposures
that occurred in that State before it implemented the
requirements in 1986. The petitioner states that Texas made
several revisions to its industrial radiography rules that became
effective in April 1999. Texas sent the proposed revisions to the
NRC for review on October 23, 1998, and received no comments
concerning the two-person crew rule. The petitioner believes that
the NRC found the Texas rules to be compatible in this area at
that time.
The petitioner states that based on the IMPEP evaluation
criteria, in 2001, the review team recommended that Texas'
performance with respect to the indicator, Legislation and
Program Elements Required for Compatibility, be found
satisfactory. The petitioner states that the Management Review
Board (MRB) believed that the Texas program presented sufficient
information to warrant reconsideration of how the rule could be
implemented. Therefore, the petitioner states that in June 2002,
the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
coordinated with the Office of State and Tribal Programs, the
CRCPD, and the OAS to establish a Working Group (WG) to
re-evaluate the two-person rule to assess the effectiveness of
the intended outcomes, including experience from past events, and
propose a strategy and rule
[[Page 76726]] interpretation that best achieves the goal of
safety.
The petitioner presented the following observations made by the
WG during its review of the final rule: Since its effective date,
the NRC has consistently implemented the two-person rule to
require both qualified individuals to maintain continuous direct
visual surveillance when radiographic operations are being
conducted.
The WG interviewed nine Agreement States that are also
radiographer certifying States regarding the implementation of
their two-person rule. Six of the nine Agreement States allow
licensees the flexibility to determine if radiographic operations
can be conducted safely when the first radiographer is able to
observe operations and prevent intrusion into the restricted area
while the second radiographer is involved in a related activity
nearby. The three remaining States indicated that they required
both radiographers to provide direct visual surveillance during
radiographic operations.
The actual words of the two-person crew requirement read very
similarly for each of these certifying States, and each State is
committed to the underlying safety objective for the two-person
rule. The differences lie in the latitude given by the various
states to their licensees in how efficiency in operations can be
accomplished without sacrificing safety. Worksite characteristics
are considered, whether it is in a populated or remote area, or
is a multi-level structure, and that the darkroom must be close
by.
The nine States interviewed are the Centers of Expertise in the
industrial radiography and certification arenas. The Centers of
Expertise, concerning industrial radiography regulations, are the
States, specifically those States with a large oil and gas
industry, because industrial radiography is closely tied to that
industry.
These nine States, together with Texas, have the clear majority
share of the radiography licenses and activity in the U.S. The
potential for differences in worksite settings in these States is
great.
Allowing one of two radiographers to work in the darkroom will
not work in all instances. Some of these States have incorporated
the opportunity to accommodate these differences in their
interpretation of this rule, using a performance-based approach
that offers flexibility in the appropriate situations, with
accountability to their licensees.
The WG was not able to attribute events involving industrial
radiography to the failure of the two-person rule, much less to
isolate the surveillance component of the regulation, because the
effectiveness of the two-person rule has not been isolated from
the other components in the regulatory framework.
The WG found that risk information obtained from NUREG/CR- 6642
does not support the manner in which the NRC requires the two-
person rule to be implemented as a requirement to enhance safety.
The WG found that during routine operations, the requirement to
have an additional qualified individual present may actually
increase overall worker occupational radiation exposure, thereby
increasing the overall societal latent cancer risk from routine
operations.
The WG found that using only two persons to provide surveillance
of radiography operations may not always be adequate to prevent
unauthorized access to restricted areas by members of the public.
However, to be present and to be exposed to the radiation field
in instances when radiographic operations are performed at
temporary job sites merely to meet the requirements of the
two-person rule, would not be considered As Low as is Reasonably
Achievable (ALARA).
When the two-person rule was enacted under the previous
compatibility designations, the Statements of Consideration
indicated Agreement State compatibility for operational safety
standards (i.e., Subpart D--Radiation Safety Requirements, which
includes Sec. 34.41, as Division 2 Matters of Compatibility). The
petitioner states that in 1997, the Joint Working Group on
Adequacy and Compatibility transposed those compatibility
determinations to the current designations.
The petitioner states that while reviewing the compatibility
designations, the WG noted a difference in the designations
between Sec. Sec. 34.41 and 34.51 for the same essential
objective, surveillance. The petitioner also states that in Sec.
34.41 the surveillance component is designated compatibility
Category B, while in Sec. 34.51 it is designated as Category C.
The petitioner states that the WG noted that the final rule,
which discusses the requirements for a second qualified
individual, also states that this individual should be able to
provide assistance when required, rather than whenever
radiographic operations are being conducted. The petitioner
states that the consensus opinion of the WG provided
risk-informed, performance-based implementation guidance for the
surveillance component of the two-person rule. The petitioner
states that the WG recommended that the NRC issue guidance in a
Regulatory Information Summary (RIS), modifying the NRC's current
interpretation of the two-person rule, but involving no
rulemaking. The RIS would indicate that the second qualified
individual must remain at the temporary job site and must be
cognizant of the site-specific circumstances when radiographic
operations are in progress. The petitioner states that licensees
would have the flexibility to allow the qualified individual to
engage in other related activities such as developing film in a
nearby darkroom, rather than being required to maintain constant
visual surveillance when the radiographer alone, can observe the
restricted area and prevent unauthorized entry into it. The
petitioner believes that under this option, the NRC and the
Agreement States would align inspection and licensing guidance
with the RIS. The petitioner states that one member of the WG
also provided a differing view, which indicated that another
approach was not needed to make the rule more effective. The
differing view recommended that the NRC notify the Agreement
States to align their implementation to be essentially identical
to that of the NRC.
The petitioner states that the MRB did not accept the WG's
consensus recommendation or the differing view. Instead, the MRB
recommended that the State of Texas, or OAS, file a petition for
rulemaking in accordance with Sec. 2.802 to revise Sec.
34.41(a). The petitioner states that the MRB agreed that until
the final decision is made on the petition for rulemaking, the
staff would defer compatibility findings on the implementation of
the surveillance component of the two-person rule in Texas, and
any other State that is implementing Sec. 34.41(a) in a similar
way. The petitioner states that the final rulemaking has been
interpreted in guidance document NUREG-1556, Volume 2, to mean,
``Both individuals must maintain constant surveillance of the
operations and be capable of providing immediate assistance to
prevent unauthorized entry to the restricted area.'' The
petitioner states that if the temporary job site presents a
situation in which the surveillance requirement of Sec. 34.51 is
met, the NRC interpretation means that even if a two-person crew
consists of two certified radiographers, both must be with the
camera; or if one of the members is in the darkroom, radiography
cannot be performed. The petitioner believes that the impact of
this interpretation on the industry is that companies must employ
[[Page 76727]] an additional third person to develop film in the
darkroom while two individuals are exposing film and preventing
unauthorized entry, regardless of what the situation warrants.
The petitioner also believes that the licensee must use
additional time at a job site to expose film and then develop it.
Either situation results in added, unnecessary cost to the
industry. The petitioner contends that in a temporary job site
situation in which the crew consists of two qualified
radiographers and the surveillance requirement can be met, the
second individual is available to provide immediate assistance,
whether in the darkroom or performing other job-related duties
nearby.
The Proposed Amendment The petitioner requests that the following
amendments be made to the NRC's regulations: 1. Section 34.41(a)
would be revised to state: Whenever radiography is performed at a
location other than a permanent radiographic installation, the
radiographer must be accompanied by at least one other qualified
radiographer or individual(s) who has at a minimum met the
requirements of Sec. 34.43(c). Radiography may not be performed
if only one qualified individual is present.'' Section
34.43(a)(1) would be revised to state: ``Has successfully
completed an accepted course of at least 40 hours on the
applicable subjects outlined in paragraph (g) of this section, in
addition to a minimum of 2 months of on-the-job training, and is
certified through a radiographer certification program by a
certifying entity in accordance with the criteria specified in
appendix A of this part. (An independent organization that would
like to be recognized as a certifying entity shall submit its
request to the Director, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.)'' 3. In Sec. 34.43(c), paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)
would be redesignated as (2), (3), and (4), respectively, a new
paragraph (c)(1) would be added, and redesignated paragraph
(c)(4) would be revised. Paragraph (c)(1) would state: ``Has
successfully completed the accepted course of at least 40 hours
on the applicable subject outlined in paragraph (g) of this
section;''. Paragraph (c)(4) would state: ``Has demonstrated
understanding of the instructions provided under paragraph (c)(2)
of this section by successfully completing a written test on the
subjects covered and has demonstrated competence in the use of
hardware described in section (c)(3) of this section by
successful completion of a practical examination on the use of
such hardware.'' 4. Section 34.51 would be revised to state:
``During each radiographic operation, the radiographer shall
ensure continuous direct visual surveillance of the operation to
protect against unauthorized entry into a high radiation area, as
defined in 10 CFR part 20 of this chapter, except at permanent
radiographic installations where all entryways are locked and the
requirements of Sec. 34.33 are met.'' 5. Change guidance
document NUREG-1556, Volume 2. In the first paragraph under the
Discussion, Temporary Job Sites, change the words ``Both
individuals must maintain'' to ``The radiographer must ensure''.
Justification The petitioner considers the requirement for a
two-person crew to be an important safety requirement, but
believes the surveillance component of that rule is more
appropriately implemented and enforced as a performance-based
requirement, rather than the current prescriptive interpretation
of the rule. The petitioner states that at least six Agreement
States are currently implementing this component differently than
the NRC. The petitioner believes that a shift in the NRC's focus
to a performance-based implementation of the final rule, based on
its acceptance of the expertise in this arena derived from the
States, would foster a regulatory partnership that benefits the
licensed community by minimizing confusion for those licensees
who operate in multiple jurisdictions. The petitioner states that
more than 10 years of information/data exist to demonstrate that
the OAS's recommended implementation of the surveillance
component of the rule is viable and achieves the safety goals of
the regulation. The petitioner states that the WG's review of the
incidents that occurred in Texas from January 1986 through May
2002, indicated that 349 incidents involved industrial
radiography at temporary field sites. The petitioner states that
of the 349 incidents during this 16-year period, 82 resulted in
over exposures >5 rem. Causes of the incidents generally fell
into the following categories: Failure to survey/improper
survey--22 percent.
Unable to determine cause--23 percent.
Badge in exposure area/not on individual--27 percent.
Reporting delays from badge processor/heavy workload--11 percent.
Improper work techniques (other than surveys)--9 percent.
Equipment malfunction--6 percent.
Deliberate badge exposure--2 percent.
The petitioner also states that of the 82 incidents that resulted
in over exposures >5 rem, 17 occurred from June 1998 (the
effective date of the NRC's rule) through May 2002. Causes for
these 17 incidents are categorized as: Failure to survey/improper
survey--4 incidents.
Unable to determine cause--5 incidents.
Badge in exposure area/not on individual--2 incidents.
Reporting delays from badge processor/heavy workload--5
incidents.
Improper work techniques (other than surveys)--1 incident.
The petitioner states that none of the overexposure incidents in
Texas were directly attributable to a lapse in safety due to one
certified radiographer being unavailable (e.g., in the darkroom),
while the other certified radiographer was using the radiographic
equipment. The petitioner states that no negative performance
regarding the Texas implementation of the two-person crew
requirement surfaced that would warrant a different surveillance
strategy.
The petitioner states that the Nuclear Materials Event Database
(NMED) information reviewed by the WG did not break down the data
to specify what effects the components of the two-person rule had
as a cause or a contributing factor (or as a prevention factor)
for radiation exposure events involving industrial radiography
personnel or members of the public. The petitioner states that,
according to the WG report, although NMED contained numerous
incidents that involved industrial radiography during a 7-year
period from 1995 through 2002, the event descriptions do not
correlate the incidents to the two-person rule. The petitioner
states that similarly, the WG reviewed data from the Enforcement
Action Tracking System (EATS), in which 67 cases occurred that
involved industrial radiography during the same 7-year period.
The petitioner states that nine cases cited violation of the
two-person rule, however, none of the cases involved radiation
over exposures to radiography personnel or workers at the site,
and other members of the public.
The petitioner agrees with the opinion of the WG, as stated by
the petitioner, that the apparent inconsistency in the
surveillance component of Sec. Sec. 34.41(a) and 34.51, along
with the conflicting guidance found in NUREG-1556, Volume 2,
raise substantial doubts as to whether the NRC's current
[[Page 76728]] interpretation of the rule is, in terms of safety,
the most desired approach. The petitioner states that the
recommended language that amends Sec. 34.51 puts the access
control responsibility with the radiographer, but allows him the
latitude to use additional personnel to control radiographic
operations if needed. The petitioner believes that this
additional personnel may include persons not qualified as a
radiographer or radiographer's assistant, but capable of
providing needed support to control access to the restricted area
while remaining at the perimeter of the restricted area. The
petitioner believes that, as the rule recommends, the rule does
not require two persons to constantly monitor operations, nor
does it limit it to two persons. The petitioner believes that the
rule allows the radiographer in charge to make that decision. The
petitioner states there is no justification for imposing
additional costs and negative impact on an industry that has not
demonstrated performance that would warrant this cost and impact.
The petitioner states that to assess the additional cost of
implementing the two-person crew as the NRC does, Texas contacted
several of its licensees who have both Texas and NRC licenses.
The petitioner states that the cost of an additional person would
be a minimum of $200 per day (including travel and per diem). The
cost of additional time would be $10-12 per hour (not including
overtime pay). The petitioner states that the licensees contacted
indicated that an even greater impact of enforcing the two-person
crew as the NRC does, would be the lack of availability of
industrial radiographic personnel to do the work. The petitioner
states that the licensees indicated that not only are there not
enough certified radiographers to do the amount of work the
companies had at that time (one licensee indicated that an
average work week is 65 hours), there is a shortage of people
interested in obtaining the training and becoming certified.
Conclusion The petitioner states that, while the OAS agrees with
a requirement for a two-person radiography crew at temporary job
sites, the organization disagrees with NRC's prescriptive
interpretation of the requirements for a two-person crew, the
apparent conflict between NRC's surveillance requirement and
two-person crew requirement, and NRC's omission of a radiation
safety training requirement prior to an individual using sources
of radiation.
The petitioner believes that while it was encouraging that the
NRC adopted requirements in 1997 similar to those that had
previously been adopted by many States, it is disheartening that
the NRC industrial radiography requirements in 10 CFR part 34 do
not address one of the primary factors identified as a root cause
of a large number of industrial radiographer over exposures. The
petitioner states that the failure to require safety training
before using sources of radiation is failing to address one of
the root causes of industrial radiography incidents. The
petitioner states that current NRC requirements allow a
radiographer assistant to use sources of radiation without
attending a safety course that addresses the basic radiation
topics outlined in rule. The petitioner believes that it is
possible for an individual to work for years as a radiographer
assistant and never receive radiation safety training. The
petitioner states that the NRC regulations merely require that
the assistant pass a written exam on the regulation, license, and
the licensee's operating and emergency procedures and pass a
practical exam on the use of the radiographic equipment. Both
written and practical exams are administered by the licensee. The
petitioner believes that it is important to remember that not all
radiography is conducted by the larger radiography companies who
have the resources to establish and oversee adequate and often
exemplary training programs. The petitioner states that in
contrast to the NRC's minimum training requirements, many of the
States' rules require that prior to using sources of radiation,
an individual must complete a 40-hour safety course addressing
radiation safety fundamentals specified in rule, in addition to
passing a licensee-administered written exam on the rules,
license conditions, and operating and emergency procedures and
passing a licensee-administered practical exam on the use of the
equipment. In many States this requirement applies equally to a
radiographer's assistant. The petitioner believes it is critical
for an individual to receive radiation safety training prior to
operating sources of radiation.
The petitioner states that the proposed actions will use risk-
informed, performance based requirements to ensure safety of
workers and the public, eliminate current compatibility
discrepancies, provide uniformity in regulations nationwide, and
ensure consistency in surveillance requirements. Accordingly, the
petitioner requests that the NRC amend its regulations concerning
radiation safety training before using sources of radiation for
industrial radiography, as previously discussed.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of December 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E5-7974 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
18 Pakistan News: More nuclear plants to be set up for meeting growing energy
needs: PM Aziz
PakTribune.Com
Ziqad 26, 1426 Hijri December 29, 2005
CHASHMA, December 29 (Online): Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has
said that Pakistan in order to meet its growing energy needs
would install more nuclear plants and more nuclear program is
only for peaceful purposes.
He expressed these views while delivering a speech on the
occasion of Concrete pouring ceremony of Chashma-2.
"Today concrete pouring ceremony of chasma-2 marks yet another
land mark in Pakistan-China relations and a milestone in the
history of nuclear technology in Pakistan. It is an important
step forward towards energy security. We are planning to produce
880 MW to nuclear power in the next 25 years", PM said while
delivering a speech on the occasion of Concrete pouring ceremony
of Chashma-2.
We want nuclear power as it is, though highly capital intensive,
cheap reliable and environment friendly. Nevertheless, this
production will contribute only 8 percent of the total
electricity production by the year 2030, he said.
Our nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. We have
established an effective command and control authority to ensure
the safety and security of our strategic assets.
We have also adopted wide-ranging controls to prevent leakage of
nuclear materials. Our nuclear power plants are under IAEA’s
safeguards internationally and our track record of compliance
has been excellent. We need these plants for the socio-economic
development of our people.
"Chashma-2 symbolizes the deep interest china has in our
development. In many ways, it is a concrete manifestation of the
resolve of our peoples to further enrich their traditional and
well-established partnership for peace and development", PM
said.
He said we are partners in bringing peace and stability in the
region and together we have made a difference in the past we
will continue to do so in the future.
"The phenomenal economic and technological transformation of
china is a source of strength for us. We take great pride in the
economic accomplishments of china and wish to develop further
linkages to fully realize the tremendous potential that our
economic complementarities provide for common progress and
prosperity", the Prime Minister said.
In the economic filed, we are pursuing a policy of
liberalization, de-regulation and privatization accompanied by
multi-sectoral reforms and restructuring leading to a high
growth trajectory.
Last year it was 8.4 percent and over the next five years, we
are targeting a growth band of 6 to 8 percent.
To achieve this accelerated growth on sustainable basis, we have
already embarked on second-generation reforms involving
deepening of capital markets and financial sector,
infrastructure upgradation including setting up of the national
trade corridor, investment in human capital and skill
development, capacity building and promoting knowledge based
economy, PM said.
In parallel, we are working to convert our progress into
meaningful gain for all segment of our society.
We recognize that to remain competitive and a fast growing
economy in the rapidly globalizing world, the water and energy
security are critical. We will be loosing existing storage
capacity by 6 MAF till 2010 and will be short in water
availability of 30 MAF by 2005.
Based on existing growth rate of power demand, there will be a
gap of 130 MW by the year 2007. Therefore, doing nothing is no
more an option of if we want to progress and move from low
income to middle income countries, he said.
In fact, our survival and competitiveness in the coming decades
depends on increasing substantially the share of hydro and
nuclear power in overall electricity production mix.
Going forward, we are aiming at construction new water
reservoirs following a consultative process to sustain high
agriculture growth, ensure water supply for drinking water and
commercial use and to generate hydropower, PM said.
"We are looking for power generation from all possible sources.
Our strategic direction for development of the energy sector to
ensure sustainable supply of energy at competitive prices to all
sectors of the economy includes.: Increasing emphasis on nuclear
energy resources, Enhancing exploitation of hydropower to make
our industry more competitive by reducing cost of inputs,
Developing and encouraging use of renewable energy resources
(Solar, wind and biomass) in remote areas, Developing coal
reserves for power generation and exploring regional linkages
(Tajikistan), Accelerating exploration and production of
indigenous oil and gas reserves including off shore drilling,
Options to import gas ( Pak-Iran-India, Pak-Turkmenistan-India,
Oman-Pakistan) and Encouraging use of CNG, LPG and import of LNG
to meet the shot term has requirements", he said.
We are positive that the tremendous economic growth in china
will lead to greater cooperation between china and Pakistan not
only in the area of nuclear power but also in other fields of
emerging technologies, he said.
Thanking the people of China for their prompt response to the
devastation caused by recent earthquake in Pakistan PM said,
"Their sentiments of solidarity and support have been a source
of comfort and solace to the people of Pakistan. We deeply value
the Chinese pledge to contribute substantively towards
post-earthquake reconstruction".
The ceremony was attended by Mr. Sun Qin Minister Commission of
Science and Technology and Chairman China Atomic Energy
Authority Mr. Kang Rizin President China National Nuclear
Corporation, General Ehsan ul Haq Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
Committee, Parvez Butt Chairman PAEC and Lt General Khalid Ahmed
Kidwai Director General Strategic Plans Division.
Later on talking to Mr Sun Qin Minister, communication for
Science and Technology Industry for National Defence and
Chairman China Atomic Energy authority who called on him at the
Friendship House at Chashma soon after concrete pouring ceremony
of Chashma-2 Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said that Pakistan and
China enjoy a unique and multi-faceted relationship and both the
countries have agreed to further enhance cooperation in the
peaceful use of nuclear energy.
The prime minister said that today’s ceremony at Chashma, which
is a landmark in the history of Pakistan’s nuclear
programme/technology is also a testimony to the peaceful nature
of nuclear cooperation between Pakistan and China.
The prime minister said China would assist Pakistan in building
and commissioning larger reactors to meet its growing energy
needs. The prime minister said that Chashma-2 will prove as shot
in the arm of the economic development and progress of Pakistan
as it will be go a long way in meeting energy requirements.
Mr Shaukat Aziz said that Pak-China bilateral cooperation in
peaceful use of nuclear technology will increase so that
Pakistan can meet its growing energy requirements necessitated
by the fast economic growth.
"Pak-China cooperation in the field of defence would also
increase in the days ahead. Pakistan has a unique relationship
with China as it is the only country which is co producing with
Pakistan JF-17 Fighter Jet would be a manifestation of the
growing defence corporation between the two countries Similarly
cooperation between the two countries. Similarly the cooperation
between the armies and navies of the two countries would also
increase in the coming days," he added.
The Prime minister terming the KKH as symbol of Sino-Pak
friendship said the volume of the trade has undergone increase
with the signing the early harvest agreement in trade, which
will give a major fillip in trade ties. He said that the Chinese
companies are bidding for major civil works in Pakistan and have
won some big contracts due to their competitive basis in open
competition.
The prime minister also informed that over 100 Pakistani
students have gone to China for higher studies and their
expected to form a bridge of under standing between the two
countries. He also thanked the Minister for China’s generous
assistance to Pakistan to help rehabilitate the victims of
earthquake.
The prime minister also said that Pakistan and China have a
common quest for peace and have similar views on many regional
and global issues like the UN Reforms and combating terrorism.
He said that both the countries have a common quest for peace
and China as a growing world power, gives Pakistan a sense of
elation.
The Chinese Minister said that China is a true friend of
Pakistan and Sino-Pak cooperation in the nuclear field would
increase. He said that his country enjoys a strategic
relationship with Pakistan as it is based on shared interest and
not directed against any country in the world.
It may be mentioned that the Chinese Minister led a high level
50-member delegation from China to the ceremony and also
conveyed greeting on behalf of the Chinese Premier.
The chairman joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Ehsan ul
Haq Lt General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai DG Strategic Division the
Chairman PAEC Mr Pervez Butt Pak Ambassador to China Mr Salman
Bashir and the Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan were also present
on the occasion.
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz took an aerial view of Kalabagh Dam
proposed site on his return to federal capital after attending
the Chashma ceremony.
Foreign Minister Khursheed Mahmood Kasuri, Federal Minister for
Science and Technology Chaudhry Naurez Shakoor, Advisor to Prime
Minister on Finance Dr Salman Shah, Dr Atta ur Rehman, and other
high dignitaries were also present in the helicopter.
The prime minister inspected the spot for sometime.
End.
Pakistan News Service © PakTribune.com Pvt Ltd
2003-2004
*****************************************************************
19 MyWestTexas.com: Public meeting planned on test reactor |
Local News - 12/28/2005 -
Ruth Campbell Staff Writer Midland Reporter-Telegram
Andrews County officials have planned a meeting to determine
public sentiment on a very high-temperature test reactor,
considered the next generation of nuclear reactor.
The gathering is set for 7 p.m. Jan. 9 at the Little Theater at
Andrews High School.
"It's really a continuation of our due diligence process," City
Manager Glen Hackler said. "In this instance it's to determine
what the public sentiment is before the community leadership
weighs in on the project."
The University of Texas of the Permian Basin, city and county of
Andrews and General Atomics of San Diego, Calif., are working on
the project. Representatives from UTPB, the Industrial
Foundation, county commission, city council and General Atomics
will likely attend the meeting.
"It's good for the community and the nation really. It's just
getting past trying to tell people what it is," County Judge
Richard Dolgener said. "É It's a community decision."
UTPB believes the logical choice for a host county is Andrews,
Hackler said.
The county is also the site of Waste Control Specialists, a
low-level radioactive waste storage facility, which borders the
prospective site of Louisiana Energy Services uranium enrichment
facility in Lea County, N.M.
Construction of the test reactor, which would not generate
nuclear power, would cost about $100 million and engineering
cost would be about $3 million, James Wright, technical project
director of the nuclear proposal at UTPB, has said.
The university is currently trying to raise $3 million for
preconceptual design - or a feasibility study, Hackler said.
"We've had nothing but positive feedback," following the October
meeting, Hackler said.
The Andrews County reactor would act as a technological
demonstration for one at Idaho national Lab outside Idaho falls.
Design would generate electricity at twice the efficiency of
regular electric plants.
The powder-like spent fuel is encased in three layers of ceramic
to be safe for up to 500 years, Wright said. The pellets can
withstand temperatures of 2,000 degrees centigrade. It would
also deter proliferation as it would cost billions to remove the
uranium from the pinhead-sized pellets.
General Atomics would operate the reactor when it's done. The
permitting process could cost $60 million and the whole project
including engineering and construction would take six years.
If developed, the facility would bring more than $400 million in
direct investment to the state to be provided by the U.S.
Department of Energy. Wright said he expects at least $40
million a year in operating funds from the government until at
least 2040 and with that money coming in, visiting scientists
would do research here.
©MyWestTexas.com 2005
*****************************************************************
20 AFP: Pakistan starts work on second Chinese-made nuclear power station -
Wed Dec 28, 5:26 AM ET
ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Pakistan has begun construction of a second
nuclear power station with China's help at Chashma in Punjab
province.
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz Wednesday launched work on the
325-megawatt power plant, a twin to an adjacent station of the
same capacity already in service since 2000.
"Today's concrete-pouring ceremony of Chashma-2 marks yet
another landmark in Pakistan-China relations and a milestone in
the history of nuclear technology in Pakistan," Aziz told a
gathering of senior Chinese and Pakistani officials.
The 850-million-dollar project is expected to start production
in 2011, a Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission spokesman told AFP.
The reactor design is based on China's Qinshan 1 nuclear reactor
in its eastern province of Zhejiang.
China agreed to build the power plant in December last year and
both sides have insisted it is for civilian use only.
Aziz said Pakistan would produce some 8,800 megawatts of nuclear
power in next 25 years, which would be eight percent of the
country's total electricity production.
Pakistan's nuclear rival India has in the past expressed its
reservations about nuclear and military cooperation between
Pakistan and China.
Aziz said Pakistan's nuclear programme was for peaceful
purposes. "We need these plants for the socio-economic
development of our people."
Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
21 Asian Tribune: Pakistan, China agree to further enhance nuclear cooperation
Date : 29/12/2005 , Thu A Newspaper Published by World
Institute for Asian Studies. Vol. 5 No. 248
By Iqbal Hussain Khan Yousafzai - Reporting from Islamabad
Islamabad, 29 December, (Asiantribune.com): Pakistan and China
have agreed to further enhance cooperation in the peaceful uses
of nuclear energy.
The agreement was reached during a meeting between Pakistani
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and Chinese Minister for Science and
Technology National Defense and Chairman of China's Atomic
Energy Authority Mr. Sun Qin at Chashma in the eastern Punjab
Province.
Mr. Shaukat Aziz said that the history of Pakistan's nuclear
technology is a testimony to the peaceful nature of nuclear
cooperation between Pakistan and China.
He said china would assist Pakistan in building and
commissioning larger reactors to meet its growing energy needs.
Mr. Aziz said Pak-China bilateral cooperation in peaceful use
of nuclear technology will increase so that Pakistan can meet
its growing energy requirements necessitated by the fast
economic growth.
He said Pakistan has a unique relationship with china as it is
only country which is co-producing with Pakistan JF-17. There is
also growing corporation between the armies and navies of the
two countries.
He said both the countries have a common quest for peace and
have similar views on many regional and global issues like the
U.N. reforms and combating terrorism.
The Chinese minister said that China is a true friend of
Pakistan and Sino-Pak cooperation in the nuclear field would
increase. He said his country enjoys a strategic relationship
with Pakistan as it is based on shared interest.
- Asian Tribune -
Copyright © 2005 www.asiantribune.com. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
22 Sunday Times: Britain's nuclear power industry should act its age
Business View by Vince Cable
12-29-05
THIS year has brought two energy-related issues to the centre of
the political stage: global warming and security of energy
supplies.
The political response, so far, makes a nonsense of the usual
ideological labels. We have a paradoxical position in which a
Labour government is baited by industrialists for failing to
"plan" energy supplies. It cheekily replies, defending
liberalised energy markets, with homilies about supply and demand
that could have been lifted from Milton Friedman.
The serious issue is how best to deal with the challenge of
climate change. On one side are the economical liberals, who
believe that price signals, consumer choice, commercial
risk-taking and decentralised decision-making are the best
mechanisms to shape a lowcarbon future. It is a case improbably
but effectively made by Greenpeace and its allies, including my
own party.
On the other hand, there are those who have great faith in
national, state, central planning guided by wise, strategic
politicians. Nuclear power has emerged as an answer to their
prayers, providing predictable quantities of apparently
carbon-free energy using tried and tested technology and minimum
foreign involvement. Adherents of this view now seem to include
the CBI and the Prime Minister. David Cameron's views are
unclear. Yet it is surely absurd to take up philosophical
positions on the basis of technologies, per se. For politicians
to be "pro" or "anti" nuclear makes no more sense than to be
"for" and "against" silicon chips or aeroplanes. The issue is
about the relative risks and costs.
Risk in relation to nuclear power concerns the tiny probability
of catastrophic events and perceived risk may, indeed, be
overstated in the public mind. Costs, on the other hand,
invariably are understated.
Forty years ago Fred Lee, one of the architects of Harold
Wilson's "white hot heat of the technological revolution",
promised in Parliament of Britain's advanced gas-cooled reactor
programme: "We have hit the jackpot . . . we have the greatest
breakthrough of all time."
But the first plant would take 17 years to build, be 50 per cent
over budget and 20 per cent below specification. The last nuclear
plant to be built in the UK, Sizewell B, generated power at the
current equivalent of 6p per kilowatt hour. That is above the
current wholesale price that causes such alarm and is three times
the level seen two years ago. Moreover, the taxpayer recently
wrote off œ50 billion of decommissioning liabilities for the
industry.
When the Government's chief scientist and others urge British
politicians to show courage and vision over nuclear, taxpayers
and shareholders and customers need to hold on to their wallets.
There is, however, some common ground. Man-made climate change
and the probability of long-term environmental damage - albeit
with big uncertainties - call for a major shift from trend
behaviour. Given the magnitude of the threats and risks, it seems
sensible, indeed essential, to set tough objectives for reducing
carbon emissions and for Britain, as a responsible member of the
international community, to meet its share.
The liberal approach is to tilt the playing field towards
low-carbon fuels, through carbon taxation or use of traded
permits, and to let new technologies compete to meet demand.
There is much scope for reducing energy demand through price
incentives and setting standards to promote conservation and
efficiency without prejudging which fuel mix will emerge to meet
it.
There are good arguments for a liberalised energy market
supporting temporary protection for infant industry. There is a
case in favour of mechanisms - from research funding to the
Renewable Energy Obligation - designed to ensure that the various
new approaches receive sufficient but not excessive support.
Yet it is hard to sustain the argument that infant industry
arguments still apply to the industrial equivalent of
40-year-olds in nappies. If the nuclear industry becomes fully
potty-trained and no longer demands subsidies or guarantees or
that taxpayers pay for safe waste disposal and decommissioning,
then it merits a fresh look. But not before. Apart from some
intensive industrial lobbying, nothing has happened to change the
conclusion of the Government's 2002 Energy Review that the
long-term waste disposal problem is "unsolved".
Underlying the demand for government patronage to deliver the
expensive certainties of nuclear power is scepticism about the
capacity of markets and competition to deal with big, long-term
challenges. But the pessimism is groundless. The oil and gas
industry regularly undertakes massive, complex deepwater
exploration projects spanning decades. Commercial foresters do
the same. Financial markets trade 50-year securities.
Re-insurance markets already factor-in the risk of climate
change.
In the power-generating sector itself, innovative, and very
efficient, new approaches are emerging, using local distributed
sources that could make the traditional, centralised model
obsolete.
Dogma about new nuclear power is unhelpful, for and against. But
the current, unwholesome alliance of big government conservatism
and a powerful industry lobby campaigning to have its business
underwritten by taxpayers should make us thoroughly alarmed.
# Vincent Cable is MP for Twickenham and Liberal Democrat Shadow
Chancellor
*****************************************************************
23 WKYT 27: Firm awarded $191 million contract to do cleanup at nuclear plant
& WYMT Mountain News -
PADUCAH, Ky. -- A firm formed by contractors in New Mexico and
Louisiana have been awarded a $191 million cleanup contract at
the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant.
The company, Paducah Remediation Services, will take over
environmental and waste management at the plant in April. The
contract will run through September 2009.
The Department of Energy and U.S. Sen. Jim Bunning, who helped
secure the contract, made the announcement Tuesday.
Bunning has a seat on the Senate Committee on Energy, which has
oversight of the Department of Energy.
"The contract has been awarded, and now we just need to make
sure this work gets done," Bunning said in a statement. "Those
living and working in and around Paducah deserved a better
environment for their families ..."
Paducah Remediation Services was formed by Shaw Environmental
and Infrastructure, of Baton Rouge, La., and Portage
Environmental, of Espanola, N.M. Paducah Remediation will take
over the work from Bechtel Jacobs, which employs 157 people out
of its Kevil, Ky., offices and oversees another 400 subcontract
workers with other cleanup firms.
It was not clear if Bechtel Jacobs workers will come to work for
Paducah Remediation, since workers went to Bechtel when it took
over the cleanup work for Lockheed Martin Energy Systems in
1998, The Paducah Sun reported Wednesday.
Executives at Shaw and Portage could not be reached for comment.
Portage's majority owner and president, Michael Spry, is a
Mississippi Band member of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe,
according to the company's Web Site.
Portage, classified as a small, disadvantaged business, is the
managing partner of the joint venture with Shaw, according to
the Department of Energy.
Both Portage and Shaw have a record of extensive cleanup
experience, notably with closed plants in Hanford, Wash., and
Fernald, Ohio. Shaw, a subsidiary of Shaw Group, has more than
$1 billion in annual business.
Union officials were surprised Tuesday by the announcement of
the new contract.
Bill Cossler, president of United Steelworkers 5-550, said he
wasn't aware that a successor had been named.
"We're glad that at long last they've named a new contractor and
we look forward to working with the new company," he said.
Nearly 200 union members do environmental work with Bechtel
Jacobs and subcontract firms.
Paducah Remediation Services will oversee plant cleanup,
including a $40 million project to extract soil contamination
around a cleaning building that is the leading source of
billions of gallons of groundwater pollution.
Construction will begin next year, and by 2007 workers are
expected to begin heating the ground deep below the surface and
vacuum out vaporized contamination.
Other responsibilities of the new contractor include cleaning up
contaminated soil, removing old waste, cleaning up and tearing
down closed contaminated buildings and operating plant
waste-storage facilities.
___
Information from: The Paducah Sun, http://www.paducahsun.com
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
24 SanLuisObispo.com: Meeting on Diablo safety
| 12/28/2005 |
South County Beat
Grover Beach is planning a communitywide Neighborhood Watch
meeting on operations, safety and security at Diablo Canyon
nuclear power plant. John Miller, who is in charge of radiation
protection at the plant, and Ellie Ripley, a tour guide there,
will speak at the meeting.
The meeting will start at 6:30 p.m. Jan. 18 at the Ramona
Garden Park Center at Ramona Avenue and North 10th Street. For
more information, call Sgt. Angelo Limon at the Grover Beach
Police Department at 473-4511 or Neighborhood Watch volunteer
Betty Ashton at 489-3932.
*****************************************************************
25 Guardian Unlimited: N.Y. Hospitals to Get 'Dirty Bomb' Devices
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Wednesday December 28, 2005 3:32 AM
By DAVID B. CARUSO
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - The city health department plans to spend nearly
$1.4 million equipping hospitals with radiation detection
devices that might become essential if terrorists detonated a
``dirty bomb.''
The equipment, largely paid for with federal grants, could help
medical centers diagnose the thousands of people who likely
would flood hospitals after such a blast, the department said.
``In the event of an incident in New York City involving
radioactive contamination, hospitals will be on the front lines
of receiving potentially contaminated persons with and without
injuries,'' the department said in a statement.
The devices would go to public and private hospitals, whose
staff members would be trained how to recognize and treat
radiation injuries, and how to protect and decontaminate
themselves while dealing with patients who may have been
exposed.
The program, to be implemented in the coming months, is part of
a nationwide effort to prepare for possible attacks with nuclear
material.
Unlike nuclear weapons, which create huge fireballs fed by
nuclear chain reactions, dirty bombs would use conventional
explosives to scatter radioactive material. That type of blast
would not be particularly powerful and would be unlikely to
cause many deaths, experts say, but the fear of contamination
could spark panic.
Land and buildings hit with radioactive particles might be
unusable for years. Tens of thousands of people likely would
besiege hospitals, wondering whether they had been contaminated
by radiological material.
Earlier this year, the National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases issued more than $47 million for grants and
contracts aimed at making it easier to diagnose and quickly
treat dirty-bomb attack victims.
As part of that program, Columbia University is leading a
consortium of researchers developing new technologies that would
allow doctors to rapidly screen large numbers of people for
radiation exposure. Those who tested positive could then get
quicker treatment.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
26 Post-Star: Spy case spooks neighbors of Milton nuclear facility
[PostStar.com]
By BRENDAN McGARRY, bmcgarry@poststar.com
Updated: 12/27/2005 9:45:11 PM
MILTON -- Richie Dapello recalled the days before 9/11, when he
could drive into the nearby Kesselring nuclear facility with a
casual nod from one of the gateside lieutenants.
Dapello said he often used its perimeter road as a short cut to
his former job at the Pioneer Hills golf course on Galway Road.
Now, he said, guards with automatic rifles man an expanded
checkpoint at the end of his street, Atomic Project Road,
preventing unauthorized access to the government-owned,
privately-operated atomic research and development facility.
"They're loaded for bear," Dapello, 50, manager of Sandy's
Mobile Acres, said earlier this month. The mobile home park,
located at 326 Atomic Project Road, is just down the street from
the checkpoint.
News of the recent arrest of a defense contractor accused of
sharing sensitive government information with the Chinese
government, including a map of the classified Kesselring site,
has some local residents talking national security.
"It's nerve-wracking, knowing that if they were looking to blow
that up, then we'd all be gone, 'cause here we are -- right on
top of it," said Dapello's wife, Sherry. "I try not to think
about it."
"It doesn't surprise me, but it concerns me," Dapello said. "It
should concern every American."
"It sounds to me like something to be concerned about, but what
can we do about it?" said John Stomski, a West Milton Road
resident. "It sounds like somebody is doing their job, catching
somebody like that."
Gary Knapp, who lives in the Friendly Neighborhood mobile home
park, also located on Atomic Project Road, said his father
helped build the atomic facility a half-century ago. He
remembers touring the buildings as a boy after construction was
completed.
"I have lived here for 30 years and, to me, there's nothing
different," he said. "Why should it bother me now?"
The Kenneth A. Kesselring site is one of two major sites
operated by the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL), a
subsidiary of Lockheed Martin, for the U.S. Department of Energy
to support the U.S. Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program; the other
site is located in Niskayuna.
The Kesselring facility, which employs about 2,000 Navy
personnel and students, KAPL employees and various
subcontractors and U.S. government personnel, has occupied 3,900
acres of wooded land in Milton and Galway since the mid-1950s.
The fenced industrial park that houses two nuclear reactors,
including one in an iconic sphere 225 feet in diameter, spans
only 65 acres. Researchers and naval students at the site test,
study and train with prototype nuclear propulsion systems.
The defense contractor charged with sharing sensitive
information about the facility, Chi Mak, 65, is a native of
China and a naturalized U.S. citizen. He was arrested Oct. 28,
as he was preparing to board a flight to Hong Kong at Los
Angeles International Airport.
A grand jury subsequently indicted him, his wife and his brother
on charges of failing to register as foreign agents, each of
which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison.
Mak formerly worked as a senior engineer at Power Paragon, an
Anaheim, Calif.-based defense contractor that has more than 200
contracts with the U.S. Navy, according to the U.S. Department
of Justice. Mak held security clearance as part of his job.
Mak was accused of taking information from his employer to his
home in Downey, Calif. and copying it onto CDs, which he passed
along to his brother, who encrypted the information and made
arrangements for taking it to China.
Mak has since admitted to passing sensitive, defense-related
information to China since 1983, including a defense program
titled, "Modifications and Additions to Reactor Facility" at the
Kesselring site, according to the Department of Justice. A
detailed, hand-drawn map of the facility was found during a
search of Mak's house.
Exactly how Mak accessed information about the Kesselring site,
and what type of program or work Power Paragon has been
contracted to undertake there, remains unclear. KAPL officials
haven't commented on the case.
"It's still pending before the court," said Anne Laroche, a
spokesperson for KAPL. "It is our policy not to discuss any of
our security measures, general or specific."
Galway Supervisor George Hargrave said he was surprised to hear
about the arrests but not worried. He said KAPL works with area
fire departments and emergency medical responders on evacuation
procedures and would notify neighboring towns of any emergencies.
Posted signs in the woods bordering the site prohibit residents
from hunting or trespassing on the property, though Texacana
Road resident Theresa Lawrence said some do anyway.
Security around the federal property was tightened after 9/11,
she said. Her daughter's school bus can no longer use the
perimeter road, and parking around a popular swimming hole on
the Kayaderosseras Creek was restricted.
On some quiet nights, however, Lawrence said she can hear what
she described as loudspeaker announcements coming from the
facility -- and guards practicing target shooting.
© Copyright 2005 DBA The Post-Star.
*****************************************************************
27 Sioux City Journal: Advocate says more needs to be done for
former ammunition workers
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
BURLINGTON (AP) -- A program to compensate former nuclear
weapons workers at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant isn't doing
enough, said an advocate for families of the workers.
After years of struggling to get approval from the federal
government to help pay for radiation-related health care
problems, about 350 former workers and family members were
approved for benefits last year.
The ammunition plant in Middletown housed a secret federal
nuclear weapons program, which was only revealed after many
former workers developed cancer.
Paula Graham, an advocate for the families, said the program
fails to do enough and should include children of all those who
died from radiation-related cancers.
The current program pays some families while others who are
equally as qualified aren't being compensated, said Graham, who
plans to send a letter to Congress early next year asking that
the program be expanded.
"Right now, it's a discriminatory program, because one family
who went through the suffering will get paid, and yet another
will not," Graham said.
The office of Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said about two-thirds of
families who are currently eligible have received payment.
The Department of Labor would not confirm those numbers.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has said he is pleased with the
recent payments, despite an absence of definitive numbers on how
many Iowans have been compensated.
Using Harkin's estimate, about $360 million in federal money has
been paid out to former ammunition plant workers.
Graham knows several people who have received payments. Most
placed the money in retirement and bank accounts. A few used
some money for home repairs. One bought a new car, Graham said.
"A lot of these people are in their 70s and 80s," Graham said.
"They don't need to go plunging into the stock market."
Copyright © 2005 Sioux City Journal
Tel: (712) 293-4250 Go to top of page
*****************************************************************
28 WCPO: Three-fifths Of Fernald Worker Claims Rejected So Far
Fernald Retirees' Health Claims Being Rejected (12/26/05)
Reported by: A.P. Web produced by: Neil Relyea Photographed by:
9News First Posted: 12/27/2005 9:42:08 PM
CINCINNATI (AP) -- Workers who say they were made sick working
at a southwest Ohio uranium processing plant have waited six
years for word on $150,000 payouts from a government
compensation program.
Last year the first 500 claims for former Fernald plant workers
were processed.
So far about 300 have been denied.
The Department of Labor uses medical records, badges that
measured a worker's exposure to radiation and other records to
determine if there was a 50% chance the worker's cancer or other
lung illness came from working at the site near Cincinnati.
The workers are suing for a different status, which would help
them qualify for the payments simply by showing they are ill --
rather than going through the exposure analysis.
[ border=]
Cincinnati.Com]
WCPO-TV is an .
*****************************************************************
29 lamonitor.com: Chromium found in aquifer
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor
Chromium has been found at levels that exceed state and federal
drinking water standards in the regional aquifer. Officials at
Los Alamos National Laboratory and the National Nuclear Security
Administration alerted state and county stakeholders late last
week of the findings.
Mat Johansen, an environmental project manager for NNSA said
this morning more than one sample from a deep monitoring well in
Mortandad Canyon has confirmed elevated readings, but not in any
wells used for drinking water by the county.
The readings are significant, he said, because this is the first
time a contaminant has been found that exceeds the Environmental
Protection Agency's maximum contaminant level (MCL).
The MCL is an enforceable standard under the Safe Drinking Water
Act. For chromium, the established level is .1 parts per million
(ppm).
Below Well R-28, roughly in the middle of Mortandad canyon,
chromium levels are found in the .375 to about .420 ppm range,
or roughly four times the EPA standard.
Low levels of tritium, perchlorate and other metals have
previously been reported, and chromium has been found in surface
water and in the intermediate zone, between the surface and the
aquifer, some 900 feet below.
No county drinking water wells have been affected. They are
monitored regularly, Johansen said and have been showing normal
background reading of 4 to 5 parts per billion of chromium.
These small amounts occur naturally in the environment.
"We are confident that those wells are not impacted to date," he
said.
"There are no estimates on future impacts," he added. "We are
going to increase the monitoring for chromium at the county
wells."
Chromium compounds, "bind to the soil (and) are not likely to
migrate with ground water," according to an EPA fact sheet.
"They are very persistent in water as sediments."
Short-term exposure to chromium causes skin irritation or
ulceration; long-term exposure may damage liver and kidneys as
well as circulatory and nerve tissues.
A press announcement from the New Mexico Environment Department
said the finding was a reminder of the importance of cleaning up
the legacy waste at the laboratory.
"This discovery should serve as a vivid reminder to the new
contractor and new director of Los Alamos that not only are
worker safety and lab security issues important, but the 60-year
environmental legacy of waste and contamination are equally
important," said NMED Secretary Ron Curry in the announcement.
Johansen said that identifying the source would be a first step
in the remediation. The Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment
Facility and cooling tower effluents in the area may have been
the source in previous decades. They were upgraded to meet
current standards during the last 15 years.
A comprehensive investigation report is in the works for
Mortandad Canyon under the laboratory's cleanup order with the
state.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
30 UCWisc: Radiation studies key to nuclear reactor life, recycling spent fuel
(Dec 28, 2005)
www.uc.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin-Madison
by Renee Meiller
Two UW-Madison projects to study advanced materials and fuels
for current and future nuclear reactors received roughly $1
million this month under the Department of Energy Nuclear Energy
Research Initiative (NERI).
The NERI program supports research and development under three
Department of Energy nuclear initiatives: Generation IV nuclear
energy systems, advanced fuel cycles and nuclear hydrogen.
In one three-year project, UW-Madison nuclear engineers will
study the resistance to radiation damage of oxide, carbide and
nitride nuclear fuel "matrix" materials-the vessels that contain
nuclear fuel. A second project will exploit recent advances in
computational power and technique to develop computer models of
how a reactor's structural materials behave as a result of
long-term radiation exposure.
The projects were among 24 selected across the country;
UW-Madison was among five universities to receive funding for
multiple projects.
Matrix materials are a key element of future fast-spectrum
reactors, which are capable of safely and efficiently recycling
spent nuclear fuel. The nuclear fission process produces
high-energy radioactive neutrons, called "fast" because of their
great energy. Current thermal reactors use a moderator to reduce
the neutrons' velocity, making them capable of sustaining the
nuclear fission reaction using simpler fuel.
But to recycle and minimize the waste impact of the spent fuel,
you need to keep those neutrons fast, says Todd Allen, an
assistant professor of engineering physics. He and James
Blanchard, a professor of engineering physics, are researching
how proposed matrix materials hold up under a barrage of
radiation.
"It's all in the context of devising new fuel forms that will
allow you to efficiently recycle reactor fuel in a way that
minimizes the net waste output from the entire fuel cycle," says
Allen. "And the reason for looking at recycle is to limit the
number of underground repositories you have to build."
Another project involves applying complex materials modeling to
nuclear reactors. In it, Allen and Dane Morgan, an assistant
professor of materials science and engineering, will incorporate
the properties of iron, chromium and nickel into more complete
computer models of radiation damage in steel, a common reactor
structural material.
Previously, a lack of computing power limited such models to
single pure materials like copper or iron. "People have learned
a lot about radiation damage," says Allen. "But you never build
anything out of just copper or just iron."
The effort may lead to structural materials that are better able
to withstand long-term exposure to radiation-in some cases,
nearly 60 years, says Allen.
File last updated: October 12, 2005
Feedback, questions or accessibility issues:
comments@uc.wisc.edu
Copyright
© 2005 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
*****************************************************************
31 PittsburghLIVE.com: Landfill fined for odors -
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
[Tribune-Review] Back to headlines
By Liz Zemba TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Protesters who persuaded an East Huntingdon Township landfill to
abandon plans to accept radioactive ash helped steer state
inspectors toward a different concern, resulting in a $9,000
fine.
The Department of Environmental Protection issued the fine to
Greenridge Reclamation for off-site odor violations at its
landfill in the township, according to the state agency.
In a prepared statement, Ken Bowman, DEP southwest regional
director, said officials looked into reports of the off-site
odors at the request of residents who attended a November public
meeting regarding the uranium-contaminated ash. At that meeting,
at least one woman questioned how the landfill could safely
dispose of radioactive ash when it has failed to stop foul odors
emanating from the site.
Immediately after the meeting, Betsy Mallison, DEP spokeswoman,
said officials accompanied residents to areas where they
indicated odors were leaving the landfill property, a violation
of state law. Off-site odors were detected during after-hours
inspections around the landfill's perimeter along Fenton Road.
According to Bowman, DEP officials met with Greenridge personnel
that night to document the violation, then levied the fine.
David Smith, Greenridge general manager, could not be reached
for comment.
Joel Suter, East Huntingdon supervisor, said off-site odors are
a common complaint lodged by residents who live near the
landfill.
"It's a continuing problem," Suter said. "We would hope it would
just go away, but garbage stinks."
Although DEP officials who attended the November meeting told
residents, supervisors and school officials the radioactive ash
posed no health problems, residents were unconvinced. The
operators of the landfill ultimately decided to rescind their
bid to accept the waste.
Southmoreland School District officials were opposed to disposal
of the radioactive ash at Greenridge because the landfill is
located near three of its schools.
The contaminated ash is the leftover of incinerated sewage
sludge generated by the former Nuclear Materials and Equipment
Corp. and its successor companies, Atlantic-Richfield Co. and
Babcock &Wilcox. It is sitting in a wastewater treatment lagoon
in Allegheny Township.
According to the DEP, Greenridge, owned by Allied Waste
Industries Inc., must pay a maximum $9,000 fine daily for
off-site odor violations as part of a 2004 consent decree.
Liz Zemba can be reached at or (724) 836-6646.
copyright © 2005 by The Tribune-Review
*****************************************************************
32 [NukeNet] More plutonium exposures at Livermore Lab
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:15:02 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
URL:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/12/24/BAG8TGCQ7A1.DTL
LIVERMORE
Contractor faulted for accidents at lab
U.S. blames workers' contamination on sloppy procedures
- Keay Davidson, Chronicle Science Writer
Saturday, December 24, 2005
Sloppy work practices involving deadly radioactive plutonium stored at
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory compounded a series of accidents last
year that contaminated employees, U.S. Department of Energy investigators
say in a report.
As a result, the three contract employees who were contaminated might face a
lifetime of special medical scrutiny, acknowledged a spokesman for the
contractor, which the Energy Department has fined for the contamination
incidents.
Among multiple violations cited by the Energy Department were workers who
blithely continued working with plutonium while emergency alarms blared
around them, warning of a possible contaminant hazard.
The report also cites workers who unsuspectingly brushed plutonium particles
off cutting tools, causing the radioactive particles to become airborne,
where they were inhaled or ingested by three unidentified workers.
The medical status of the workers was unavailable Friday. But a spokesman
for the contractor responsible for the accidents says he believes that
they're fine and that their exposure was low enough to make health problems
unlikely.
Their exposure to plutonium radioactivity was "about one-tenth of what
they're legally allowed to get as a nuclear worker," spokesman Jack Herrmann
of Washington Group International said Friday. He added, "We're determined
to make sure it doesn't happen again. We've improved our procedures."
The affected workers were employees of Livermore contractor Washington TRU
Solutions, a firm owned by Washington Group International and hired to
dispose of the lab's radioactive waste.
On Thursday, Energy Department officials announced they were slapping
Washington TRU with a $192,500 fine for the violations that led to and
compounded the accidents, which occurred between April and August 2004.
Herrmann said the firm would not contest the fine.
Washington Group is one of the four main partners of a consortium led by UC
and Bechtel that, under the leadership of outgoing Livermore director Mike
Anastasio, was named by the Energy Department on Wednesday to take over
Livermore's sister nuclear weapons lab, Los Alamos National Lab in New
Mexico next year.
The violations cited by the Energy Department during last year's mishaps
occurred while Washington TRU operated a mobile plutonium packaging and
shipment facility at Livermore from April to August 2004. The company is
assigned to package and transport radioactive waste from the Lawrence
Livermore lab to a salt mine in New Mexico for disposal.
Included in the Energy Department report is a Dec. 22 Energy Department memo
by investigator Stephen M. Sohinki. He charges Washington TRU with having a
"less than adequate level of understanding" of what it takes to design and
operate the kind of mobile laboratory in which the accidents occurred at
Livermore.
The mobile facility contains a "glove box"-type apparatus in which workers
who are sealed in protective clothes handle radioactive materials while
manipulating glove-shaped flexible tubes and mechanical arms. The contractor
is used by the Energy Department at other facilities as well.
"Particularly troublesome," Sohinki noted in the memo, was Washington TRU's
"lack of proactive response ... towards identifying and correcting quality
problems" in the facility at Livermore.
Rules required that the mobile facility's ventilation system be blowing air
with a certain level of intensity while plutonium operations were underway.
If they weren't, an alarm would automatically sound. The alarm "frequently
sounded during operations," the Energy Department report says, yet "the
workers failed to stop work and take appropriate actions to investigate this
recurring condition."
Susan Houghton, spokeswoman for Lawrence Livermore lab, declined to discuss
the case in detail, stating that it strictly involved the contractor and its
employees. The lab was not responsible for the incidents in any way, she
said late Thursday. However, the Energy Department report says lab
inspectors did investigate the contamination cases.
News of the plutonium incidents drew a strong reaction from Marylia Kelley,
head of a Livermore-based anti-nuclear group, Tri-Valley Communities Against
a Radioactive Environment. In an e-mail, she said the Energy Department
report seemed to indicate that the Washington TRU workers "cut some
amazingly dangerous corners."
"To ignore a whole series of 'abnormal events,' including high levels of
contamination found on equipment workers used outside the glove box area
(is) outrageous," she said.
E-mail Keay Davidson at kdavidson@sfchronicle.com.
Page B - 1
Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551
- 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
*****************************************************************
33 New Mexican: Los Alamos lab blog site to shut down
Wed Dec 28, 2005 7:55 pm
The Associated Press |
ALBUQUERQUE A retired Los Alamos National Laboratory
scientist says hes closing a blog site he launched for lab
workers. Doug Roberts of Nambé said he is shutting it down July
1 because its time to move on. He said he chose July 1
because a new contract to run the lab will be in place shortly
before then. If somebody wants to start a new one, thats
fine, said Roberts, who retired last July after 20 years
working at the lab. But my time is almost over.
Because of scandals at the nations pre-eminent nuclear lab, the
contract to run it was put out to bid this year for the first
time its 63-year history.
The U.S. Department of Energy decided Dec. 21 to award the
management contract to Los Alamos National Security LLC, a group
of three corporations Bechtel Corp., BWX Technologies and
Washington Group International and the University of
California.
The university had run the lab since the labs birth during
World War II.
The blog, which debuted last December, has contained postings
from mostly anonymous lab workers who have targeted work
conditions and perceived weak morale at the lab.
It has become a lively public forum for current and former lab
workers who share articles, gripes, rumors and observations.
Brad Holian, a theoretical physicist at the lab for 33 years,
said he thinks the blog was important during the bidding process
for a new management contract. He periodically helped Roberts
with the blog.
I really think that it was the only avenue that employees had to
get their views out to both the management of the laboratory and
the competition for the contract, not to mention DOE itself,
Holian said.
It served its purpose as about the only effective means of
rallying the LANL staff, he said. ON THE WEB LANL: The Real
Story: lanl-thereal-story .blogspot.com/
2005, Santa Fe New Mexican, all rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
34 DOE: Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology; Nuclear Energy
FR Doc E5-7975
[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Notices] [Page 76790] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28de05-68]
Research Advisory Committee; Notice of Renewal Pursuant to
Section 14(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, App.
2, and section 102-3.65, title 41, Code of Federal Regulations
and following consultation with the Committee Management
Secretariat, General Services Administration, notice is hereby
given that the Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee has been renewed
for a two year period.
The Committee will provide advice to the Office of Nuclear
Energy, Science and Technology on long-range planning and
priorities in the nuclear energy program. The Secretary of Energy
has determined that resetablishment of the Nuclear Energy
Research Advisory Committee is essential to conduct the business
of the Department of Energy and is in the public interest in
connection with the performance of duties imposed by law upon the
Department of Energy. The Committee will continue to operate in
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the General Services Administration Final
Rule on Federal Advisory Committee Management, and other
directives and instructions issued in implementation of those
acts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rachel Samuel at (202)
586-3279.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 19, 2005.
James N. Solit, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E5-7975 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
35 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho
FR Doc E5-7976
[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Notices] [Page 76790-76791] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28de05-69]
National Laboratory AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Idaho National
Laboratory. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No.
92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting
be announced in the Federal Register.
DATES: Tuesday, January 17, 2006, 8 a.m.-6 p.m., Wednesday,
January 18, 2006, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Opportunities for public
participation will be held Tuesday, January 17, from 12:15 to
12:30 p.m. and 5:45 to 6 p.m.; and Wednesday, January 18, from
11:45 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 4:00 to 4:15 p.m. Additional time may
be made available for public comment during the presentations.
These times are subject to change as the meeting progresses,
depending on the extent of comment offered. Please check with the
meeting facilitator to confirm these times.
[[Page 76791]]
ADDRESSES: Ameritel Inn, 645 Lindsay Boulevard, Idaho Falls, ID
83402.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon A. Brennan, Federal
Coordinator, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955
Fremont Avenue, MS-1216, Idaho Falls, ID 83415. Phone (208)
526-3993; Fax (208) 526-1926 or e-mail:
Shannon.Brennan@nuclear.energy.gov or visit the Board's Internet
home page at: http://www.inelemcab.org.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of
environmental restoration, waste management, and related
activities.
Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the
meeting; please contact Shannon A. Brennan for the most current
agenda): Fiscal Year 2006 budget for the Idaho Cleanup Project
Radioactive Waste Management Complex topics, including
stakeholder involvement planning, buried waste excavation status,
and management of low-level radioactive waste Groundwater
monitoring Deactivation of the Loss of Fluid Test reactor
containment facility Sodium Bearing Waste Record of Decision
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral
presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Shannon
A. Brennan at the address or telephone number listed above. The
request must be received five days prior to the meeting and
reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in
the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to
conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly
conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their
comments.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes
will also be available by writing to Shannon A. Brennan, Federal
Coordinator, at the address and phone number listed above.
Issued at Washington, DC, on December 21, 2005.
Rachel Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E5-7976 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
36 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Hanford
FR Doc E5-7977
[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Notices] [Page 76791] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28de05-70]
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Hanford. The
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770)
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the
Federal Register.
DATES: Thursday, February 2, 2006, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.; Friday,
February 3, 2006, 8:30 a.m.-4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Red Lion Hotel, Columbia Center, 1101 North Columbia
Center Boulevard, Kennewick, Washington 99336, Phone Number:
(509) 783-0611.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erik Olds, Federal Coordinator,
Department of Energy Richland Operations Office, 2440 Stevens
Drive, P.O. Box 450, H6-60, Richland, WA, 99352; Phone: (509)
376-8656; Fax: (509) 376-1214.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of
environmental restoration, waste management, and related
activities.
Tentative Agenda: Tutorial on Health and Worker Safety 2006
Hanford Advisory Board Priority Discussion Update on Bulk
Vitrification Estimate at Completion Discussion on the Waste
Treatment and Immobilization Plant Budget Prioritization and
Allocations for Fiscal Years 2006, 2007 and 2008 Emerging Issues
from the River and Plateau Committee Public Participation: The
meeting is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements
pertaining to agenda items should contact Erik Olds' office at
the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be
received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision
will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of
business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and
4:00 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will
also be available by writing to Erik Olds' office at the address
or telephone number listed above.
Issued at Washington, DC, on December 21, 2005.
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E5-7977 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
37 KTVB.COM: Watchdog group says records show INL reactor unsafe
| Boise Idaho News,
02:12 PM MST on Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Associated Press
JACKSON, Wyo. -- A watchdog group in Wyoming says documents it
has obtained reveal safety problems at the Idaho Engineering
Laboratory.
Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free is questioning the Department of
Energy's plan to produce plutonium-238 at the facility.
The DOE wants to build a new facility at INL involved in
producing plutonium.
But KYNF says the 40-year-old reactor is wearing out and should
be replaced. The group also says the facility couldn't withstand
an earthquake.
Brad Bugger, a DOE spokesman, says upgrades have been made to
the reactor in recent years and that the Advanced Test Reactor
is operated safely.
KTVB.COM
©2005 KTVB MEDIA GROUP
*****************************************************************
38 Paducah Sun: DOE plant site gets new cleanup firm -
Paducah, Kentucky
Shaw Environmental and Infrastructure and Portage Environmental
will replace Bechtel Jacobs at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion
Plant
Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
After two years of procurement delays, the Department of Energy
has awarded a $191.6 million contract to a firm founded by Shaw
Environmental and Infrastructure and Portage Environmental to do
cleanup work at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant.
The contract, to Paducah Remediation Services LLC, will run
through Sept. 30, 2009. Following a transition period, the
company will replace longtime cleanup contractor Bechtel Jacobs,
whose contract expires April 23, DOE said Tuesday.
Bechtel Jacobs employs 157 people out of its Kevil offices and
oversees another 400 subcontract workers with various cleanup
firms. It was not immediately clear if all the Bechtel Jacobs
workers will move to Paducah Remediation Services, although that
largely was the case when Bechtel Jacobs took over for Lockheed
Martin Energy Systems in 1998.
Repeated attempts to reach senior executives of Shaw, based in
Baton Rouge, La., and Portage, based in Espanola, N.M., were
unsuccessful Tuesday.
Portage´s Web site says Michael Spry, majority owner and
president, is a Mississippi Band member of the Minnesota
Chippewa Tribe. He grew up on the White Earth Indian Reservation
in northern Minnesota.
Portage, classified as a small, disadvantaged business, is the
managing partner of the joint venture with Shaw, according to
DOE.
Both Portage and Shaw list extensive cleanup experience, notably
with closed DOE plants such as in Hanford, Wash., and Fernald,
Ohio. Shaw, a subsidiary of Shaw Group, has more than $1 billion
in annual business.
DOE announced two years ago that Bechtel Jacobs would be
replaced with a smaller firm to try to be more cost-efficient.
After repeated delays, North Wind Paducah Cleanup Co. was named
the successor last January, and a separate firm was named to
head cleanup work at the closed uranium enrichment plant in
Piketon, Ohio.
But protests came from other bidders, including Portage and
Shaw, forcing DOE to rebid. Bechtel Jacobs´ contract was
repeatedly extended without explanation as procurement again
dragged on.
Tuesday´s announcement took plant union officials by surprise.
Bill Cossler, president of United Steelworkers 5-550, said he
wasn´t aware that a successor had been named.
“We´re glad that at long last they´ve named a new contractor and
we look forward to working with the new company, he said.
Nearly 200 union members do environmental work with Bechtel
Jacobs and subcontract firms. Cossler said the union contract
has a transition clause for hourly cleanup workers.
The Kentucky congressional delegation has been scrutinizing the
elongated Paducah contract situation. In the fall, Congress
passed legislation sponsored by Rep. Ed Whitfield,
R-Hopkinsville, to protect the pensions and retiree medical
benefits of displaced uranium enrichment workers who find jobs
with DOE cleanup firms.
Contract issues are among those slated for a field hearing at 10
a.m. Jan. 19 at Paducah City Hall by Whitfield, a senior member
of the Energy and Commerce Committee. He said he will conduct
the hearing through his role as chairman of the committee´s
Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.
Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Southgate, said Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman called him Tuesday with the contract news.
“The contract has been awarded, and now we just need to make
sure this work gets done, Bunning said. “Those living and
working in and around Paducah deserve a better environment for
their families.
Bunning said that if expectations are not met, he would continue
using his influence as a member of the Senate Energy Committee
“to bring accountability to the process and the contract.
The committee has oversight over DOE, including Paducah plant
cleanup. Bunning has held committee field hearings on plant
matters.
John Anderson, director of the Paducah Area Community Reuse
Organization, said he was “extremely pleased that a new
contractor was finally named. “For the community´s sake I think
it´s time to more forward and have something for the workers to
be able to plan on, he said.
However, Anderson pointed out that the contract award is subject
to a grace period to allow other bidders to protest.
Anderson´s economic development group wants the Energy
Department to relax a ban on the commercial use of low-level
radioactive scrap metal at the plant if it can be fully
decontaminated. DOE included language about the scrap metal in
rebidding the work.
Paducah Remediation Services will oversee cleanup, including a
$40 million project to extract soil contamination around a plant
cleaning building that is the leading source of billions of
gallons of groundwater pollution. Construction will begin next
year, and by 2007 workers are expected to begin heating the
ground far below the surface and vacuum out vaporized
contamination for carbon-filter treatment.
Two pump-and-treat systems on the northeastern and northwestern
plant boundaries remove about 16 million gallons of contaminated
groundwater a month, and have cleaned up more than a billion
gallons. But the systems only remove the highest concentrations
of the contamination, which covers much of the area from the
plant to the Ohio River.
Other responsibilities of the new contractor include cleaning up
contaminated soil, removing old waste, cleaning up and tearing
down closed contaminated buildings and operating plant
waste-storage facilities.
*****************************************************************
39 AP Wire: Audit shows cost of SRS nuclear fuel facility soaring
| 12/28/2005 |
Associated Press
GREENVILLE, S.C. - A federal audit shows construction of a
factory to convert weapons-grade nuclear material into fuel for
power plants will cost $2.5 billion more than expected.
The U.S. Energy Department Inspector General's Office blames the
cost overruns on "weakness in project management" and problems
with contract administration.
Previous cost estimates for the planned facility at the Savannah
River Site have ranged from $1 billion to $1.6 billion.
Officials with the National Nuclear Security Administration
dispute the cost estimate and says project management is not to
blame. They blame increases in labor and construction costs and
changes to the design and construction schedule.
The plant will convert 34 metric tons of potentially lethal
plutonium to mixed oxide fuel, or MOX under terms of a 2000
nuclear nonproliferation pact.
Trees have been cleared for the site, but construction on the
facility has not begun, said Jim Giusti, an Energy Department
spokesman at SRS.
While the audit indicates that only $206 million remains
available for construction, the NNSA says it has $550 million
set aside, which is enough to begin construction.
The audit says that by July 2005 only 70 percent of the design
had been completed and the administration already had spent $453
million. That is nearly half the $950 million Congress set aside
for the project through 2005.
U.S. Rep. Bob Inglis, R-S.C., said the problems could discourage
Congress from continuing to fund the project.
"I want an explanation for why it is the management seems to
have been so poor on this project," Inglis said.
Information from: The Greenville News,
*****************************************************************
40 Tracy Press: UC's Los Alamos win will impact Livermore
December 28, 2005 Tracy, CA
The University of Californias securing a new contract to operate
the Los Alamos National Laboratory is a major victory for the
university, a victory that will have an impact on Lawrence
Livermore Natoinal Laboratory as well.
Having both major nuclear weapons laboratories under the
operational umbrella of the same university continues a sibling
relationship that has existed since the Livermore Lab was
launched in 1952. Certainly, through the years, there have been
both cooperation and competition between the two labs in a wide
range of areas, and the continuing UC operation of Los Alamos
and Livermore will provide a basis for continuity in the
positive aspects of the sibling relationship.
Closer ties should be in the offing with Dr. Michael Anastasio,
director of LLNL, moving to Los Alamos to head management of
that laboratory. Anastasios role in leading the proposal to
continue UC management of the New Mexico lab was a key element
in the winning bid.
The most immediate challenge for the Livermore lab will be
replacing Anastasio and several key staff members he will take
with him to Los Alamos. Anastasio has been credited with being
an effective manager and consensus-building leader at Livermore
in recent years, so finding the right replacement will be
critical to maintaining the Labs reputation as an effective
research and development facility, not only in nuclear weapons
but in a host of other national security and basic and applied
science programs.
The new LLNL director and management team will will face
immediate challenge of developing UCs proposal to win a new
operational contract in the next year. Success at beating back
the University of Texas-Lockheed challenge at Los Alamos
provides some measure of confidence that UC will prevail at
Livermore, but there are no guarantees under increasingly closer
federal scrutiny of the national laboratory network.
Tracyites working at the Labs Livermore and Site 300 facilities
will be more than interested spectators as the changes and
challenges unfold in the next year. Now if the Livermore Lab can
avoid the kinds of security problems that plagued Los Alamos in
recent years, gaining a new contact for the UC system should go
a lot easier.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************