***************************************************************** 11/09/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.261 ***************************************************************** 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 US: Platts: Wilson says Niger U industry could not have supplied Ira 2 RIA Novosti: No disagreement with EU on Iran nuclear file - Russian 3 AFP: Iranian atom chief vows to continue, woos investment - 4 Guardian Unlimited: New Talks on N. Korea Nuke Program Begin 5 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.: North Korea Must Build Confidence 6 Reuters: Day One Concludes at Six-Party Talks 7 RIA Novosti: North Korea, U.S. still divided at six-party nuclear ta 8 AFP: US holds line as North Korean talks resume - Yahoo! News 9 AFP: US rejects North Korea's disarmament idea 10 US: [NLCBW] Ensign Amendment Update 11 Asia Times: Stopping Bush's bunker buster 12 US: EurekAlert!: How to plug the energy gap 13 [DU-WATCH] Has the nuclear catastrophe already arrived? 14 Indiatimes: Changing times: N-deal a major US policy shift 15 RIA Novosti: U.S. Senate requests report on Russian-U.S. nuclear arm 16 BBC: Britain facing large energy gap 17 Xinhua: Russia keeps nuclear deterrence potential: defense minister 18 Japan Times: The politics of assigning a nuclear carrier to Japan NUCLEAR REACTORS 19 US: NRC: Improvement Efforts at Salem, Hope Creek Nuclear Power Plan 20 Rediff: 'India can play a lead role in nuclear energy' 21 US: Platts: NRC's FY-06 funding increases to $743.3-million 22 US: NRC: NRC Considering Request by Minnesota to Be an “Agreement St 23 Independent: New nuclear power plants 'essential' to avoid energy sh 24 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th 25 US: NRC: State of Minnesota: NRC Draft Staff Assessment of a propose 26 Telegraph: Nuclear power is best, say scientists 27 New Scientist: UK gearing up for nuclear revival - Technology 28 US: Independent Florida Alligator: Officials insist UF nuclear react NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 29 [du-list] Has the nuclear catastrophe already arrived? 30 US: NRC: NRC Ends License for Saxton Experimental Facility, 31 US: Seattle Times: Downwinder's second trial gets under way in Spoka 32 US: Hawk Eye: Controlled burns planned at IAAP 33 New Scientist: If a nuclear convoy should crash… - News 34 US: CurryPilot.com: RADIATION: VETERAN STRUGGLES WITH FALLOUT 35 US: Times-News: Employees evacuated from Idaho nuclear lab after pro 36 AU ABC: Campaigner leaves Maralinga record NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 37 US: NRC Rejects Petition Calling for More Protection of Nuclear 38 US: Deseret News: Nuclear waste battle in D.C. court 39 Guardian Unlimited: House Cuts Funding for Yucca Mountain 40 Las Vegas SUN: Federal judge dismisses Indian tribe suit against nuc 41 US: Las Vegas SUN: Neighbors of toxic Nevada mine want ARCO to pay f 42 US: AP Wire: Utah asks court to reject nuclear dump 43 AU ABC: Scullion backs shorter nuclear dump inquiry 44 Platts: EC 'in no hurry' on EU nuclear safety, waste laws: Piebalgs 45 US: Montrose Daily Press: Cotter Corp. closes six mines 46 Daily Yomiuri: Govt demands payment to dispose of DU scrap 47 US: reviewjournal.com: Reid new Utah ally on nukes 48 US: Las Vegas SUN: Reid puts GOP senators on defensive 49 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Patriot Act's probing problem 50 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Yucca is falling from grace 51 GREENPEACE UK: Solar panels beside Sizewell B Nuclear Plant 52 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Envirocare hires big GOP guns 53 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Unlikely ally aids foes of N-dump 54 US: Dispatch: Perchlorate Levels on the Decrease 55 US: The Dispatch: A New Call to Clean Perchlorate 56 AU ABC: Nuclear dump inquiry 'far too short'. 57 US: WKYT 27: Independent study asked of depleted cylinders PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 58 AP Wire: Committee approves study of toxic gas at Paducah plant 59 Seattle Times: Employees evacuated from Idaho nuclear lab after prop 60 courier-journal: Study of phosgene threat at Paducah plant urged 61 SF Chronicle: Lawrence Livermore to get most of its laser funding 62 WBIR.COM: Reduction in weapons stockpile will likely impact Oak Ridg 63 Paducah Sun: Congressional approval of $105 million for cleanup, $42 64 Seattle Weekly: Cleaning Up Hanford ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Platts: Wilson says Niger U industry could not have supplied Iraq + The 2002 rumor that Saddam Hussein was buying 500 metric tons (MT) of yellowcake from Niger was not credible because Niger's uranium industry was incapable of providing the material to anyone without substantial investment to expand mines and transport, former ambassador Joseph Wilson said Oct. 31. Speaking to a National Press Club luncheon, Wilson, who went to Niger to track down the rumor at the request of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analysts, said providing that much material would have required Niger to expand its production capacity 40%. He said he had found, in speaking to officials in both the mining industry and the government in February 2002, no indication at all of any expansion. That was a key reason he concluded the rumor was false, he said. The claim that Iraq was attempting to buy U from Niger was used by President George W. Bush in his January 2003 State of the Union speech as one justification for invading Iraq. Bush attributed the allegation to British intelligence. The original allegation appears to have stemmed from forged documents rejected by a CIA station chief in Italy early in 2002 and then peddled to other intelligence services. Wilson, after several months of trying to get the White House to correct the record following the State of the Union address, went public with his finding in July 2003. Administration officials tried to downplay the revelation by discrediting Wilson, and one or more administration officials revealed the name of his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, who worked in CIA covert operations. A two-year special investigation into that leak, which may have breached national security law, resulted in indictment of the vice president's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, on Oct. 28 on obstruction of justice charges. Wilson, a career Foreign Service official who was the last U.S. charge d'affaires in Iraq negotiating with Hussein before the first Gulf war, had been dispatched to Niger on missions several times during the Clinton Administration, on behalf of the National Security Council, and had served as ambassador to Gabon. He noted that Gabon, like Niger, has uranium mining that is controlled by French mining interests. In Niger, that is Cogema with other foreign partners including Spain's Enusa and Japan's Overseas Uranium Resources Development Co. Ltd. (OURD). Niger's Office National des Resources Minieres is a one-third partner in the mines. He said the costs of mining in Niger had been for some time higher than the U would fetch on the world market. According to a presentation at the 2004 World Nuclear Association conference, Niger produced around 3,000 MT U annually in the five years through 2003. Cogema and its partners continued to mine in Niger for their own purposes, he said, but the government, which he described as "bankrupt since independence," received very little revenue because the material was being taken by the private partners at a loss. If government officials had made any deal for expanded U sales that would have brought in revenue, he said, it would have precipitated a "scramble" that could not have been kept secret in that impoverished country. Moreover, Wilson said, the government does not control the mines. They are controlled by the mining companies and are under IAEA inspection. Since the mines "are in the middle of the Sahara Desert," the Cogema-led consortium would have had to increase both mining and transport capability to meet an order the size of 500 MT, he said. He said that his discussions with contacts in the mining group and with present and former government officials found "none of that took place." Wilson said he discussed his findings with the U.S. ambassador in Niamey, Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick, who had come to the same conclusions from her own contacts. A third inquiry led by a Marine Corps general also came to the same conclusions, he said. But less than a year later, the allegation was part of Bush's State of the Union address, and the White House did not retract the claim that Iraq was seeking yellowcake to restart its nuclear weapons program until after Wilson went public with his dissent in early July 2003. The rumor of Iraqi U plans stemmed from documents purporting to show a deal between Saddam Hussein and Nigerien officials. Wilson said he never saw those documents and they did not enter into his investigation. The IAEA asked the U.S. to turn over the documents shortly after Bush's speech, since the IAEA is charged with investigating such issues. The agency quickly declared them a forgery. Last week, the Italian newspaper La Repubblica alleged the documents were created by Italian intelligence service Sismi to aid the government in gaining White House favor by supporting its ambition to dislodge Saddam Hussein. Sismi's chief strongly denied the allegation. For more information, take a trial to Platts Nuclear Fuel at http://nucfuel.platts.com. New York (Platts)--8Nov2005 Copyright © 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 2 RIA Novosti: No disagreement with EU on Iran nuclear file - Russian minister 09/ 11/ 2005 MOSCOW, November 9 (RIA Novosti)-Russia and the European Union have no disagreements over the issue of the Iranian "nuclear file", the Russian foreign minister said Wednesday. "There are no contradictions here," Sergei Lavrov said. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said that the EU troika of Germany, Britain and France would not refer Iran's file to the UN Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions on the Islamic republic if the country is found to be in breach of its international obligations. Straw also praised interaction with Russia over Iran. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: Iranian atom chief vows to continue, woos investment - Wed Nov 9, 2:55 PM ET TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> Iranwill carry on with its nuclear programme whatever the circumstances, the head of the country's atomic energy agency said, adding that "we have got past the stage of threats." Gholamreza Aghazadeh, who is head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Agency and also vice president of Iran, also detailed opportunities for foreign firms to take part in his country's nuclear programme, which his government says is aimed only at the peaceful generation of energy. "Iran has chosen the political path and will push ahead with its nuclear activities in all circumstances," he said in a statement carried by the student news agency ISNA. He was replying to a question about plans by the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) to refer Iran to the UN Security Council over its nuclear activities, which the United States believes are aimed at developing a weapon. Aghazadeh also gave details of the role to be played by foreign companies in his country's uranium enrichment programme. The Iranian government recently said it would open up the sector to foreign firms. The atomic agency chief told ISNA that foreign firms could take stakes in an enrichment programme in the town of Natanz for a sum of up to 350 million dollars (300 million euros), out of a total of one billion dollars for the whole programme. The Natanz site, in the centre of Iran, "spreads over 1,400 hectares (3,400 acres) and can contain up to 60,000 centrifuges," he said, referring to a key device needed to refine uranium. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Guardian Unlimited: New Talks on N. Korea Nuke Program Begin From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday November 9, 2005 10:46 AM By ALEXA OLESEN Associated Press Writer BEIJING (AP) - Talks aimed at persuading North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions opened Wednesday, with negotiators concentrating on the contentious details of how the North will disarm and what it will get in exchange. Before the six-nation talks opened at a Chinese government guesthouse, Washington affirmed its refusal even to discuss the North's demand for a civilian nuclear reactor until after Pyongyang disarms. The last round of talks ended in September with a pledge by the North to give up nuclear development in exchange for aid and a security guarantee. But the North raised doubts about its willingness to proceed by demanding a civilian nuclear reactor before it disarms. The Chinese delegate, Wu Dawei, whose government appealed in advance for participants to be ready to make progress in the slow-moving talks, called on negotiators to be flexible and pragmatic. The U.S. envoy, Christopher Hill, a U.S. assistant secretary of state, said Washington won't discuss giving the North a reactor until it returns to the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and accepts safeguards from the International Atomic Energy Agency. The North's envoy, Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye Gwan, said Pyongyang would insist on verifying that there are no nuclear weapons in South Korea and demand a guarantee from the U.S. that it has no plans to attack North Korea, the Russian Interfax news agency reported. The report, which cited a North Korean diplomatic source whose name was not given, did not mention the light-water reactor. In an editorial in the state-run media, Pyongyang also blasted Washington on Wednesday for its plan to station a nuclear aircraft carrier in Japan, saying it threatened to ``ignite a new war.'' The nuclear dispute erupted in late 2002 after Washington said North Korea admitted operating a secret uranium enrichment program in violation of a 1994 deal that gave the isolated country energy aid in exchange for renouncing atomic weapons. China says it expects the talks this week to last three days and then recess to let diplomats attend an Asian-Pacific economic conference in South Korea in mid-November. South Korea's envoy, Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon, called Tuesday for the participants - the two Koreas, China, the United States, Japan and Russia - to ``take actions mutually that are conducive to create confidence.'' China tried Tuesday to moderate expectations, saying the meeting could be considered a success even if it produces no written agreement. ``I do not think that progress of the talks needs to be measured by the signing of a document,'' Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said. South Korea's Song told reporters that the current session was unlikely to result in an agreement but rather would be focused on the preliminary work necessary to get an implementation agreement in the next phase of the fifth round. Tensions between the United States and North Korea rose after the North on Tuesday condemned President Bush for calling its leader a ``tyrant,'' saying the criticism raised doubts about the prospect of the six-nation talks. Bush made the remarks on Sunday in Brazil while praising Japan as a close U.S. ally in confronting a ``tyrant'' in North Korea. While he did not mention North Korean leader Kim Jong Il by name, it was widely seen as a reference to him. ``If this is true, what he uttered is a blatant violation of the spirit of the joint statement of the six-party talks which calls for 'respect for sovereignty' and 'peaceful coexistence,''' a spokesman for North Korea's Foreign Ministry said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.: North Korea Must Build Confidence From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday November 9, 2005 12:31 PM SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - The United States is ready to establish relations with North Korea, but the regime in Pyongyang must do its part to build confidence, Washington's new ambassador to Seoul said Wednesday. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow made the remarks in a meeting with South Korean lawmakers, apparently referring to the North's human rights abuses and its pursuit of nuclear weapons. ``We're prepared to go down the road of normalizing our relation, negotiating a permanent peace agreement for the Korean peninsula, open an office in Pyongyang, things that show in a concrete way that we have no hostile intention toward North Korea,'' Vershbow said, according to a transcript provided by his embassy. ``For us to offer to normalize relations with North Korea is not a simple or easy step for an American political leader given how awful that regime really is. So I hope North Koreans will do their part in building confidence. We're ready to do our part,'' he said. The North's communist regime has long been accused of torture, public executions and other atrocities against its people. Between 150,000 and 200,000 people are believed to be held in prison camps there for political reasons, the U.S. State Department said in a report earlier this year. Pyongyang bristles at talk of its human rights problems, saying it is part of a U.S. attempt to overthrow the regime. The North has also claimed it is compelled to build nuclear weapons to defend itself against an alleged U.S. nuclear threat, despite repeated assurances from Washington that it has no intention of invading. The new ambassador, who took office last month, said he believes the North's regime creates fear of a U.S. invasion to ``justify or to cover up the failures of their own domestic policies to feed the population and to provide for a better life to the people.'' North Korea has relied on outside handouts to feed its 22 million people since natural disasters and mismanagement devastated its economy in mid-1990s. Yet, the regime keeps tight control on its hunger-stricken populace with the help of a personality cult and fears of a U.S. invasion. Washington and Pyongyang has been locked in a standoff for three years over the North's nuclear programs. In September, the North pledged to abandon its nuclear programs in exchange for aid and security assurances under a six-nation accord that also involved the United States, China, South Korea, Japan and Russia. A new round of negotiations opened in Beijing on Wednesday to try to work out details of how the North will disarm, but widespread views were that progress is unlikely in this week's talks. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 6 Reuters: Day One Concludes at Six-Party Talks 2005-11-9 19:05:51 CRIENGLISH.com (Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang described the atmosphere of the first-day talks practical and forward-looking.) By Xu Fei (CRI) Day one of the fifth round of six-party talks, aimed at persuading North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program, concluded Wednesday at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in central Beijing. A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman held a press conference at six p.m., after a plenary session on Wednesday morning and several bilateral talks in the afternoon: between South Korea and the United States; Japan and Russia; the U.S. and North Korea; and China and Japan. Spokesman Qin Gang described the atmosphere of the first-day talks practical and forward-looking. Qin Gang added that in the following two days, there will be meetings of group leaders and bilateral talks. After the briefing, the U.S and China held another bilateral meeting. The six-party talks resumed Wednesday in Beijing after a two-month break, with officials and experts expressing a cautious outlook on the outcome. Addressing the opening ceremony, ChinaˇŻs chief negotiator Wu Dawei stated the central task of the first phase of the ongoing talks is the detailed implementation of the September agreement. The last round of talks in September ended with an agreement outlining the principles and goals for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Under this agreement, North Korea agreed to cease all its nuclear programs, rejoin the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and allow outside nuclear inspections in exchange for security guarantees and economic aid. The United States promised not to attack North Korea and agreed to join the other four parties in providing energy supplies to the North. The six parties will continue discussing the future of North Korea's nuclear weapons program in the next two days. Copyright of crienglish.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 RIA Novosti: North Korea, U.S. still divided at six-party nuclear talks 09/ 11/ 2005 BEIJING, November 9 (RIA Novosti, Alexei Yefimov) - North Korea and the United States are still divided on how to implement the terms agreed upon for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, said a spokesman for the Chinese delegation to the six-party nuclear talks being held in Beijing Wednesday. Gang said that during the negotiations fifth round, which began Wednesday, the parties came to a general consensus on establishing expert groups, but they still had to agree on the composition and the form the work the groups will do. The Chinese diplomat said the parties would still have to decide on the duration of the current stage of the fifth round and on a joint document. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 8 AFP: US holds line as North Korean talks resume - Yahoo! News Wed Nov 9, 4:04 AM ET BEIJING (AFP) - Sharp differences over North Korea" /> North Korea's nuclear programs were back in the spotlight as the United States held its line at the opening of another round of six-nation disarmament talks. The talks are aimed at implementing a September deal for North Korea to scrap its nuclear programs in exchange for energy and other aid, but the North later demanded an atomic reactor for energy purposes before disarming. "First, they have got to disarm (and) create a nuclear-free Korean peninsula," chief US delegate Christopher Hill told reporters before the talks got under way in the Chinese capital. "It is very clear in the agreement what they need to do," Hill said, holding the US position on Pyongyang, which US President George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bushhas called part of the "axis of evil" with Iran" /> Iranand Saddam Hussein" /> Saddam Hussein's Iraq" /> Iraq. Delegates from China, North Korea, South Korea" /> South Korea, the United States, Russia and Japan opened their fifth round of talks with little outward sign of a breakthrough in the impasse. Chinese delegation chief Wu Dawei urged all parties at the opening of the talks, which are expected to last three days and resume again in December, to work towards a phased implementation of the September agreement. "This result has not come easily and therefore all the parties should highly cherish and seriously treat it," Wu said. " The central task of this fifth round of the six-party talks... is to formulate the detailed rules, methods and steps to implement the joint statement under the principle of commitment for commitment and action for action." The United States insists the light-water reactor must be a last step, with the North first having to rejoin the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and accept inspections by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA). "Once they are back in the NPT, with IAEA safeguards, at an appropriate time we will have discussions about the subject of the provision of a light-water nuclear reactor," Hill said. North Korea has said little about its intentions but adopted a typically angry stance on the eve of the meeting by claiming Bush had slandered its leader Kim Jong-Il this week as a "tyrant." "What he uttered is a blatant violation of the spirit of the joint statement of the six-party talks which calls for 'respect for sovereignty' and 'peaceful co-existence,'" a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said. North Korea has repeatedly insisted that it needs nuclear weapons to defend against any attack from the United States, but in the September deal Washington agreed not to attack the reclusive regime. Russia's Interfax news agency quoted a North Korean official as restating Pyongyang's position that it wanted a nuclear reactor, diplomatic relations with the United States and other assistance to coincide with disarmament. Japan has said it will put forward a "roadmap" to the other nations outlining the steps it proposes all sides should take. Japan's chief delegate Kenichiro Sasae presented his broad strategy to his North Korean counterpart, Kim Gye-gwan, at a two-and-a-half-hour bilateral meeting late ahead of the talks. "The Japanese side stated its position that it wished to discuss how we formulate a roadmap in implementing the joint statement," a Japanese official said. South Korea's chief delegate, Song Min-soon, expressed cautious optimism that some progress would be achieved. "After meeting with each side (in the bilateral meetings) I came to think there is a way to reach an agreement on implementation plans, even if it requires endurance," Song told reporters. All the delegates met for two hours before breaking up into a series of bilateral and trilateral talks. The nuclear crisis flared up in October 2002 after the United States accused North Korea of running a secret uranium-enrichment program. The North responded by throwing out weapons inspectors and leaving the NPT. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 AFP: US rejects North Korea's disarmament idea 09/11/2005 23h36 (L-R) Song Min-soon, Christopher Hill, Wu Dawei and Kenichiro Sasae ©AFP/Pool - Peter Parks BEIJING (AFP) - The United States brushed aside North Korea's fresh proposal to abandon its nuclear arms as six-nation disarmament talks resumed here with sharp differences remaining between the two Cold War foes. Chief US delegate Christopher Hill said North Korea put forward unspecified steps to rid itself of nuclear weapons and nuclear programs in exchange for energy aid, security guarantees and other benefits. "I think that the DPRK (North Korea) needs to understand that we need to move swiftly on denuclearization and the fact that denuclearization is the first step in the agreement," Hill told reporters. The two Koreas, the United States, China, Russia and Japan convened the fifth round of the talks following their September 19 agreement on principles in the disarmament-for-benefits deal. Progress in the 27-month-old talks has stalled over sharp differences about who does what first. "I think the DPRK has a much more deliberately slower process of how to handle denuclearization," Hill added after having a one-on-one dinner with his North Korean counterpart Kim Gye-Gwan that followed a flurry of plenary and bilateral contacts on the first day of the new six-nation round. Kim Gye-gwan ©AFP/Pool - Peter Parks North Korea insisted it was ready to give up its nuclear programs and weapons in phases on condition it was provided with a light-water reactor, Japan's Kyodo news agency reported quoting a negotiation source. "They (North Korea) introduced some elements that are not in the agreed principles" and that "we are not able to work with," Hill said. "On the other hand, they showed a willingness to move forward to figure out how to implement principles." The US assistant secretary of state pointed out that a nuclear reactor, which could produce weapons-grade plutonium, had continued to operate even after the basic agreement. "In a sense, the problem got worse since September 19." South Korea, Japan and China proposed discussions in three categories to move the talks forward. But the United States was skeptical. "We don't want to get into protracted discussions on who takes what steps first and how we calibrate each step," Hill said, adding that the six nations should rather "sort out things boldly about how we can make some important steps forward." A North Korean soldier walks past at the north side of the border village of Panmunjom ©AFP - Jung Yeon-Je South Korea's chief delegate Song Min-soon said he proposed to put the implementation plan into three categories -- "the dismantling of North Korea's nuclear program, the economic cooperation and energy aid for North Korea and the normalization of relations between the countries concerned." Japan further said the talks should be broken down into working-level groups to discuss the three categories. It was unclear if North Korea would accept the proposals. "North Korea did not single out the issues one-by-one but came up with a rudimentary opinion about the issue of a light-water nuclear reactor and the process of dismantling the nuclear program," Song said. North Korea insisted immediately after the September accord that it would not disarm unless the United States first supplied it with a light-water nuclear reactor to generate electricity. A delegate takes notes at the Diaoyutai State Guest House in Beijing ©AFP/Pool - Peter Parks Hill maintained his nation's policy Wednesday that the North must first rejoin the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and accept inspections by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). North Korea has adopted a typically angry stance on the eve of the meeting by claiming Bush had slandered its leader Kim Jong-Il this week as a "tyrant." "What he uttered is a blatant violation of the spirit of the joint statement of the six-party talks which calls for 'respect for sovereignty' and 'peaceful co-existence,'" a North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said. The nuclear crisis flared in October 2002 after the United States accused North Korea of running a secret uranium-enrichment program. The North responded by throwing out weapons inspectors and leaving the NPT. On day two of the talks due to last three days, a plenary session is scheduled to begin at 10:00 am (0200 GMT), South Korea's Song said. The second phase of the fifth round of talks is due to be held in December. + Ŕđŕáńęčé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 10 [NLCBW] Ensign Amendment Update Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 12:15:38 -0600 (CST) X-Fingerprint: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu-127.127 Hi Folks - A cut and past from the US Congressional Record of last night is below, prefaced by comments from Alan Pearson at The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. The potentially disastrous amendment apparently will be voted on very soon, if not already. EH ----- From: apearson@armscontrolcenter.org The following comes from the Congressional Record for Nov. 8. Note that Senator Ensign seems to be describing the old version of his amendment, rather than the one he just introduced. That said, the revised version still contains significant problems - first and foremost the assertion that RCAs are NOT chemical weapons, which is simply wrong according to the CWC and to US law, as the US has ratified the CWC. Moreover, the amendment may be laying the groundwork for overriding Executive Order 11850, issued in 1975. The Senate resolution of ratification of the CWC, in 1997, gave EO 11850 legal status, stating that the President "shall take no measure, and prescribe no rule or regulation, which would alter or eliminate Executive Order 11850 of April 8, 1975." Thus, paragraph 2G of the Ensign amendment is very odd indeed, and raises questions about the intent of the amendment in the first place. Alan [Mr. ENSIGN] proposes an amendment numbered 2443. Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment is as follows: (Purpose: To restate United States policy on the use of riot control agents by members of the Armed Forces, and for other purposes) On page 286, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following: SEC. 1073. RIOT CONTROL AGENTS. (a) Restatement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United States that riot control agents are not chemical weapons and that the president may authorize their use as legitimate, legal, and non-lethal alternatives to the use of force that, as provided in Executive Order 11850 (40 Fed. Reg. 16187) and consistent with the resolution of ratification of the Chemical Weapons convention, may be employed by members of the Armed Forces in war in defensive military modes to save lives, including the illustrative purposes cited in Executive Order 11850. (b) Report Required.-- (1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress a report on the use of riot control agents by members of the Armed Forces. (2) CONTENT.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall include-- (A) a description of all regulations, doctrines, training materials, and any other information related to the use of riot control agents by members of the Armed Forces; (B) a description of the doctrinal publications, training, and other resources provided or available to members of the Armed Forces on an annual basis with regard to the tactical employment of riot control agents; (C) a description of how the material described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) is consistent with United States policy on the use of riot control agents; (D) a description of the availability of riot control agents, and the means to employ them, to members of the Armed Forces deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan; (E) a description of the frequency of use of riot control agents since January 1, 1992, and a summary of views held by military commanders about the utility of the employing riot control agents by members of the Armed Forces; (F) a general description of steps taken or to be taken by the Department of Defense to clarify the circumstances under which riot control agents may be used by members of the Armed Forces; and (G) an assessment of the legality of Executive Order 11850, including an explanation why Executive Order 11850 remains valid under United States law. (3) FORM.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. (c) Definitions.--In this section: (1) CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION.--The term ``Chemical Weapons Convention'' means the Convention on the Prohibitions of Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction, with annexes, done at Paris, January 13, 1993, and entered into force April 29, 1997 (T. Doc. 103-21). (2) RESOLUTION OF RATIFICATION OF THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION.--The term ``resolution of ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention'' means S. Res. 75, 105th Congress, agreed to April 24, 1997, advising and consenting to the ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention. Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, before I make my full statement, I want my colleagues to know that the amendment that I have sent to the desk is something that we have been working with the administration on for almost 8 months now. I believe we have come up with a compromise that most people in the administration support. It is a very important amendment as far as the foreign policy and the military policy of our country is concerned. This amendment will allow our soldiers and marines to more effectively carry out their mission on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, while saving both military and civilian lives. [Page: S12496] GPO's PDF Riot control agents, more commonly referred to as tear gas, can be a more effective alternative to the use of lethal weapons in combat. It is shocking and unacceptable that under current policy our military is banned from using tear gas on the battlefield. Let me restate that. Under current policy, our military is banned from using tear gas on the battlefield. Police officers in any city in America can use tear gas to avoid the loss of life, but our men and women carrying out the global war on terror cannot. This is not right and it must change. This restriction on the use of tear gas is the direct result of the bureaucracy's faulty interpretation of the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, an interpretation made by arms control advocates in Brussels and The Hague and regrettably at our own State Department. Under this faulty interpretation, tear gas is considered a chemical weapon. In those isolated cases where it can be used, it requires Presidential authorization. This is wrong. The use of riot control agents in combat for defensive purposes to save lives is wholly consistent with the U.S. obligations under the laws of land warfare and of our treaty obligations. Retaining this capability was so important to our military leaders that the Senate included a condition in the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention that preserved our right to use tear gas in conflict. Many Members today were in the Senate when this matter was debated. All concurred with the arguments put forward by then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell, that giving up this capability is not even worth getting the treaty. Here is what he said: Nonlethal riot control agents provide a morally correct option to achieve defensive military objectives without having to resort to the unnecessary loss of innocent lives. Sacrificing such an option would be an unacceptable price to pay for a CW [chemical weapons] treaty. Senators LUGAR, BIDEN, and others spoke eloquently on this point in a bipartisan manner. Senators knew then, and many do know now, that the use of nonlethal weapons, such as tear gas, is demonstrated routinely to be effective by law enforcement agencies all over the world. It is a moral alternative to the use of lethal force. In towns and streets throughout Iraq and Afghanistan, marines and soldiers are going house to house in an attempt to flush out hiding terrorists. In carrying out this vital mission, structures are damaged and innocent people are killed. Some of that death and destruction could be avoided if we allowed our military to use tear gas instead of bullets. In other cases, we know of situations where the insurgents have mixed in with innocent civilians, using them as human shields, forcing our fighting men and women to either retreat or fire into a crowd, which is a choice they should not have to make. I am reminded of a New York Times article, dated June 28 of this year. It chronicled marines clearing a town in Iraq. The article referenced one particular incident where three civilians, a mother and two children, were killed as marines battled an insurgent who had taken the family hostage. Perhaps the use of tear gas would have saved their lives; perhaps not. We will never know that. What we do know is that those marines were not provided every tool with which to carry out this global war on terrorism. Certainly our image has been tarnished as a nation, and our public diplomacy has suffered every time we use lethal force to clear a room, empty a building or take other actions that wound or kill innocent people. This is unconscionable when nonlethal alternatives are available. Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, described the restriction on the use of riot control agents as a straitjacket. Here is what he said: We are doing our best to live within the straitjacket that has been imposed on us on this subject. We are trying to find ways that non-lethal agents could be used within the law. He went on to point out that our soldiers and marines are authorized to shoot and to kill people in situations where tear gas is prohibited. This is a lethal lapse in legal judgment. It seems as if some would put the concerns of the global arms control theocracy above the lives of our military personnel. If anybody is watching or listening and they are scratching their head wondering where is the common sense, that is exactly what I thought and what led me to offer this amendment. In fact, our military has been so spooked about this issue they don't know how to train themselves on Riot Control Agent use on the battlefield. The Tactical Employment of Nonlethal Weapons training manual, dated January 2003, is applicable to all military branches. It specifically reminds all that ``..... using Riot Control Agents in an armed conflict requires Presidential approval.'' Additionally, the Department of Defense's Joint Doctrine Encyclopedia, dated July 1997, advises that ``Commanders must consider the international ramifications ..... before recommending the use of herbicides or Riot Control Agents.'' Now, there are those who erroneously claim my amendment seeks to change long standing policy on the use of riot control agents in combat and runs counter to U.S. treaty commitments. In fact, my amendment seeks merely to reaffirm the policy of the United States since 1975, and the Senate's view on this issue from 1997, by stating that it is the policy of the United States that Riot Control Agents are not chemical weapons but are legitimate, legal, and non-lethal alternatives to the use of lethal force. It adds that these tools may be employed by members of the Armed Forces in defensive military modes to save lives. My amendment further requires the President to submit a one-time report to Congress on the availability and use of Riot Control Agents by our fighting men and women. It includes reporting language that prods the State Department to speak about and advocate the U.S. view on this important life-saving tool in multilateral forums. Finally, my amendment presses the Pentagon to develop this capability, which has languished in our training regimens, our doctrine, and our tactics through lack of use. I urge all of my colleagues to reaffirm this policy, to reaffirm what the Senate said in 1997, and to send a strong message to our men and women in uniform that the Senate puts their welfare above misguided interpretations of arcane international agreements, that the Senate wants to give them a full range of tools to help them accomplish their mission in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that we want to do so in a manner that doesn't jeopardize their lives or those of innocent civilians. I reserve the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I want very much to support my colleague from Nevada, but I would like to have some clarification. I tried to listen very carefully to what the Senator said. I want to see if my interpretation of the amendment is correct. I begin by saying the question of whether and how the use of riot control agents would be limited by the Chemical Weapons Convention became a major issue when the treaty was considered by the Senate for ratification in 1997. The resolution of ratification for the CWC contains a condition requiring the President to certify that the United States is not restricted by the CWC in its use of riot control agents in certain specified circumstances. The condition also required the President not to eliminate or alter Executive Order 11850--which I have before me; it was signed by President Ford on April 8, 1975--which prohibits the use of riot control agents in war except in defensive military modes to save lives. Now, I turn to the Executive Order 11850 and specifically ask the Senator, is his interpretation of his amendment consistent with the objectives as stated in Executive Order 11850, signed by President Ford April 8, 1975? Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Virginia that he has stated it exactly right. We are trying to restate the position that the Senate took in 1997, in the Executive Order 11850. It has been the policy of the United States, based on this Executive order, based on what the Senate did with the Chemical Weapons Treaty in 1997. But the problem is there have been lawyers down at the State Department who have interpreted it differently and therefore have put the military in a very difficult position, [Page: S12497] GPO's PDF that if they used it consistent with former U.S. policy, they could be accused of violating the Chemical Weapons Treaty and be subject to prosecution as individual soldiers. Mr. WARNER. I thank my colleague. If I could further propound a clarification, reading from the preamble to 11850, the Executive order, it says: The United States renounces, as a matter of national policy, first use of herbicides in war except use, under regulations applicable to their domestic use, for control of vegetation within U.S. bases and installations or around their immediate defensive perimeters, and first use of riot control agents in war except in defensive military modes to save lives such as-- and these are the examples-- (a) Use of riot control agents in riot control situations in areas under direct and distinct U.S. military control, to include controlling rioting prisoners of war. (b) Use of riot control agents in situations in which civilians are used to mask or screen attacks and civilian casualties can be reduced or avoided. (c) Use of riot control agents in rescue missions in remotely isolated areas, of downed aircrews and passengers, and escaping prisoners. (d) Use of riot control agents in rear echelon areas outside the zone of immediate combat to protect convoys from civil disturbances, terrorists and paramilitary organizations. Regarding the ground operations as we are reading about daily in the Anbar Province, in Fallujah--I visited up in Fallujah several weeks ago. How would they, under your amendment, be deployed, assuming this amendment is adopted, in a manner differently than what they are doing today? Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I would say to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, frankly, they are not being used today by our military and that is the problem. Therein lies the problem. We just saw President Bush down in the Summit of the Americas, and they had riots down there and they used these very agents to control the crowds. Even when they had problems at Abu Ghraib prison, these riot control agents were not allowed to be used because people were afraid to use them. Can you imagine, if you are a first lieutenant or you are a sergeant and you are out there and you know that these things have been allowed in the past, but now the State Department and the military are putting stuff out and there are questions, you are not going to use the thing that may be the most effective at saving lives of the personnel around you, as well as the civilians, because you could be accused potentially of violating the Chemical Weapons Treaty. We are handcuffing the very personnel that this Senate is supposed to be trying to protect. That is why I believe, as the Senator has correctly pointed out, that this amendment is consistent with the very examples that you pointed out that are in the Executive Order No. 11850 that was signed back in 1975. Mr. WARNER. I want to make clear I presume the amendment of the Senator clarifies some ambiguity, which ambiguity acts as a deterrent on our forces today from using it. Once the ambiguities are set aside, then we can proceed to utilize these agents, provided it is consistent with the Executive Order 11850? Have I correctly stated that? Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I think what the Senator has stated is very concise. That is exactly the intent of the amendment. Mr. WARNER. I thank my distinguished colleague. We will have, perhaps, opportunity in the morning to further debate this amendment. I do want to posture myself so I can support your amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I wish to clarify a question the chairman of the committee asked. I think I heard the answer, but I was not 100 percent sure. Is the amendment intended to state the current policy of the United States? When it says on line 1 of page 1, ``It is the policy of the United States,'' is that intended to reflect the current policy of the United States? Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I would say to the Senator from Michigan that the current policy is exactly what our amendment is trying to reinforce. It is the interpretation of that current policy that is happening down at the State Department that we are trying to clarify. We think they are misinterpreting the current policy which has existed for some time now in the United States. We now need to clarify it so that our warriors know exactly that they can use riot control agents under specific uses, as the examples that the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services has pointed out. Mr. LEVIN. Is it the intention of the amendment, then, to state the policy of the United States as reflected in Executive Order 11850? Mr. ENSIGN. That is correct, Mr. President. Mr. LEVIN. So there is no effort, no intent in the statement of policy on line 4 on page 1 through line 6 on page 2, to in any way modify the policy set forth in that Executive Order 11850? Mr. ENSIGN. The Senator is correct. Mr. LEVIN. So this restatement of policy is not intended to modify this in any way. But as I understand it, what the good Senator from Nevada is saying is that some people in the Government have interpreted Executive Order 11850 differently from the way the policy is stated in section 1073? Mr. ENSIGN. I think the policy is very clear in this Executive order, as well as what the Senate stated. But it appears that certain people down at the State Department have interpreted it a different way and believe there is a higher threshold that our warriors must come under before they can use these riot control agents out on the battlefield; that they must seek Presidential authority. That is what we are trying to clarify here, is to get back to what this Executive order said, as well as what the Senate stated in 1997. Mr. LEVIN. I thank my friend from Nevada. Mr. President, we will reserve the time. We are not necessarily at all in opposition, but we would like to review this overnight. We thank the Senator from Nevada. Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, subject to the order by the majority and Democratic leader as to the sequence of events tomorrow, the Ensign amendment would remain the pending business at such time as the leadership directs the Senate return to this bill; am I correct in that? The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct, the Ensign amendment is pending. ***************************************************************** 11 Asia Times: Stopping Bush's bunker buster By Lawrence S Wittner (Republished with permission from Japan Focus) Confronted with strong opposition from disarmament groups and from Congress, the Bush administration has abandoned its plan to develop a nuclear "bunker buster". This new weapon, formally known as the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, became the symbol of the Bush administration's aggressive nuclear stance. The administration alleged that the bunker buster was necessary to destroy deeply buried and hardened enemy targets, and that - thanks to the fact that it would explode underground - it would produce minimal collateral damage. But critics charged that, with more than 70 times the destructive power of the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima, a single bunker buster might kill millions of people. This contention was Gas A global gas production peak within this timeframe is unlikely, although projection of historic growth rates suggest production constraints may arise around mid-century. For the UK, expanding Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) re-gasification facilities would alleviate current concern about supply security from Russia; but this will also require expanding storage capacity. Gas to Liquid (GTL) technology provides a route to augmenting liquid supplies. Coal Ample coal supplies exist - at cost structures similar to today's. Supply sources are diverse and differ from those for gas. Moreover, a price increase of only $10/tonne would effectively double the world's economic coal reserves. Maintaining the UK's coal-based generating capacity would therefore augment both diversity and security of electricity supply. Long-term, coal can be used as a chemical source for methane, hydrogen and liquid fuels when conversion costs become economic. Coal burning traditionally produces large emissions of carbon dioxide - which is why replacing coal by gas helped the UK to meet Kyoto targets. The only way that fossil fuels can contribute to easing the CO2 emissions problem is by embracing cleaner technologies - for which there is a real cost (which is highest for coal relative to other fossil fuels). The alternative of carbon capture and storage is only proven and demonstrated in principle - no large scale plant is currently operational. It is likely, however, that the permissioning regime for a sequestration plant would be difficult; conceivably leading to the sorts of decadal delays familiar with nuclear power plants. 4. Renewables "How much of our total energy requirements can renewables be expected to provide, in light of the White Paper statement that the price of energy should allow us to maintain our competitive advantage as a nation?" + Renewable energy technologies could supply up to 40% of current demand by 2050. + Development will require maintaining and reinforcing Government incentive schemes, covering both the generation technologies and changes in systems of energy supply and usage. + Further cost reductions are probable, but not to the historically low levels produced by fossil fuels over recent years. The meeting reviewed and debated a number of renewable technologies presently in service or development. It was the opinion of those directly involved in the business that large-scale renewables, specifically wind, bio-energy, and (to a lesser extent) marine energies, could potentially provide around 15% of current national demand by 2020, rising to 35–40% by 2050 if the newer technologies could be successfully developed and deployed. Distributed systems could provide additional energy for local use, although their contribution to remote demand would depend on substantive changes to the architecture of electricity networks. Full exploitation of renewable energies also requires changes to the way energy systems are designed and used, adopting "fresh-start" thinking. The demonstration in Woking highlighted some of these including the use of local electricity grids for power sharing, and the more efficient energy design of buildings and processes. The renewables industry believes that cost reductions to such systems can be achieved, but that incentives to encourage necessary development and stimulate demand management remain necessary. If such incentives are provided, the industry remains confident that the low-carbon energy supply envisaged in the White Paper is achievable by 2050. However, the Government's current measures are insufficient to ensure this. 5. Impact "As we strive to meet the targets in the White Paper, how will the consequential changes in energy production and use be made culturally and politically acceptable in the UK?" + Public engagement has been poor to date, and the Government's attempts to develop it have failed to recognise the way individuals interact with the energy system. + For enterprises, real action has arisen only when appropriate incentives are in place - such as carbon trading. + Future approaches will need to provide clear and consistent incentives that identify and engage with public and business alike. The conference focused on two aspects: increasing efficiency of energy use, and means to reduce demand for energy. There was a close relationship between discussion on these topics and that concerning energy demand. In particular, reducing demand by applying existing technologies was cited as an example of how opportunities to hand now are not currently being fully exploited. Incentives to apply low-energy options, and public awareness of the impact of doing so as individuals, were still weak. The meeting agreed that schemes to engage the public had been generally unsuccessful, and that the reason for this failure was the approach that had been taken. Many schemes used approaches based on economic or technical rationality; which may reflect how such decisions are taken within a technocracy, but which fail to take into account the real ways in which individuals made personal decisions about their daily lives. Changing public reaction substantially in the future will need more perceptive public engagement that recognises how individuals interact with the energy system. Business and enterprise have responded to certain schemes - such as carbon trading. These have encouraged process-changes, leading to more efficient on-site energy generation and usage. However, clear and consistent incentive schemes are still needed to encourage the wider adoption of such measures. ***************************************************************** 13 [DU-WATCH] Has the nuclear catastrophe already arrived? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:36:39 -0600 (CST) http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/647/647p26.htm From Green Left Weekly, November 2, 2005. Has the nuclear catastrophe already arrived? Blowin in the Wind Directed by David Bradbury Limited national season commencing in Sydney and Melbourne at Dendy cinemas on October 27, other cities to follow REVIEW BY LACHLAN MALLOCH David Bradbury needs almost no introduction to Green Left Weekly readers: his lifetime of progressive film-making speaks for itself. Bradburys latest documentary a film he says youll never see on your ABC continues that tradition into perhaps his most dangerous subject yet, the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the era of the war on terror. In production terms it might seem modest just under an hour long and made for the equivalent of chicken feed but its content is breathtaking, sensational and urgent. Blowin in the Wind documents the increasing use of so-called depleted uranium (DU) in weapons around the world and forcefully reveals the devastating health and environmental effects of these mini-nukes. The world authority on the devastation wreaked by DU is former US Army physicist Dr Doug Rokke, who suffers from radiation sickness due to his work in Iraq after the first Gulf War. Dr Rokke is one of the heroes of this film, tirelessly campaigning around the world against the criminal use of nuclear weapons. The other great heroes are the dying children in Iraq, whose bodies are riddled with the minuscule deadly radioactive particles unleashed by US bombing 15 years ago and carried for kilometres by Iraqs notorious, dusty winds. The condemned children stare at us as if from the other side of a great abyss. It is impossible to look at them and not feel a burning guilt and shame at the nightmare visited upon them in our name. The footage seen here, of dying children and grotesquely malformed foetuses, is not new. John Pilgers 2000 TV documentary Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq eloquently exposed the Wests genocidal regime of economic sanctions and DU bombing in Iraq. Before the Gulf War, few babies in Iraq were born with malformations. Now there are 7-10 per day, some of them so badly mutated that they are just pieces of flesh. This medical nightmare can only be expected to worsen, with the USs increasing use of DU on battlefields around the world. Yugoslavia was bombed with over 84 tonnes of DU, over 1000 tonnes were dropped on Afghanistan and Iraq was blasted with more than 2500 tonnes in the latest invasion. Bradburys new and sensational thesis is that these deadly nuclear winds have come to Australia and are set to blow even harder, in several ways. First, Australian military veterans are suffering from the euphemistically titled Gulf War Syndrome more likely, radiation sickness. We meet Gulf War veteran Ed Grant, suffering an unexplained disease and battling the Australian government to take his case seriously. Not surprisingly hes afraid of what poison he might have passed on to his children and eventual grandchildren. Second, Bradbury outlines the Australian governments enthusiastic plans for dramatically expanding uranium mining here. This is a double-edged sword: well be faced with increased dangers of waste storage and accidents at mine sites, as well as increasing our complicity in the proliferation of nuclear weapons, by increasing the global supply of uranium. But the centrepiece of Bradburys thesis is his examination of the secret treaty, or Memorandum of Understanding, that was signed by Australia and the US on July 7, 2004, setting the framework for intensified military cooperation between the two nations. Bradbury argues that this agreement gives a 20-year-long, virtual blank cheque to the US to use all sorts of deadly weapons, including those with DU, in their testing and training exercises on Australian soil. It is likely that nukes were used in the June 2005 Talisman Sabre exercises at beautiful Shoalwater Bay on the Queensland coast, when 11,000 US troops joined the Australian military in live aerial bombardments, doing unknown levels of damage to such a precious environmental treasure. Blowin in the Wind shows us that we are entering a new period in Australias long history of complicity with and support for imperial power, but its mostly taking place behind the backs of the Australian people. The extremely truncated cinematic exhibition of this film means that activists will need to work hard to make it anything more than a voice in the wilderness. It asks urgent questions that we ignore at our own peril. ------- [Visit the films website at .] ============== ***NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.*** --------------------------------- To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] ***************************************************************** 14 Indiatimes: Changing times: N-deal a major US policy shift AGENCIES[ THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2005 12:43:55 AM] SILICON VALLEY: The landmark Indo-US nuclear deal has come in for sharp criticism by some American experts who claim that it would lead to an arms race in Asia and is aimed at checking the rising power of China. George Perkovich of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace says the US administration has an important goal that it does not like to talk about, which is balancing the rising power of China. When the President (George W Bush) says we now have as our goal to make India a major power, part of that is Indias intrinsic worth, but a big part of that is to balance China as a major power. The logic being that if you build up India, you build up US power. The idea is, may be China just backs of and says okay we wont compete, he said. Perkovich said the administration may not like to talk much about the balancing China part of this strategy, but you cant really explain why they didnt push hard to get India to stop making bombs. Except with the understanding that this was about balancing China. Under the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement reached between President George W Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on July 18, the US would lift restrictions on the supply of reactors and fuel for Indias civilian nuclear programme provided New Delhi fulfilled a series of obligations. Congress must amend US law before the deal can be completed. Henry Skoloski, executive director of the Non-Proliferation Policy Education Centre told a House of Representative panel that some in the administration are not unhappy with the prospect of helping India make more bombs. "More than a few of the deal's backers believe that to enhance US security against, let us say a hostile China, we shouldn't press these points too hard. They are even willing to let the US indirectly help India build more nuclear weapons," Skoloski said. China is believed to have between 300 and 400 nuclear weapons, a far larger stockpile of fissile material than India, which is thought to have no more than 75. South Asia expert Ashley Tellis said, "The Indians are calculating that as long as Chinese stockpile is so huge and there is great uncertainty about where China's strategic nuclear weapons programme is going, they would be unable to accede to any request for a moratorium. I think the US understands this too and, therefore, we didn't make this condition for the successful completion of the agreement. "At recent House and Senate hearings, many experts opined that the policy shift put the international system of non-proliferation at risk. They say the deal turns on its head decades of US non-proliferation policy that prohibits the country from co-operating with a state that has the atom bomb outside the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). "By sending the signal that the US will tolerate and eventually accommodate a decision to acquire nuclear weapons, it will reduce the perceived costs to states that might consider going nuclear in the near future," former Assistant Secretary of State Robert J Einhorn said. Under the terms of the agreement, India will separate civilian and military nuclear programmes and place civilian programme under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection. In return, Washington will give India access to technology normally reserved for nations that have signed NPT. White House officials have largely evaded the issue of how the acceptance of India's status as a nuclear weapons state can be reconciled with the country's commitment to NPT. Tellis, a former adviser in the US embassy in India, told NPR, "It can't be squared at a legal level. It has to be squared at a practical level. The practical solution is creating some kind of an exceptionalism that accommodates the peculiar situation that we find ourselves in." Copyright © 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 RIA Novosti: U.S. Senate requests report on Russian-U.S. nuclear arms 09/ 11/ 2005 WASHINGTON, November 9 (RIA Novosti, Arkady Orlov) - The U.S. Senate has requested that the U.S. State Department and the Pentagon prepare a report on U.S. and Russian non-strategic nuclear arms, the Senate's secretariat said Wednesday. The U.S. Senate voted in a corresponding amendment to the current bill on defense spending for 2006. The document says that not later than six months after the defense budget is approved, the U.S. Defense Secretary will consult the Secretary of State on reviewing U.S. and Russian non-strategic nuclear armaments. The heads of the Pentagon and the State Department will then use this review to prepare a report on the need for cuts in non-strategic nuclear arms, measures to improve security during their storage and transportation, and means of decommissioning excess non-strategic nuclear weapons. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 16 BBC: Britain facing large energy gap Last Updated: Wednesday, 9 November 2005, 23:31 GMT [ By Richard Black Environment Correspondent, BBC News website [Coal pit head. Image: PA] Fossil fuels will remain the dominant energy source - there is no alternative John Loughhead Britain is facing a shortfall in energy supply in the near future, according to a major report being launched today. Within a decade, the country may be generating only about 80% of the electricity it needs. A panel of 150 experts says fossil fuels will remain the mainstay of supply, with renewables expanding and nuclear power almost certainly needed. The panel urges the government to take steps quickly to solve the issue; doing nothing, it says, is not an option. "Up to the year 2050, fossil fuels will remain the dominant energy source - there really is no alternative," said John Loughhead of the UK Energy Research Centre, who compiled the report following a two-day conference held last month under the auspices of the Geological Society of London. The conference drew contributions from about 150 delegates representing all sectors of the energy field. "If the UK is to remain on the path of reducing atmospheric emissions of greenhouse gases, it will need to retain some nuclear capacity," Dr Loughhead told reporters at a news briefing on Wednesday. "Renewables are going to play a role, but they're going to need support if they're to continue on a downward path of cost." Nuclear closure BRIDGING THE ENERGY GAP - KEY CONCLUSIONS [Power station showing coal heap and cooling towers. Image: BBC] Generating capacity shortfall of 7-16GW by 2015 Equivalent to about 20% of current capacity Without need to restrain emissions, gap could be bridged easily Fossil fuels will remain the dominant technology Nuclear is proven and reliable, but building takes at least a decade - decision needed soon Renewables could supply 40% of generation by 2050 The immediate issue is the impending closure of most British nuclear power stations and many coal-fired units. By 2015, all four Magnox nuclear stations still operating will have shut down, as will five of the seven stations running Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactors (AGRs). Under the European Large Combustion Plant Directive, many of the nation's coal-fired plants will also close in the next decade. In principle, the gap could be bridged by new power stations burning gas or coal; but this would work against the government's short term targets and long term aspirations on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. "Without the need to reduce emissions, there would not be an energy gap by 2050," said Dr Loughhead. Meanwhile, demand may continue to rise; and managing that demand, says the report, is a key issue. Technologies exist to increase efficiencies, but they are not being used to anything like their full potential, it finds - largely because the public is not properly engaged in the energy issue. This is one area in which it recommends urgent attention from the government. Another is setting up the right frameworks to encourage investment and research, setting up a long-term stable marketplace which will allow companies to plan for the future. Creating the climate "If there is a next generation of nuclear stations, they are almost certain to be built with private money," said John Loughhead. [Control room of 1960s nuclear power station. Image: PA] [ src=] If you don't want nuclear, there are hard choices to be made [ src=] Shaun Fitzgerald "Companies are looking at an investment spanning 80 years, from construction to decommissioning; and there is concern within the investor community about having a regulatory framework which takes account of this and which will not be changed after commissioning." The report concludes that the gap in electricity supplies left by nuclear closures will almost certainly have to be bridged by building new reactors, if the government is to fulfil its long term ambitions on climate change. "The conclusion of our discussions was that renewables can't plug the gap soon," said Charles Curtis of Manchester University and the nuclear company Nirex. "They will play a part, but it's unlikely they will provide everything we need; they need more support, more aid in deployment." There was clearly some dissention from that conclusion among experts consulted for the report. The report will be formally launched at London's Royal Society on Thursday morning, and its authors hope it will stimulate government action. Key considerations for the government are, it believes + setting up stable fiscal and regulatory frameworks + finding ways to engage the public in energy questions + stimulating the development of new technologies such as carbon capture + exploring options for new nuclear stations The government is unlikely to make a formal announcement on new nuclear build before the middle of next year, when a committee advising on options for disposing of Britain's existing nuclear waste is due to present its recommendations. The researchers were emphatic that whatever decisions are taken, the government needs to take them swiftly. "Doing nothing is not an option," commented Shaun Fitzgerald from the BP Research Institute at Cambridge University. "If you don't want nuclear, there are hard choices to be made on other issues." However, there was clearly some dissent from these conclusions among experts consulted for the report. "In the case of nuclear, the government should take a decision soon, and the decision should be 'no'," the chief executive of the solar energy company solarcentury Jeremy Leggett told the BBC News website. "More than 50% of Britain's greenhouse gas emissions come directly or indirectly from buildings; and the key to reducing that lies in renewables and energy efficiency." THE NUCLEAR DEBATE IN PICTURES Living with Sizewell B [ src=] KEY STORIES Analysis: Is nuclear the answer? Blair 'open' over nuclear future Sizewell B given 10 more years Talks sought on UK nuclear future Nuclear firm 'to be privatised' BACKGROUND EXPERTS' VIEWS Viewpoint: Finland's new reactor Viewpoint: German phase-out Email debate: Part one Email debate: Part two HAVE YOUR SAY Are more reactors needed? [ src=] [ src=] SEE ALSO: Greenhouse gas 'to rise by 52%' 07 Nov 05 | Business ***************************************************************** 17 Xinhua: Russia keeps nuclear deterrence potential: defense minister www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-11-10 02:38:32 MOSCOW, Nov. 9 (Xinhuanet) -- Russian strategic nuclear forces still maintain their deterrence potential, Defense Minister SergeiIvanov said on Wednesday at a meeting of commanders of armed forces, which was attended by President Vladimir Putin. Russia's nuclear forces "are still able not only to secure deterrence of an aggression against our country and its allies, but also guarantee an adequate answer to any aggressor", Ivanov was cited by the Itar-Tass news agency as saying. "The level of preparedness at the present time has allowed making several successful launches from positional areas, air and sea missile carriers. Early warning systems have timely detected all launches of Russian and foreign inter-continental ballistic missiles and carrier rockets," Ivanov said. According to the defense minister, the 2006-2010 program of building the armed forces envisages the "preservation and development of a minimally sufficient potential of the strategic deterrence forces" and "qualitative enhancement of possibilities of the armed forces to a level securing the guaranteed rebuffing of military threats of the present day and possible in the future". Ivanov continued that the Russian army and navy at present has 1,134,800 officers and men and will be cut to 1,100,000 men by 2011. "This means that about 35,000 men of the non-combat personnel will be laid off within the next five years, including some staff members of military chairs and other dual-purpose structures. It is also planned to do away with three hundred high-rank command posts, after which the number of generals and admirals in the Armed Forces will not top 1,100 men, meaning their reduction to the optimal proportion of one per thousand servicemen," Ivanov explained. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 Japan Times: The politics of assigning a nuclear carrier to Japan Wednesday, November 9, 2005 BUSH MAY DECIDE By RICHARD HALLORAN Special to The Japan Times HONOLULU -- The easy part of newly assigning a U.S. aircraft carrier to Japan, which was to persuade the Japanese to accept a nuclear-powered vessel, has been accomplished. Now comes the hard part: deciding which one of 10 carriers should be based in the port of Yokosuka. Deployments of the world's mightiest warships are not to be taken lightly. They are the most visible symbols of the ability of the United States to project sea power and to maintain a presence far from America's shores. In a crisis, often the first question from the White House is: "Where are the carriers?" Indeed, the decision of which carrier to base in Japan is so complicated that it may go all the way to President George W. Bush. The move must take into account Japanese attitudes, U.S. military strategy, and American politics and economics -- much of which will be difficult to reconcile. At the moment, the leading candidates would seem to be the USS Abraham Lincoln, named for the American perhaps most revered in Japan, and the USS George Washington, named for the president know as the father of his country. The Lincoln, based in Bremerton in the state of Washington, belongs to the Pacific Fleet while Washington is assigned to the Atlantic Fleet based in Norfolk, Virginia. Among the carriers that should not be under consideration is the USS Harry S. Truman, named for the president who ordered the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 to get Japan to surrender and end World War II. Similarly, the USS Nimitz is named for the U.S. naval commander, Adm. Chester Nimitz, in that war against Japan. Posting the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower to Japan would recall the cancellation of President Eisenhower's visit to Tokyo in 1960 in the face of violent protests against the U.S. Japan Security Treaty. The USS Enterprise, the first nuclear-powered carrier to visit Japan, stirred up similar protests in Sasebo, a port in southwestern Japan, in 1968. The USS Theodore Roosevelt is named for the president who negotiated a treaty to end the Russo-Japanese war of 1905 that many Japanese thought unfair. The USS John C. Stennis and USS Carl Vinson are named for chairmen of the Senate Armed Services Committee unknown to most Japanese. Finally, the USS Ronald Reagan would get an indifferent reception. Triggering this search is the need to replace the USS Kitty Hawk, the conventionally powered carrier based in Yokosuka now. She is scheduled to be retired in 2008. The USS John F. Kennedy, based in Mayport, Florida, is also conventionally powered and is to follow shortly after. After months of quiet negotiations, U.S. diplomats recently got an agreement from Japan that the Kitty Hawk's replacement would be nuclear powered. The "nuclear allergy" of Japan that is the legacy of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki appears to be fading. Moreover, nuclear plants generate a third of Japan's electricity today. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is preparing a report for Congress known as the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), which officials say will reflect a shift in U.S. power from the Atlantic to the Pacific due to the rise of China, the belligerence of North Korea, piracy in vital sea lanes in Southeast Asia, and the threat of terror. The QDR, to be delivered early next year, will call for shifting a carrier from the Atlantic to the Pacific so that six of those 90,000-ton warships, each carrying 85 fighters, bombers, and other aircraft, and operated by 5,500 sailors and aviators, will be posted in the Pacific and four in the Atlantic. The sixth Pacific carrier would most likely be based at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. Here's where politics weigh in. The five carriers based in Norfolk, are under the vigilant eye of Sen. John Warner, chairman of the Armed Services Committee. He is a Republican, as are Virginia's other senator, George Allen, and five of the state's eight representatives. Rumsfeld will find it hard to persuade Republican allies to give up a ship that brings dollars and jobs into their electoral districts. Ship maintenance, supplies, and spending by the crews all pump large sums into economies around naval bases. Even so, sending one of the five carriers from Norfolk to Hawaii or Japan would seem to be on the horizon. By contrast, the senators from California, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, and from Washington state, Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, are Democrats critical of the Bush administration. Their pleas to keep ships in San Diego or Bremerton are not likely to be given much heed. Richard Halloran, formerly a correspondent for Business Week, The Washington Post and The New York Times, is a freelance journalist. The Japan Times: Nov. 9, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 19 NRC: Improvement Efforts at Salem, Hope Creek Nuclear Power Plants to Be Discussed at NRC Meeting Scheduled for Nov. 17 News Release - Region I - 2005-05-061 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov No. I-05-061 November 9, 2005 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS AT SALEM, HOPE CREEK NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO BE DISCUSSED AT NRC MEETING SCHEDULED FOR NOV. 17 Printable Version Actions taken by PSEG Nuclear, LLC, to improve the safety conscious work environment at the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plants will be the primary subject of a Nuclear Regulatory Commission public meeting on Thursday, Nov. 17. In addition, NRC staff and plant managers will discuss PSEG efforts to improve performance in the area of problem identification and resolution at the facilities, which are located in Hancocks Bridge (Salem County), N.J. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. at the Bridgeport Holiday Inn, at One Pureland Drive in Swedesboro, N.J. The hotel is located off Exit 10 of Interstate 295. Members of the public will be able to observe the NRC-PSEG discussions. Before the session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public regarding the topics. Safety conscious work environment refers to maintaining an environment in which workers feel free to raise safety concerns. In the NRC mid-cycle assessment of the Salem and Hope Creek units issued earlier this year, the agency stated that a cross-cutting issue in the area of safety conscious work environment would remain open until PSEG has concluded that substantial, sustainable progress has been made. Further, the NRC will need to complete a review confirming PSEGs assessment results. (A cross-cutting issue is one that affects several different areas of performance.) The mid-cycle assessment also determined that a cross-cutting issue in the area of problem identification and resolution for the plants would remain open. This was based on additional inspection findings and documented shortcomings in this area in 2004. Under a Deviation Memo approved in late July, the NRC is continuing to devote additional resources to reviewing performance at the plants. The upcoming meeting will provide a good opportunity for us to discuss whether the companys efforts are yielding the kind of meaningful and lasting results that are needed, NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins said. Until that occurs, we intend to maintain additional oversight at the Salem and Hope Creek plants involving, among other things, enhanced baseline inspections, regular reviews of the companys plans and periodic management meetings like the one scheduled for November 17th. More information about the NRCs oversight of the plants is available on the agencys web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/plant-specific-items/hope-creek-salem -issues.html. Privacy Policy | Site Disclaimer Last revised Wednesday, November 09, 2005 ***************************************************************** 20 Rediff: 'India can play a lead role in nuclear energy' PTI November 10, 2005 02:04 IST Director General of World Nuclear Association, John Ritch Wednesday said India can play a lead role in the world in the development of nuclear energy. Addressing an international conference on `Characterization and Quality Control of Nuclear fuels' here, Ritch welcomed the initiatives designed to end the isolation imposed upon India for its unwillingness to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Hoping that both American and Indian governments will take all possible steps to ensure that the nuclear non-proliferation regime is strengthened rather than weakened, he urged the need to cooperate in the fullest possible measures in realising the potential of nuclear power to achieve the global clean energy revolution which the world needs urgently. Speaking on the occasion, S Banerjee, director, Bhabha Atomic Research Center and member, Atomic Energy Commission said India is capable of handling the need for nuclear fuel in the view of the country's planned nuclear facilities. Stating that it is imperative that for economic growth, 4.5 to 5 per cent electricity growth is must, he said India is way ahead when compared to Europe. However, it is unfortunate that India has been using large biomass and coal energy. But since it is a signatory to a protocol not to have carbon dioxide emissions the only option is nuclear energy which is clean energy, Banerjee felt. However, India is not going on a fast pace mode as there are limited resources of uranium but is now trying its best to expand by having fresh excavations, Banerjee said adding, India is also making efforts to use thoranium but for that it has to wait for fast reactors. India is likely to get uranium from foreign countries once agreements are signned. This will increase the capacity for nuclear production in the country, he said. Dr Yuri Sokolov, deputy director general, Department of Nuclear Energy, International Atomic Energy Agency, in his address said that in many countries there was growing approval for promoting nuclear energy for future. © Copyright 2005 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or Copyright © 2005 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 21 Platts: NRC's FY-06 funding increases to $743.3-million + NRC will receive $743.3-million in fiscal 2006, a House-Senate conference committee decided last night. The amount is a $41-million increase over FY-05 funding. The increase would be used to support licensing of next generation reactors and would require NRC to undertake a security assessment of utility on-site spent fuel pool storage. Washington (Platts)--8Nov2005 Copyright © 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 22 NRC: NRC Considering Request by Minnesota to Be an “Agreement State” News Release - 2005-05-153 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov No. 05-153 November 9, 2005 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering a request from the governor of Minnesota to assume part of the NRCs regulatory authority over certain nuclear materials in the state. If the request is accepted, Minnesota will become the 34th state to sign such an agreement with the NRC. Under the proposed agreement, the NRC would transfer to Minnesota the responsibility for licensing, rulemaking, inspection and enforcement activities for: (1) radioactive materials produced as a byproduct of processes related to the production or utilization of special nuclear material (SNM); (2) source material (uranium and thorium); and (3) SNM in quantities not sufficient to support a nuclear chain reaction. If the agreement is approved, approximately 167 NRC licenses, many of them for medical and industrial uses, would be transferred to Minnesotas jurisdiction. The NRC would retain jurisdiction over a number of activities identified in 10 CFR Part 150, including regulation of commercial nuclear power plants and federal agencies using certain nuclear material in the state. In addition, NRC would retain authority for the review, evaluation and approval of sealed sources and devices containing certain nuclear materials within the state. An announcement of the proposed agreement, along with a summary of the NRC staffs draft assessment of the Minnesota program, will be published for comment once a week for four consecutive weeks in the Federal Register. Comments should be sent to Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Copies of the proposed agreement, the governors request and supporting documents, as well as the NRC staffs assessment are available through the NRCs Agency-wide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). Help in using ADAMS is available by contacting the NRC Public Document Room staff at 301-415-4737 or 1-800-397-4209, or by sending an e-mail message to pdr@nrc.gov. These documents are also available for public inspection at the NRC Public Document Room at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Thirty-three other states have previously signed such agreements with NRC. They are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin. Last revised Wednesday, November 09, 2005 ***************************************************************** 23 Independent: New nuclear power plants 'essential' to avoid energy shortfall By Steve Connor, Science Editor Published: 10 November 2005 Britain must consider building new nuclear power stations urgently if it is to meet its international commitments on cutting greenhouse gases as well as plugging a looming "energy gap", a study by more than 150 experts has found. It concluded that renewable sources of green energy would be unable to generate enough electricity to meet the expected shortfall resulting from the closure of existing nuclear power plants. Power stations would be unable to supply 20 per cent of peak demand in 10 years' time. John Loughhead, executive director of the UK Energy Research Centre and lead author of the study, said that cutting emissions of greenhouse gases from gas and coal-fired power stations was driving the need for fresh sources of energy. "If the UK is to continue on its path of reducing atmospheric emissions, then it will need probably to maintain some nuclear capability," Dr Loughhead said. "Renewable sources of energy will play a growing role in the future, but... many of them still have a higher cost base and are going to need continued support both in development and deployment." Nuclear power generates about 20 per cent of Britain's electricity but many existing power stations are near the end of their lives and there are no plans to replace them following a moratorium on new plants. The Government is in the midst of an energy review and Tony Blair has signalled that he may approve the building of new nuclear power stations to help to meet Britain's target of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. "If we envisage what life will be like without those nuclear power stations, and if you look at the development of the other generating technologies and our current demand growth patterns, the sums don't add up," Dr Loughhead said. The latest study comes out of a conference on energy organised by the British Geological Society, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Institute of Physics, the Institution of Electrical Engineers and the Institution of Civil Engineers. Also in this section © 2005 Independent News & Media (UK) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 24 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the FR Doc 05-22314 [Federal Register: November 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 216)] [Notices] [Page 68106] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09no05-109] Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision. 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 30--Rules of General Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material. 3. The form number if applicable: Not applicable. 4. How often the collection is required: Required reports are collected and evaluated on a continuing basis as events occur. There is a one- time submittal of information to receive a license. Renewal applications are submitted every 10 years. Information submitted in previous applications may be referenced without being resubmitted. In addition, recordkeeping must be performed on an on-going basis. 5. Who will be required or asked to report: All persons applying for or holding a license to manufacture, produce, transfer, receive, acquire, own, possess, or use radioactive byproduct material. 6. An estimate of the number of responses: 35,178 (7,648 NRC Licensee responses (3,163 Responses + 4,485 Recordkeepers) and (27,530 Agreement State Licensee responses (11,384 Responses + 16,146 Recordkeepers)). 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 20,631 (4,485 NRC licensees and 16,146 Agreement State licensees). 8. An estimate of the number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 248,034 (NRC licensees 53,948 hours [25,983 reporting + 27,965 recordkeeping] and Agreement State licensees 194,086 hours [93,431 reporting + 100,655 recordkeeping] or 8.2 hours per response and 6.2 hours per recordkeeper). 9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13 applies: Not applicable. 10. Abstract: 10 CFR Part 30 establishes requirements that are applicable to all persons in the United States governing domestic licensing of radioactive byproduct material. The application, reporting and recordkeeping requirements are necessary to permit the NRC to make a determination whether the possession, use, and transfer of byproduct material is in conformance with the Commission's regulations for protection of the public health and safety. A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F23, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC World Wide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by December 9, 2005. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. John Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150- 0017), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3087. The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301-415-7233. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of November 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. 05-22314 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 25 NRC: State of Minnesota: NRC Draft Staff Assessment of a proposed FR Doc 05-22317 [Federal Register: November 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 216)] [Notices] [Page 68102-68106] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09no05-108] Agreement Between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of Minnesota AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of a Proposed Agreement with the State of Minnesota. SUMMARY: By letter dated July 6, 2004, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) enter into an Agreement with the State as authorized by section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act). Under the proposed Agreement, the Commission would discontinue, and Minnesota would assume, portions of the Commission's regulatory authority exercised within the State. As required by the Act, NRC is publishing the proposed Agreement for public comment. NRC is also publishing the summary of a Draft Staff Assessment of the Minnesota Program. Comments are requested on the proposed Agreement and the NRC Draft Staff Assessment which finds the Program adequate to protect public health and safety and compatible with NRC's program for regulation of agreement material. The proposed Agreement would release (exempt) persons who possess or use certain radioactive materials in Minnesota from portions of the Commission's regulatory authority. The Act requires that NRC publish those exemptions. Notice is hereby given that the pertinent exemptions have been previously published in the Federal Register and are codified in the Commission's regulations as 10 CFR part 150. DATES: The comment period expires December 9, 2005. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission cannot assure consideration of comments received after the expiration date. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted to Mr. Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments may be submitted electronically at . The NRC maintains an Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The documents may be accessed through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at . If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at (800) 397-4209, or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to . [[Page 68103]] Copies of comments received by NRC may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Public File Area O-1-F21, Rockville, Maryland. Copies of the request for an Agreement by the Governor of Minnesota including all information and documentation submitted in support of the request, and copies of the full text of the NRC Draft Staff Assessment are also available for public inspection in the NRC's Public Document Room--ADAMS Accession Numbers: ML041960496, ML041960499, ML052440344, ML050130375, ML050140452, ML051330043, ML051740384, ML051650073, ML052200424, and ML053060372. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cardelia Maupin, Office of State and Tribal Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Telephone (301) 415-3340 or e-mail . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since section 274 of the Act was added in 1959, the Commission has entered into Agreements with 33 States. The Agreement States currently regulate approximately 17,200 agreement material licenses, while NRC regulates approximately 4,700 licenses. Under the proposed Agreement, approximately 167 NRC licenses will transfer to Minnesota. NRC periodically reviews the performance of the Agreement States to assure compliance with the provisions of section 274. Section 274e requires that the terms of the proposed Agreement be published in the Federal Register for public comment once each week for four consecutive weeks. This Notice is being published in fulfillment of the requirement. I. Background (a) Section 274d of the Act provides the mechanism for a State to assume regulatory authority, from the NRC, over certain radioactive materials \1\ and activities that involve use of the materials. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \1\ The radioactive materials are: (a) Byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act; (b) byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(2) of the Act; (c) source materials as defined in section 11z. of the Act; and (d) special nuclear materials as defined in section 11aa. of the Act, restricted to quantities not sufficient to form a ceitical mass. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- In a letter dated July 6, 2004, Governor Pawlenty certified that the State of Minnesota has a program for the control of radiation hazards that is adequate to protect public health and safety within Minnesota for the materials and activities specified in the proposed Agreement, and that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for these materials and activities. Included with the letter was the text of the proposed Agreement, which is shown in Appendix A to this Notice. The radioactive materials and activities (which together are usually referred to as the ``categories of materials'') which the State of Minnesota requests authority over are: (1) The possession and use of byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act; (2) the possession and use of source materials; and (3) the possession and use of special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass, as provided for in regulations or orders of the Commission. (b) The proposed Agreement contains articles that: --Specify the materials and activities over which NRC's authority is discontinued and transferred; --Specify the activities over which the Commission will retain regulatory authority; --Continue the authority of the Commission to safeguard nuclear materials and restricted data; --Commit the State of Minnesota and NRC to exchange information as necessary to maintain coordinated and compatible programs; --Provide for the reciprocal recognition of licenses; --Provide for the amendment, suspension or termination of the Agreement; and --Specify the effective date of the proposed Agreement. The Commission reserves the option to modify the terms of the proposed Agreement in response to comments, to correct errors, and to make editorial changes. The final text of the Agreement, with the effective date, will be published after the Agreement is approved by the Commission, and signed by the Chairman of the Commission and the Governor of Minnesota. (c) Minnesota currently registers users of naturally-occurring and accelerator-produced radioactive materials. Authority for Minnesota's radiation control unit and proposed Agreement State activities is primarily found in Minnesota Statutes, sections 144.12-144.121, and in the Minnesota Rules Chapter 4731. Section 144.1202 provides the authority for the Governor to enter into an Agreement with the Commission and contains provisions for the orderly transfer of regulatory authority over affected licensees from NRC to the State. After the effective date of the Agreement, licenses issued by NRC would continue in effect as Minnesota licenses until the licenses expire or are replaced by State-issued licenses. (d) The NRC Draft Staff Assessment finds that the Minnesota Program is adequate to protect public health and safety, and is compatible with the NRC program for the regulation of agreement materials. II. Summary of the NRC Draft Staff Assessment of the Minnesota Program for the Control of Agreement Materials NRC staff has examined the Minnesota request for an Agreement with respect to the ability of the Minnesota radiation control program to regulate agreement materials. The examination was based on the Commission's policy statement ``Criteria for Guidance of States and NRC in Discontinuance of NRC Regulatory Authority and Assumption Thereof by States Through Agreement'' (referred to herein as the ``NRC criteria''), published on January 23, 1981 (46 FR 7540), as amended by policy statements published on July 16, 1981 (46 FR 36969), and on July 21, 1983 (48 FR 33376). (a) Organization and Personnel. The agreement materials program will be located within the existing Environmental Health Division (Program) of the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). The Program will be responsible for implementation of all regulatory activities related to the proposed Agreement. The educational requirements for the Program staff members are specified in the Minnesota State personnel position descriptions, and meet the NRC criteria with respect to formal education or combined education and experience requirements. All current staff members hold at least bachelor's degrees in physical or life sciences, or have a combination of education and experience at least equivalent to a bachelor's degree. Several staff members hold advanced degrees, and all staff members have had additional training plus working experience in radiation protection. The Program supervisor has more than 20 years work experience in radiation protection. The Program performed, and NRC staff reviewed, an analysis of the expected Program workload under the proposed Agreement. Based on the NRC staff review of the State's staff analysis, Minnesota has an adequate number of staff to regulate radioactive materials under the terms of the Agreement. The Program will employ a staff of 3.5 full- time professional/technical and administrative employees for the agreement materials program. The [[Page 68104]] distribution of the qualifications of the individual staff members will be balanced to the distribution of categories of licensees transferred from NRC. (b) Legislation and Regulations. The MDH is designated by law in section 144.1202 of the Minnesota Statutes to be the radiation control agency. The law provides the MDH the authority to issue licenses, issue orders, conduct inspections, and to enforce compliance with regulations, license conditions, and orders. Licensees are required to provide access to inspectors. The MDH is authorized to promulgate regulations. The State's regulations are found in Minnesota Rules Chapter 4731 effective June 2004. The NRC staff reviewed and forwarded comments on these regulations to the Minnesota staff. The NRC staff review verified that, with the comments incorporated, the Minnesota rules, and with the addition of legally binding requirements to incorporate recent changes to 10 CFR part 35 and 71 contain all of the provisions that are necessary in order to be compatible with the regulations of the NRC on the effective date of the Agreement between the State and the Commission. The MDH has extended the effect of the rules, where appropriate, to apply to naturally-occurring or accelerator-produced radioactive materials (NARM), in addition to agreement materials. The NRC staff is satisfied that the Minnesota Program, will not regulate in areas reserved to the NRC in matters concerning or affecting the proposed Agreement. (c) Storage and Disposal. Minnesota has also adopted NRC compatible requirements for the handling and storage of radioactive material. Minnesota will not seek authority to regulate the land disposal of radioactive material as waste. The Minnesota waste disposal requirements cover the preparation, classification and manifesting of radioactive waste, generated by Minnesota licensees, for transfer for disposal to an authorized waste disposal site or broker. (d) Transportation of Radioactive Material. Minnesota has adopted regulations compatible with NRC regulations in 10 CFR part 71. Part 71 contains the requirements that licensees must follow when preparing packages containing radioactive material for transport. Part 71 also contains requirements related to the licensing of packaging for use in transporting radioactive materials. (e) Recordkeeping and Incident Reporting. Minnesota has adopted the sections compatible with the NRC regulations which specify requirements for licensees to keep records, and to report incidents, accidents, or events involving materials. (f) Evaluation of License Applications. Minnesota has adopted regulations compatible with the NRC regulations that specify the requirements which a person must meet in order to get a license to possess or use radioactive materials. Minnesota has also developed a licensing procedures manual, along with the accompanying regulatory guides, which are adapted from similar NRC documents and contain guidance for the Program staff when evaluating license applications. (g) Inspections and Enforcement. The Minnesota radiation control program has adopted a schedule providing for the inspection of licensees as frequently as the inspection schedule used by NRC. The Program has adopted procedures for the conduct of inspections, the reporting of inspection findings, and the reporting of inspection results to the licensees. The Program has also adopted, by rule based on the Minnesota Statutes, procedures for the enforcement of regulatory requirements. (h) Regulatory Administration. The MDH is bound by requirements specified in State law for rulemaking, issuing licenses, and taking enforcement actions. The Program has also adopted administrative procedures to assure fair and impartial treatment of license applicants. Minnesota law prescribes standards of ethical conduct for State employees. (i) Cooperation with Other Agencies. Minnesota law deems the holder of an NRC license on the effective date of the proposed Agreement to possess a like license issued by Minnesota. The law provides that these former NRC licenses will expire on the date of expiration specified in the NRC license. Minnesota also provides for ``timely renewal.'' This provision affords the continuance of licenses for which an application for renewal has been filed more than 30 days prior to the date of expiration of the license. NRC licenses transferred while in timely renewal are included under the continuation provision. Minnesota Rules Chapter 4731 provides exemptions from the State's requirements for licensing of sources of radiation for NRC and U.S. Department of Energy contractors or subcontractors. The proposed Agreement commits Minnesota to use its best efforts to cooperate with the NRC and the other Agreement States in the formulation of standards and regulatory programs for the protection against hazards of radiation and to assure that the Minnesota Program will continue to be compatible with the NRC's program for the regulation of agreement materials. The proposed Agreement stipulates the desirability of reciprocal recognition of licenses, and commits the Commission and Minnesota to use their best efforts to accord such reciprocity. III. Staff Conclusion Subsection 274d of the Act provides that the Commission shall enter into an agreement under subsection 274b with any State if: (a) The Governor of the State certifies that the State has a program for the control of radiation hazards adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the agreement materials within the State, and that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for the agreement materials; and (b) The Commission finds that the State program is in accordance with the requirements of subsection 274o, and in all other respects compatible with the NRC's program for the regulation of materials, and that the State program is adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials covered by the proposed Agreement. On the basis of its Draft Staff Assessment, the NRC staff concludes that the State of Minnesota meets the requirements of the Act. The State's program, as defined by its statutes, regulations, personnel, licensing, inspection, and administrative procedures, is compatible with the program of the NRC and adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials covered by the proposed Agreement. NRC will continue the formal processing of the proposed Agreement which includes publication of this Notice once a week for four consecutive weeks for public review and comment. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of November, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. Appendix A--An Agreement Between the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of Minnesota for the Discontinuance of Certain Commission Regulatory Authority and Responsibility within the State Pursuant to Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended Whereas, The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) is authorized under section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the Act), to [[Page 68105]] enter into agreements with the Governor of any State providing for discontinuance of the regulatory authority of the Commission within the State under Chapters 6, 7, and 8, and section 161 of the Act with respect to byproduct materials as defined in sections 11e.(1) and (2) of the Act, source materials, and special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass; and, Whereas, The Governor of the State of Minnesota is authorized under Sec. 144.1202, subdivision 1, Minnesota Statutes, to enter into this Agreement with the Commission; and, Whereas, The Governor of the State of Minnesota certified on July 6, 2004, that the State of Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the State) has a program for the control of radiation hazards adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials within the State covered by this Agreement, and that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for such materials; and, Whereas, The Commission found on [date] that the program of the State for the regulation of the materials covered by this Agreement is compatible with the Commission's program for the regulation of such materials and is adequate to protect public health and safety; and, Whereas, The State and the Commission recognize the desirability and importance of cooperation between the Commission and the State in the formulation of standards for protection against hazards of radiation and in assuring that State and Commission programs for protection against hazards of radiation will be coordinated and compatible; and, Whereas, The Commission and the State recognize the desirability of the reciprocal recognition of licenses, and of the granting of limited exemptions from licensing of those materials subject to this Agreement; and, Whereas, This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; Now, therefore, It is hereby agreed between the Commission and the Governor of the State acting in behalf of the State as follows: Article I Subject to the exceptions provided in Articles II, IV, and V, the Commission shall discontinue, as of the effective date of this Agreement, the regulatory authority of the Commission in the State under Chapters 6, 7, and 8, and section 161 of the Act with respect to the following materials: A. Byproduct materials as defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act; B. Source materials; C. Special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass. Article II This Agreement does not provide for discontinuance of any authority and the Commission shall retain authority and responsibility with respect to: A. The regulation of the construction and operation of any production or utilization facility or any uranium enrichment facility; B. The regulation of the export from or import into the United States of byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials, or of any production or utilization facility; C. The regulation of the disposal into the ocean or sea of byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials waste as defined in the regulations or orders of the Commission; D. The regulation of the disposal of such other byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials as the Commission from time to time determines by regulation or order should, because of the hazards or potential hazards thereof, not be so disposed without a license from the Commission; E. The evaluation of radiation safety information on sealed sources or devices containing byproduct, source, or special nuclear materials and the registration of the sealed sources or devices for distribution, as provided for in regulations or orders of the Commission. F. The regulation of the land disposal of by-product, source, or special nuclear materials waste received from other persons; G. The extraction or concentration of source material from source material ore and the management and disposal of the resulting byproduct material. Article III With the exception of those activities identified in Article II, paragraphs A through D, this Agreement may be amended, upon application by the State and approval by the Commission, to include one or more of the additional activities specified in Article II, paragraphs E, F, and G, whereby the State may then exert regulatory authority and responsibility with respect to those activities. Article IV Notwithstanding this Agreement, the Commission may from time to time by rule, regulation, or order, require that the manufacturer, processor, or producer of any equipment, device, commodity, or other product containing source, byproduct, or special nuclear materials shall not transfer possession or control of such product except pursuant to a license or an exemption from licensing issued by the Commission. Article V This Agreement shall not affect the authority of the Commission under subsection 161b or 161i of the Act to issue rules, regulations, or orders to protect the common defense and security, to protect restricted data, or to guard against the loss or diversion of special nuclear materials. Article VI The Commission will cooperate with the State and other Agreement States in the formulation of standards and regulatory programs of the State and the Commission for protection against hazards of radiation and to assure that Commission and State programs for protection against hazards of radiation will be coordinated and compatible. The State agrees to cooperate with the Commission and other Agreement States in the formulation of standards and regulatory programs of the State and the Commission for protection against hazards of radiation and to assure that the State's program will continue to be compatible with the program of the Commission for the regulation of materials covered by this Agreement. The State and the Commission agree to keep each other informed of proposed changes in their respective rules and regulations, and to provide each other the opportunity for early and substantive contribution to the proposed changes. The State and the Commission agree to keep each other informed of events, accidents, and licensee performance that may have generic implication or otherwise be of regulatory interest. Article VII The Commission and the State agree that it is desirable to provide reciprocal recognition of licenses for the materials listed in Article I licensed by the other party or by any other Agreement State. Accordingly, the Commission and the State agree to develop appropriate rules, regulations, and procedures by which such reciprocity will be accorded. Article VIII The Commission, upon its own initiative after reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State, or upon request of the Governor of the State, may terminate or suspend all or [[Page 68106]] part of this Agreement and reassert the licensing and regulatory authority vested in it under the Act if the Commission finds that (1) such termination or suspension is required to protect public health and safety, or (2) the State has not complied with one or more of the requirements of section 274 of the Act. The Commission may also, pursuant to section 274j of the Act, temporarily suspend all or part of this Agreement if, in the judgment of the Commission, an emergency situation exists requiring immediate action to protect public health and safety and the State has failed to take necessary steps. The Commission shall periodically review actions taken by the State under this Agreement to ensure compliance with section 274 of the Act which requires a State program to be adequate to protect public health and safety with respect to the materials covered by this Agreement and to be compatible with the Commission's program. Article IX This Agreement shall become effective on [date], and shall remain in effect unless and until such time as it is terminated pursuant to Article VIII. Done at [City, State] this [date] day of [month], [year]. For the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Nils J. Diaz, Chairman. For the State of Minnesota. Tim Pawlenty, Governor. [FR Doc. 05-22317 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 26 Telegraph: Nuclear power is best, say scientists A group of 150 academics and energy industry specialists concluded that in order to achieve the Government's target for reducing greenhouse gases and meet the demand for energy, Britain must replace its nuclear power stations as they reach the end of their useful lives. The report, published by the Geological Society, stated that renewable energy sources are unlikely to fill the gap left by the ageing nuclear reactors when they are decommissioned, all but one of which will be shut down by 2023. With demand for energy growing by around 0.7 per cent per year, the report said production will be 20 per cent, below peak demand by 2015. Dr John Loughead, of the UK Energy Research Centre, said at the launch of the report: "Given that we are going to lose some of the current emission-free sources and assuming we want to stick to our objectives on reducing emissions, we felt that replacement of emission-free solutions would most likely be made by nuclear. "Looking at the costs, it seems to us that renewables will play a growing role but if we are looking at securing supply over this time period [up to 2050], it is unlikely that they will provide what we need." Nuclear power stations currently supply 21.5 per cent of Britain's electricity while renewable sources such as biofuel, solar, and wind power provide 4.5 per cent. Most coal-fired power stations are unable to meet European Union emission standards and will be closed within a decade, cutting generation capacity by 35 per cent. The report also found that fossil fuels will remain our most important source of energy for the next 50 years and that measures to reduce energy demand will be vital. The authors were critical of the Government for not doing more to engage the public in the debate on future sources of energy and said that companies who are considering investing in nuclear power are unclear about the regulatory regime. Jean McSorley, of Greenpeace, said: "Plugging the energy gap with nuclear reactors should not be an option. Ten new reactors would add to the amount of highly dangerous radioactive spent fuel already held in the UK by a massive 400 per cent." © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005. Terms &Conditions ***************************************************************** 27 New Scientist: UK gearing up for nuclear revival - Technology [NewScientist.com] November 2005 IN A clear sign that the UK is gearing up to build more nuclear power stations, a Ł6.1 million research programme has been launched to investigate reactor designs. Research Councils UK wants to find ways of making reactors safer. The programme will also look at smarter ways of monitoring existing reactors and technologies for safely disposing of nuclear waste. Researchers will study the pebble-bed reactor being pioneered in South Africa, in which an inert gas such as helium circulates through hot fuel pebbles and is then used to drive a turbine. Japan's high temperature reactors will also be considered. The research councils also plan to develop ultrasound monitors to check for reactor cracks and radiation-proof sensors that can transmit key data from deep inside reactor cores. From issue 2525 of New Scientist magazine, 12 November 2005, page ***************************************************************** 28 Independent Florida Alligator: Officials insist UF nuclear reactor safe Wednesday, November 9, 2005 1:00 a.m. By JUSTIN RICHARDS Alligator Writer Almost a month after an ABC News special decried "gaping security holes" at universities' nuclear reactors, UF has not upgraded its reactor security because university officials disagree with the network's report. UF spokesman Steve Orlando said the university's nuclear-engineering department, featured in the news report, is reviewing its procedures. However, he called the ABC report flawed. "We know what we have in place is safe. There's no question of that. Sometimes it comes down to people's perception of what's safe," he said. Joe Hice, UF associate vice president for marketing and public relations, said his office received about a dozen calls from concerned parents after the Oct. 13 report. Orlando said most callers were easily calmed, but one father hung up on the person taking his call. Brian Ross, the ABC News reporter who led the investigation, said in a phone interview that UF officials are "giving a sugar-coated version of the truth." Ross said the biggest danger at UF's research reactor, which hosts routine guided tours, was its lack of security guards and metal detectors. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not require these provisions at research reactors due to their size and relatively low risk, according to the commission's Web site. Ross expressed concern about a "dirty bomb," which uses conventional explosives to spread nuclear material. He cited a 1981 report filed by UF with the federal government that imagined a worst-case scenario in which radioactive contamination spread a half-mile from the reactor. But an excerpt of the report, released by the NRC, states that the scenario is "unrealistic" and "extremely conservative and unlikely to occur under any circumstances." Ross said officials from the Department of Defense, NRC and U.S. Congress have told him university research reactors are troublesome. "It's a very real concern," Ross said, "and it's unfortunate that the University of Florida doesn't seem to want to take it seriously." But NRC spokeswoman Beth Hayden said otherwise in an interview. "ABC is trying to use this to scare people. We feel like they're perfectly safe and perfectly secure," she said. Hayden said the notion that saboteurs could access UF's nuclear material, which is underwater and beneath 50 tons of concrete, is not feasible. "Even to get to this fuel would take hours, hours of work - large cranes. And it just wouldn't happen because there would be a response by the local law enforcement," she said. For security reasons, NRC officials could neither confirm nor deny video surveillance at the reactor, but they said unauthorized activity would bring a swift, armed response. Ross said ABC has tentative plans to follow up on the report, pending further developments. Copyright © 19962005 Alligator Onlineand Campus Communications. ***************************************************************** 29 [du-list] Has the nuclear catastrophe already arrived? Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 12:11:35 -0800 http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/647/647p26.htm From Green Left Weekly, November 2, 2005. Has the nuclear catastrophe already arrived? Blowin’ in the Wind Directed by David Bradbury Limited national season commencing in Sydney and Melbourne at Dendy cinemas on October 27, other cities to follow REVIEW BY LACHLAN MALLOCH David Bradbury needs almost no introduction to Green Left Weekly readers: his lifetime of progressive film-making speaks for itself. Bradbury’s latest documentary — a film he says “you’ll never see on ‘your ABC’” — continues that tradition into perhaps his most dangerous subject yet, the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the era of the “war on terror”. In production terms it might seem modest — just under an hour long and made for the equivalent of chicken feed — but its content is breathtaking, sensational and urgent. Blowin’ in the Wind documents the increasing use of so-called “depleted uranium” (DU) in weapons around the world and forcefully reveals the devastating health and environmental effects of these “mini-nukes”. The world authority on the devastation wreaked by DU is former US Army physicist Dr Doug Rokke, who suffers from radiation sickness due to his work in Iraq after the first Gulf War. Dr Rokke is one of the heroes of this film, tirelessly campaigning around the world against the criminal use of nuclear weapons. The other great heroes are the dying children in Iraq, whose bodies are riddled with the minuscule deadly radioactive particles unleashed by US bombing 15 years ago and carried for kilometres by Iraq’s notorious, dusty winds. The condemned children stare at us as if from the other side of a great abyss. It is impossible to look at them and not feel a burning guilt and shame at the nightmare visited upon them in our name. The footage seen here, of dying children and grotesquely malformed foetuses, is not new. John Pilger’s 2000 TV documentary Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq eloquently exposed the West’s genocidal regime of economic sanctions and DU bombing in Iraq. Before the Gulf War, few babies in Iraq were born with malformations. Now there are 7-10 per day, some of them so badly mutated that they are “just pieces of flesh”. This medical nightmare can only be expected to worsen, with the US’s increasing use of DU on battlefields around the world. Yugoslavia was bombed with over 84 tonnes of DU, over 1000 tonnes were dropped on Afghanistan and Iraq was blasted with more than 2500 tonnes in the latest invasion. Bradbury’s new and sensational thesis is that these deadly nuclear winds have come to Australia and are set to blow even harder, in several ways. First, Australian military veterans are suffering from the euphemistically titled “Gulf War Syndrome” — more likely, radiation sickness. We meet Gulf War veteran Ed Grant, suffering an unexplained disease and battling the Australian government to take his case seriously. Not surprisingly he’s afraid of what poison he might have passed on to his children and eventual grandchildren. Second, Bradbury outlines the Australian government’s enthusiastic plans for dramatically expanding uranium mining here. This is a double-edged sword: we’ll be faced with increased dangers of waste storage and accidents at mine sites, as well as increasing our complicity in the proliferation of nuclear weapons, by increasing the global supply of uranium. But the centrepiece of Bradbury’s thesis is his examination of the secret treaty, or “Memorandum of Understanding”, that was signed by Australia and the US on July 7, 2004, setting the framework for intensified military cooperation between the two nations. Bradbury argues that this agreement gives a 20-year-long, virtual blank cheque to the US to use all sorts of deadly weapons, including those with DU, in their testing and training exercises on Australian soil. It is likely that nukes were used in the June 2005 Talisman Sabre exercises at beautiful Shoalwater Bay on the Queensland coast, when 11,000 US troops joined the Australian military in live aerial bombardments, doing unknown levels of damage to such a precious environmental treasure. Blowin’ in the Wind shows us that we are entering a new period in Australia’s long history of complicity with and support for imperial power, but it’s mostly taking place behind the backs of the Australian people. The extremely truncated cinematic exhibition of this film means that activists will need to work hard to make it anything more than a voice in the wilderness. It asks urgent questions that we ignore at our own peril. ------- [Visit the film’s website at .] ============== ***NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.*** --------------------------------- To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 30 NRC: NRC Ends License for Saxton Experimental Facility, Releases Site for Unrestricted Use News Release - 2005-05-152 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov www.nrc.gov No. 05-152 November 8, 2005 NRC ENDS LICENSE FOR SAXTON EXPERIMENTAL FACILITY, RELEASES SITE FOR UNRESTRICTED USE Printable Version The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has granted the request of Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation (SNEC) and GPU Nuclear to terminate the license for the Saxton nuclear facility, which closed permanently in May 1972. The NRC has determined the site is safe for unrestricted use. The facility was located in Bedford County, Penn., about 30 miles southeast of Altoona. Saxton began operations in November 1961, primarily to research various aspects of power reactor technology and to train personnel. Saxton had a net thermal power output of 23.5 megawatts. After Saxton ceased operations, its spent fuel was shipped to the Department of Energys Savannah River Site. Limited decommissioning took place at Saxton from 1972 to 1974, and the site was monitored until 1987. Support buildings and structures were decontaminated and removed between 1987 and 1992, and full-scale decommissioning started in 1998. SNEC and GPU Nuclear submitted a license termination plan to the NRC for Saxton in February 2000, and conducted cleanup and decommissioning activities until September 2005. Decommissioning activities included dismantlement of the reactor and decontamination. On Sept. 15, the licensees submitted an application to the NRC to terminate its license, indicating that they had completed radiological decommissioning and that final radiation surveys of the site show that it meets NRC criteria for decommissioning and release for unrestricted use. NRC conducted a number of on-site inspections of the licensees actions during the decommissioning process to verify that decommissioning and cleanup were being conducted as described in the license termination plan and to evaluate the quality of this activity. The agency also conducted independent measurements to verify the companys final radiation surveys. NRC has concluded that (1) dismantlement and decontamination activities were performed in accordance with the approved license termination plan, and (2) the final radiation surveys and associated documentation demonstrate the facility and site have met the criteria for decommissioning in Part 20 of the Commissions regulations. Therefore, the license has been terminated. NRC Commissioner Jeffrey S. Merrifield spoke at the public event marking the Saxton license termination, and his remarks will be available on the NRC Web site at this address: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/speeches /2005/. Last revised Tuesday, November 08, 2005 ***************************************************************** 31 Seattle Times: Downwinder's second trial gets under way in Spokane Wednesday, November 9, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 AM By NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS The Associated Press SPOKANE  An Idaho woman who contends that radiation releases from the Hanford nuclear reservation caused her thyroid cancer believes a jury will be on her side this time  an outcome that would bode well for thousands of other plaintiffs who were exposed to relatively low doses of radiation. Jury selection began Monday for the second trial for Shannon Rhodes of Coeur d'Alene. In May, a federal-court jury deadlocked over whether her health problems were caused by the emissions during the early days of Cold War production of nuclear weapons. Rhodes' cancer, which had been in remission, returned during the first trial, but defense attorneys for federal contractors insisted that jurors not be told that. Rhodes believes the information about her cancer returning, and the fact that the jury will be presented with only one case this time rather than six as in the previous trial, will work in her favor. "I think it was very confusing for the jury last time, having so many," Rhodes said outside the courtroom. "I am optimistic." In the first trial, Rhodes was one of six so-called "bellwether" plaintiffs who were considered representatives of thousands who had been exposed to Hanford releases. The lawsuit was filed in 1990 on behalf of those so-named downwinders who sued the private companies that ran Hanford's plutonium factories during World War II and the early days of the Cold War. The case did not reach the trial stage until earlier this year. Of the six bellwether plaintiffs, two who suffered from thyroid cancer were awarded a combined total of about $500,000 after the jury decided their illnesses were "more likely than not" caused by Hanford radiation. The jury rejected the claims of three others with autoimmune thyroid disease, saying their illnesses likely were not caused by Hanford's emissions of radioactive iodine-131, a byproduct of plutonium production. The jury deadlocked 10-2 in Rhodes' case, so U.S. District Judge William Nielsen declared a mistrial. Among the thyroid-cancer cases, Rhodes had the lowest estimated Hanford radiation dose, 6.9 rads of iodine-131. A jury verdict in Rhodes' favor would be good news for thousands of other plaintiffs with radiation doses under 10 rads. Richard Eymann, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, has said the government's liability could reach $2 billion in the remaining 2,300 cases. Defense attorney Kevin Van Wart has said he expects many of the remaining cases to be rejected. Rhodes, who grew up near Colfax, Whitman County, drank milk from the family's cows during the years of Hanford's largest iodine-131 emissions in the mid-1940s. Children were most at risk from the radiation, which fell on grass that was consumed by cows. Rhodes' left thyroid lobe was removed in 1978, and she was told it was a benign tumor. Cancer was detected again after she and her husband retired and moved to Coeur d'Alene from Seattle five years ago. She had three more cancer surgeries and joined the downwinders' lawsuit in 2003. Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company ***************************************************************** 32 Hawk Eye: Controlled burns planned at IAAP Tuesday, November 8, 2005 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST MIDDLETOWN — If you can't stand the heat, stay out of ... Line 7? The environmental cleanup at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant flares up again next week with several controlled burns planned on the abandoned production line to eliminate hidden explosives. According to a plant press release, "thermal decontamination" of nearly 30 buildings could begin as early as Monday. Dunnage — wood pallets and other clean–burning material — will be stacked in the buildings and set alight. When temperatures inside hit 500 degrees Fahrenheit, all explosive chemicals will be neutralized. Plexus Scientific Corp., a subcontractor to environmental company Tetra Tech, is tasked with the decontamination. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources already has evaluated potential air pollution hazards and has given the go–ahead. The fires may only be set under ideal weather conditions. Line 7 sits near the center of the 19,000–acre plant, about one mile from the chain–link fence marking the perimeter. Plexus crews removed 75 tons of asbestos from the line in recent weeks in preparation for the thermal decontamination. The job doesn't end with Line 7. Five more abandoned lines are candidates for demolition. The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com ***************************************************************** 33 New Scientist: If a nuclear convoy should crash… - News [NewScientist.com] + 12 November 2005 Rob Edwards Y + Magazine issue 2525 Simulations of accidents involving nuclear weapons reveal the UK authorities are not fully prepared to protect its population from radiation exposure SIMULATIONS of accidents involving nuclear weapons have revealed that the UK authorities were not fully prepared to protect people from being exposed to radioactivity, according to confidential reports obtained by New Scientist. The revelations come in the wake of reports that the UK is considering replacing its existing generation of nuclear warheads, which are attached to submarine-launched Trident missiles. Because the warheads need to be constantly refurbished, batches are shuttled by road convoy several times a year between the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston in Berkshire and the Royal Naval Armament Depot at Coulport in Dumbartonshire. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) regularly runs exercises to evaluate how the armed forces, emergency services and local authorities would respond to accidents en route. The exercises imagine crashes in which trucks carrying nuclear bombs burn, explode and scatter plutonium downwind. In response to a request from New Scientist under the Freedom of Information ... The complete article is 727 words long. To continue reading this article, subscribe to New Scientist. Get 4 ***************************************************************** 34 CurryPilot.com: RADIATION: VETERAN STRUGGLES WITH FALLOUT Published: November 9, 2005 Al Larton, after many years, tons of paperwork and with the help of a radiation survivors group, was awarded $75,000 from the U.S. government to cover some of his medical costs. Photo illustration by Joseph Friedrichs and Scott Graves By Joseph Friedrichs Pilot staff writer He remembers the blasts as deafening. Although his memory isn't quite what it used to be, he says, the image from the atomic blasts that took place more than 50 years ago are still as clear as the moment he first saw them. Al Larton, 74, is a retired military serviceman living in Brookings. He is suffering from radiation poisoning. His work with government testing of atom bombs (A-bombs), has left him with colon cancer, cancer of the ear and other health problems, he says. He is now a member of the National Association of Radiation Survivors (NARS), a national, non-profit organization whose members are mostly U.S citizens exposed to ionizing radiation from nuclear weapons and nuclear waste. NARS was created in 1982 by a group who believed that all radiation survivors needed to work together in order to demonstrate the wrath created by the nuclear weapons and nuclear power programs.  The original goal for NARS was to obtain health care or compensation for those who became sick. NARS has grown from its original 17 founding members to a membership of more than 11,000. Larton was a 21-year-old U.S. Navy airman in the Air Transport Squadron Three at an air station in Moffett Field, Calif., when he took part in the atomic testing. His unit transported samples of radioactive debris from the Enewetak Islands and Marshall Islands to the stateside sites of Kirtland and Travis Air Force bases. During this time, Larton says he was exposed to the in-flight radiation from the samples. He was also exposed during the detonation of multiple A-bombs at the Enewetak Islands. In the years that followed the tests, all of the information Larton possessed was top secret material. He could have faced prison time had he released any of the information, until he was out of the military for ten years. Larton retired from the military in 1956. "You do these kind of things and everyone is hush-hush," he says. "We didn't know anything." The personnel involved did know that their work was far from average military testing. In-depth background checks by the government about a top pilot to the men seated in the back of the plane were conducted. "You got an idea that you weren't going to a birthday party after a while," he says. During tests, which were being performed on a string of desolate islands in the south Pacific, the military personnel were given only a pair of flimsy goggles and some ear plugs. He and his fellow servicemen were placed in trenches as the bombs were detonated. Military officials told them not to look at the blast or move from the trenches until the heat wave from the explosion had passed. "We were too curious," Larton says. "We had to look. We were all young fellas who wanted to be involved with the action." Larton remembers a giant mushroom cloud forming in the sky, followed by immense heat and clouds of debris. A group of soldiers positioned on a ship nearby the islands was standing with their backs to a deck wall when one of the A-bombs was detonated. Larton says the force of the blast and rush of debris in their direction left a perfect outline of their bodies on the paint of the ship. "It's hard to explain," he says. "It was crazy." The islands where the tests were conducted are simply no longer there, Larton says. The power of the A-bomb wiped them off the map. Drone planes were sent through the mushroom cloud to collect samples of the air after a bomb had gone off. There proved to be traces of radiation in those collected samples, but no one knew how bad the long-term effects from the bombs would be, Larton says. The past 50 years have been painfully honest about the long-range health consequences of exposure to radiation and about the amount of radioactive residue left in the ground, water and atmosphere. Because of the testing and use of nuclear weapons by several nations, in addition to accidental leaks of radioactive material, everyone on the planet could be considered a radiation survivor, NARS officials say. The military personnel were exposed to high levels of radiation. A majority of those who were exposed to these high levels have experienced various forms of cancer, heart problems and immune deficiency disorders. During World War II, Larton served in the European Theater of Operation (ETO). There were two bombs dropped on Japan by U.S. military personnel in the Pacific Theater during the war. Larton did not take part in the dropping of the A-bomb during the war. He has mixed feelings to the choice made by the U.S. to drop the bomb. "Dropping the bombs is one of the keys to our nation being as safe as it was," he says. "It's extremely sad that innocent people had to die for the cause, though." The bombs killed millions of Japanese people. Mothers, children, the elderly; there was no escape from the A-bomb. "Sometimes I question it," Larton says. "What good did it do? What purpose did it serve?" There were a quarter-million American service men and women exposed to ionizing radiation, either in the occupation and cleanup of Hiroshima and Nagasaki or in the more than 200 atmospheric tests of nuclear weapons conducted by the U.S. between 1942 and 1962. For years after his departure from the military, Larton never noticed any health effects due to his exposure to radiation. In the 1980s he started to notice his health was failing. He visited a doctor who was amazed at the amount of radiation in his body. He was diagnosed with colon cancer in 2003. At the time, Larton was struggling with not only his health, but with the income to cover his medical bills. Efforts made by Larton and his associates at NARS helped him receive compensation from the government. A tremendous amount of paperwork and letters back and forth between Larton, doctors and various governmental agencies took years to complete. On Sept. 13, 2004, more than 50 years after the nuclear testing, Larton was give $75,000 by the U.S. Department of Justice. The compensation came under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. The money will give Larton and his wife a chance to enjoy their time together without worrying about finances, he says. "It's a little late," he says. "But I'll take it." This Veteran's Day, Friday, Nov. 11, Larton says he doesn't have any big plans. He will pause to reflect on the impact his years of service for his country have had on his life. Larton recently purchased a new home where he plans to spend the rest of his life. Healthwise, he says he has good days and bad, like most people his age. "I think I'll be all right for a while," he says. "I hope." Curry Coastal Pilot is a community newspaper serving Curry County on the Southern Oregon Coast from Brookings, Oregon. Your comments are welcome at mail@currypilot.comor PO Box 700, Brookings, Oregon, 97415. Phone: (541) 469-3123. Fax: (541) 469-4679 © Copyright 2000-2005 Western Communications, Inc. ***************************************************************** 35 Times-News: Employees evacuated from Idaho nuclear lab after propane leak November 10, 2005 • Twin Falls, Idaho Nov 9, 3:30 AM EST By CHRISTOPHER SMITH Associated Press Writer BOISE, Idaho (AP) -- Crews fixed a leaky propane line in a radioactive waste treatment plant on the federal Idaho National Laboratory site after approximately 650 employees were evacuated. No injuries were reported and officials said there was never a chance the incident could lead to a radiation release. After spending most of Tuesday trying to determine the source of the leak in the piping assembly that delivers fuel to the building's space heating system from a pair of external 1,000-gallon propane tanks, repair crews were able to stop the leak and return the facility 65 miles northwest of Idaho Falls to normal operations. "They did seal it off, and are just monitoring now to make sure there is no reoccurence," said Tom McKay, a spokesman for CWI, the contractor for the Department of Energy's Idaho Cleanup Project at the eastern Idaho compound. "At this point in time, the next morning's shift is expected to report for work as scheduled." According to surveys of combustible levels of gas taken during the leak, no detectable readings of propane were found beyond 100 yards from the structure. Even if the propane had been accidentally ignited, officials said the resulting explosion would not have dispersed radioactive material into the atmosphere. The 177-acre Radioactive Waste Management Complex handles the cleanup of buried Cold War-era defense nuclear waste and low-level radioactive waste, but the excavated radioactive material is isolated from the facility where the propane leak was discovered. "The chances of a radiological episode are none whatsoever," said Ray Grant of the Idaho Cleanup Project. The leak occurred in a pipe connecting two 1,000-gallon propane tanks that fuel the space heating system inside the Accelerated Retrieval Project facility in the southwestern corner of the 890-square-mile federal research area. Officials initially thought one of the tanks had been filled beyond capacity and had begun venting excess propane into the air. "It turned out to be more serious than we first believed," said McKay. The first attempt Tuesday afternoon to repair the leaking pipe failed, so crews withdrew from the building and undertook a second attempt that shut off the gas leak that succeeded shortly before 5 p.m. MST. Investigators were working Tuesday night to determine the cause of the leak. The 350 employees at the Accelerated Retrieval Project facility were evacuated from the building to a parking lot about 500 yards away when the leak was first discovered early Tuesday. An additional 300 employees from the nearby Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project facility were also evacuated to the parking lot. Around noon, officials decided to send all but the emergency response crews home for the day. "It just basically made no sense to have them standing around while the investigation of the leak was under way," Grant said. The evening shift of employees at the waste management complex was told not to report for work Tuesday night. The Idaho Cleanup Project is removing tons of plutonium-contaminated debris and other radioactive waste from pits and trenches and shipping it to a permanent underground repository in New Mexico. The propane leak was discovered a day after a conference committee approved a fiscal 2006 spending bill expected to pass both houses of Congress this week giving INL a $50 million increase in funding above President Bush's initial $510 million request for the Idaho site. Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, a member of the House and Senate conference committee that hammered out details of the final spending bill, said INL's good safety record and reputation for security have been factors in the willingness of Congress to steer more projects to the Idaho site. "I think the safety record at INL has been fantastic and when problems do come up as this one did with the propane leak, they are professionals and handle things as they should," said Simpson. © 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy. Copyright © 2005, Lee Publications Inc. Magicvalley.com is an on-line division of The Times-News, ***************************************************************** 36 AU ABC: Campaigner leaves Maralinga record 7.30 Report - 09/11/2005: Australian Broadcasting Corporation 7.30 Report Broadcast: 09/11/2005 Reporter: Mike Sexton KERRY O'BRIEN: At the height of the Cold War, Maralinga, in the South Australian outback, served as a testing ground for British atomic weapons. While the radioactive fallout has now been cleaned up, there have been persistent claims that servicemen who worked there were left carrying a deadly legacy. Despite the hazards they faced, nuclear veterans never received the entitlements given to many other servicemen and women because they didn't serve in a theatre of war. Now, with their numbers dwindling, one long-time campaigner has decided to leave a record of what he and others went through at Maralinga and other nuclear test sites. Mike Sexton reports. DR ROGER CROSS, RETIRED FELLOW, UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE: They were naive. They were young. They had little or no understanding of the effects of radiation on their bodies. MIKE SEXTON: It's been half a century since the last atomic bomb was detonated at Maralinga, but for the men who worked at the weapons range the shockwaves are still reverberating. AVON HUDSON, AUSTRALIAN NUCLEAR VETERANS ASSOCIATION: You are living with a time bomb inside of you, perhaps. Waiting for it to manifest itself in a disease like cancer or leukaemia or whatever. And it's a bit like living on death row waiting for the final sentence, as I put it. MIKE SEXTON: Avon Hudson was a 23-year-old RAAF leading aircraftsman when he arrived at Maralinga in 1960. By then the British had stopped testing A-bombs and, instead, had begun what became known as the minor trials at the old bomb sites. AVON HUDSON: I had no idea when I went out to this site, nor did the chaps that I was working with, know that there had been a boom exploded there. And we set up these experiments and starting building these heavy steel firing platforms just 200 metres from ground zero. MIKE SEXTON: While not as spectacular as the atmospheric tests, the minor trials were far dirtier with experimental blasts scattering beryllium, uranium and plutonium across the desert. The most polluted site of all was Taranaki. When Avon Hudson worked there he saw scientists wearing protective clothing, but the closest he ever came to being warned about the potential dangers of the work was a conversation with a so-called boffin. AVON HUDSON: He did indicate to me once that there was a hazard down there. "You shouldn't spend any more time than you needed to." That was the only indication that I was ever given from anybody in those sort of positions that there might have been something - some danger. But then at the time I never took much notice of it. DR ROGER CROSS: Eventually a few of them like Hudson began to question that, "Why are they dressed up like mummies when we're having fun in our shirt sleeves or down to the waist?" You see. So as soon as you kind of look at the difference you understand (a) their naivety and (b) the duplicity of the British and Australian governments in this whole affair. MIKE SEXTON: Avon Hudson is one of more than 10,000 servicemen who took part in the nuclear tests. Since the 1980s when he helped form the National Nuclear Veterans Association, he's fought to lift the veil of secrecy surrounding the tests and gain recognition for the men who worked there. AVON HUDSON: Many died early on after leaving Maralinga from various complaints, mainly radiation-induced cancers and leukaemias and the like. Some committed suicide, for instance. DE-ANNE KELLY, MINISTER FOR VETERANS AFFAIRS: Veterans' Affairs so far has paid out some $5,000 to eight ex-serving personnel who've made successful claims, related to their participation in the nuclear tests. MIKE SEXTON: While some individuals have been compensated, the nuclear veterans believe they should all be entitled to benefits under Commonwealth laws covering those who've served in workplaces deemed hazardous. Australian governments have never classified Maralinga as a hazardous workplace. But five years ago then science minister Nick Minchin celebrated a $100 million clean-up of the site paid for by the British. NICK MINCHIN, SCIENCE MINISTER (MARCH 2000): Obviously, when atomic weapons were developed no-one really knew how dangerous they were or how dangerous it would be to deal with them. Now we do know and I think it is terrific that we've accepted the responsibility to clean up the mess that was created. MIKE SEXTON: The most recent inquiry into veterans' entitlements, the Clarke Review, released in February 2003 concluded that "by commonsense and by any reasonable measure service in the test operations must be regarded as involving hazards beyond those of normal peacetime duties," adding that, "natural justice for these members is long overdue." DE-ANNE KELLY: As a result of the Clarke Review last year, the Government committed that they'd would respond positively to the findings of this current health study. We intend to do that and make sure that those who are affected receive their full and just entitlements. MIKE SEXTON: The health report that the minister is referring to is divided into two parts. The first is a mortality study. In effect, finding out who has died and why. The second is a dose reconstruction committee, whose task it is to decide what amounts of radiation those at Maralinga were exposed to. Now the results of this health study should decide what, if anything, the veterans are entitled to. But after more than 40 years and four inquiries, including a royal commission, Avon Hudson is deeply cynical about the process. AVON HUDSON: Successive governments have ordered another inquiry or another committee to be set up. Sometimes they take three to five years. That's another three to five years. In that time another 10 per cent of the veterans are dead. Well, given another five years, there won't be any of us left, quite frankly. DE-ANNE KELLY: There's no intention at all to stall. We want to find out about the health of those who participated in the nuclear tests here in Australia as quickly as we can. MIKE SEXTON: At 68, Avon Hudson knows his time is running out. He wants to leave a record of the experiences of those at Maralinga and other nuclear test sites. He's co-written a book detailing some of the veterans' stories. Royalties from which will be used to build a memorial to those who lived and worked there. AVON HUDSON: This will be the last great effort I make because I'm getting too tired and worn out. After that, I don't know what can happen. KERRY O'BRIEN: That report from Mike Sexton. ***************************************************************** 37 NRC Rejects Petition Calling for More Protection of Nuclear Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 12:08:41 -0800 Subject: NRC Rejects Public Petition Calling for More Protection of Nuclear Waste Stored in Vulnerable Storage Pools on Reactor Roof Tops Nuclear Security Coalition For Immediate Release: November 8, 2005 Contact: Eric Epstein, TMIA, 717-541-1101 Paul Gunter, NIRS, 202-328-0002 NRC Rejects Public Petition Calling for More Protection of Nuclear Waste Stored in Vulnerable Storage Pools on Reactor Roof Tops Washington, DC- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staff issued its final decision on November 7, 2005 in essence dismissing a petition calling for emergency enforcement action to address the vulnerability to a terrorist attack of high-level radioactive waste currently stored in storage pools located on top of 32 U.S. nuclear reactor buildings in 15 states. The NRC Staff Denial will hold unless the NRC 5-member Commission reviews and overturns the staffąs decision within 25 days. The Coalition filed an appeal to the Commission today asking for review. The Nuclear Security Coalition filed their original Petition for Emergency Enforcement on August 10, 2004. It focused on the extreme vulnerability to terrorist attack of 32 General Electric Mark I & II Boiling Water Reactors whose design locates storage pools for highly radioactive łspent nuclear fuel˛ in the attic of the reactor building, outside primary containment, under sheet metal roofs - vulnerable from 3 sides. łIt is disturbing that the NRC is more worried about security cost containment to protect industry than radiation containment to protect people,˛ said Paul Gunter, Director of the Reactor Watchdog Project for the Washington, DC-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service.˛ The NRC is attempting to conceal the fact that a large release of radioactivity as the result of a terrorist attack on these structures is entirely possible according to a congressionally mandated study by the National Academy of Sciences,˛ he added. The petition called for immediate steps to decrease vulnerability and, like the National Academy, for independent site specific analysis. Specifically, the Petitioners requested that NRC take 5 actions. The NRC claims to have in effect granted 2 of those actions; however the Petitioners do not see it that way ­ in substance, all actions were denied. łBefore 9/11 the Federal Government listed a hurricane strike on New Orleans as one of the three most likely catastrophic disasters facing America. After 9/11, President Bush, CIA, 9/11 Commission, and the National Academy of Sciences listed nuclear reactors as prime terrorist targets vulnerable to attack - - all bad, some worse because of the location of their fuel pools,˛ stated Eric Epstein, TMI Alert. Eric added. łAgain the experts warned about nuclear reactors and told the government what to do; again they were ignored. The Federal Government took no adequate preventative actions to avert disaster in New Orleans and it looks like none will be taken here.˛ Request for NRC Commission Review The Coalition submitted an appeal today to the Commission to review and overturn the NRC staffąs denial. The appeal cited inherent procedural and substantive flaws in the staffąs review process and decision; and also asked the Commission to direct the NRC staff to hold a public meeting with the Nuclear Security Coalition to review the basis for their decision. Substantive Flaws: Standard of Review The Directorąs denial is improper. The Petitioners contentions are factually supported by the National Academy of Sciences recent report, Safety & Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage - a report mandated by Congress and paid by taxpayers. Therefore it is now the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Academy, and by extension those of the Petitioners, that are presumed to be correct - not NRCąs. A standard of review requires that NRC demonstrate with facts, not as they did in their denial with broad brushed opinions, that no reasonable person could have reached the same conclusions as did the Academyąs panel of experts and by extension the Petitioners. Procedural Issues The staff based their final decision on a review of perhaps only some, not all, of the comments submitted on the Proposed Directorąs Decision. Nobody knows, including the NRC, how many of the total submitted was reviewed by the staff or how many were lost -- a serious flaw. _______________________________________________________________ The NRC Director's Decision is available on NRCąs Electronic Library- Accession Number łML051960343;˛ the Petition is available on Adams ­Ascension Number łML042370023,˛and, the Coalitionąs appeal is attached. APPENDIX U.S. Commercial Reactors with Elevated Radioactive Fuel Storage Pools GE Boiling Water Reactors - Mark I Containments (24 Units) Browns Ferry 1,2 &3 - Decatur, AL Brunswick 1&2 - Southport, NC Cooper - Brownville, NB Dresden 2&3 - Morris, Ill Duane Arnold - Palo, IA Edwin hatch 1&2 ­ Baxley, GA Fermi 2- Monroe, MI Hope Creek- Artificial Island, NJ Fitzpatrick ­ Scriba, NY Millstone 1- Waterford, CT Monticello ­ Monticello, MN Nine Mile Point Unit 1- Scriba, NY Oyster Creek- Lacey Township, NJ Peach Bottom 2&3- Delta, PA Pilgrim I ­ Plymouth, MA Quad Cities 1&2 ­ Cordover, IL Vermont Yankee ­ Vernon, VT General Electric Boiling Water Reactor- Mark II Containments (8 units) LaSalle 1&2 ­Seneca, IL Limerick 1&2- Pottstown, PA Nine mile Point Unit 2- Scriba, NY Susquehanna 1&2 ­ Berwick, PA WNP-2 - Columbia Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\clip_image001.gif" Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\2.206 BWR Request to NRC Commission to Review Staff Decision 11.05.doc" ***************************************************************** 38 Deseret News: Nuclear waste battle in D.C. court [deseretnews.com] Wednesday, November 9, 2005 And Reid supports effort to block storage at Skull Valley site By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News Utah on Tuesday asked the nation's second-highest court to revoke federal approval of a proposal to store high-level nuclear waste in the state. Also on Tuesday, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced he is throwing his support behind a move in Congress to block the Private Fuel Storage facility proposed for Skull Valley, Tooele County. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, also took action Tuesday against PFS, telling company officials they should look for alternatives to Skull Valley. The triple attack comes a week after Hatch released letters of opposition to PFS by a Bureau of Land Management official, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Hatch himself. The last was sent to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Utah is petitioning the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C., "for review of all issues related to NRC's licensing proceeding for storage up to 4,000 casks of spent nuclear fuel" on land owned by the Skull Valley Band of the Goshute Indians, according to the state Attorney General's Office. Because this is a state appeal of an environmental issue and not an ordinary lawsuit, it skips the district court level and goes straight to the appeals court. The only court higher is the U.S. Supreme Court. Utah is asking the court to "declare that the NRC's decisions relating to the PFS license application are arbitrary and capricious and inconsistent with applicable law; (and) direct the NRC to revoke any license" granted to the facility. An accident, malfunction or negligence at the plant could cause significant harm to Utah, its citizens and the environment, the petition states. Citing several specific "defects" with the process, the petition asserts that NRC board members didn't act according to their own earlier rulings and didn't offer any explanation why. Also, it charges, the board and NRC failed to follow NRC regulations or federal statutes, failed to consider important evidence that would have changed the outcome of various decisions, violated Utah's due process rights and committed other errors. The petition also contends: • The board and commission held that "PFS was not required to consider the environmental effects of a terrorist attack" on the plant. • State fears about an accident "from a crashing aircraft or bomb" at the storage facility were not given enough credence. Thousands of Air Force F-16s, some carrying live ordnance, fly over the site every year en route to the Utah Test and Training Range where "pilots engage in war maneuvers and weapons testing," the petition notes. • The possibility that the DOE will not collect and transport waste for the proposed permanent repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., "unless it is first unsealed and repackaged elsewhere," implying that "elsewhere" is Skull Valley. The petition was submitted by Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff; several staffers in his office: Denise Chancellor, Fred G. Nelson, James R. Soper and Connie Nakahara; and Washington, D.C., lawyers working for the state: Roy T. Englert Jr. and Noah Messing. Meanwhile, Reid landed a stinging political blow against the storage plant, declaring in a news release that he is casting his lot with Utah against PFS and is dropping his opposition to a proposal to create a new wilderness area near the Skull Valley site. Wilderness designation could prevent the storage plant from opening. "Reid has traditionally opposed the provision (to create a wilderness area) out of concerns it would set a bad precedent for future wilderness designation," the release states. "But, after a recent conversation with Utah's Sen. Robert Bennett, Reid agreed to set aside his concerns." In a state where the federal government controls 80 percent of the land, Reid believes Congress "must be very careful in how we approach wilderness designation," according to the release. "While I continue to have concerns about the Cedar Mountain wilderness proposal," Reid states, "of even greater concern is the threat posed by deadly nuclear waste. With the proposed Goshute nuclear waste site moving forward, timing has become critical, and the state of Utah will need every available resource to fight this project." Hatch said he and DOE deputy secretary Clay Sell are pointing out to the majority owners of PFS — Xcel Energy, according to a Hatch statement — that they should look elsewhere for alternative sites. Hatch said in a press release that Xcel Energy CEO Dick Kelly and company president Paul Bonavia attended a meeting where he told them "I will pull out every stop" to block the PFS plan. He noted that he thinks progress is being made and that "we're very close to the point where we can move past the private Skull Valley plan and focus instead on a national policy for the interim storage of our spent nuclear fuel." Hatch said he believes Xcel Energy "understands that the (Bush) administration and I have laid out an impassible minefield that PFS should not want to or even try to run through." E-mail: bau@desnews.com © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company [ /] ***************************************************************** 39 Guardian Unlimited: House Cuts Funding for Yucca Mountain From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday November 9, 2005 9:01 PM By ANDREW TAYLOR Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The House voted Wednesday to cut the budget for the troubled Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump well below this year's level and President Bush's request. At the same time, lawmakers again rejected Bush's proposal to curb spending on water projects undertaken by the Army Corps of Engineers. But the president fared much better on his plans to send astronauts to Mars. The moves came as the House adopted, by a 399-17 vote, a final House-Senate compromise on a $30.5 billion energy and water spending bill for the budget year that began Oct. 1. Reflecting tight budget times, the bill is $750 million below this year's levels. In rapid succession, the House adopted a second $57.9 billion compromise measure funding the budgets for the departments of Commerce, Justice and State, awarding a $260 million budget increase to NASA, funding Bush's plan to send astronauts back to the Moon and on to Mars. The Commerce, Justice and State bill passed by a 397-19 vote. The programs funded by the bill would receive a 3 percent increase over 2005 funding levels. The FBI won a 10 percent budget increase but state and local governments would receive a 10 percent cut in law enforcement grants. Bush had sought far deeper cuts. Negotiators on that measure also killed a House provision to block the FBI from routinely gaining access under the Patriot Act to library materials and bookstore sales. But a renewal of the Patriot Act before year's end is likely to achieve the same purpose. The Yucca nuclear waste repository would be funded at $450 million for the 2006 budget year, $127 million below the level for each of the past two years. Bill negotiators also ditched a controversial House plan to supplement Yucca with interim storage sites for nuclear waste. The final figure was also less than the House and the Senate passed during earlier debates. More delays in the oft-delayed project caused lawmakers to curb Yucca Mountain's budget. Those cuts helped free up funds for the Corps of Engineers, which received $5.6 billion, $1 billion above Bush's request. That includes $8 million requested by Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., for the Corps to design a plan to bring south Louisiana up to Category Five hurricane protection. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 40 Las Vegas SUN: Federal judge dismisses Indian tribe suit against nuclear dump Today: November 09, 2005 at 18:32:31 PST By KEN RITTER ASSOCIATED PRESS LAS VEGAS (AP) - An Indian tribe will try again to get a federal judge to stop plans for a national nuclear waste dump in Nevada based on a 19th century treaty after its initial lawsuit was dismissed, a lawyer for the tribe said Wednesday. The Western Shoshone National Council will appeal a ruling that the U.S. government had sovereign immunity from the tribe's lawsuit, the Las Vegas federal court lacked jurisdiction, and the case was premature because the Yucca Mountain project has not been built, said Robert Hager, a Reno-based lawyer who represents the tribe. "The U.S. government has spent $8 billion and hollowed out a sacred mountain, yet the court found that the government's actions are still merely 'hypothetical,'" said Hager, who received notice of U.S. District Judge Philip Pro's ruling this week. A spokeswoman for the Justice Department, which had argued the government's case, declined immediate comment. An Energy Department official in Las Vegas said Yucca Mountain project administrators welcomed the ruling. It came two days after congressional lawmakers agreed to slash the 2006 budget for development of the repository to $450 million from $577 million - just the latest in a series of setbacks that have included a required court-ordered rewrite of radiation safety standards and an investigation into possible falsification of scientific data. The tribe filed suit March 4, citing the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863. Tribal members said the treaty allows only specified uses of Western Shoshone ancestral lands - including settlements, mining, ranching, agriculture, railroads, roads and communication routes. They maintained that entombing 77,000 tons of the nation's most radioactive nuclear waste was not among the approved uses. The same judge in May declined the tribe's request for an injunction to stop the federal government from applying to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an operating license and from planning a railroad line across Nevada to reach the $58 billion repository. In his ruling filed Nov. 1, Pro rejected outright the tribe's contention that it had standing to sue the government because the two parties were equal signatories to the 1863 treaty. The treaty recognized vast stretches of territory in present-day Nevada, California, Utah and Idaho as Western Shoshone tribal land. However, an Indian Claims Commission decided in 1946 that the tribe lost the land through "gradual encroachment." The date for opening the Yucca Mountain project 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas has been pushed back from 2010 to 2012 or later after the Energy Department postponed submitting an application for an operating license to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "The challenged actions in this case are not final because the decision-making process regarding whether Yucca Mountain will become a nuclear repository is not completed," the judge said. "Additionally, (the Energy Department) has not completed its decision-making process regarding methods for transporting waste to Yucca Mountain, should it be licensed." --- On the Net: Western Shoshone Defense Project: http://www.wsdp.org/ Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 41 Las Vegas SUN: Neighbors of toxic Nevada mine want ARCO to pay for fence Today: November 09, 2005 at 16:8:33 PST By SCOTT SONNER ASSOCIATED PRESS WEED HEIGHTS, Nev. (AP) - Neighbors of a toxic mine site in northern Nevada want to know why an oil company responsible for its cleanup won't fence off nearly 6 square miles of old tailings and waste ponds. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed that Atlantic Richfield Co., a subsidiary of BP America Inc., erect fences at the former Anaconda copper mine and pay for 24-hour security to keep people off the site that's contaminated with uranium, arsenic and various heavy metals. While the company has agreed to put up only a limited amount of barbed wire, Atlantic Richfield's new project manager told residents he would reconsider their requests. ARCO has argued any security costs should be covered by the Bureau of Land Management. The BLM, which issued a federal closure order in April that subjects trespassers to a $1,000 fine, owns about half the 3,600-acre mine site. Tests last summer found unusually high levels of radiation in soil samples at the mine that borders Yerington 65 miles southeast of Reno. Earlier groundwater tests showed high concentrations of uranium, apparently from the chemical processing of the copper. Atlantic Richfield has been providing free bottled water to more than 100 neighboring households as a precaution. More fencing and round-the-clock security are proposed in a unilateral order EPA is preparing as the first step toward cleanup after the federal agency assumed the oversight role from the state this year. Atlantic Richfield, a former owner of the mine, is responsible for the cleanup because the most recent owner, Arimetco Inc., filed for bankruptcy in 1997 and abandoned it in 2000. The company plans to install 2.2 miles of barbed wire fence around the most contaminated areas but has rejected residents' calls for an 8-foot-tall cyclone perimeter fence, which BLM estimates would cost at least $1 million. Neighbors pressed Atlantic Richfield at a meeting Tuesday to take responsibility for security and fence most of the site's 14-mile perimeter. "This is such a petty issue for somebody like BP," said Ken Pollard, who lives next to the mine which produced copper for about 30 years until 1978. "BP is always saying how consumer friendly they are, how wonderful they are in all these TV ads I keep seeing," Pollard said. "For them to continue to drag their feet, it's mind boggling." Dietrick McGinnis, a consultant for the Yerington Paiute Tribe, said the fence cost likely will be only 1 percent or 2 percent of overall cleanup costs that could reach hundreds of millions of dollars. "If you were concerned about the community as they have maintained all along, wouldn't you immediately restrict access to the site?" he asked. One resident showed photographs she took of three boys who climbed through existing barbed wire and onto a large tailings pile. "Barbed wire fencing is to keep out cows. We're concerned about our children," Peggy Pauly said. Pauly said she telephoned the sheriff's office about the boys, as she had been instructed by BLM, but was told deputies were powerless. Lyon County Sheriff's Lt. Pat Soukup said Tuesday that his office has no jurisdiction at the mine, nor any authority to enforce federal law. The deputies also lack the safety equipment and uniforms BLM requires workers to wear on certain parts of the mine. "As far as being an essential part of your security, we are not. We are ill-prepared to do anything," Soukup said. Craig Smith, BLM's acting project manager, said deputies had been instructed to contact BLM agents about trespassing, and he will meet with the sheriff to clarify jurisdiction and policy. Robert Boyce of the Yerington Paiute Tribe said concerns about security were raised five years ago and nothing has been done. "My concern is that security is basically a minor issue. If it takes us this long to deal with minor issues, then how long is it going to take to address major issues at the mine?" Roy Thun, ARCO's project manager, said residents' concerns are legitimate. "You make good points. Your comments are genuine, both about mine security and against BP's ads," Thun said. "I can't promise anything. I need to go back and talk with our folks a little bit more. ... 14 miles of fencing is not going to happen overnight even if we decide to do it." Libby Vianu, regional representative for the Centers for Disease Control's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, said it was "irresponsible" to leave the security question unresolved. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 42 AP Wire: Utah asks court to reject nuclear dump | 11/09/2005 | PAUL FOY Associated Press SALT LAKE CITY - Utah asked a federal appeals court on Wednesday to overturn the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval of a nuclear waste storage site in the state's western desert. The petition, filed by lawyers in Washington, D.C., challenges a license authorized but not yet issued by the commission. It allows a group of nuclear-power utilities to stockpile 44,000 tons of spent fuel rods at the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation, about 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. Gov. Jon Huntsman directed lawyers to file the petition, which was filed at the District of Columbia U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. "We're just going to keep fighting as hard as we can until it's dead," the governor's general counsel, Mike Lee, said Wednesday. The commission authorized the license in September for Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of utilities, rejecting Utah's arguments that the site was too dangerous. Lee said the petition asserts the commission underestimated the risk of a fighter jet crashing into the site and releasing radiation. Hill Air Force Base uses Skull Valley as a flight path to a training range in Utah's western desert. Utah's petition also argues that Private Fuel Storage plans to keep spent nuclear fuel rods in welded steel casks that won't be accepted for storage at Nevada's Yucca Mountain, where the Energy Department is working to open a federal repository for nuclear waste. Private Fuel Storage plans to use Skull Valley as a temporary way station for nuclear waste pending work at Yucca Mountain. "All along we have encouraged the state of Utah to do what they need to do in protesting this project because we have always said, 'If it's not deemed to be safe, then it won't be built,'" said Bruce Whitehead, a spokesman for the utility consortium. "But we have passed every criteria, every test, put up by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We have proven all of our points along the way. Our opposition really has yet to prove their points." Huntsman has vowed to "stop at nothing" to keep the nuclear waste out of Utah. "We are urging Congress, the Bush administration, and the courts not to let PFS force us to accept nuclear waste that we didn't produce, we don't want and shouldn't have to take," Huntsman said. Lee said Utah wasn't asking for a court injunction because even if the NRC issues the license, Private Fuel Storage won't immediately be able to deliver any waste to Skull Valley. The Bureau of Land Management is refusing to grant a right of way for a rail spur that would carry the waste across government land to the reservation. ***************************************************************** 43 AU ABC: Scullion backs shorter nuclear dump inquiry 2005. 21:48 (ACST)Wednesday, 9 November 2005. 21:48 CLP Senator Nigel Scullion has voted with his party to shorten the timeframe for an inquiry into the Federal Government's nuclear waste dump legislation. The Senate has approved an inquiry into the Government's Radioactive Waste Management Bill but it will wrap up by the end of this month. That gives the Senate committee less than three weeks to scrutinise the laws. Territory Labor Senator Trish Crossin says it is not enough. "For people to put in a submission, for people to actually appear before the committee, and for the committee to actually take the evidence it needs to take from scientists," he said. Senator Scullion has been under pressure to cross the floor and oppose the laws situating a nuclear waste facility in the Northern Territory. ***************************************************************** 44 Platts: EC 'in no hurry' on EU nuclear safety, waste laws: Piebalgs + The European Commission is prepared to wait for the adoption of its two draft laws on nuclear safety and waste, European Union energy commissioner Andris Piebalgs told Platts on the sidelines of a nuclear conference in Brussels late Monday. "We're not in a hurry," said Piebalgs. The EC has been negotiating with the EU Council of member state governments since 2002 to get the two EU harmonized laws adopted under the Euratom treaty. The final versions have hit a stalemate in the Council, with a minority of member states blocking adoption but not enough to reject the proposal entirely. "The EC will continue to strive for adoption of the nuclear package," said Piebalgs. "Both safety and waste management must be ensured for nuclear to remain part of the EU energy mix." But for the moment Piebalgs is simply hoping for the Council to resume the debate. "It depends on the EU presidency--hopefully under Finland (January-June 2006) we'll get a deeper debate," he said. Finland has decided to build a nuclear power plant--the first newbuild in Europe for decades--to reduce its dependency on power imports from Russia. The EC is also impressed by Finland's thought out and publicly accepted decommissioning and waste management strategy--something it would like all member states to have. But Piebalgs was not expecting the debate to lead to immediate adoption. "Member states are cooperating on safety and so far it's not a problem," said Piebalgs. "It's a bottom up approach." The Council has set up a working party on nuclear safety to look at nuclear safety and waste management in the EU with the aim of reporting conclusions by end-2006. The WPNS is to take account of two reports by the Western European Nuclear Regulators' Association planned for end-2005--one on safety and one on waste management and decommissioning-- which are to recommend steps to a harmonized approach. Wenra members are to respond with national action plans before end-2006, which are also to feed into the WPNS report. Delegates at the conference supported the bottom up approach, arguing that the differences between each nuclear power plant's situation were too great for top down safety standards to be useful. But a bottom up approach does not rule out eventual binding rules. "Experience shows that all voluntary initiatives become directives eventually," said Piebalgs. The EC is also working on a non-binding recommendation on best practice for nuclear decommissioning funds. It wants member states to show that they can ensure that they have set aside enough available funds to pay for the decommissioning when needed, and that such funds are managed completely transparently. For more nuclear news, request a free trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/ Brussels (Platts)--8Nov2005 Copyright © 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 45 Montrose Daily Press: Cotter Corp. closes six mines Wednesday, November 09, 2005 James Shea Daily Press Writer URAVAN  Increased fuel costs and limited uranium and vanadium production forced the Cotter Corporation to close six mines on Montrose Countys West End this week. We had 49 people on the West Slope that were affected by this, Cotter Corporation Manager of Administration Jerry Powers said. Powers said the company began mining ore three years ago at mines on the West End. Before the closure, Cotter Corporation had three mines producing uranium and vanadium, two mines close to production and one mine it leased from another company. Once the ore was extracted from the mine, it was shipped to a processing facility in Canon City. Powers said the company will also close the mill once the remaining ore is processed. We are going to continue to operate the mill for 60 days, he said. Powers said despite the increased price for uranium and vanadium, the company was not able to make the mines profitable. He said the mines were small and could not produce enough material to make the operations viable. Its an economic decision, Powers said. Trying to get the ore to a mill was difficult. Montrose Countys West End has been a longtime producer of uranium and vanadium. In the 1940s and 1950s, the area produced uranium used in nuclear power and weapons production. However, by the late 1970s, the price of uranium plummeted and all of the mines closed. Over the last few years, there has been renewed interest in uranium mining. The price has nearly tripled, hovering around $33 per pound, due to decreased inventory and renewed interest in nuclear power around the world. Powers said miner workers, foremen and clerical workers were impacted by the layoffs. He said the decision was not a full closure, but the company did not have a timeline for opening the mines or mill site. Montrose County Commissioner Allan Belt, whose district includes the West End, said the companys decision will be hard economically for the area. This may just be the straw that broke the camels back, Belt said. He said the county will not be able to provide much assistance given the recent failure of the countys sales tax referendum. Its an absolute economic disaster, potentially, Belt said. Down the road, Powers said the company will watch the Department of Energys decision on opening new uranium leasing tracts. The DOE leases uranium mines on federal lands and is studying the viability and impact of opening new mines on the Western Slope. We are actively going to look at those, Powers said. Tracy Plessinger, the DOEs Uranium Lease Program Manager, said the agency is conducting an environmental assessment on the lease tracts. The agency has 13 active leases and must decide whether to open 25 other leases. Those we could reopen and put out to competitive bid, Plessinger said. She said she has heard about the mines closing but was waiting for a written statement from the company. If the company is closing the mines permanently, Plessinger said the company could be required to begin remediation work on the mines. I really need to see what they say is their business decision, Plessinger said. But she added that there is strong demand for uranium leases and she would be surprised if the mines will be closed permanently. There still seem to be companies that think it is economically viable, Plessinger said. The DOE will make a decision on the EA some time during the middle of next year. The Cotter Corporation was founded in 1956. It was purchased by Commonwealth Edison and later sold to General Atomics in 2000. The company has long been a source of controversy. During World War II, some of the uranium used in the Manhattan Project was processed in Canon City. During the transportation or processing, radioactive waste was released into the air and discovered around Canon City. The companys mill site was declared a Superfund Site in 1984, because of the large amount of toxic waste and nuclear material. Some published reports have stated that the company wants to move away from uranium and vanadium production and into zirconium, a metal used in pottery. Cotter Corporation President Richard Cherry said the company could not make the Western Slope operation economically viable, but he was optimistic about the future. Recent trials to increase mining and processing output from Colorado ore is showing promise, but cannot be implemented in the current production environment, Cherry said in a released statement. We hope as we move forward with these changes, the company will again be able to expand its employment in both locations. Contact James Shea via email at Jamess@montrosepress.com Copyright © 2005 Montrose Daily Press ***************************************************************** 46 Daily Yomiuri: Govt demands payment to dispose of DU scrap The Yomiuri Shimbun A metal factory owner who found depleted uranium (DU) in imported scrap was asked to pay more than 220,000 yen when he asked the Education, Science and Technology Ministry to dispose of the hazardous material for him, The Yomiuri Shimbun learned Wednesday. The factory owner has refused to pay, leaving 40 kilograms of the material suspected as causing serious health problems, including cancer and kidney ailments, improperly stored. The factory owner said two lumps of DU, weighing 10 kilograms and 30 kilograms, were found among 16 tons of scrap metal recently imported from the United States to produce aluminum alloy. The 1957 Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law stipulates the three nuclear elements of uranium, thorium and plutonium can be transferred only between businesses licensed to handle the materials. The law fails to accommodate instances in which operators such as the Hyogo Prefecture factory unintentionally come into possession of the radioactive elements. The factory owner correctly reported finding the hazardous material to the ministry. But the ministry said it had to comply with the law by instructing him to obtain a license to handle the material--a procedure that requires a 227,200 yen application fee. This shortcoming of the nuclear regulation law was pointed out at least five years ago, but the ministry has failed to plug this oversight. In 2000, the then Science and Technology Agency said it would enhance the regulations on nuclear material in response to a string of cases in which hazardous materials were found across the country. In one highly publicized case that year, a small amount of monazite--a mineral that is a phosphate of thorium--was found in a package sent to the Prime Minister's Office. The agency, which was later merged into the Education, Science and Technology Ministry, said that year it was considering a range of measures in response to the incident, including a nationwide search for nuclear materials held at unlicensed facilities and creating a scheme to accept unwanted radioactive material. But none of those measures have been implemented. The ministry now says it has yet to decide where to store unneeded nuclear materials because such a plan would inevitably be opposed by neighboring residents. (Nov. 10, 2005) Copyright © The Yomiuri Shimbun. + THE YOMIURI SHIMBUN ***************************************************************** 47 reviewjournal.com: Reid new Utah ally on nukes Nov. 09, 2005 Senator no longer stands in the way By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., sought to strengthen ties Tuesday to a new ally in the campaign against Nevada nuclear waste disposal. Reid said he will no longer stand in the way of Utah lawmakers who are trying to block a nuclear waste complex on the Goshute Indian reservation in their state by having the nearby area designated government-protected wilderness. Reid's announcement came several weeks after Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah, pledged in a Senate speech that he was withdrawing his support for the nuclear waste repository the Department of Energy wants to build at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Bennett said he now favored keeping highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel stored at power plants -- a concept that Reid has promoted. Bennett said Tuesday his speech helped build a new alliance with Reid. "Sen. Reid and I have been taking about this over a period of time," Bennett said. "He and I are pretty much on the same page now where we ought to go. Neither one of us is opposed to nuclear power, neither one of us thinks a single national repository makes sense and both of us are interested in some kind of (waste) reprocessing." Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said Bennett's speech "helped bring (Reid) along." Tessa Hafen, a Reid spokeswoman, said Bennett's overture was a factor in Reid's decision to withdraw his opposition to the wilderness proposal, which the Utah senators are trying to add to a defense policy bill. Reid had argued that carving out protected wilderness through defense legislation would set a bad precedent. But in a statement Tuesday Reid said prospects of nuclear waste storage in Utah now poses a greater threat. "With the proposed Goshute nuclear waste site moving forward, timing has become critical and the state of Utah will need every available resource to fight this project," Reid said. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved plans by Private Fuel Storage, a utility consortium, to store 44,000 tons of nuclear spent fuel on the Goshute Indian Reservation in Tooele County. Reid's change of heart is the latest turn in what has been a sometimes rocky relationship between senators of neighboring states that are each trying to fight off nuclear waste. Some Utah officials have accused Reid of holding a grudge dating back to 2002, when Hatch and Bennett voted in favor of designating Yucca Mountain for a nuclear waste repository. Hatch said Tuesday that may have been the case, but relations have improved. Hafen maintained the 2002 episode has not influenced Reid's activities on nuclear waste. Even with Reid stepping aside, the Utah wilderness plan faces an uphill climb, Bennett and Hatch said Tuesday. Other senators remain opposed, including Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. "I will be blocking that vehemently," Ensign said. Ensign said he wants to keep pressure on the Utah senators. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2005 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement ***************************************************************** 48 Las Vegas SUN: Reid puts GOP senators on defensive Today: November 09, 2005 at 8:41:0 PST By Benjamin Grove Sun Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- A week ago Republicans derided Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada for pulling what they said was nothing more than a cheap "stunt" designed to politicize the issue of pre-war intelligence. But the GOP isn't dismissing the action this week, as the issue still reverberates on Capitol Hill. Democrats are seeking to gain more political traction by repeatedly stressing that the White House may have exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq. They also are drumming up creative ways to keep attention focused on the indictment of top White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in the CIA leak investigation. Now Republicans are push-ing back. As the Senate on Tuesday turned its attention to a bill that authorizes Defense Department spending, Republican senators took to the chamber floor to defend the invasion of Iraq, to tout its successes -- and to remind Democrats that many of them supported the war, too. Reid was among those who voted to authorize the invasion. In a Senate speech, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., reminded listeners that President Bill Clinton and top aides had believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Ensign responded to a "vocal minority" who are now arguing that the nation went to war for the wrong reasons and that the Bush administration lied to get the public behind it. The nation is safer now because terrorists and countries that harbor them understand that they "could be the next ones to feel the force of the United States military," he said. "See, our word means something now because the president laid a marker down in the sand and stood behind that marker when it was time -- when Saddam Hussein did not come forward and agree to the hhsolutions that the United Na-tions had passed," he said. Ensign said the more than 2,000 U.S. military personnel who have died made the nation safer. "I believe that history will show in the fullness of time that America is involved in a noble effort that transformed a region, and indeed the world," Ensign said. Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., summed up some frustration felt by the GOP at Democratic attacks in recent days. "We cannot as a nation lose our resolve or have politicians quibble on the edges while our men and women are in harm4s way," Isakson said. Reid on Nov. 1 shocked and angered GOP leaders when he called a rarely used closed-chamber session for the purpose of demanding more answers from Republican leaders in the probe of pre-war intelligence. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said Reid had "hi-jacked" the Senate. But Reid scored some political points, energizing long-suffering party faithful. Supporters sent flowers and cards to his office after the "stunt" and more than 650 people posted messages on Reid's Web blog, mostly praise. "It4s about damn time," one wrote. "Harry4s actions have restored my hope in the Democratic Party." Democrats appear eager to capitalize on polls that show voters are increasingly suspicious of the White House. A Washington Post-ABC News survey last week found that 40 percent of Americans view Presi-dent Bush as honest and trust-worthy, a new low. In a poll taken by the Pew Research Center Nov. 3-6, 79 percent said the Libby indictment is important to the nation. That compares with 65 percent in September 1998 who said Clinton4s lies under oath were important. Reid and other top Democrats on Tuesday sent a letter to Bush urging him not to pardon Libby if Libby is convicted. The Nevada senator said he had no evidence that Bush would do that, but Reid made the letter the focus of his weekly briefing with reporters to keep a spotlight on Libby's indictment. "We have a president who the American people have lost confidence in," Reid said. He criticized Vice President Dick Cheney for his role in the "manipulation of intelligence to sell the war in Iraq." He criticized Vice President Dick Cheney for his role in the "manipulation of intelligence to sel the wat in Iraq." All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 49 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Patriot Act's probing problem Today: November 09, 2005 at 10:12:32 PST Editorial: Patriot Act's probing problem Congress rejects Bush's budget for this flawed project, opting instead for a lesser amount A few years ago those in support of turning Yucca Mountain into a dump for nuclear waste talked of the project with certainty. The word "inevitable" came up frequently in their conversations. They were bold in saying that Nevada should kneel and beg the federal government for benefits in exchange for exposing its residents to the waste site's dangers. The project will be built anyway, so the state should should stop fighting it and get whatever it can, they would argue. Today it is doubt, not certainty, that characterizes the prospect of Yucca Mountain ever getting built as a permanent, underground burial facility for high-level nuclear waste. Owing to the fight that Nevada has waged over the past two decades, a fight that has exposed the multiple health and safety flaws of the project, Yucca Mountain opponents are the ones who have reason for confidence these days. The latest blow against the project came this week from Congress, where both the House and Senate decided to cut the budget for Yucca and at the same time fund an alternative to burying the waste. President Bush had asked for $650 million for continued work at the site, which is 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Congress approved $450 million. In each of the past two years it had approved $577 million. This willingness to cut the budget in a year that Bush had asked for a significant increase suggests that the president's support in Congress on this issue has weakened. At the same time it cut the Yucca budget, Congress approved $50 million to promote the recycling, rather than the burial, of spent nuclear fuel. This would never have happened in Yucca's heyday. We regret, however, that Congress appropriated any money at all for this outrageously flawed and apparently doomed project. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Yucca is falling from grace Today: November 09, 2005 at 11:5:24 PST Congress rejects Bush's budget for this flawed project, opting instead for a lesser amount A few years ago those in support of turning Yucca Mountain into a dump for nuclear waste talked of the project with certainty. The word "inevitable" came up frequently in their conversations. They were bold in saying that Nevada should kneel and beg the federal government for benefits in exchange for exposing its residents to the waste site's dangers. The project will be built anyway, so the state should should stop fighting it and get whatever it can, they would argue. Today it is doubt, not certainty, that characterizes the prospect of Yucca Mountain ever getting built as a permanent, underground burial facility for high-level nuclear waste. Owing to the fight that Nevada has waged over the past two decades, a fight that has exposed the multiple health and safety flaws of the project, Yucca Mountain opponents are the ones who have reason for confidence these days. The latest blow against the project came this week from Congress, where both the House and Senate decided to cut the budget for Yucca and at the same time fund an alternative to burying the waste. President Bush had asked for $650 million for continued work at the site, which is 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Congress approved $450 million. In each of the past two years it had approved $577 million. This willingness to cut the budget in a year that Bush had asked for a significant increase suggests that the president's support in Congress on this issue has weakened. At the same time it cut the Yucca budget, Congress approved $50 million to promote the recycling, rather than the burial, of spent nuclear fuel. This would never have happened in Yucca's heyday. We regret, however, that Congress appropriated any money at all for this outrageously flawed and apparently doomed project. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 51 GREENPEACE UK: Solar panels beside Sizewell B Nuclear Plant Ditch the dodgy nukes! Last edited: 09-11-2005 Prime Minister Tony Blair needs to get his facts straight - nuclear power is not a sustainable energy source. At the Labour party conference in September 2005, Mr Blair talked about "building on Britain's Kyoto commitments", and looking at all options for 'sustainable' energy - "including civil nuclear power". The UK not currently on track to meet its carbon emission targets, with CO2 emissions increasing in the last 2 years. Tony Blair has found himself in a vulnerable and unenviable position, desperately seeking a solution. The nuclear industry's lobbyists, equally desperate to revive their dying trade, have found rich pickings in Prime Minister's situation. Blair seems to have desperately seized upon nuclear power as the default solution - not because it's environmentally acceptable or economically sound, but merely because it exists. The chief executive of British Energy, Bill Coley - who should know better - followed up the Labour conference by saying that "Tony Blair must give the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power stations by the end of next year if the government is to meet its climate-change targets and safeguard security of supply." By October, the nuclear lobby seem to have had their feet firmly in the door of Number 10 Downing Street - energy minister Malcolm Wicks, was telling the Guardian that the "government is preparing to win the 'hearts and minds' of MPs and the public over new nuclear power stations." It appears the government have now seized on nuclear power as their safety net for Kyoto failures, and is even using it for some extremely dodgy political manoeuvring. John McTernan - Blair's director of political operations - has apparently suggested to colleagues that building a new nuclear power station at Dounreay in Scotland would be an aggressive method of undermining local Liberal Democrat colleagues - who are campaigning for a shift away from nuclear towards wind and wave power. Yet, at the recent follow up meeting in London to the G8 summit earlier this year , Blair seemed determined to shy away from greenhouse emission commitments by siding with big business. In a speech to environment and energy ministers, Blair said that legally binding targets to reduce pollution made people "very nervous and very worried". Interestingly, Mr Blair didn't identify these nervous folk, or mention how many of them exist. However, it's fair to say that there are plenty of people "very nervous and very worried" about the effects of climate change, and the government's apathy towards Kyoto Protocol targets - and the fact that Blair's speech signals a government movement away from its Kyoto commitments. The idea of nuclear power as a 'clean' or 'sustainable' method of generating power smacks of a lack of imagination - and of political lobbying by a nuclear industry in decline. It argues that nuclear power can help cut carbon emissions - but the figures on this just don't add up. To make any serious impact on climate change in the UK, we need to reduce carbon emissions by 20% by 2020 and 60% by 2050. Doubling nuclear energy in the UK - as proposed - would double the amount of spent fuel, double the amount of nuclear targets for terrorists, cost the taxpayer billions in public subsidies... and for what? A mere 8% reduction in overall greenhouse gas emissions - and that's not taking into account the environmental costs of building and later decommissioning the plants. Research carried out for the European Union found that the whole cycle of nuclear generation would produce around 50% more greenhouse gas emissions than wind power. The real solution to both securing our energy supply and meeting our carbon targets is not simply to find more energy, it's to make the most of the energy we already have. Nuclear power stations are fundamental elements of an outdated, inefficient, centralised electricity system put in place almost a century ago and has barely changed since. Of every unit of energy put into a coal or nuclear power station, only one-fifth is actually turned into usable electricity. Most is lost in the form of heat, and some is lost when transporting it along the wires, while the rest through inefficient appliances. By decentralizing the system and locating small-scale stations powered by renewable sources, we can make the most of our primary energy sources. Power is not lost through transmission, the heat can be captured and used for heating, and individuals can become engaged in taking responsibility for their own energy use by giving them the chance to generate as well as consume energy. Be in no doubt - the renewable potential in the UK is vast. The potential for wind power alone is nine times our energy needs - and it takes less than a year to build an offshore wind farm (depends how big the wind farm is). It would be 2018 before a new nuclear station could be built. Tidal, wave, solar and biomass technologies are in constant development, and a diverse renewable energy industry is emerging. These innovations are combined with the possible 30% energy reductions in energy demand identified by a recent government Energy Review, there simply won't be any need for nuclear power stations. There's a finite amount of money available for government and private investment into developing electricity generation systems. Investment in renewable energy depends on government involvement. Competition with a heavily subsidised nuclear industry would seriously undermine both the future of renewable energy as well as economic growth in the energy sector. Then of course, there's the most obvious issue - safety. Nuclear power atoms are no different to the atoms used in nuclear weapons and dirty bombs. As terrorist targets, nuclear power stations are expensive, polluting sitting ducks - static time bombs. Renewable energy installations are flexible, cheap to construct and pose no terrorist or proliferation threat. So come on Mr Blair - show some real courage on climate change - ditch the expensive, dangerous dodgy nukes, and embrace realistic energy development - renewable energy and a decentralized grid that helps us make the most or our vast resources. ***************************************************************** 52 Salt Lake Tribune: Envirocare hires big GOP guns Article Last Updated: 11/09/2005 01:59:35 AM Lobbyists' ties to guv, company's expansion plans questioned By Judy Fahys and Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune Envirocare has hired three influential Utahns, including state Republican Party Chairman Joe Cannon, to advocate for the company nationally and to help it grow. Along with Cannon, the hazardous and radioactive waste company has signed on as lobbyists two Republican Party fundraisers, Max Farbman and Greg Hopkins. Both are directors of Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s political action committee. The company says all three lobbyists focus on the national arena, drumming up new business from the government and nuclear reactors, and building relationships with national figures concerned about radioactive cleanup and disposal. "What we've asked them to do is help us with ways to expand our business operation on a national level," said Envirocare Vice President Tim Barney. Barney downplayed the idea that the new lobbyists might be assisting the company's large lobbying team at the state Capitol or with Envirocare's efforts to win approval to double its size. But Cannon noted that he did register as a Utah lobbyist for Envirocare in the past week just to be safe. Envirocare has brought on these big guns at a critical time. Since it came under new ownership last February, the company has moved swiftly into new business lines and a more national profile. Industry insiders say the company wants to have a crack at the sort of national contracts worth billions. Envirocare used to focus narrowly on federal disposal contracts, primarily from the Defense Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Department. But last month, it bought a decontamination and decommissioning business and began its first major cleanup-removal-transportation-disposal job in Massachusetts. *** Envirocare wants to grow; public can comment + The public hearing on Envirocare of Utah's expansion plans is set for Tuesday at 7 p.m. in Room 101 of the Department of Environmental Quality's Building #2, 168 N. 1950 West, Salt Lake City. *** In Utah, the company is expecting another record year, taking in more than 12 million cubic feet of radioactive and hazardous waste in the first half of 2005, but expecting its mainstay of government contracts to begin tapering off. Envirocare also has been pushing to expand to nearly double its current size of nearly one square mile. The expansion already has the approval of the state Division of Radiation Control. And the company is pressing to quickly dispense with an appeal brought by the environmental group, the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah (HEAL) in time for the question to be taken up this winter by the state Legislature and governor. Huntsman's office distanced itself from Envirocare's efforts to enlarge its facility and operations. "The governor has concerns about any proposal that would expand our capacity for this kind of waste," said Mike Mower, Huntsman's deputy chief of staff. Hopkins, a former director of the Utah GOP and a key fundraiser for the governor, insisted his work is not related to any particular legislation before Congress. "We're not doing anything related to their expansion to their facility in Utah," he added. Meanwhile, a lobbyist disclosure report filed with the Secretary of the U.S. Senate says Farbman and Hopkins are "assisting [the] company in gaining support for expanded operations." But Barney and Hopkins both insisted that is unrelated to the pending Utah expansion. "That's kind of an inopportune choice of words because we've explicitly asked them not to help them with our expansion in Utah," Barney said, adding that the specific terms of their work is confidential. "We're a company that operates in a competitive environment and it's important for us to do that." Cannon said in an interview Tuesday, he has helped arrange meetings with members of Congress and their staffs, but he primarily deals with issues before federal regulators. In an ironic twist, Cannon's law firm merged last spring with the firm pushing a high-level reactor fuel storage site in Tooele County that has been proposed by a consortium of utilities called Private Fuel Storage. It is a project Envirocare President and CEO, Steve Creamer, vocally opposes, although the PFS members are also the kind of low-level waste customers Envirocare is now trying to line up. Cannon said he has been friends with Creamer for years. They both worked in 2003 on "Plan B," an effort to derail the PFS disposal site and offer high-level waste disposal on Utah school trust lands in southeastern Utah. The two say they have since dropped Plan B. The Utah GOP has also hired Farbman and Hopkins to raise money for Republican causes and candidates, said Cannon. "My impression is they are not very busy on the governor's stuff" but on the party fundraising, he said. "Utah is a small state," Cannon added, referring to Hopkins and Farbman's important expertise in raising money. "That is one of the problems." While Cannon sees nothing inappropriate nor conflict of interest in these relationships, HEAL does. Vanessa Pierce, program director for HEAL, accused Envirocare of "purposely" bringing on board people with close ties to the governor as it pushes for his favorable vote on the expansion. She noted that the governor's brother-in-law, Rick Durham, is a partner in one of the investment groups that bought Envirocare earlier this year. Durham used to be CFO of the Huntsman Corp. and is a trustee of the Jon and Karen Huntsman Foundation. "With all the folks Envirocare has hired," Pierce said, "the only way they could get closer to the governor is if they hired [first lady] Mary Kaye [Huntsman]." Mower, the governor's aide, said Huntsman would "certainly re-evaluate our relationship" if Farbman and Hopkins were registered as state lobbyists. Hopkins is currently listed as "inactive" on the state's lobbyist registration site. Farbman's only listed lobby client is the Western Governors University. Envirocare has a record of lining up high-profile lobbying help. In 2003, U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah pushed for federal legislation that would allow Envirocare to accept highly-concentrated waste from an Energy Department cleanup in Fernald, Ohio, that, in effect, was hotter than the radioactive waste allowed in the state. Bishop had been a lobbyist for Envirocare before going to Washington. Pierce said Utahns say over and over they don't want to be the radioactive dumping ground of the nation, but continue to work the backrooms of politics to defeat the public will. "Envirocare's first loyalty is to their stakeholders and their shareholders," she said. "And, consequently, they're going to pull whatever political levers they need to double their size and double their profits." fahys@sltrib.com gehrke@sltrib.com Envirocare's new power hitters Max Farbman Ties to Envirocare: Registered as lobbyist in late September. Ties to Huntsman: A director of the governor's political action committee, which solicited $25,000 last year from the businessman who now heads Envirocare. The governor later returned the money, intended to help pay for his inauguration. Fundraiser for the Utah Policy Partnership, a Huntsman non-profit think tank. Other important ties: Fund-raising for Utah Republican Party. Greg Hopkins Ties to Envirocare: Registered as lobbyist in late September. Ties to Huntsman: A director of the governor's political action committee, which solicited $25,000 last year from the businessman who now heads Envirocare. The governor later returned the money, intended to help pay for his inauguration. Huntsman transition team director. Fundraiser for the Utah Policy Partnership, a Huntsman non-profit think tank. Other important ties: Worked for U.S. Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah; Fundraising for Utah GOP Party; Former Utah Republican Party executive director. Joe Cannon Ties to Envirocare: Hired as lobbyist last March; longtime friend of Envirocare President and CEO Steve Creamer. Other important ties: Utah GOP Party Chairman since 2001; former assistant administrator for Air and Radiation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Member of the Washington, D.C. law firm Pillsbury Winthrop Saw Pittman, the same firm that represents Private Fuel Storage, the company proposing to store high-level nuclear waste in Tooele County. © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 53 Salt Lake Tribune: Unlikely ally aids foes of N-dump Article Last Updated: 11/09/2005 01:59:35 AM Reid drops opposition to wilderness plan By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune U.S. Senator Harry Reid WASHINGTON - In a significant reversal, Nevada Sen. Harry Reid dropped his opposition Tuesday to a plan to create a new Utah wilderness area that could block high-level nuclear waste from being stored in the state. The newfound support for the effort to block nuclear waste may give the plan its best chance for passage after years of frustrating defeat. Utah's congressional delegation is seeking to create the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area near the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes Indian reservation, where Private Fuel Storage, a group of electric utilities, wants to store 44,000 tons of nuclear fuel. Such a designation would keep the Bureau of Land Management from approving a needed rail line to the site. The proposed wilderness provision has in the past been stymied by several senators, including Reid. "While I continue to have concerns about the Cedar Mountain wilderness proposal, of even greater concern is the threat posed by deadly nuclear waste," Reid said in a statement. "After speaking with Utah leaders, including Sen. [Bob] Bennett and Gov. [Jon] Huntsman, I have agreed to drop my opposition to this proposal. With the proposed Goshute nuclear waste site moving forward, timing has become critical and the state of Utah will need every available resource to fight this project." The language to designate the wilderness area is included in a House-passed Defense Department policy bill, which is before the Senate this week. Utah's senators met resistance when they tried to add the provision to the Senate bill, but the delegation says inclusion in the House bill gives it a strong chance of survival - a chance boosted by Reid's involvement. "It is a significant help," said Rep. Rob Bishop, who led the fight in the House. "I think he realizes very clearly that both Western states have a great deal in common and something negative that could happen in Utah could just as easily happen in Nevada. . . . I think it helps us move the issue forward and helps us to be more successful." PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin said it remains to be seen what impact Reid's move will have. She said the wilderness would not stop the PFS plan, just force the utilities to unload the rail cars and deliver the waste to the site on trucks. "Any reasonable person can see the safest way to make these shipments to the reservation would be via rail down the west side of Skull Valley . . . so to have the Utah delegation opposing this safe method of shipment is almost bizarre," she said. For the past several weeks, Reid has been working behind the scenes to help resolve Democrats' concerns with the proposal. Bennett thanked Reid for his support, but said Reid "was not the primary problem." "There may well be other senators who have opposed it in the past who are yet to be heard from and we should keep working as hard as we can and hold any celebration until the final report is written," Bennett said in a statement. The leading opponents of the Cedar Mountain proposal are Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Reid's colleague, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. In September, Bennett reached out to Reid, admitting that he made a mistake when he voted to build a permanent nuclear dump beneath Yucca Mountain in Nevada. In the speech, he endorsed Reid's plan to store the waste at the reactors that produced it until technology is available to reprocess the material. Bennett's reversal on Yucca helped lay the groundwork for Reid's change of heart Tuesday. Huntsman, Bishop and Reps. Chris Cannon and Jim Matheson also support Reid's proposal. "I think it's a good example of how, to some extent, we're in the same boat," said Michael Lee, Huntsman's general counsel. "We're in a similar situation with Nevada and I think for that reason it's good to have Nevada's leaders working with leaders from our state to try to keep spent nuclear fuel from being stored here." Sen. Orrin Hatch has insisted that rejecting Yucca and joining Reid would be a slap in the face of the Bush administration, which he says holds the key to defeating PFS. Hatch and Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell met Tuesday with the president and chief executive officer from XCel Energy, the largest PFS shareholder, to try to convince the company that the Skull Valley plan should be scrapped. Hatch argued that other alternatives are available and could have government support. "When you're a utility and you're moving upstream against the future chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and the administration, you know it's time to take a very critical look at where you're heading," XCel CEO Dick Kelly said in a statement released by Hatch's office. Hatch promised to "pull out every stop in the book" to block the PFS plan. The fight moves to court The state of Utah went to court Tuesday in hopes of overturning the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's license for the proposed PFS storage site. In a move expected long before the NRC's decision to license the Private Fuel Storage facility in September, lawyers for the state asked the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., to take up the case. They would like the court to take a fresh look at some of the 70 rulings made against the state in its administrative fight against the licensing. "We think this [waste storage] is an ill-fated, ill-considered plan - public policy at its worst," said Michael Lee, counsel to Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. "We are excited to present the arguments we have to the D.C. Circuit." PFS wants to build a kind of parking lot for reactor waste on its way to permanent disposal, presumably at the U.S. Energy Department's proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev. The 100-acre pad, located on the Skull Valley Goshutes Reservation about 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, would hold 44,000 tons of reactor waste in containers stored above ground. - Judy Fahys © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 54 Dispatch: Perchlorate Levels on the Decrease Tuesday, November 08, 2005 By Matt King San Martin - New test results show that perchlorate concentrations in South County groundwater are dropping dramatically. In three rounds of testing this year, the number of wells found to exceed the state’s public health goal for the contaminant has fallen from 145 to 96 to 34. A total of 850 wells were tested. Last year, in a smaller sample, 198 wells tested above 6 parts per billion. Perchlorate is a sodium known to disrupt thyroid function that’s used to produce rocket engines and road flares. It also occurs naturally in some fertilizers and has been detected in lightning. Its presence in South County’s groundwater was discovered in a routine environmental evaluation when the Olin Corp., which made road flares in Morgan Hill from 1955 to 1987, tried to sell its factory. The test results, released by Olin last week, are getting a mixed response from water experts who say it’s far too soon to know whether perchlorate is actually dissipating or if the results will prove temporary. “I’m glad people’s wells are below [6 parts per billion] because the fewer wells below six, the fewer people are impacted,” said David Athey, who’s overseeing Olin’s cleanup effort for the Central Coast Regional Water Resources Control Board. “I always have a cautious eye on data because the proof is in long-term monitoring. I don’t think it’s natural remediation. It’s not disappearing.” Athey said the more than 100 wells with indeterminate results show the impossibility of drawing conclusions about the contamination after only two years of testing. “It’s important that there are so many with no trend,” he said. “I would want to see at least [another] two or three years of data.” Perchlorate has been detected in South County from Morgan Hill to the northern and eastern edges of Gilroy. One possible explanation for the drop is that last season’s heavy rains diluted the perchlorate in the groundwater. Athey said a drought could cause an equally dramatic increase in perchlorate concentration. Tracy Hemmeter, of the Santa Clara Valley Water District, noted that the overall size of the 9.5-mile plume south of the former Tenant Avenue factory, has not changed, and that many wells on the fringes of the plume have not shown a decrease in contamination. “It’s great that perchlorate concentrations are down,” Hemmeter said. “But this shows how important it is to continue to investigate and characterize the groundwater basin.” Olin is currently testing wells and will present new results early next year. By June 2006, the company must present a plan to clean the southern plume. Since the contamination was revealed in 2003, the company has provided bottled water to any resident south of Morgan Hill who’s well water tests above 4 parts per billion. In June, the company won the right to raise the threshold to 6 parts per billion to match the public health goal. More than 100 residents may lose their alternative water supply next year. Matt King covers Santa Clara County for The Dispatch. He can be reached at 847-7240 or mking@gilroydispatch.com. [(408)842-9070] [Gilroy Dispatch's ***************************************************************** 55 The Dispatch: A New Call to Clean Perchlorate Tuesday, November 08, 2005 By Matt King San Martin - Morgan Hill leaders say new evidence proves that the Olin Corp. polluted the city’s groundwater and they’ve renewed calls for the company to begin cleaning it up. According to City Manager Ed Tewes, a report released last week by Olin contradicts the company’s assertions that its former road flare factory is not the source of the city’s perchlorate contamination that flows north. While the company continues to deny that its responsible for the city’s pollution, Olin for the first time has allowed that it’s possible. Olin has accepted responsibility for a 9.5-mile perchlorate plume flowing south and east of the Tenant Avenue site and is under a state order to clean it. Tewes said Monday that the time has passed for the Central Coast Regional Water Resources Control Board to issue a similar order for the so-called northeast flow that has contaminated city wells that serve 6,000 residents and hundreds of businesses. Morgan Hill residents pay a 15 percent surcharge to cover the city’s cost of removing the perchlorate, a sodium known to disrupt thyroid function. “The board appears to be using two different standards,” Tewes said. “Two years ago the board cited Olin as the discharger [to the south] on no greater scientific evidence. The only difference is, Olin didn’t resist.” Since the pollution was revealed in February 2003, Olin has provided bottled water to residents in the most-contaminated areas south of the site, and in February, the water board ordered the company to present a final cleanup plan for the southern plume by June 2006. But Olin has resisted responsibility for the northern flow, citing their own studies that show the groundwater beneath its factory does not flow to the north. Company consultants reaffirmed that position last week, but in their latest analysis of South County groundwater activity, they conceded for the first time the theoretical possibility of a northern flow. The company’s most detailed analysis to date of groundwater at various depths revealed some northern movement. Michael Taraszki, a hydrogeologist with Olin Consultant MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc., said it’s conceivable that perchlorate-laced water flowed north at some point in the past, though he doesn’t believe it did. “This is an emerging story,” Taraszki said. “There’s nothing that would stop that from happening, but it’s not occurring. All we can say for certain is what’s happening today. Historically, it all becomes a little more conjectural.” Morgan Hill officials point to some historical data to support their argument, most notably a 1916 U.S. Geological Survey map that shows groundwater flowing north under what is now Tenant Avenue. And Tewes said Olin’s suggestions that the city’s perchlorate is from another source or naturally occurring are “unreasonable.” “Our arguments starts with common sense, but is bolstered with the science such as it is,” Tewes said. “The standard in the law is whether there’s a reasonable basis for declaring a responsible party and we want a responsible party identified.” David Athey, who’s managing the cleanup effort for the water board, said his agency will continue to evaluate the evidence before deciding to order Olin to clean north of the site. Athey has pressed the company to perform a forensic analysis of the northeast flow, a relatively new procedure that may pinpoint the source of contamination. Olin resisted that effort, and to keep the issue out of court, the water board agreed to let the Santa Clara Valley Water District perform the analysis as part of broader attempt to learn the history of perchlorate contamination throughout the groundwater subbasin. The district will begin the analysis in the coming months and may know the source of the northeast flow in about a year. Morgan Hill Mayor Dennis Kennedy, though, called the forensic analysis a “red herring” that focuses attention away from the real problem - protecting the city’s water. “The real solution is to put into place a [cleanup order] for the entire contaminated basin, including the northeast flow,” Kennedy said. Matt King covers Santa Clara County for The Dispatch. He can be reached at 847-7240 or mking@gilroydispatch.com. [(408)842-9070] Gilroy Dispatch's ***************************************************************** 56 AU ABC: Nuclear dump inquiry 'far too short'. 10/11/2005. ABC News Online Last Update: Thursday, November 10, 2005. 8:27am (AEDT) The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) says an inquiry into the Commonwealth's nuclear waste dump legislation is too short to properly scrutinise its impact on Territorians. The Senate yesterday passed a motion to refer the Radioactive Waste Management Bill to a Senate committee after the Government shortened the inquiry's timeframe. The inquiry will have until the end of this month to gather submissions on the legislation which opens the way for a nuclear waste facility to be built in the Northern Territory. The ACF's Dave Sweeney says the time restriction is insulting. "Any inquiry is better than no inquiry and any scrutiny is better than none but it's far too short for the complexity of the issue," he said. "And I tell you if nuclear waste lasted the same time as current Senate inquiries and current Senate reviews, it'd be a whole lot less of a problem." ***************************************************************** 57 WKYT 27: Independent study asked of depleted cylinders NEWSFIRST & WYMT Mountain News - WASHINGTON A House-Senate conference committee has asked for a study of whether a toxic gas left in depleted uranium cylinders poses a danger at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. A memo from the Department of Energy's Inspector General's Office says as many as 18-hundred-25 cylinders have phosgene mistakenly left in them and may be corroding. Some experts have said that a leak could release hydrogen fluoride, a toxic gas that hugs the ground. Paducah's stockpile of depleted uranium hexafluoride consists of about 35-thousand-200 cylinders. It has been slated to be processed into a more stable compound beginning in 2007. Senator Mitch McConnell inserted the study order in the final pending bill for energy and water programs and projects, which was approved by the conference committee. Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This .gif"> All content © Copyright 2001 - 2005 WorldNow, WKYT, and WYMT. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 58 AP Wire: Committee approves study of toxic gas at Paducah plant | 11/09/2005 | Associated Press LOUISVILLE, Ky. - A House-Senate conference committee has approved a study of whether there is a threat to the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant from the toxic gas phosgene left in depleted uranium cylinders. The measure was inserted into the final spending bill for energy and water programs and projects, which was approved by the conference committee Monday. It is expected to pass the House and Senate this week and be sent to President Bush. A memo from the Department of Energy's Inspector General's Office said as many as 1,825 cylinders had phosgene mistakenly left in them and may be corroding, The Courier-Journal reported last month. Some experts have said a leak could release hydrogen fluoride, a toxic gas that hugs the ground. U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., inserted the study order into the final spending bill and also included: _$105 million for ongoing cleanup of chemical and radiological contamination at the Paducah plant; _$42.9 million for continued construction of the facility that will process the depleted uranium; _$465,000 for health monitoring of current and former workers at the Kentucky facility and its sister plants in Piketon, Ohio, and Oak Ridge, Tenn. Paducah's stockpile of depleted uranium hexafluoride in about 35,200 cylinders is slated to be processed into a more stable compound beginning in 2007. "I understand (the Energy Department) believes that phosgene poses no risk to workers or the community, but I believe it is worth seeking an independent opinion before the conversion facility begins operations in 2007," McConnell said in a statement. Bill Cossler, president of United Steelworkers Local 5-550, which represents hourly workers at the Paducah plant, said he welcomed the study. "It's a very good idea," Cossler said. "We had told him this was a concern of ours and feel having an independent study is far more prudent." The phosgene study is to be conducted by the Government Accountability Office, the nonprofit auditing arm of Congress. The cost would come out of the GAO's regular annual budget, McConnell's office said. Elizabeth Stuckle, a spokeswoman for the United States Enrichment Corp., which enriches uranium for commercial nuclear reactor fuel at the Paducah plant, said the company commends Sens. McConnell and Jim Bunning and Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-1st District, and the Ohio congressional delegation "for their continued concern for the safety of all employees on the Paducah Department of Energy reservation." Alfred K. Walter, the Energy Department's assistant inspector general for inspections and special inquiries, said in a memo obtained by The Courier-Journal that the "unexpected introduction" of phosgene into the recycling plants under construction in Paducah and Piketon could have "catastrophic consequences." "We believe the findings may warrant immediate attention," Walter wrote. Stuckle and Laura Schachter, spokeswoman for the Energy Department, said at the time that the memo was disclosed that there were adequate safeguards to protect the 1,200 workers at the plant and people living near the sprawling facility. Information from: The Courier-Journal, http://www.courier-journal.com ***************************************************************** 59 Seattle Times: Employees evacuated from Idaho nuclear lab after propane leak Tuesday, November 8, 2005 - Page updated at 09:40 PM The Associated Press BOISE, Idaho  About 650 employees of a radioactive waste treatment plant on the federal Idaho National Laboratory site were evacuated today after a propane heating system sprang a leak. No injuries were reported, and repair crews were able to stop the leak of flammable gas after several hours. Officials said there was never a chance the incident could lead to a radiation release at the site in eastern Idaho. The 177-acre Radioactive Waste Management Complex handles the cleanup of buried Cold War-era nuclear waste and low-level radioactive waste, but the excavated radioactive material is isolated from the facility where the propane leak was discovered. The leak occurred in a pipe or valve connecting two 1,000-gallon propane tanks that fuel the space heating system. Investigators were trying to determine the cause of the leak. Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company ***************************************************************** 60 courier-journal: Study of phosgene threat at Paducah plant urged courier-journal.com Wednesday, November 9, 2005 McConnell puts order into bill By James R. Carroll jcarroll@courier-journal.com WASHINGTON -- Congress has been asked to order an independent study of whether a toxic gas left in depleted uranium cylinders poses a danger at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. A House-Senate conference committee on Monday night approved the study, which was proposed in response to an Oct. 25 article in The Courier-Journal. The newspaper reported that a memo from the Department of Energy's Inspector General's Office said as many as 1,825 cylinders had phosgene mistakenly left in them and may be corroding. Some experts have said that a leak could release hydrogen fluoride, a toxic gas. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., inserted the study order in the final spending bill for energy and water programs and projects, which was approved by the conference committee. McConnell was a member of the committee. The measure is expected to pass the House and Senate this week and be sent to President Bush. Bill Cossler, president of United Steelworkers Local 5-550, which represents hourly workers at the Paducah plant, said he welcomed the study. "It's a very good idea," Cossler said. "We had told him this was a concern of ours and feel having an independent study is far more prudent." In the spending bill, McConnell also included: $105 million for ongoing cleanup of chemical and radiological contamination at the Paducah plant; $42.9 million for continued construction of the facility that will process the depleted uranium; $465,000 for health monitoring of current and former workers at the Kentucky facility and its sister plants in Portsmouth, Ohio, and Oak Ridge, Tenn. Staff writer James Malone contributed to this story. Copyright 2005 The Courier-Journal. ***************************************************************** 61 SF Chronicle: Lawrence Livermore to get most of its laser funding Keay Davidson, Chronicle Science Writer Wednesday, November 9, 2005 The U.S. Senate has restored most of the funding for a giant super-laser project at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, after more than four months of uncertainty about its fate. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said a joint Senate-House conference had agreed on funding for the Energy and Water Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2006 that would include $327 million for the laser project, known as the National Ignition Facility. That's still $10 million short of the $337 million the Bush administration sought for the project. In June, Domenici, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, spearheaded a Senate effort to kill construction funding for NIF. He originally fought for funding of the super-laser project in Congress in the 1990s, but he soured on it because of concerns about its budget overruns, delays, and the potential for sucking money from other scientific programs. Domenici still doubts it will live up to its original billing, he said in a statement late Monday. "Although we've settled on continuing construction at NIF, I remain skeptical that (Department of Energy) will be able to deliver on its promises regarding schedule, cost and scientific capability regarding NIF," Domenici said. If the project -- an array of 192 laser beams that function as if they were one monster laser -- is ready and running by 2009, as scheduled, it will be used mainly in a program that aims to ensure that the nation's aging arsenal of nuclear weapons remains reliable for decades to come. For years, Livermore officials have regarded the project as central to the lab's post-Cold War future as one of the nation's three nuclear weapons laboratories. They hope to use the laser to simulate thermonuclear explosions on a small scale so that they can refine computer codes used to model real nuclear explosions. In this way, they hope to improve ways of ensuring that U.S. nuclear weapons will detonate as designed for decades to come, even if the nation never resumes full-scale nuclear bomb tests. To date, the project has cost more than $3 billion, considerably more than its originally projected cost of less than $2 billion. "We are committed to bringing NIF on line as quickly and efficiently as possible," Livermore Director Michael Anastasio said in a statement Tuesday. Also, "we look forward to working with the National Nuclear Security Administration to minimize the impact of the $10 million FY 06 shortfall," he added, alluding to the $10 million cut. E-mail Keay Davidson at kdavidson@sfchronicle.com. Page A - 6 San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 62 WBIR.COM: Reduction in weapons stockpile will likely impact Oak Ridge The Y-12 plant in Oak Ridge could stay busy for decades under government plans. The Energy Department is to remove about 200 metric tons of bomb-grade uranium from the nation's nuclear weapons inventory and convert it to other uses. U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman announced yesterday in Washington that the uranium will become available as weapons are dismantled. The Y-12 complex employs about 4700 people as the department's expert in highly enriched uranium. The plant refurbishes warhead secondaries that contain highly enriched uranium parts and is the primary storehouse for weapons-grade uranium, holding an estimated 400 to 500 metric tons. The dismantlement plan announced by Bodman follows the 2002 Moscow Treaty in which the United States and Russia agreed to cut back their deployed warheads. copyright AP Katie Allison Granju, Online Producer Last updated: 11/8/2005 5:53:32 PM Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | WBIR.com RSS feeds Copyright ©2005 WBIR-TV Knoxville ***************************************************************** 63 Paducah Sun: Congressional approval of $105 million for cleanup, $42.9 million for uranium hexafluoride project is predicted - Uranium plant site funding endorsed Congressional approval of $105 million for cleanup, $42.9 million for uranium hexafluoride project is predicted Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656 Wednesday, November 09, 2005 The Paducah area stands to receive much of the roughly $333 million approved for Kentucky projects by the House/Senate Conference Committee as requested by U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell. Included Monday night in the fiscal 2006 Energy and Water Appropriations Conference Report, the funding is expected to be approved by the House and Senate later this week, McConnell said. It then will go to President Bush for his signature. McConnell, R-Louisville, is a senior member of the Appropriations Committee and a member of the conference committee. He said the legislation has:  $105 million for continued cleanup at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, including additional funds to accelerate the characterization and offsite disposal of scrap metal and low-level radioactive waste.  $85.8 million to build depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF6) plants at Paducah and Piketon, Ohio. Paducah is expected to receive $42.9 million of the sum for a factory to convert 39,000 canisters of the hazardous waste into a more stable compound. The plant will create 200 construction jobs and 150 permanent jobs.  Language calling for an independent study of 1,825 of the Paducah cylinders to determine if phosgene is present. McConnell wrote the provision in response to recent news reports that traces of the chemical — acquired by the Department of Energy from the Army´s Chemical Warfare Service in the 1940s and 1950s — might be causing corrosion in some of the canisters. Despite a September DOE inspector general´s memo to the contrary, Energy Department officials recently briefed members of the Kentucky delegation that only 31 Paducah cylinders are suspect and it is “very unlikely that phosgene is present. “I understand DOE believes that phosgene poses no risk to workers or the community, McConnell said, “but I believe it is worth seeking an independent opinion before the conversion facility begins operations in 2007.  $465,000 toward continued operation of a mobile health unit that screens current and former Paducah plant workers for early signs of lung cancer. The unit also travels to Piketon and Oak Ridge, Tenn.  A provision calling for an independent study to determine the best use of the plant property after the plant closes and is cleaned up. The language was requested by he Paducah Area Community Reuse Organization, an economic development group. PACRO director John Anderson said earlier that the study might take three years and would address whether the Energy Department should offer to buy contaminated property of plant neighbors.  $23 million for an ongoing project to double the size of Kentucky Lock to handle increased tonnage of larger barge traffic. The Bush administration previously had no new money for the work, now 25 percent complete.  $90 million for the new Olmsted Locks and Dam, stretching from Olmsted, Ill., to the Kentucky shore. The project will replace locks 52 and 53 on the Ohio River, and be the largest locking facility in Kentucky in terms of tonnage. The conference report also has $70 million for an ongoing expansion of McAlpine Locks and Dam at Louisville, and nearly $2 million for energy-related projects involving the University of Louisville. U.S. Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Hopkinsville, who gave House support, applauded the “key funding victories for public safety and enhanced growth in western Kentucky. ***************************************************************** 64 Seattle Weekly: Cleaning Up Hanford by Geov Parrish November 9 - 15, 2005 Columnist Geov Parrish is a regular guest on "Mind Over Matters" on KEXP-FM (90.3) Saturdays at 8:30 a.m. and provides news commentary on KBCS-FM (91.3) Fridays at 4:30 p.m. POLITICS Cleaning Up Hanford by Geov Parrish Processing radioactive waste at Hanford. (Jeff T. Green / Getty Images) Whatever happened to I-297? That was the initiative approved a year ago by nearly 70 percent of state voters. It mandated that no additional radioactive or chemically dangerous waste be imported to Eastern Washington's Hanford Nuclear Reservation until the existing mess is cleaned up. That existing mess is one of the most contaminated patches of land in the western hemisphere. The cleanup is proceeding slowly, with the federal Department of Energy, operator of Hanford, having $295 million less in its 2006 cleanup budget than it did in 2005. I-297 passed by the largest margin of any statewide initiative in Washington history. But a year later, the initiative known as the Clean-Up Priority Act remains unenforced, tied up in the U.S. District Court of Judge Alan McDonald of Yakima. The Department of Energy is paying for the lawsuit of Hanford contractor Fluor Hanford and the Tri-City Industrial Development Council (TRIDEC) to try to stymie the will of voters and stop the Clean-Up Act from becoming law. "In the end, we'll have I-297 upheld," says Gerry Pollet, longtime executive director of Heart of America Northwest, the watchdog group that sponsored I-297. "But the schedule is such that we won't be out of U.S. District Court for nearly a year, and then another year for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals." McDonald is to hear arguments in the case May 23. Meanwhile, there is nothing to prevent the office of Republican state Attorney General Rob McKenna from enforcing the act right now, but it has declined to do so. Thus, it's in the interest of Department of Energy officials to drag the legal case out for as long as possible. While the act remains in limbo, the feds have proceeded with a plan for a massive new National Radioactive Waste Dump at Hanford. "The landfill will be dug and open before there's a court hearing in May," says Pollet. "If this was a big priority of the attorney general's office, they'd implement it." So far, courts have sided with the voters. July 28, the state Supreme Court ruled that I-297 did not regulate "pure" radioactive materials, like those used for medical research, and that it did not prevent the movement of waste on sitetwo key arguments of initiative opponents. But the court kept alive the contention that the act might regulate materials that are both radioactive and have hazardous or toxic substances in them. According to Pollet, that's what's keeping the federal lawsuit going. U.S. Department of Justice attorneys, in a motion filed Nov. 1 seeking summary judgment against the act, offered a host of other legal arguments. The act would "not only interfere with a nationwide plan that calls for storing or disposing of certain radioactive wastes at Hanford, but also would disrupt national security research being done at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and undermine the Navy's ability to maintain and decommission nuclear submarines," according to court documents. The feds also argue that the act was an attempt by the state to usurp federal authority in regulating nuclear material essential to national security and violates the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy and Commerce clauses. Pollet is confident the state will eventually prevail in the court case. But he argues that the Legislature could render most of the lawsuit moot by passing a law to clarify the limited scope of the act. Seattle legislator Adam Kline pushed such a bill this year, and it passed with bipartisan support of two-thirds of the Senate. But the bill stalled in the House, held up by a representative from the Tri-Cities who cut a deal to prevent it from ever coming up for a vote. Pollet hopes for better luck in the 2006 session. "Contractors are fighting tooth and nail to prevent the Legislature from adopting that," he says. "We just have to hope we'll be allowed to have a vote in the state House." None of this should obscure the fact that the state of Washington could implement the provisions of I-297 right now, if it wanted to. At an annual "State of the Site" hearing in Seattle Nov. 2, nearly three hours' worth of testimony poured from concerned citizens, who were virtually unanimous in their demand that Hanford clean up the existing mess before fouling the nest further. Near the end of the evening, state Department of Ecology Director Jay Manning announced that he agreed with the "cleanup first" philosophya statement Pollet characterizes as "kind of a breakthrough." Now, the trick is to get other state officials, particularly McKenna and party leaders in the House, to sign off on the act. Initiative professional Tim Eyman, oddly enough, is something of a model here. When state officials try to ignore or circumvent his tax-cutting measures, he rallies supporters and raises holy hell. Perhaps that sort of pressure is needed for Hanford cleanup, too. The principle is the same: a mandate passed by an overwhelming majority deserves to be honored by the state and federal governments. gparrish@seattleweekly.com ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************