***************************************************************** 10/03/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.229 ***************************************************************** 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 U.S. plans to invade Iran before Bush's term ends 2 RIA Novosti: Russia urges Iran to observe IAEA agreement - 3 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Urges End to Nuke Project With Iran 4 US: CITIZEN-TIMES.com: Both practically and morally, nuclear 'bunker 5 [toeslist] Nuclear War in the Works? 6 Assembly Committee Must Work To Break Stalemate On Nuclear Arms - UN 7 RIA Novosti UPDATE: Switzerland to extradite Russian ex-minister Ada 8 BBC: Russian to be 'extradited to US' 9 Reuters: India, Pakistan in "good" talks, sign two pacts 10 Scotsman.com: Nuclear option 'open for Scotland' 11 Guardian Unlimited: India, Pakistan Sign Missile Tests Deal 12 Guardian Unlimited: Swiss to Extradite Ex-Russia Nuke Minister 13 Guardian Unlimited: Swiss to Extradite Russian Ex-Minister NUCLEAR REACTORS 14 US: Exelon's PA nuke EP plans in violation; licenses could be 15 US: NRC: NRC Releases Majority of Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant Si 16 BBC: 'Options open' on nuclear power 17 FT.com: UK - Ministers warned on high cost of energy 18 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th 19 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th 20 US: NRC: Notice of Extension of the Public Comment Period for Scopin 21 US: NRC: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Diablo Canyon Power Plant, 22 US: Boston Globe: NRC signs off on Maine Yankee's decommissioning - 23 US: Boston Globe: Here is a look at Maine Yankee's decommissioning - 24 Telegraph: Nuclear power decision is due 'within a year' 25 UK: News & Star: Nuclear decision needed soon 26 Xinhua: China's energy: continuous struggle with shortage NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 27 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Mill produces cancer rumors 28 US: KPHO Phoenix: Tucson district to continue monitoring air at seve NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 29 [NukeNet] Uranium Contaminated Soil Shipped 30 RIA Novosti: Armenia signs deal to upgrade nuclear waste facility 31 US: Baltimore Business Journal: Duratek adds fuel to its waste manag 32 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding 33 US: Madison Courier: Sodrel now addressing JPG cleanup 34 Nevada: Yucca Mountain Proposals Getting Curiouser And Curiouser 35 AU ABC: Birney rules out nuclear power, waste dump. 36 reviewjournal.com: Citizen Alert counting on fear, self-interest 37 Bellona: Equipment installation began at reactor compartment storage PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 U.S. plans to invade Iran before Bush's term ends Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 05:53:44 +0100 Top-ranking Americans have told equally top-ranking Indians in recent weeks that the US has plans to invade Iran before Bush's term ends. In 2002, a year before the US invaded Iraq, high-ranking Americans had similarly shared their definitive vision of a post-Saddam Iraq, making it clear that they would change the regime in Baghdad. -------------------------------------------------------- http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050926/asp/nation/story_5284580.asp The Telegraph, Calcutta India Gulf factor key to PM's Iran vote decision K.P. NAYAR Washington, Sept. 25: New Delhi acquitted itself reasonably well in the first significant challenge to its global standing and diplomacy since the world acknowledged India as an emerging global power worthy of being in the big league in the 21st century. The handling of the challenge -- its vote on whether Iran's nuclear programme should be referred to the UN Security Council -- was all the more commendable because its outcome defied domestic political expediency. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh personally cleared the decision to vote with the US and the so-called EU-3, namely Germany, France and the UK, in favour of referring Iran at an unspecified date to the Security Council on suspicions of pursuing a programme to acquire nuclear weapons in the full knowledge that the vote would spark a furore among Left parties and to a lesser extent in the BJP. In deciding to vote with the West and not abstaining along with Russia, China, Brazil and South Africa, what weighed with the Prime Minister was the absolute imperative for India to secure its interests in the Gulf and not the desire to protect the July 18, 2005, Indo-US nuclear agreement, according to diplomats engaged in the negotiations that led to the IAEA resolution yesterday. Top-ranking Americans have told equally top-ranking Indians in recent weeks that the US has plans to invade Iran before Bush's term ends. In 2002, a year before the US invaded Iraq, high-ranking Americans had similarly shared their definitive vision of a post-Saddam Iraq, making it clear that they would change the regime in Baghdad. On the last day of his stay in New York this month, Singh made public his fears for the safety of nearly four million Indians in the Gulf in the event of diplomacy failing to persuade Iran away from a confrontation with the US and others on the nuclear issue. Singh knows that whatever he has done on the economic front in the last year and a half as Prime Minister and much of what he did as finance minister in the 1990s will be under threat if the Gulf was plunged into another war. In talks with leaders in the US, Russia and Europe, Singh has linked India's energy security and its comfortable balance of payments to stability in the Gulf. That squarely put India against Iran acquiring nuclear weapons in violation of its own international commitment under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). In his conversation with Singh on Friday, Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, made it clear that Iran would no longer be bound by the IAEA's "additional protocol" allowing its inspectors into the country if it was referred to the Security Council. Such an action would have been only a few steps away from an Iranian withdrawal from the NPT itself, which would have created a grave international crisis. Through other channels, the Iranians also told India that they would start uranium enrichment from a second nuclear facility if the Security Council was brought into the issue. In the light of these developments, foreign secretary Shyam Saran in New York and India's permanent representative to the UN in Vienna, Sheel Kant Sharma, engaged in marathon talks with the Americans and Europeans right upto the actual vote last night to ensure that Iran was dealt with in the IAEA and not hauled before the Security Council immediately. South Block's recommendation that India should vote for the resolution was put before the Prime Minister after the EU-3 approached India in New York on Friday night. French, German and British officials assured Saran then that India's insistence on dealing with Iran in the IAEA -- at least till the next meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors in November -- had been accommodated. The EU-3 also assured India that IAEA director-general Mohamed El Baradei would continue to have the whiphand on the issue. Iran is understood to have assured India privately after last night's vote that it would resume negotiations with the IAEA. But in Tehran's world of doublespeak, it is also expected to whip up popular sentiment by publicly railing against the IAEA resolution. -- http://cyberjournal.org "Apocalypse Now and the Brave New World" http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/rkm/Apocalypse_and_NWO.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: cj-unsubscribe@cyberjournal.org For additional commands, e-mail: cj-help@cyberjournal.org ***************************************************************** 2 RIA Novosti: Russia urges Iran to observe IAEA agreement - foreign ministry 03/ 10/ 2005 MOSCOW, October 3 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement Monday urging Iran to comply with the additional protocol to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Safeguards Agreement. "...The continuation of Tehran's cooperation with the IAEA on remaining issues and Iran's observance of voluntary obligations, including the additional protocol to the IAEA Safeguards Agreement, will normalize the situation involving Iran's nuclear program," the statement said. The Foreign Ministry said compliance with the provisions of the document, which Iran signed in 2003 but never ratified, was an important confidence-building measure. On the other hand, refusal to observe the provisions could hinder a resolution to the Iranian nuclear problem within the IAEA framework. Iran denies seeking atomic bombs and says its nuclear program is only for generating electricity. However, it concealed its nuclear fuel program from the IAEA for 18 years. Moscow and Tehran are cooperating under bilateral agreements on the supply of nuclear fuel and the return of nuclear waste. But the future of their cooperation looks uncertain in light of the IAEA Board of Governors' recent decision to refer Iran's nuclear dossier to the UN Security Council. This body may decide to impose sanctions on Tehran, including an economic embargo and a comprehensive ban on nuclear research, thereby postponing construction of a second Bushehr reactor indefinitely. The Iranian parliament is drafting a document that instructs the government to withdraw from the additional IAEA protocol if the United States and the EU increase pressure on the country to abandon the development of its nuclear fuel cycle, the statement said. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 3 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Urges End to Nuke Project With Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Monday October 3, 2005 11:31 PM AP Photo XHS104 By NICK WADHAMS Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - In an apparent reference to Russia, the United States on Monday urged governments to end nuclear projects with Iran in light of a recent finding that Tehran is not complying with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Stephen G. Rademaker, assistant U.S. secretary of state for arms control, told a U.N. committee that nations must change their policies as a result of a Sept. 24 International Atomic Energy Agency resolution that found Iran in noncompliance because of its past covert activities. ``We think it's self-evident, for example, that in the face of such a finding, no government should permit new nuclear transfers to Iran and all ongoing nuclear projects should be frozen,'' Rademaker told a U.N. General Assembly First Committee session to discuss disarmament issues. Rademaker did not mention Russia by name, but Russia has an $800 million contract to build a nuclear reactor in the city of Bushehr. Russia has trained about 700 Iranian nuclear engineers, and several dozen Iranian experts are in training at a nuclear power plant in the country's southwest. Asked later if he would urge Russia directly to end its cooperation with Iran, Rademaker said ``I think the statement I gave today speaks for itself.'' Russia's U.N. spokesman, Sergei Trepelkov, said Rademaker's remarks were nothing new and insisted that Russia would not end its cooperation with Iran. ``Certainly we're not interested in Iran getting nuclear weapons but, as for Bushehr, it's a purely peaceful project, and it fully meets the demands of the International Atomic Energy Agency,'' Sergei Trepelkov said. ``I don't think there is any ground for ceasing this cooperation.'' The Bush administration has long urged Russia to call off the Bushehr program over concerns that the reactor could help Tehran develop nuclear weapons. Yet U.S. officials had recently accepted Russian assurances that no enrichment or reprocessing would take place, especially after a deal that required any spent fuel rods to be returned to Russia. This was the first time the United States had made such a call since the IAEA resolution passed. A spokesman for Iran's U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment. Iran insists its nuclear program is for energy purposes, while the United States suspects Iran is trying to build atomic bombs. ``IAEA investigations have exposed almost two decades of clandestine nuclear work, as well as a pattern of evasion and deception that can only be explained as part of an illegal nuclear weapons program,'' Rademaker said. Last week's IAEA board resolution put off a decision on whether to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. The board hopes that will give Tehran time to meet its demands, which included a call on Iran to end uranium conversion - a precursor of enrichment - and commit to freezing all enrichment plans. Russia abstained at the IAEA board's vote and has said it opposes sanctions for Iran. Earlier Monday, it urged Iran not to suspend cooperation on inspections by the U.N. nuclear watchdog. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 4 CITIZEN-TIMES.com: Both practically and morally, nuclear 'bunker buster' weapons are a non-starter Asheville, NC published: October 3, 2005 6:00 am There's an adage in the theater that if a prop gun is seen on stage during the first act, someone will fire it before the end of the third act. This is why we need to get nuclear weapons off the world stage. Unfortunately, some elements of this administration are determined to make nuclear weapons more useable, virtually guaranteeing that at some point they will be used. Planners envision a scenario in which nukes would be used pre-emptively against weapons of mass destruction. Exhibit No. 1 of this policy is the so-called "bunker buster." Officially known as the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, the bunker buster is designed to destroy strategic targets either buried underground or "hardened" to the point that conventional explosives cannot destroy them. Bunker busters would be much less powerful than existing nuclear weapons, and they would be detonated underground rather than on or above the surface, supposedly minimizing civilian causalities. But they wouldn't, according to a National Academy of Sciences report commissioned by Congress. Casualties "would be equal to that from a surface burst of the same weapon yield," the report said. Stephen Young, who works with the Union of Concerned Scientists, says the weapon "is ineffective against bunkers that are deeper than 300 meters (roughly 1,000 feet) underground, a distance reached easily by current tunneling technology." Aside from the morality of using such weapons, has anyone seriously thought of the practical implications? The most logical target for bunker busters would be Iran, a nation with too large an army to be defeated in conventional battle without straining U.S. resources to the breaking point. It's hard to imagine any scenario that yields a positive outcome if we drop a nuclear weapon on an Islamic nation. Much of the world, including most of our major oil suppliers, would be turned implacably against us and most of the rest would be appalled. In a very real sense, the United States would likely have started World War III. In the case of Iraq, the administration could have peppered that nation with glowing holes and insisted that weapons which never existed were destroyed by the blasts. A senior Pentagon official says the pre-emption doctrine "is a long way from being done," but that is not very reassuring. Thus far Congress has saved the administration from itself, and it needs to do so again. An amendment to the defense funding bill offered by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., would take the money sought to resume studies and reallocate it to the D.C. National Guard for disaster training and equipment. That amendment, or something similar, should be adopted. We must not reach Act III with these props in place. © 2005 Asheville Citizen-Times • 14 O. Henry Ave., Asheville, NC 28801 • Phone: 828-252-5611. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the . View our . The Asheville Citizen-Times is a newspaper along with . ***************************************************************** 5 [toeslist] Nuclear War in the Works? Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 11:49:17 -0500 (CDT) "Top-ranking Americans have told equally top-ranking Indians in recent weeks that the US has plans to invade Iran before Bush's term ends." "... what weighed with the (Indian) Prime Minister was the absolute imperative for India to secure its interests in the Gulf, and not the desire to protect the July 18, 2005, Indo-US nuclear agreement .." I saw a custom bumper-sticker -- a billboard, really -- on the back of a red pickup truck in Rutland, Vermont the other day. It said "Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea, Syria -- Two Down, and Two To Go". If what you're about to read is correct, that bumper-sticker is most likely wrong. We learned with the Iraq fiasco that it is possible to determine whether the Bush regime will attempt an invasion many months before the actual fact of the invasion. We know, of course that the regime's economists may be saying to Bush and Cheney that the Iranian Oil Bourse must not come on-line, as is planned for first or second quarter 2006. What that would most likely accomplish is the removal of the monopolistic underpinning of the value of the dollar, which currently is the 'fiat' currency accepted for the purchase of crude oil from most of the world's major suppliers. This is why we must begin to pay attention to reports like the one below. Please, if you have any knowledge that would reinforce this supposed diplomatically-telegraphed intention, kindly send it in for publication on the CERJ list. We did it before, and we will do it again, all other things being equal. And if the 'petrodollar' era ends, would that be so bad? I don't think so, really. Maybe the USA would undergo a huge economic recession, possibly even a multi-year depression. But the damage can't be as great as the results of the illegal Iraq-Attack, that is, expenses approaching a trillion dollars, and upwards of a million people killed outright in warfare, famine, epidemic, pestilence, etc. And I have to believe that the rest of the world would not let me and my children starve. I think its the white supremacists who do that, not the rest of the world. In any case, I'd take my chances with my country, because I don't believe in 'American exceptionalism'. Not only that, I'm doing everything I can to struggle against it. Naturally, the Bush regime will make the same old same old, excuses of weapons of mass destruction or whatever. Insofar as can be determined, what the Iranians are doing -- with the help of Russia and other countries in Europe -- is developing nuclear power and research capabilities. In the upcoming weeks, you can expect to see conflicting reports of whether this will install in Iran the capability of manufacturing nuclear weapons, and/or whether or not they will embrace the intention of doing so. I am already seeing unconfirmable reports to the effect that Iran now has huge secret underground nuclear facilities working on weaponry. Look carefully at the source, and the funding of the source, of any information you receive to this effect. You will find that by and large, if the source is speculating that Iran may develop nuclear weapons, the source will be corporate, governmental, or neocon. Independent sources and those outside the USA will be more likely to give an unbiased portrayal of the situation. It is safe to say, as this article outlines, that the USA is developing 'contingency plans' for making war on Iran. Will it involve ground troops like in Iraq? If so, we would likely know weeks or months beforehand via grassroots reporting of troop movements. Will ol' Bushie just nuke 'em? Not likely, as this would result in the world's further, and much more pronounced, ostracism of the USA. Will Iran concluded some sort of agreement with the neocon west whereby they would decline to bring the Oil Bourse on line after all? I consider this possible, though I have not seen any speculation thereto -- this has most certainly been the USA's classic modus operandi with respect to Saudi Arabia -- promise to keep a noxious regime in power in exchange for keeping resources on the 'dollar standard'. Will the plans involve Israel 'taking out' the Iranian nuclear facilities, just as they did with Iraq years before the two US invasions? Personally, I still consider this the most likely scenario. The scariest thing, though, is that for the first time since 1945, it is likely there are now plans afoot to actually launch a nuclear war, and the true intentions to carry forward those plans. In the USA? In Israel? In Iran? In China or Russia? Stay tuned, folks. And you CERJers out there who comb the web, please stay alert for more developments. -- John Wilmerding <...> On Monday, October 3, 2005, cyberjournal.org carried: Top-ranking Americans have told equally top-ranking Indians in recent weeks that the US has plans to invade Iran before Bush's term ends. In 2002, a year before the US invaded Iraq, high-ranking Americans had similarly shared their definitive vision of a post-Saddam Iraq, making it clear that they would change the regime in Baghdad. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050926/asp/nation/story_5284580.asp Gulf Factor Key to Prime Minister's Iran Vote Decision by K. P. Nayar 2005 The Telegraph, Calcutta, India Washington, DC -- Friday, September 25, 2005 -- New Delhi acquitted itself reasonably well in the first significant challenge to its global standing and diplomacy since the world acknowledged India as an emerging global power worthy of being in the 'big league' in the 21st century. The handling of the challenge -- its vote on whether Iran's nuclear program should be referred to the UN Security Council -- was all the more commendable because its outcome defied domestic political expediency. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh personally cleared the decision to vote with the US and the so-called EU-3, namely Germany, France and the UK, in favor of referring Iran at an unspecified date to the Security Council on suspicions of pursuing a program to acquire nuclear weapons, in the full knowledge that the vote would spark a furor among Left parties, and to a lesser extent in the BJP. In deciding to vote with the West and not abstaining along with Russia, China, Brazil and South Africa, what weighed with the Prime Minister was the absolute imperative for India to secure its interests in the Gulf, and not the desire to protect the July 18, 2005, Indo-US nuclear agreement, according to diplomats engaged in the negotiations that led to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) resolution yesterday. Top-ranking Americans have told equally top-ranking Indians in recent weeks that the US has plans to invade Iran before Bush's term ends. In 2002, a year before the US invaded Iraq, high-ranking Americans had similarly shared their definitive vision of a post-Saddam Iraq, making it clear that they would change the regime in Baghdad. On the last day of his stay in New York this month, Singh made public his fears for the safety of nearly four million Indians in the Gulf in the event of diplomacy failing to persuade Iran away from a confrontation with the US and others on the nuclear issue. Singh knows that whatever he has done on the economic front in the last year and a half as Prime Minister, and much of what he did as finance minister in the 1990s, will be under threat if the Gulf was plunged into another war. In talks with leaders in the US, Russia and Europe, Singh has linked India's energy security and its comfortable balance of payments to stability in the Gulf. That squarely puts India against Iran acquiring nuclear weapons in violation of its own international commitment under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). In his conversation with Singh on Friday, Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, made it clear that if the matter is referred to the UN Security Council, Iran would no longer be bound by the IAEA's "additional protocol" allowing its inspectors into the country. Such an action would have been only a few steps away from an Iranian withdrawal from the NPT itself, which would have created a grave international crisis. Through other channels, the Iranians also told India that they would start uranium enrichment from a second nuclear facility if the Security Council were brought into the issue. In the light of these developments, foreign secretary Shyam Saran in New York, and India's permanent-representative to the UN in Vienna, Sheel Kant Sharma, engaged in marathon talks with the Americans and Europeans right up to the actual vote last night to ensure that Iran was dealt with in the IAEA, and not hauled before the Security Council immediately. South Block's recommendation that India should vote for the resolution was put before the Prime Minister after the EU-3 approached India in New York on Friday night. French, German and British officials assured Saran then that India's insistence on dealing with Iran in the IAEA -- at least till the next meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors in November -- had been accommodated. The EU-3 also assured India that IAEA director-general Mohamed El Baradei would continue to have the whiphand on the issue. Iran is understood to have assured India privately after last night's vote that it would resume negotiations with the IAEA. But in Tehran's world of doublespeak, it is also expected to whip up popular sentiment by publicly railing against the IAEA resolution. <...> Watchdog Agrees On Iran Resolution International Atomic Energy Agency Delays UN Talks on Iran's Nuclear Intentions 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP Vienna, Austria -- Tuesday, September 27, 2005 -- (Reuters) -- The UN nuclear watchdog has passed a resolution requiring Iran to be reported to the Security Council over a failure to convince the agency its nuclear program was entirely peaceful. "The resolution was adopted," an IAEA spokeswoman told reporters. The International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) governing board approved it despite Iranian threats to begin enriching uranium if the U.S.-backed resolution, drafted by the EU's three biggest powers, that could eventually lead to UN Security Council sanctions against Tehran was passed. With 22 votes for the resolution, 12 abstentions and only one vote against, the outcome highlighted the split between rich Western nations and poorer developing nations led by Russia, China, South Africa, which disagree with Washington and Europe on how to deal with Iran. In what EU diplomats said was a victory for Western efforts to ratchet up the pressure on Tehran, both China and Russia, which had strongly opposed the EU's proposed resolution, abstained. Venezuela was the only country to vote against it. India, which had opposed the EU resolution, voted for it. Iran denies seeking atomic bombs, and says its nuclear program is only for generating electricity. However, it concealed its atomic fuel program from the IAEA for 18 years. Russia, which is building a $1 billion nuclear reactor at Bushehr in Iran, and has much to gain from Iran's plans to develop atomic energy, has long been an opponent of referring Iran's program to the Security Council. China, which needs Iran's vast energy resources for its own booming economy, also opposes the Western drive against Iran. Both countries fear a U.N. referral will cause the standoff over Iran's program to escalate into an international crisis. Watered-Down Resolution The EU resolution requires Tehran to be reported to the Security Council, but at an unspecified date -- watering down an earlier demand from the Europeans for an immediate referral. This means Iran would most likely not be referred to the Council until the IAEA board meets in November, diplomats say. The resolution, which diplomats said was prepared in close consultation with Washington, says Iran's "many failures and breaches" of its nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Safeguards Agreement "constitute non-compliance" with the pact. It added there was an "absence of confidence" that Iran's atomic program was exclusively peaceful and this gave rise to questions "within the competence of the Security Council". For two years, the EU's three biggest powers -- France, Britain and Germany -- have tried to persuade Iran that it needed to abandon its enriched uranium fuel program to convince the world that its atomic ambitions are peaceful. Last month, the talks collapsed after Tehran resumed uranium processing and rejected an EU offer of economic and political incentives if it scrapped its uranium enrichment program, prompting the EU trio to join Washington in calling for the case to be sent to the Security Council. Tehran Has Threatened to Retaliate On Friday, diplomats said the Iranian delegation had been showing some board members and IAEA general director, Mohamed ElBaradei, two unsigned letters informing the IAEA what would happen if the EU resolution is approved. One letter said that Iran would begin enriching uranium, a process that produces fuel for atomic power plants or weapons, at an underground facility at Natanz. The second says Tehran would end short-notice inspections under a special NPT protocol. <...> Note, this is last year's news, but there will be a meeting in November that could build further upon these trends, moving the issue closer to the UN Security Council -- probably for consideration of "sanctions". -- JW, Ed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3669530.stm Full Text: IAEA Iran Resolution The following is the full text of the resolution adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency on Iran on September 18, 2004. Background Click here to go to demands The Board of Governors (a) Recalling the resolutions adopted by the board on 18 June 2004, 13 March 2004, 26 November 2003, and on 12 September 2003 and the statement by the board of 19 June 2003, (b) Noting with appreciation the director general's report of 1 September 2004, on the implementation of safeguards in Iran, (c) Noting the director general's assessment that the agency is making steady progress towards understanding Iran's nuclear programmes, but that further work is still required on a number of questions and issues, notably contamination and the scope of the P2 centrifuge programme, and that there are other issues that will also require further follow-up, for example the timeframe of Iran's plutonium separation experiments, Iran has not heeded repeated calls from the board to suspend, as a confidence building measure, all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities (d) Noting with serious concern that, as detailed in the director general's report, Iran has not heeded repeated calls from the board to suspend, as a confidence building measure, all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, (e) Also concerned that, at its Uranium Conversion Facility [UCF], Iran is planning to introduce 37 tons of yellowcake, as this would run counter to the request made of Iran by the board in resolution GOV/2004/49, (f) Recognising the right of states to the development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful purposes, including the production of electric power, consistent with their Treaty obligations, with due consideration for the needs of the developing countries, and (g) Stressing the need for effective safeguards to prevent nuclear material being used for prohibited purposes, in contravention of agreements, and underlining the vital importance of effective safeguards for facilitating co-operation in the field of nuclear energy, Demands 1. Strongly urges that Iran respond positively to the director general's findings on the provision of access and information by taking such steps as are required by the agency and/or requested by the board in relation to the implementation of Iran's Safeguards Agreement, including the provision of prompt access to locations and personnel, and by providing further information and explanations when required by the agency and proactively, to assist the agency to understand the full extent and nature of Iran's enrichment program and to take all steps within its power to clarify the outstanding issues before the board's 25 November meeting, specifically including the sources and reasons for enriched uranium contamination, and the import, manufacture, and use of centrifuges; The Board of Governors considers it necessary, to promote confidence, that Iran immediately suspend all enrichment-related activities. 2. Emphasizes the continuing importance of Iran acting in accordance with all provisions of the Additional Protocol including by providing all access required in a timely manner; and urges Iran once again to ratify its Protocol without delay; 3. Deeply regrets that the implementation of Iranian voluntary decisions to suspend enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, notified to the agency on 29 December 2003 and 24 February 2004, fell significantly short of the agency's understanding of the scope of those commitments, and also that Iran has since reversed some of those decisions; stresses that such suspension would provide the board with additional confidence in Iran's future activities; and considers it necessary, to promote confidence, that Iran immediately suspend all enrichment-related activities, including the manufacture or import of centrifuge components, the assembly and testing of centrifuges, and the production of feed material, including through tests or production at the UCF, under agency verification so that this could be confirmed in the reports requested in paragraphs 7 and 8 below; 4. Calls again on Iran, as a further confidence-building measure, voluntarily to reconsider its decision to start construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water; 5. Underlines the need for the full and prompt co-operation with the agency of third countries in relation to the clarification of outstanding issues, and expresses appreciation for the co-operation received by the agency to date; 6. Appreciates the professional and impartial efforts of the director general and the Secretariat to implement Iran's NPT Safeguards Agreement, and, pending its entry into force, Iran's Additional Protocol, as well as to verify Iran's suspension of enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, and to investigate supply routes and sources; 7. Requests the director general to submit in advance of the November board: -- a report on the implementation of this resolution; -- a recapitulation of the agency's findings on the Iranian nuclear program since September 2002, as well as a full account of past and present Iranian co-operation with the agency, including the timing of declarations, and a record of the development of all aspects of the program, as well as a detailed analysis of the implications of those findings in relation to Iran's implementation of its Safeguards Agreement; 8. Also requests the director general to submit, in advance of the November board, a report on Iran's response to the requests made of it by the board in previous resolutions, especially requests relating to full suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities; 9. Decides that at its November session it will decide whether or not further steps are appropriate in relation to: -- Iran's obligations under its NPT Safeguards Agreement; -- the requests made of Iran, as confidence-building measures, by the board in this and previous resolutions; .. and to remain seized of the matter. ========================================= COLLEGIUM IUSTITIF FQUITATEM RESTITUENTI +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ John Woolman College of Equity-Restorative Justice Peacemaking and Conflict Transformation c/o John Wilmerding 217 High Street, Brattleboro, VT, USA 05301 Phone: (01)-802-254-2826 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "There is no time left except to make peace work a part of our every waking activity." -- Elise Boulding, Quaker Scholar & Peace Activist +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ To join (or leave) the College's email list, send an email message to wilmerding@earthlink.net or to cerj@igc.org, including your first & last name, your email address, and your state, province or country of residence. A partial CERJ list archive is at this site: http://lists.topica.com/lists/CERJ/read ========================================= ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/NJYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/toeslist/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: toeslist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 6 Assembly Committee Must Work To Break Stalemate On Nuclear Arms - UN Official Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 19:00:48 -0400 The senior United Nations disarmament official today called on the General Assembly’s security committee to break the diplomatic stalemate on nuclear arms that led to a failure to achieve progress on the issue at recent international meetings. “It is a secret to no one in this room that collectively we are at present stumbling to meet this challenge,” said Under-Secretary for Disarmament Affairs, Nobuyasu Abe said in an address to the panel, known as the First Committee. Echoing previous comments by Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Mr. Abe blamed posturing by Member States for the lack of results on the nuclear issue at the Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference earlier this year and again at the UN World Summit last month. “It falls in some large measure to this Committee to begin [the] task of trying to pick up the pieces and provide fresh orientation,” he told the body, which includes representatives from all 191 of the UN’s Member States. Specifically, Mr. Abe called for guidance from the Committee on how the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament can achieve progress on negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty and other issues, including negative security assurances and even “the fundamental question of complete nuclear disarmament.” Biological and chemical weapons remain major items on the agenda because of their “potentially massive and indiscriminate effects,” he said, adding that growing concern that nuclear weapons will fall into the hands of terrorists has also become an important issue for the UN Department of Disarmament. “There are many measures to be taken to establish domestic laws and regulations to criminalize activities concerning proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to non-State actors and to establish and tighten export and border controls,” Mr. Abe said. He also called for greater attention to the threat posed by conventional arms, noting that “everyday tragedies” that occur around the world “kill thousands of people every year.” To that end, he urged action on a draft international instrument aimed at enabling States to identify and trace illicit small arms and light weapons. 2005-10-03 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 7 RIA Novosti UPDATE: Switzerland to extradite Russian ex-minister Adamov to USA - justice official 03/ 10/ 2005 GENEVA, October 3 (RIA Novosti)-Switzerland will extradite Yevgeny Adamov, a former minister for nuclear power, to the United States, an official for the Swiss justice department said Monday. Adamov, who was minister from 1998 to 2001, was arrested on May 2 in Berne at the request of the U.S. authorities, which suspect him of embezzling $9 million. Both Russia and the U.S. sought his extradition from Switzerland. But the Swiss authorities took the view that the U.S. petition was a priority. Adamov's lawyers now have 30 days to appeal against the decision in the Switzerland's highest legal body, the Federal Supreme Court in Lausanne. The main argument the Swiss authorities gave in favor of extraditing Adamov to the U.S. was that the ex-minister was a Russian citizen and Russia did not extradite its own. Therefore, according to the Swiss justice department, there is no guarantee that Russia will extradite Adamov to the U.S. in the future. The U.S., however, said it was ready to send Adamov, who started a hunger strike in protest at how long it was taking to decide his extradition, back to his homeland to face justice there. According to the Swiss authorities, this decision should satisfy both Russia and the U.S., as both countries will have the opportunity to prosecute Adamov. The U.S. filed an official extradition request on June 24, and Russia did so on May 17. The Russian Prosecutor General's Office has charged the ex-minister with embezzlement and abuse of office. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 8 BBC: Russian to be 'extradited to US' Last Updated: Monday, 3 October 2005 [Yevgeny Adamov] Yevgeny Adamov has gone on hunger strike in protest Former Russian nuclear energy minister Yevgeny Adamov is to be extradited from Switzerland to the United States, the Swiss justice ministry has announced. The US accuses Mr Adamov of embezzling up to $9m (Ł4.9m) it gave to improve security at Russian nuclear facilities. Russia has been fighting the move for fear his detailed knowledge of the country's nuclear weapons programme could fall into US hands. It said the decision to extradite Mr Adamov was politically motivated. "The [Swiss] federal justice authorities has taken a decision that runs counter to judicial and objective circumstances," a statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry said. The former minister has 30 days to appeal to the Swiss federal supreme court against the US extradition order. Hunger strike Mr Adamov was arrested in Switzerland in May on a warrant issued in the US. Moscow filed its own extradition request shortly afterwards. A US federal grand jury has indicted him on charges of conspiracy to transfer stolen money, conspiracy to defraud the US, money laundering and tax evasion. The nuclear physicist, who was Russia's nuclear minister from 1998 to 2001, denies the charges and has said he would prefer to be extradited to his homeland. Swiss Justice Ministry spokesman Rudolf Wyss said the US request had been given precedence because it meant Mr Adamov could still be extradited to Russia once he had served any sentence imposed in the US. If he had been sent back to Russia first, it would not have been possible to re-extradite him to Washington later, he said. Mr Adamov started a hunger strike on Monday to press for extradition to Russia or release, Mr Wyss added. ***************************************************************** 9 Reuters: India, Pakistan in "good" talks, sign two pacts World Crises | Reuters.com Mon 3 Oct 2005 4:14 AM ET By Aamir Ashraf ISLAMABAD, Oct 3 (Reuters) - India and Pakistan signed two agreements on security cooperation on Monday as their foreign ministers discussed a tentative peace process, but a breakthrough on their core dispute over Kashmir was not expected. India's Natwar Singh and his Pakistani counterpart, Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri, said their talks were going well as officials signed pacts on advance warning of ballistic missile tests and on a hotline between their coast guards. "All I can say is that the talks went off in a very cordial manner," Kasuri told reporters at the Foreign Ministry in Islamabad, during a break in the discussions. Singh said: "We have had very good talks. Now we are again going for talks." The nuclear-armed neighbours have gone to war three times since independence in 1947 and nearly fought a fourth in 2002 before launching a peace process early last year. As well as the two security pacts, there is also a possibility of progress on the withdrawal of troops from a disputed Himalayan glacier and on a maritime border row, analysts said. But a breakthrough on the main issue of contention, their decades-long dispute over the Himalayan region of Kashmir, was not likely, analysts from both sides have said. "We shouldn't expect major breakthroughs but definitely we'll see some progress," Jamshed Ayaz, president of the Institute of Regional Studies, an Islamabad-based think-tank, said on Sunday. CEASEFIRE HOLDING Singh's visit follows a meeting between Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in New York last month that ended without any major announcement or concrete initiatives, as many had expected. Even before that meeting on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly, the neighbours exchanged barbs on Kashmir. Both countries claim the region but it remains divided by a ceasefire line, the result of their first war over the territory soon after independence from Britain in 1947. Tens of thousands have died in Indian Kashmir since 1989, when a Muslim separatist revolt against Indian rule erupted. India wants Pakistan to do more to stop militants slipping across the ceasefire line into Indian Kashmir. Muslim Pakistan says Indian forces should stop rights abuses in the region. Despite differences over Kashmir, a ceasefire has held there since late 2003 and the two sides have launched a so-called composite dialogue on a range of issues,including Kashmir. While little progress has been made on Kashmir, the two sides have reached agreement in several other areas including the restoration of diplomatic, sports and transport links, as well as on some trade and prisoner exchanges. They have also discussed energy cooperation, in particular a $7 billion gas pipeline from Iran, through Pakistan, to India. But analysts say that project could be at risk in the wake of India's vote at the international Atomic Energy Agency's governing board meeting late last month. At the meting, India joined the United States in voting to refer Iran's nuclear programme to the United Nations Security Council for possible sanctions. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 Scotsman.com: Nuclear option 'open for Scotland' Mon 3 Oct 2005 Jack McConnell said Scotland must keep its "options open" on the question of new nuclear power stations but not before a solution is found to disposing of radioactive waste. The First Minister, giving his first media briefing since the summer, said the Executive would use its powers "in the best interests of Scotland". He said: "We are not prepared to consider a new nuclear power station in Scotland until the issue of waste is successfully resolved and even then it will only be to consider, discuss and debate. It will not necessarily be to agree." The session also allowed the First Minister to renew his opposition to a Bill, due to be voted on this week, to make St Andrew's Day a bank holiday. Mr McConnell was asked about reports that a senior Labour advisor had suggested the party could gain the Liberal Democrat-held Holyrood seat of Caithness, Sutherland &Easter Ross by building a nuclear power station at Dounreay. John McTernan, the Prime Minister's political secretary, later said his comments were meant as "a joke" but Labour's opponents seized on the remarks. They pointed to the urgency of Labour ministers south of the border in making a decision about whether to start work on a new generation of nuclear power station to help meet rising demand for electricity amid rising oil world prices and global warming. The issue also fuelled speculation of growing tensions between Scotland's coalition parties - a partnership Mr McConnell appeared keen to praise. He said the two-term Labour-Lib Dem coalition had worked well for Scotland and made "a huge difference". And he insisted: "I'm not going to start slagging off our coalition partners who have provided, I have to say, extremely loyal and disciplined support for the coalition by and large since 2003." © Copyright Press Association Ltd 2005, All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: India, Pakistan Sign Missile Tests Deal From the Associated Press [UP] Monday October 3, 2005 10:16 AM AP Photo ISL102 By SADAQAT JAN Associated Press Writer ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - India and Pakistan on Monday signed a deal requiring them to notify each other of plans for ballistic missile tests, a key step in the peace process between the two nuclear-armed rivals. Indian External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh and his Pakistani counterpart, Khursheed Kasuri, announced the agreement after talks that they described as cordial and constructive. Groundwork for the deal was laid in talks in the Indian capital of New Delhi last month. ``The agreement entails that both countries provide each other advance notification of flight tests that it intends to undertake of any surface-to-surface ballistic missile,'' the Indian side said in a statement. ``India has now handed over a draft memorandum of understanding on measures to reduce the risks of accidental or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons under the control of both countries,'' the statement said. India did not elaborate on the draft document, but officials have said they plan to set up a hotline to reduce the possibility of a misunderstanding that could lead to nuclear conflict. India and Pakistan already operate one hotline between senior army commanders. India also said the two countries signed a memorandum of understanding that would establish a hotline between their coast guards. Such a communication link could speed up the repatriation of fishermen from both countries who often stray across the border in the Arabian Sea. Singh and Kasuri did not sign the missile test agreement, leaving that task to top officials in their ministries. Instead, they discussed ways to strengthen the fledgling peace process between India and Pakistan, which have fought three wars since independence from British rule in 1947. ``The talks went off in a very cordial atmosphere,'' Kasuri said. Singh said the talks were ``good.'' The two countries have often staged tit-for-tat missile tests that raise regional tensions. Singh was likely to meet Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz on Tuesday, and revive a joint commission for promoting economic cooperation and other contacts. Singh will also travel to the southern port city of Karachi to meet business leaders. He returns to India on Wednesday. India and Pakistan began peace talks in January last year, but have made little headway in resolving a bitter dispute over the Himalayan region of Kashmir. The two neighboring countries control parts of the territory, but each claims it in its entirety. However, the rivals have resumed some severed transportation links, restored normal diplomatic ties and made it easier for people from either side to travel to the other country. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 12 Guardian Unlimited: Swiss to Extradite Ex-Russia Nuke Minister From the Associated Press [UP] Monday October 3, 2005 12:16 PM DANIEL FRIEDLI Associated Press Writer BERN, Switzerland (AP) - Switzerland has decided to extradite former Russian nuclear minister Yevgeny Adamov to the United States rather than to his homeland, the Justice Ministry said Monday. Russia has been fighting the U.S. extradition request for fear Adamov could reveal nuclear secrets while facing charges in the United States of stealing up to $9 million intended for improvements to Russia's nuclear security. Adamov has 30 days to file an appeal with the Swiss supreme court, the ministry said in a statement. Adamov has accepted extradition only to Russia. He started a hunger strike on Monday, ministry spokesman Rudolf Wyss said, without elaborating on the reason. It was unclear if the strike was meant as a protest against the extradition procedure, he said. Swiss authorities arrested Adamov on a U.S. warrant on May 2, while he was visiting his daughter in Bern. A U.S. federal grand jury in Pittsburgh has since indicted the Russian on charges of conspiracy to transfer stolen money and securities, conspiracy to defraud the United States, money laundering and tax evasion. U.S. authorities suspect Adamov of embezzling U.S. Energy Department funds and diverting them into private projects in the United States, Ukraine and Russia. The U.S. extradition request was given priority over the Russian one, because ``had priority been given to Russia, Adamov's Russian citizenship would have meant that he could not subsequently have been extradited onward to the (United States),'' the statement said. Russian news agency Interfax reported that Adamov was going on a hunger strike until a decision was made on his extradition to Russia or release. ``Not recognizing a single charge brought against me and having no other way to protest against my actually unlimited confinement, I declare a hunger strike until the (Swiss) Federal Office of Justice decides on my extradition or release,'' Adamov said Monday in a statement published by the Russian daily Izvestia. The Russian embassy in Bern, Switzerland, was not immediately available to comment. ----- Associated Press correspondents Bradley S. Klapper in Geneva and Judith Ingram in Moscow contributed to this report. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: Swiss to Extradite Russian Ex-Minister From the Associated Press [UP] Monday October 3, 2005 9:01 PM By DANIEL FRIEDLI Associated Press Writer BERN, Switzerland (AP) - Switzerland has decided to extradite Russia's former nuclear minister to the United States on charges of stealing up to $9 million that was intended to improve security of nuclear plants, the Justice Ministry said Monday. Russia has been fighting the U.S. extradition request for Yevgeny Adamov out of fear that he could reveal nuclear secrets while facing the charges in the United States. Adamov has accepted extradition only to Russia and has 30 days to appeal to the Swiss supreme court, the ministry said. Earlier in the day, Adamov began a hunger strike, apparently to press for extradition to Russia, but it was over by early afternoon. ``I saw him eating lunch,'' Adamov's lawyer, Stefan Wehrenberg said. Swiss authorities arrested the nuclear physicist on a U.S. warrant on May 2, while he was visiting his daughter in Bern. A federal grand jury in Pittsburgh has since indicted him on charges of conspiracy to transfer stolen money and securities, conspiracy to defraud the United States, money laundering and tax evasion. U.S. authorities suspect Adamov of embezzling U.S. Energy Department funds and diverting them into private projects in the United States, Ukraine and Russia. The U.S. extradition request was given priority over the Russian one because, ``had priority been given to Russia, Adamov's Russian citizenship would have meant that he could not subsequently have been extradited onward to the (United States),'' the ministry said. It said also the United States could later deport Adamov to Russia after its justice proceedings conclude. Adamov was appointed Atomic Energy Minister in 1998 by then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin, but came under criticism in connection with corruption allegations and his proposal to import nuclear waste to Russia for reprocessing. He also angered U.S. authorities when he shrugged off their objections to Russia's assistance to Iran's nuclear energy program. In 2001, the anti-corruption committee of Russia's State Duma, or lower house of parliament, accused Adamov of illegally setting up companies inside and outside Russia, including a consulting firm called Omeka registered in Monroeville, Pennsylvania. Adamov was dismissed from his post in March 2001 as part of a Cabinet reshuffle engineered by President Vladimir Putin one year after taking office. After leaving the minister's post, Adamov joined the Dollezhal Institute and worked on projects to improve safety at Russia's 11 Chernobyl-type reactors still in operation. The Russian Embassy in Bern was not immediately available to comment. Viktor Ilyukhin, a communist lawmaker in Russia's State Duma, questioned the U.S. motive in its extradition request. ``Parliament believes the U.S. is interested in having at its disposal a Russian ex-minister with secret information of great interest to U.S. intelligence services,'' Ilyukhin was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying. --- Associated Press writers Bradley S. Klapper in Geneva and Judith Ingram in Moscow contributed to this report. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 14 Exelon's PA nuke EP plans in violation; licenses could be Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:36:28 -0700 X-Temp-Whitephrase: YES nuclear X-Spamprobe: ham-super * 0.0000668 OK More From The Patriot-News | Subscribe To The Patriot-News Preschools near TMI lack plans to evacuate NRC engineer urges corrective action by state and local officials Monday, October 03, 2005 BY GARRY LENTON Of The Patriot-News Preschool children in day care and nursery schools are at risk of being left behind should an emergency be declared at any of Pennsylvania's five nuclear power stations, according to a memo written by a Nuclear Regulatory Commission engineer. Because federal and state officials have not planned how they will move preschool children to safety in a nuclear emergency, Michael Jamgochian, a 40-year veteran of the NRC, recommended that his agency give state and local officials four months to correct the problems or risk having the plants closed. Jamgochian's findings support claims raised three years ago by Larry Christian of New Cumberland and Eric Epstein of the watchdog group Three Mile Island Alert. They filed a petition with the NRC claiming day-care centers and nursery schools were not included in the emergency evacuation plans for the 10-mile zone surrounding TMI. Christian raised the concerns after learning that his daughters' child-care center did not have an emergency evacuation plan. His petition asked the NRC to adopt regulations requiring protection of day-care centers. The NRC was about to rule on that petition when Jamgochian intervened with a Sept. 7 memo directed to senior NRC administrators and obtained last week by The Patriot-News. Christian said he was encouraged by Jamgochian's memo. "It obviously means validation of the concerns we've been raising," he said. "It also gives me some hope that we'll finally have the protective measures in place ... to make sure preschool children are properly planned for." Epstein called Jamgochian's memo "courageous" and said it had the potential to change the way emergency planning is carried out. Jamgochian, who helped write the regulatory agency's rules for emergency planning after the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island, met with senior NRC administrators to discuss his findings. "Thus far," he said, "they agree with me." State compliance questioned: CONTINUED 1 | 2 | 3 Next More From The Patriot-News | Subscribe To The Patriot-News Preschools near TMI lack plans to evacuate Page 2 of 3 State compliance questioned: Federal law requires elaborate emergency planning for the area within 10 miles of a commercial nuclear power plant. The NRC relies on the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help determine the adequacy of emergency planning. FEMA's findings are the basis for granting operating licenses. Advertisement In his memo, Jamgochian wrote that FEMA regulations requiring state and local officials to arrange transportation for schoolchildren have not been met. Day-care children also have not been assigned to evacuation centers, he said. "I believe that FEMA and the State of Pennsylvania does not comply with FEMA guidance that NRC bases its licensing decision on," he wrote. He called on the NRC to codify FEMA's regulations, a move that would give the agency authority to assure that the requirements are met. Jamgochian's memo calls into question the basis on which nuclear plant owners were granted permission to operate. If his assertions are accepted by senior NRC staff, the agency could pull the plug on plants that provide more than 36 percent of the state's electricity. Such a move is unlikely, however. The finding could have ramifications outside Pennsylvania if the NRC finds that FEMA failed to ensure the safety of preschoolers in other states. "Certainly, this should be looked at," Jamgochian said in a telephone interview. Adrian King, who resigned Friday as director of the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, said in a written statement that the state was in compliance with federal regulations. He rejected Jamgochian's assertion that the regulations require state and local officials to provide transportation to evacuate preschoolers. Page 3 of 3 Under Department of Public Welfare licensing requirements, day-care centers must provide their own transportation, King wrote. If, during an emergency, they cannot, "PEMA is confident that state, county and local government assets will be adequate to meet transportation needs." A spokeswoman for FEMA said Jamgochian's memo was being reviewed but would not comment further. Possible 'confusion, chaos': Advertisement In a letter to the NRC last year, PEMA maintained that "day-care facilities are, for the most part, private business entities who, in conjunction with parents, should assume responsibility for the safety of their charges." Jamgochian quoted the letter in his memo as proof that the state was in violation of the requirements. "The documents we have received from the state and local governments in Pennsylvania seem to confirm [Christian's] concerns, and that's significant," Jamgochian said in a telephone interview. One of those documents, a Dec. 3, 2002, letter from Harrisburg Mayor Stephen R. Reed, said the lack of planning for preschoolers could result in "confusion and chaos." "Parents and others would be attempting to reach the nursery schools and day-care centers, which would almost certainly delay any prospect of their orderly evacuation," Reed wrote. This year, a survey of nearly 40 day-care center operators around TMI found that 87 percent didn't know who would provide transportation for their children if an evacuation were ordered. More than half didn't know where they would take their children in an evacuation. The survey was conducted by the EFMR Monitoring Group, a nonprofit organization started by Epstein that independently monitors radiation around TMI. Exelon Nuclear, owner of TMI, the Peach Bottom (York County) and Limerick (Montgomery County) nuclear plants, plans to offer training sessions for day-care operators soon, said Pete Resler, a spokesman for the Chicago-based company. Though plant operators are not responsible for emergency planning outside their properties, Resler said the company would work with state and local officials to ensure that preschoolers are protected. "Obviously, we have a stake in it," Resler said. "We want everybody to be safe." GARRY LENTON: 255-8264 or glenton@patriot-news.com ***************************************************************** 15 NRC: NRC Releases Majority of Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant Site for Unrestricted Public Use News Release - 2005-13 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 05-135 October 3, 2005 license of the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co. to release the majority of land from the old Maine Yankee power plant site for unrestricted public use. The land, approximately 167 acres, meets NRC regulatory requirements of a maximum radiation dose of 25 millirem per year, as well as the state of Maines clean-up standards of 10 millirem per year from all pathways and 4 millirem per year from groundwater sources of drinking water. (The average person in the United States receives about 300 millirem from background radiation each year.) Release of this land for unrestricted use poses no threat to public health and safety. Maine Yankees amended license will still apply to the sites dry cask storage facility, where the spent nuclear fuel from the plants 23 years of operation is stored, plus a small parcel of land adjacent to this facility that was used as a loading area for excavated soil awaiting offsite shipment and disposal during the decommissioning of the plant and will be used for future cask-handling operations. The total land remaining under the license is approximately 12 acres. Maine Yankee remains responsible for the security and protection of this land and the dry cask storage facility, and is required to maintain a radiation monitoring program at the site. Maine Yankee received an operating license on June 29, 1973. The plant ceased production on December 9, 1996, and the company informed the NRC in August 1997 that it intended to decommission the plant. Decommissioning work began in February 2003 and was completed in June 2005. Transfer of the spent fuel from the spent fuel pool to the dry cask storage facility was completed in February 2004. The NRCs Safety Evaluation of Maine Yankees license amendment request will be available in the agencys online documents database, ADAMS, at this address: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html, using accession number ML052380284 in the search field. A notice of the license amendment will be published soon in the Federal Register. Last revised Monday, October 03, 2005 ***************************************************************** 16 BBC: 'Options open' on nuclear power Last Updated: Monday, 3 October 2005 [Hunterston B] Two nuclear power stations in Scotland are near the end of their lives The first minister has said he is keeping his "options open" on the question of new nuclear power stations. But Jack McConnell repeated that the Scottish Executive was not prepared to consider the issue until the problem of nuclear waste was resolved. He told a media briefing that the executive would use its powers "in the best interests of Scotland". Opposition parties said ministers should rule out nuclear and focus their attention on renewable energy. Mr McConnell's comments came after Trade Secretary Alan Johnson said he has not yet decided if the UK should be building a new generation of nuclear power stations. Radioactive waste In May, Mr McConnell said that the Scottish Executive had the power to stop nuclear power stations being built north of the border, regardless of Westminster's decision. The first minister also said that there would be no new plants in Scotland until the issue of managing radioactive waste was resolved. He repeated that stance last month during a BBC Scotland News Interactive webcast. I think it's right and prop that in the longer term we keep energy options open Jack McConnell First Minister "Until there's a solution to the problem of nuclear waste, I don't believe that we should be involved in further generation of nuclear power," he said. "The solving of the issue of nuclear waste seems to me to be of paramount importance because that waste currently exists and needs to be dealt with." On Monday, the issue was raised at Mr McConnell's first media briefing since the summer. He said: "We are not prepared to consider a new nuclear power station in Scotland until the issue of waste is successfully resolved. "And even then it will only be to consider, discuss and debate. It will not necessarily be to agree." 'Out of touch' But he added: "I think it's right and proper that in the longer term we keep energy options open." Scottish National Party energy spokesman Richard Lochhead claimed that Mr McConnell was out of touch with public opinion. "We should be trying to create a better and safer future for Scotland by making the most of Scotland's vast renewable energy potential, instead we see the first minister willing to jeopardise public safety to keep London happy," he said. It certainly appears as McConnell is biding his time before he presses the nuclear button Chris Ballance Green spokesman "Rather than spend billions on unwanted and potentially dangerous new nuclear power stations, Scotland should invest in developing our offshore renewable potential and carbon capture technology. "The first minister should rule out new nuclear power stations once and for all and throw his weight behind turning Scotland into a renewable powerhouse instead of a nuclear danger zone." The Scottish Green Party's spokesman on nuclear power, Chris Ballance, said: "It certainly appears as if Mr McConnell is biding his time before he presses the nuclear button. "A mature debate on nuclear power would need to consider a lot more than just where to dump the waste - it would need to look at the risks, the costs, the fuel sourcing, the links to weapons of mass destruction and also the fact that nuclear power still adds to climate change pollution." b ***************************************************************** 17 FT.com: UK - Ministers warned on high cost of energy By Jean Eaglesham and Thomas Catan Published: October 3 2005 22:04 | Last updated: October 3 2005 [uk energy / utility] Business groups have attacked the government for “complacency” and drift over energy policy, warning that a combination of high prices, potential power cuts and uncertainty over the future of nuclear power is damaging British manufacturing. Industry groups have told ministers that concerns over the security of supply are deterring overseas investors, while high costs relative to the rest of Europe are undermining the sustainability of energy-intensive sectors, such as chemicals. UK energy costs have soared in the past two years. Business users are paying at least 60 per cent more for their energy than they were in January 2004, according to the consumer watchdog, energywatch. For energy-intensive users such as chemical manufacturers, costs have doubled. While Tony Blair's commitment last week to holding an energy review next year has been welcomed, industry is warning that the prime minister cannot afford to ignore nuclear energy. Alan Eastwood, head of competition and utilities at the Chemical Industries Association, told the Financial Times: “We can't live with prices 50 per cent higher than our competitors on the continent. This is threatening the future of the industry.” Jeremy Nicholson, director of the Energy Intensive Users Group (EIUG), said the problem for his members was “convincing investors there is a future here . . . the absence of a long-term strategy is a deterrent to investment in the UK”. The concerns about energy policy extend across a wide swathe of employers, according to the EEF, the manufacturers' trade body. “It's impacting strongly on business,” Martin Temple, EEF director-general, said. “This is now affecting a much broader range of companies than the heavy energy users, because the increases are so enormous.” With North Sea production falling, the UK's gas supply is expected to be tight this winter. The EIUG warned that the forecast squeeze on supplies could drive prices up to a level where some of its members have to close plants temporarily. “It's hardly an advertisement for people to invest in manufacturing in the UK,” Mr Nicholson said. Industry lays much of the blame for the current problems on the government's last attempt to frame policy, a 2003 white paper which set ambitious targets for wind and other renewable power while avoiding a decision on nuclear power. “It was behind the curve in a number of respects, particularly on prices, and fudged a number of issues,” Michael Roberts, director of business environment at the CBI, said. “The government must now get on top of policy.” According to the government's own forecasts, a failure to build new nuclear stations would leave the UK dependent on gas for more than 60 per cent of its electricity by 2020. © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. ***************************************************************** 18 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the FR Doc E5-5349 [Federal Register: October 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 190)] [Notices] [Page 57625] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03oc05-141] Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request AGENCY: 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 currently valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension. 2. The title of the information collection: Voluntary Reporting of Performance Indicators. 3. The form number if applicable: N/A. 4. How often the collection is required: Quarterly. 5. Who will be required or asked to report: Power reactor licensees. 6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 416. 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 104. 8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: Approximately 84,520 hours (83,200 reporting hours plus 1,320 recordkeeping hours for 33 recordkeepers). 9. An indication of whether Section 3507(d), Public Law 104-13 applies: N/A. 10. Abstract: As part of a joint industry-NRC initiative, the NRC receives information submitted voluntarily by power reactor licensees regarding selected performance attributes known as performance indicators (PIs). PIs are objective measures of the performance of licensee systems or programs. The NRC's reactor oversight process uses PI information, along with the results of audits and inspections, as the basis for NRC conclusions regarding plant performance and necessary regulatory response. Licensees transmit PIs electronically to reduce burden on themselves and the NRC. 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 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC Worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by November 2, 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 A. Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150- 0195), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be e-mailed to John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or submitted by telephone at (202) 395-4650. The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301-415-7233. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of September, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E5-5349 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 19 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the FR Doc E5-5355 [Federal Register: October 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 190)] [Notices] [Page 57625-57626] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03oc05-142] 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 [[Page 57626]] 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 currently valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension. 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 26, ``Fitness for Duty Program.'' 3. The form number if applicable: 3150-0146. 4. How often the collection is required: On occasion. 5. Who will be required or asked to report: All licensees authorized to construct or operate a nuclear power reactor; all licensees authorized to use, possess, or transport Category 1 nuclear material; and contractors/vendors who have developed a fitness-for-duty program that is formally reviewed and approved by a licensee, which meets the requirements of Part 26. 6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 1,419 (1,350 responses + 69 recordkeepers). 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 69. 8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 61,143 (5,853 hours reporting [an average of 4.3 hours/response] and 55,290 hours recordkeeping [an average of 801 hours/recordkeeper]). 9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13 applies: N/A. 10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 26, ''Fitness for Duty Program,'' requires licensees of nuclear power plants, contractors/vendors who have developed a fitness-for-duty program that is formally reviewed by a licensee, and licensees authorized to possess, use, or transport Category 1 nuclear material to implement fitness-for-duty programs to assure that personnel are not under the influence of any substance or mentally or physically impaired, to retain certain records associated with the management of these programs, and to provide reports concerning significant events and program performance. Compliance with these program requirements is mandatory for licensees subject to 10 CFR part 26. In addition, licensees of nuclear power plants are required to comply with security order EA-03-038, which implements work hour controls for security force personnel and requires licensees to retain certain records associated with the management of this security order. 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 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by November 2, 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. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0146), 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 26th day of September, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E5-5355 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 20 NRC: Notice of Extension of the Public Comment Period for Scoping FR Doc E5-5356 [Federal Register: October 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 190)] [Notices] [Page 57628-57629] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03oc05-145] Process To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants On June 3, 2003, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) issued a Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants and To Conduct Scoping Process in the Federal Register (68 FR 33209). Notice is hereby given that the Commission has extended the public comment period for the scoping process on the update to the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' NUREG-1437 (May 1996) and Addendum 1 (August 1999). The comments already received by the Commission will be considered; this provides additional opportunity for public to reflect on issues that may have emerged during the period that this project was inactive. The public comment period is extended to December 30, 2005. In 1996 and 1999, the Commission amended its environmental protection regulations in 10 CFR Part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions,'' to improve the efficiency of the environmental review process for applicants seeking to renew a nuclear power plant operating license for up to an additional 20 years. The final rules were published in the Federal Register on December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66546), and September 3, 1999 (64 FR 48507). The amendments are based on the analyses reported in NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (May 1996) and its Addendum 1 (August 1999). The GEIS, prepared by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and its contractors, summarizes the findings of a systematic inquiry into the environmental impacts of refurbishment activities associated with license renewal and the environmental impacts of continued operation during the renewal period (up to 20 years for each licensing action). The significance of environmental impacts were analyzed for each of nearly 100 issues. Thereafter, the NRC categorized which of these analyses could be applied to all plants and whether additional mitigation measures would be warranted for each environmental issue. Of the 92 issues analyzed, 69 issues were resolved generically, 21 require a further site-specific analysis that applicants are required to address, and 2 require a site-specific assessment by the NRC. As part of its application to renew its operating license, an applicant submits a supplemental environmental report and the NRC staff develops a site-specific supplement to the GEIS and includes a recommendation for each license renewal application. The environmental protection regulations for any NRC licensing action is contained in 10 CFR Part 51 and may be viewed on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part051/index.h tml. The license renewal process also includes a safety review and inspections prior to issuance of a renewed license. In the introductory remarks to Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51, ``Environmental Effects of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant,'' the Commission stated that, on a 10-year cycle, it intends to review the material in Table B-1 and update it, if necessary. This update effort began in 2003; the goal of the NRC staff is to complete this GEIS Update Project by the end of 2009. The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the NRC continues to plan to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS), in this case it is an update to the GEIS, and to provide the public an additional opportunity to participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in 10 CFR 51.29. The scoping process is the initial opportunity for stakeholder participation in the GEIS update and it occurs before the NRC has determined results or recommendations for the update. The environmental review process for license renewal will continue under the current regulatory framework throughout the course of this effort. If, as a result of this scoping process, it is determined that an update is not necessary, then that result will be published in the Federal Register as well. The GEIS and Addendum 1 to the GEIS were prepared pursuant to 10 CFR part 51 and are available for public inspection at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html , which provides access through the NRC's Electronic Reading Room link. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to PDR@NRC.GOV. The GEIS, its Addendum 1, and its supplements may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437 . As indicated, the NRC prepares site-specific supplements to the GEIS for each license renewal application assessing the environmental impacts specific to that power plant location; these reports may be useful to scoping participants to understand the environmental review process and the environmental issues associated with the review for license renewal. The supplements to the GEIS also can be viewed on the Internet in the context for each project and are listed by project at http://www.nrc.gov/ reactors/ operating/ licensing/renewal/applications.html. The update of the GEIS is a generic activity; therefore, is not the appropriate forum to consider site-specific issues or concerns. In keeping with the framework outlined under the National Environmental Policy Act, the NRC conducts this scoping process for the update to the GEIS and, thereafter, plans to prepare a draft addendum to the GEIS for public comment outlining the results of the NRC review. Participation in the scoping process by members of the public and local, State, Tribal, and Federal government agencies is encouraged. The scoping process for the addendum to the GEIS will be used to accomplish the following: a. Determine whether the purpose and need for the update (the proposed action) is clear. b. Determine the scope of the addendum to the GEIS and identify [[Page 57629]] whether there are any significant issues that should be analyzed in depth. c. Identify and eliminate from detailed study those issues that are peripheral or that are not significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review. d. Identify any environmental assessments and other EISs that are being or will be prepared that are related to, but are not part of the scope of the addendum to the GEIS being considered. e. Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements related to the proposed action. f. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of the environmental analyses and the Commission's tentative planning and decision-making schedule. g. Identify any cooperating agencies and, as appropriate, allocate assignments for preparation and schedules for completing the addendum to the GEIS to the NRC and any cooperating agencies. h. Describe how the addendum to the GEIS will be prepared including any contractor assistance to be used. The NRC invites the following entities to participate in the scoping process: a. Any Federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved, or that is authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. b. Any affected State and local government agencies, including those authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. c. Any affected Indian tribe. d. Any person who requests or has requested an opportunity to participate in the scoping process. The scoping process for an EIS may include a public scoping meeting to help identify significant issues related to a proposed activity and to determine the scope of issues to be addressed in an EIS. The NRC conducted four public meetings on the GEIS in July 2003. These meetings were transcribed; the transcripts are available for public inspection at the NRC PDR or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's ADAMS. ADAMS is accessible at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html , which provides access through the NRC's Electronic Reading Room link. Written comments already received by the Commission are available electronically and accessible through the NRC's Electronic Reading Room link in ADAMS. As described above, persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR Reference staff at 1- 800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to PDR@NRC.GOV. Members of the public may send any additional written comments on the environmental scope of the GEIS Update Project to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Comments may also be delivered to Room T-6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. during Federal workdays. To be considered in the scoping process, written comments should be postmarked by December 30, 2005. Additional electronic comments may be sent by e-mail to the NRC at LRGEISUpdate@nrc.gov. Electronic submissions should be sent no later than December 30, 2005, to be considered timely in the scoping process. Comments will be available electronically and accessible through the NRC's Electronic Reading Room link at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. At the conclusion of the scoping process, the NRC will prepare a summary of the determinations and conclusions reached, including the significant issues identified, and will send a copy of the summary to participants in the scoping process. The summary also will be available for inspection at the NRC PDR or through the Electronic Reading Room link. If necessary, the staff will then prepare and issue for comment the draft addendum to the GEIS, which will be the subject of a separate Federal Register notice, to report the results of the NRC's review. At this time, the NRC plans to conduct separate public meetings, at similar locations as the public scoping meetings, on the draft addendum to the GEIS. Copies of the draft addendum to the GEIS will be available for public inspection at the above-mentioned address, and one copy per request will be provided free of charge. After receipt and consideration of the comments on the draft, the NRC will prepare a final addendum to the GEIS, which will also be available for public inspection. Should the review indicate that one or more environmental issues enumerated in Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51, ``Environmental Effects of Renewing the Operating License of a Nuclear Power Plant,'' requires change, then the proposed and final rule amendments will accompany the draft and final addendum to the GEIS. For Further Information Contact: Mr. Barry Zalcman, License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Mr. Zalcman may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-368-5642, extension 2419, or by e-mail at LRGEISUpdate@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of September, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jacob Zimmerman, Acting Program Director, License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-5356 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 21 NRC: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Diablo Canyon Power Plant, FR Doc E5-5387 [Federal Register: October 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 190)] [Notices] [Page 57626-57627] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03oc05-143] Units 1 and 2; Notice of Partial Withdrawal of Application for Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the licensee) to partially withdraw the request of approval to adopt the extreme growth method, which was a part of its application dated March 18, 2004, and its supplements dated August 18 and 20, and September 17, 2004, for proposed amendments to Facility Operating License No. DPR-80 and Facility Operating License No. DPR-82 for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, located in San Luis Obispo County, California. The amendment request included (i) revisions to the Final Safety Analysis Report Update to incorporate the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approval of a permanently revised steam generator voltage-based repair criteria probability of prior cycle detection (POPCD) method; (ii) addition of a new reporting requirement to the DCPP Technical Specifications as TS 5.6.10.i; and (iii) approval to adopt the extreme growth method coincident with the above POPCD method. However, by letter dated September 17, 2004, the licensee requested that the extreme growth method be approved at a later time. Therefore, on October 28, 2004, the Commission issued Amendment Nos. 177 and 179, to Facility Operating License No. DPR-80 and Facility Operating License No. DPR-82 for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, without reviewing the extreme growth method. The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments published in the Federal Register on June 22, 2004 (69 FR 34704), and a Notice of Issuance of Amendments published in the Federal Register on November 23, 2004 (69 FR 68190). However, by letter dated September 22, 2005, the licensee withdrew the remaining portion of the amendment request pertaining to the approval to adopt the extreme growth method. The licensee's application dated March 18, 2004, and its supplements dated August 18 and 20, and September 17, 2004, and withdrawal letter dated September 22, 2005, are available in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession Numbers ML040840449, ML042380475, ML042530054, ML042680323 and ML052660327, respectively. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated March 18, 2004, its supplements dated August 18 and 20, and September 17, 2004, and withdrawal letter dated September 22, 2005, which withdrew the request of approval to adopt the extreme growth method. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or (301) 415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. [[Page 57627]] Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of September, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Girija S. Shukla, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-5387 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 22 Boston Globe: NRC signs off on Maine Yankee's decommissioning - Boston.com Associated Press By David Sharp, Associated Press Writer | October 3, 2005 WISCASSET, Maine --The Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Monday signed off on the decommissioning of the former Maine Yankee nuclear power plant, certifying that the cleanup of the 167-acre site exceeded federal radiation guidelines. The project followed stricter cleanup standards than those mandated by the NRC and the Environmental Protection Agency. It also went further than past efforts in the United States by wiping away virtually all structures. "We're the first commercial nuclear power plant to fully decommission the plant, remove all buildings, and restore the property," said spokesman Eric Howes. The NRC last month signed off on Maine Yankee's final radiological survey results. On Monday, it released the land for unrestricted use when it amended Maine Yankee's license, reducing the company's footprint to a 12-acre storage facility where highly radioactive fuel rods will be stored indefinitely. The NRC's action formally ended the process of razing buildings, removing contaminated soil and rubble, and restoring the property. It came little more than a year after the dramatic toppling of the 150-foot-containment dome with explosives on Sept. 17, 2004. Today, seeded with grass, there's little evidence that the waterfront property was once the site of a 900-megawatt nuclear power plant. The decommissioning cost is expected to come in close to the $500 million budget despite the stricter cleanup standard and being months behind schedule, Howes said. A final tally was not available Monday, he said. Maine Yankee officials expected to complete the decommissioning last February. But a harsh winter and wet spring pushed the date back. All told, about 310 million pounds of radiological material were removed during the eight-year process. Nuclear critic Ray Shadis said he's largely satisfied with the cleanup, but he's disappointed that Maine Yankee chose to leave some pipes buried underground. Maine Yankee decided it didn't make sense to remove the pipes that are 60 feet underground, so they were encased in concrete and left in place. "At the end of it, you can't say it's a clean site. It may be relatively clean on the surface but you have buried in it this radioactive heart," he said. The NRC allows for an annual exposure of 25 millirems above normally occurring background radiation, while the EPA calls for a 15-millirem standard. Shadis and other community leaders successfully lobbied for a 10-millirem standard. In the end, the cleanup exceeded even that standard because annual exposure to someone living on the site would be closer to 1 millirem per year, Howes said. "Maine Yankee's decommissioning broke new ground in many areas and will be studied as a success story for years to come," said Gerald Poulin, Maine Yankee's president. The pressurized water reactor began operation in 1972 and survived three statewide referendums aimed at closing the plant in the 1980s. It was shut down following operational problems that escalated after the discovery of cracked steam generator tubes in 1994. Problems continued to mount and the plant was placed on the NRC's list of worst-run plants in January 1997. Maine Yankee's board voted to close the plant permanently in August 1997, 11 years before the plant's license was set to expire. All that remains are a security building and a storage facility where 64 canisters hold the former plant's highly radioactive fuel rods and steel from the reactor vessel, along with two electric substations owned by Central Maine Power. Those spent fuel assemblies will remain under tight security until the federal government follows through with its promise to build a repository for high-level radioactive waste. There is no timetable for when that will happen. ------ Maine Yankee http://www.maineyankee.com/[ /] © Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 23 Boston Globe: Here is a look at Maine Yankee's decommissioning - Boston.com By The Associated Press, By The Associated Press | October 3, 2005 --Maine Yankee was the first commercial nuclear power plant in United States to be fully decommissioned with all buildings removed. --The $500 million decommissioning marked the first use of explosives to safely demolish a containment building. --Approximately 450 million pounds of waste were safely removed by rail, truck and barge. Fuel rods remain in canisters. --Workers involved in the plant's decommissioning received less than half the NRC's allowable radiological dose limit. --200 acres of property will be used for conservation and environmental education; 400 acres is being used for economic development. --167-acre site released for unrestricted use on Monday remains off limits to the public because of security for storage facility on adjacent land. Source: Maine Yankee[ /] © Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 24 Telegraph: Nuclear power decision is due 'within a year' "We have to now make government decisions so we can put proposals before the British people next year," said Alan Johnson, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. "Tony Blair has said right from the general election in May that we need to tackle this issue within this parliament; and I think early in this parliament is the time for government to make its decisions," he said. The minister, speaking on the BBC's Sunday AM programme, said he was "agnostic" about the issue, and that "we're generally neutral". However, Mr Johnson admitted that many Labour members would be furious at new nuclear construction. "It is still very controversial - what do we do with the waste?" he said. The Government has stalled and fudged the issue of new nuclear build for years. Consequently, Mr Johnson's comments, together with a series of increasingly pro-nuclear hints from the Prime Minister, convinced commentators that the Government has now come to terms with the idea of new nuclear power stations. Although British Energy is extending the life of most of the current stations, this will only add another 20 to 25 years, and nuclear power stations take a great deal of time to plan and build. Nuclear power is also seen as the only way Britain can deliver on its greenhouse gas-emission targets under the Kyoto protocol. "Many environmentalists now accept that the more we increase renewables, we are just running to catch up, because as nuclear energy diminishes, we are losing a form of CO2-free emission," Mr Johnson said. Industry sources said the government had raised the nuclear issue to head off an expected pro-nuclear campaign from the Conservatives. "They have a short window to push the nuclear issue while electricity prices are high," said one source, who did not wish to be named. "When prices come down, because there is more gas on the market, the debate will be less interesting," he said. Separately, the Government's ability to shape nuclear policy may be affected by British Nuclear Fuels' plans to privatise several of its major plants. BNFL wants to sell Sellafield, Sizewell and Dungeness. Mr Johnson said of the proposals: "That's not a decision that has come to me yet. I think they wrote to us on Friday." The unit that BNFL wants to sell decommissions and cleans up redundant nuclear facilities. The cost of cleaning up Britain's nuclear legacy is about Ł48billion, so there are likely to be several interested parties. © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005. Terms &Conditions ***************************************************************** 25 UK: News & Star: Nuclear decision needed soon Published on 03/10/2005 Britain will have to decide "pretty soon" if it is to build a new generation of nuclear power stations according to the trade and industry secretary, Alan Johnson. Mr Johnson indicated that the government would make a decision on the issue next year which will raise hope that a plant will be situated at Sellafield. "We have to make decision pretty soon if we are going to have nuclear new-build," he told BBC1's Sunday AM programme. "Because all of our nuclear power stations will be retired over the next 20-25 years, we have to make a decision now whether to replace them as part of that general policy to concentrate on the effect on the climate, concentrate on security of supply and affordability for the customer." The nuclear debate was thrown open last week when Tony Blair said the Government would review all of the energy options - a move which was followed on Friday by the announcement that British Nuclear Fuels wants to sell off British Nuclear Group which manages sites including Sellafield. But yesterday BNFL was again on the defensive as after a leaked internal report about a plant at Sellafield was published by the national press. BNFL insisted safety was its priority following claims in the document of a “catalogue of dubious practices” at a waste vitrification plant at the Cumbrian nuclear site. The internal report, which it is claimed was compiled by a manager, at one stage features the heading: “Homer Simpson Works At Sellafield”. It also alleges the plant was “potentially dangerous” and some safety measures were based on “guesswork”. The leaked document claims that the Government forced BNFL to call in its French counterpart Cogema (CORR) to help address concerns about how the plant is run. The plant in question binds radioactive waste produced by the nuclear industry in glass so it can be stored and disposed of easily. “The scientific basis for control of the plant relies at best on interpretation and at worst on guess work,” says the document. It adds that “reports from employees on the site reveal a catalogue of dubious practices”. It goes on: “The low morale is endemic. Control cables to vital robotic arms have been cut, waste drums that should hold solid glass have been accidentally filled with highly active liquid waste, faults in safety mechanisms are not reported properly. “The plant has become driven by production targets so much that it is becoming difficult to operate properly. “Concerns raised at formal quality review committees are referred to secret ‘black file’ meetings, where no minutes or records are ever made and no is held to account.” BNFL said: “Safety is our number one priority and all our activities on site are not only monitored by plant management, but overseen by our regulators.” It denied “secret black-file meetings” took place. ***************************************************************** 26 Xinhua: China's energy: continuous struggle with shortage www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-10-03 09:44:22 BEIJING, Oct. 3 (Xinhuanet By Xinhua writer Yang Jianxiang ) -- The Yangtze River Delta is one of the richest areas in China. But the region is poor in energy resources and in the last couple of years this economic engine house of the country was strangled by repeated power cuts. Supply is most stressing in summer at the peak time. It is not unusual for a manufacturing facility to operate but four days a week. In the province of Zhejiang, which was hardest hit, blackouts averaged 11.32 days a month in the first half of 2004. Escalators in commercial centers were put to stop. Half the streetlights were off. And in some areas, even traffic lights wereturned off on temporary basis. The power shortage is not restricted to the Yangtze Delta, though. Started in 2001, it is a nationwide phenomenon with varied degrees of impact on different regions. Statistics show 24 provincial regions in China were forced to rationed power supply in 2004. The problem took place when China witnessed an unprecedented growth of energy production, which was even faster than its GDP growth in the period of 2001-2005. Last year energy output reached the equivalent of 1.97 billion tons of coal, up 15 percent on a year before. In terms of installed power generating capacity, the growth rate was 14.5 percent or a net increase of 50,500 MW. That's the best world record. Lift of living standards has propelled demand. But even with major cities like Beijing and Shanghai, the per capita consumption of electricity still cannot compare with that of developed countries. The odds are roughly 1,000 KWH to 8,000 KWH. The major factor for the energy shortage was, rather, the overheated and improperly structured economy, accompanied by a wasteful style of energy utilization. "The fast growing economy isa basic cause for the power shortage," says Zhou Dadi, director of Energy Institute under the National Development & Reform Commission (NDRC). The problem is partly institutional. China's Ministry of Energy was scraped more than a decade ago. The tasks of reserves prospecting, production, transport and sales of energy are dividedamong different ministries. Only months ago the Energy Bureau under NDRC was solely responsible for the overall planning of and coordination of efforts in the nation's energy development. Given an inferior status and insufficient manpower, the bureau had not performed its duty effectively. A high profile Leading Group on Energy Development (LGED) was inaugurated in May. It comprises 13 top officials from relevant government departments and the military, headed by the premier andtwo vice premiers. A dedicated LGED Office of under-ministerial level was set up simultaneously. The two new government arms are expected to deal with strategic energy issues and coordinate efforts more effectively. The issue is urgent and with far-reaching significance. "Energy has become an important factor that holds back economic and social development," states a news release from the first LGED meeting convened June 2. Statistics show by the end of 2004 China's total power capacity reached 440,000 MW. Experts say that should be raised to approximately one million MW by 2020, which means an annual addition of 33,000 MW. The prospects cause concerns over diminishing energy reserves and the environmental impact. Comprehensive, strong measures are needed to address the current shortage in supply, which include the termination of reckless projects to cool down the economy, many analysts say. Andto ensure a healthy sustainable development, the structure of industries as a whole and the mix of energy sources should be optimized. And frugal use of energy should become compulsory. In spite of negative effects on the environment, coal will remain the major energy source. Coal-fired power made up 73.72 percent of China's total power consumption in 2004. Last year's coal output was 1.956 billion tons, of which 800 million was produced by stretching the capacity. That may be a temporary move in response to urgent needs. In the future, analysts say, the share of coal in the energy portfolio will decline gradually. Thanks to the booming auto market, China's consumption of oil went up rapidly, by an average of 5.77 percent since 1990, while domestic output grew merely 1.67 percent. China is now the world's second largest oil purchaser. Its dependence on imports grew to an alarming 45 percent last year. At present, oil accounts for 23 percent of primary energy consumption. Analysts predict consumption would climb at an annual pace of 3 percent in the following 15 years. The dependence on imports would reach 50 percent by 2020. The difficulty in procuring oil on the global market has convinced the Chinese government to establish a national strategic oil reserve. Four sites have been chosen in October 2004. According to NDRC director Ma Kai, the three big state-owned oil companies are requested to make similar efforts. Increasing domestic yield is another solution. Huang Yicheng, the former energy minister, says the problem lies in prospecting. He believes much more oil could be found in the country's east offshore areas and west hinterland. The oil reserves currently spotted for exploitation aggregates 4 billion tons. The share of natural gas in China's primary energy consumption is 2.7 percent, against the world average of 24.2 percent. The official targets for the following 15 years are an average growth of 10 percent in production and an ultimate share of 10 percent. Natural gas is expected to become the third largest energy source. China's gas is found largely in the west and inland regions. Four pipelines have been built in recent years to deliver the gas to east coastal cities. The longest line extends 4,000 kilometers from Xinjiang to Shanghai. In addition to home resources, China also imports a considerable amount of LNG from neighboring countries. Of the 395,000 MW hydropower potentials of the country, only less than one fourth has been exploited. The share of hydropower in total electricity production is about 24 percent. China plans to raise the hydro capacity to 250,000 MW by 2020. Nuclear power is a new favorite of government policy makers, who envision it as the third pillar of the future power industry, after clean-coal-fired power and hydropower. Plans were announced that the country would put in 400 billion yuan to build 30 gigawatt-class nuclear power units before 2020, which would lift the nuclear total to 40,000 MW and its share in total power capacity from the current 1.6 percent to 4 percent. That speed is rare in the world. Presently China has two nuclear power stations in operation and five on-going projects. All of them are located in coastal areas. China has cooperated with France, Canada and Russia in nuclear power development. Its two existing facilities run with satisfactory safety records. The technology adopted by China's nuclear power programs is predominantly the generation-2 and -3 thermal reactors, which makes a lavish use of uranium resources. Official analysts say they wish to see a fast reactor industry in 30 to 40 years. China's first ever Renewable Energy Law is to become effective on 1 January 2006. It will have a positive impact on the exploitation of all renewable energies. The development of wind power in China is gaining speed. NDRC announced in May that the country will have established a complete wind industry by 2010, with a total capacity of 4,000 MW. The current 43 wind farms aggregate about 764 MW. Vigorous efforts are also being made in promoting other renewables like solar, biomass, ocean, geothermal,and hydrogen energies. Statistics show the comprehensive efficiency rate of China's energy use is much lower than the average for developed countries,with its unit GDP power consumption two to four times higher. Experts say a frugal use through better management could save China about 200 billion KWH a year. The nation's energy circle hasa rare consensus that conservative production and frugal utilization of energy should be a prioritized development strategy. At Huaihai Road of downtown Shanghai, the 40w filament bulbs fixed in cross-street decorations have been replaced by 3w CCFL ones. The 6,500 low rating bulbs, while keeping the special visual effects of peeps, leaps and flows, save 90 percent of the electricity. Other places are following suit. When all efforts pay off, analysts say, the power shortage will ease up by 2007 in the Yangtze Delta area. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 27 Salt Lake Tribune: Mill produces cancer rumors Article Last Updated: 10/03/2005 01:07:13 AM Monticello deals with decades-old uranium program By Lisa Church Special to The Tribune MONTICELLO - Fifty years ago, people of this small southeastern Utah community saw the uranium/vanadium processing mill on the south end of town as a godsend. The mill, originally built by Vanadium Corp. of America in 1942 and sold to the federal Atomic Energy Commission in 1948, brought year-round employment to a struggling community and helped boost the local economy. But it also brought problems. Ash from the plant's roaster stack and dust blown by Monticello's persistent winds coated lawns and porches throughout town. Airborne contaminants crumbled metal window screens, ate holes in clothing hung outside to dry, and corroded the chrome trim and paint on automobiles, residents say. Still, they supported the mill until the day it closed permanently in 1960. "You do what you have to to provide for your family and put a roof over your head," says Fritz Pipkin, who was a child during the mill's heyday. "They were all so dang happy to have employment that they didn't think there might be danger." As a boy, Pipkin, now 57, and his friends played in the fields adjacent to the mill, building forts and molding pots from the soft earth. On hot summer days, they gulped water from Montezuma Creek, which cut through the middle of the mill site, and swam in the mill tailings pond. "We spent endless hours down there, digging holes and making hideouts. For kids, it was the place to go play," Pipkin says. "We didn't know any better. Nobody warned us that it was dangerous. We used to joke that we would glow in the dark. Now some of us probably do." Today, decades after the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission ceased operations, and years after the final structures were permanently removed from the property, the mill still casts a long shadow over Pipkin's life. Two years ago, he was diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Pipkin and his wife, Barbara, are convinced the cancer is a direct result of exposure to uranium, radon and other toxic chemicals throughout his life in Monticello. Pipkin is not alone. An informal community survey in 1993 of those who had lived in Monticello during the years the mill operated identified 236 people living and dead who had been diagnosed with some form of cancer and 46 with serious respiratory illnesses. Of those, 17 people had leukemia. Between 1956 and 1965, four Monticello children developed acute leukemia, according to a report prepared by the Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, a branch of the federal Department of Health and Human Services. The 1997 report was completed for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy after cleanup of the Monticello Mill site had begun. "On the basis of the leukemia mortality rate for the United States in 1960," the report concluded, "only one leukemia case in 30 years would be expected among children in a town the size of Monticello." In 1960, the population of Monticello totaled 1,845 - about the size of the community today. This year, Barbara Pipkin conducted a new survey. She advertised and inserted 2,200 questionnaires in the local newspaper and, she says, received phone calls and more than 300 completed surveys from current and former Monticello residents now scattered across the United States. After deleting duplicate names, Pipkin charted 126 previously undocumented cancer cases, including four diagnosed with leukemia. Most of those who had leukemia are now deceased, she says. Five members of one family died of cancer, and the remaining two family members, who no longer live in Monticello, reported they both also have cancer, Pipkin says. "A lot of people here feel like they were lied to and taken advantage of," Barbara Pipkin says. "It's like we were expendable." The Pipkins and other Monticello residents recently met with officials from the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency - the federal government has spent more than $250 million to clean up the Monticello Mill site - to ask for funding to conduct a scientific study of health issues in Monticello and to create a cancer treatment clinic in the community. When Barbara Pipkin unrolled a city map marked with blue and red dots to denote the cancer and leukemia cases reported in the surveys, the mood of the meeting turned somber. "You need to start getting scientific support for what you've documented here," said Jay Silvernale who oversees the project for the EPA. He added that neither the EPA nor the DOE has funding for medical studies beyond those conducted as part of the mill site cleanup. Federal officials recommended that the community work with congressional representatives. But Dave Bird, state Department of Environmental Quality project manager for the Monticello site, said this week that the Utah Health Department might be able to help by conducting a cancer cluster study of Monticello. He said he was "surprised" by the numbers cited by the Monticello residents, but scientific evidence is needed to prove that a problem exists. "[The map] made me wonder if there is something going on that we don't realize," Bird said. "But this is purely anecdotal, and until we have a scientific study, we don't really know. But it certainly raised questions in my mind." Recent state and regional cancer data based on the 2000 census do not show elevated numbers of cancer cases in Monticello or San Juan County, said John Contreras, manager of the state Health Department's epidemiology office. But the data only reflects cancer cases for people who currently live in Utah, he said. Former Monticello residents who live in other states would not be included in the data provided to the Utah Cancer Registry by Utah hospitals, physicians and others who diagnose and treat the disease. "I'm not saying [the residents] are wrong," Contreras said. "I'm just saying that their numbers are significantly different from ours." Barbara Pipkin says one problem is that Monticello residents with cancer must go elsewhere - often to Grand Junction, Colo. - for treatment. She believes the out-of-state hospitals do not accurately report those cases to the state of Utah. "But proving that is another thing," she says. "It's frustrating. But those of us who live here know how many we've lost to cancer. There is nobody in this town that it hasn't touched." The travel and treatment is also costly. The Pipkins were forced to mortgage their home to pay more than $50,000 last year in out-of-pocket medical costs and travel to St. George for Fritz's treatment. "I'm damned angry. I think we all are. We were guinea pigs," Fritz Pipkin says. "These people down here gave everything to help way back then. Now, they're just forgotten." lchurch@citlink.net © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 28 KPHO Phoenix: Tucson district to continue monitoring air at several schools October 3, 2005 TUCSON, Ariz. A Tucson school district plans to continue testing for airborne beryllium, a substance that could potentially cause cancer. Testing by both the state and Pima County show there are no reasons for concern. But Sunnyside Unified School District president Eva Carrillo Dong says they'd rather be safe than sorry. The district has spent more than 61-thousand dollars on the monitoring program since 2002. The testing is being done because beryllium oxide is used in the production of specialty ceramics at Brush Ceramic Products, which is within two miles of several district schools. ___Information from: Tucson Citizen, http://www.tucsoncitizen.com Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, All content © Copyright 2001 - 2005 WorldNow and News ***************************************************************** 29 [NukeNet] Uranium Contaminated Soil Shipped Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:35:58 -0700 X-Temp-Fromphrase: YES Information X-Temp-Whitephrase: YES Nuclear X-Spamprobe: ham-super * 0.0000663 OK NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Media Release (3 October 2005) New nuclear research agency inherits predecessor's radioactive waste problems: Japanese radioactive soil shipped to the US The newly formed Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) has inherited the radioactive waste problems of one of its predecessors, the Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute (JNC). JAEA officially opened for business on October 1st, but its predecessor, JNC, still has 3,000 tons of unwanted radioactive soil to dispose of. A portion of the more radioactive soil (290 cubic meters of uranium-contaminated soil) was shipped to the US today, allegedly for refining, but really for disposal. JNC has denied requests to reveal the name of the US company that will receive the radioactive soil, but piecing together information obtained through freedom of information requests, it is now known that the soil will be sent to International Uranium Corporation's White Mesa uranium mill in Utah. In justifying its decision not to reveal the company's name, JNC said that it feared that the company would refuse to accept the soil if its name was released. Now that the US company's name has been made public, we will be interested to see if it does indeed reject the soil. The uranium was scheduled to be loaded onto the Panamanian ship Bright Stream and leave Kobe Port today, though the location of the US port remains unclear. A further 2,710 cubic meters remains in the Katamo District of Yurihama Town in Tottori Prefecture. As a result of an October 2004 ruling by the Supreme Court in favor of Katamo District, it must be removed by May 2006, or compensation must be paid to the local citizens at the rate of 50,000 yen per day. (Compensation for the 290 cubic meters shipped today was paid from March 2005 at the rate of 750,000 per day.) No indication has been given of what will be done with the remaining soil, but we hope that a precedent hasn't been set with the first 290 cubic meters. We have no doubt that Japan's nuclear industry would love to solve its radioactive waste problems by exporting it all to other countries, but the truth is that countries which are unable to handle their own radioactive waste are not qualified to produce such waste. Within two days of its establishment, JAEA has already demonstrated that it is not a responsible agency. By dumping radioactive waste in another country, it has shown that it will prioritize expediency over integrity. Who will trust such an agency in future? Contact: Philip White (International Liaison Officer) 03-5330-9520 For more detailed information see the following links: http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit107/nit107articles/ nit107uraniumsoil.html http://cnic.jp/english/news/newsflash/uransoil7Sep05.html Citizens' Nuclear Information Center 3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Phone: 81-3-5330-9520 Fax: 81-3-5330-9530 http://cnic.jp/english/ cnic@nifty.com _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 30 RIA Novosti: Armenia signs deal to upgrade nuclear waste facility 03/ 10/ 2005 YEREVAN, October 3 (RIA Novosti, Gamlet Matevosyan) - An agreement to upgrade the radioactive waste management facility at the Armenian Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) was signed Monday, a senior official said. Gagik Markosyan, the plant's general director, said the agreement had been signed by the Armenian NPP and France's Ńogema Logistic. "The French company will provide the technology to build a nuclear waste storage facility using the dry-burial method, along with consulting services," he said, adding that the agreement stipulated the construction of 24 additional modules, each containing 56 cassettes of spent nuclear fuel. Markosyan said the project would be funded by the Armenian government but did not reveal the overall cost, citing the deal's confidentiality. He said $1.89 million had been allocated to the project this year. The first additional storage facility is scheduled to be operational in 2007. The Armenian NPP produces 40% of the country's electricity and will remain operational until 2016, according to experts. In September 2003, the plant came under the five-year trust management of INTER RAO UES, a subsidiary of Rosenergoatom and Russia's RAO UES electricity monopoly. The European Union has insisted that Armenia shut down the nuclear power plant, offering 100 million euros in aid. But Armenian experts have said the construction of alternative power generating facilities would cost the country about a billion euros. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 31 Baltimore Business Journal: Duratek adds fuel to its waste management services - 2005-10-03 Rebecca LoganStaff Duratek Inc.is taking its radioactive waste activity up a level. The Columbia company announced Monday that it has formed a teaming agreement with Alabama-based Trivis Inc.to deal is the movement of dry fuel used in the U.S. nuclear utilities marketplace. The agreement marks Duratek's entry into high-level commercial radioactive waste management services. "Until now, Duratek's business on the commercial side had been low level -- that involved things like construction materials used in the plant, booties and gloves, metal -- anything that goes inside the radioactive controlled area," said Diane R. Brown, a spokeswoman for Duratek. This new arrangement involves the licensing, design, construction and operation of independent spent fuel storage installations and services to load spent fuel into dry storage containers. Duratek said the market for spent nuclear fuel dry storage and related services is approximately $100 million over the next five years and could grow significantly when transportation to permanent or temporary storage occurs, Duratek said. Monday's announcement boosted Duratek stock -- a different picture from recent Duratek announcements, including one in September that sent stocks diving 14 percent to $16.84. Duratek said last month that it expects flat revenues for the year. Investors dumped shares in February after the company missed analyst earnings estimates. In March, Duratek's announcement that it failed in its bid for a giant Department of Energy contract in Idaho hurt the stock. Another selloff came in July after the company reported lower second-quarter earnings. But after the announcement Monday morning, Duratek shares (Nasdaq: DRTK) were trading at $18.45, up 18 cents from Friday's close. Duratek and Trivis also announced Monday the award of their first joint project, for the support of a dry fuel storage campaign later this year at the Tennessee Valley Authority's Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in Soddy Daisy, Tenn. That plant has been operating since 1981 and makes electricity by splitting uranium atoms to make steam. Duratek CEO Robert Prince said in a statement that the agreement with Trivis marks milestone for Duratek's growth. "Our extensive service capabilities and outstanding platform base in support of waste management activities at U.S. nuclear power plants make it a natural progression for us to move into management of high-level waste," Prince said. Trivis President David Bland said in a statement that there are more than 30 independent spent fuel storage installations in the US. operating as dry fuel storage sites -- a number that he said could double over the next 10 years. "Because Yucca Mountain is not open, a lot of the utilities are building dry storage pads and they're taking the spent fuel and loading them into containers,'' Brown said. According to the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, spent fuel is first removed from a reactor and placed in a pool of water kept in a steel lined concrete basin. When that is cooled, the containers are either placed upright on concrete pads or stored horizontally in metal canisters in concrete bunkers. The U.S. Department of Energybegan studying Yucca Mountain in Nevada in 1978 as a possible first long-term geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste but there has been considerable debate over regulations and the facility does not yet have a repository license, according to the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, © 2005 American City Business Journals Inc. Add RSS Headlines ***************************************************************** 32 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding FR Doc E5-5357 [Federal Register: October 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 190)] [Notices] [Page 57627-57628] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr03oc05-144] of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for Kerr McGee Cimarron Corporation Former Fuel Fabrication Facility in Crescent, OK AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of availability. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Kalman, Project Manager, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-6664; fax number: (301) 415-5398 e-mail: klk@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering amending Material License No. SNM-928 issued to Kerr McGee Cimarron Corporation Cimarron or (the licensee), to authorize the deletion of License Condition 22 and revisions to License Conditions 23 and 27e of the license for its former fuel fabrication facility in Crescent, Oklahoma. NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this amendment in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. The amendment will be issued following the publication of this Notice. II. EA Summary The purpose of the proposed amendment is to authorize revisions to the license for the licensee's former fuel fabrication facility. Specifically, License Condition 22 will be deleted, as all requirements of this condition have been completed. License Conditions 23 and 27e will be revised. The actions required by these license conditions were addressed in the EA for approval of Cimarron's Decommissioning Plan (DP). That EA is summarized in the Federal Register notice of the Finding of No Significant Impact published on August 12, 1999, (64 FR 44059). The licensee requested that License Condition 22 be deleted from the license, as the specific requirements of this license condition had been completed. License Condition 22 authorizes the licensee to breach the berms, close the two East and West Sanitary lagoons in Subarea L, and backfill the former burial ground in Subarea F. Cimarron backfilled the two sanitary lagoons in 1993. NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and an NRC confirmatory survey of Subarea L demonstrated that all soil samples met the NRC's release criteria of License Condition 27 of Cimarron's license (SNM-928) and the regulatory limits for unrestricted use. The staff determined that all work addressed in License Condition 22 has been completed and that all the requirements of this condition have been met. Therefore, the NRC staff concluded that this condition can be deleted from the license, and will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. The licensee also requested that License Condition 23 be revised to reflect completion of some of the decommissioning activities identified in this condition. License Condition 23 authorizes the licensee to dispose of low-enriched uranium contaminated soil in an on-site burial cell in Subarea N. The licensee stated that all requirements in this license condition have been completed except for the requirement to ``periodically monitor the disposal area for subsidence, erosion, and status of the vegetative cover for at least five years, and promptly repair any problems noted.'' The NRC staff conducted a confirmatory survey of the burial cell in Subarea N. The staff determined that the buried cell had been completed in accordance with License Condition 23. All measurements were below the release criteria of Cimarron's license (SNM-928) and the regulatory limits. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's request and determined that the licensee has met all of the requirements of License Condition 23, except for the last two sentences of License Condition 23d. This license condition will be revised and the last two sentences will become License Condition 23a. The NRC staff has concluded that this revision to the license will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment, because the revision is only deleting protective actions that have already been completed. License Condition 27e authorizes the licensee to make certain changes to the DP or Radiation Protection Plan (RPP) and associated procedures without prior NRC approval provided that those changes meet the specific criteria stated in License Condition 27e. The licensee requested that License Condition 27e be revised so that only changes to the facility or process, tests, and experiments described in the DP or the RPP are required to be reviewed by the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) Committee. In addition, the licensee requested that the license condition be revised so changes to the associated radiation protection procedures would only require review and approval by the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO). The NRC staff has reviewed this request and found that the requested amendment to License Condition 27e should be granted. This proposed change to the license will have not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. III. Finding of No Significant Impact Based upon the analysis contained in the EA, NRC staff concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment, because it is only deleting license requirements that have been completed and making changes to a License Condition 27e, which relates to approval of changes to the procedures associated with the Decommissioning Plan or Radiation Protection Procedures. Accordingly, the staff and has determined that preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice are: Environmental Assessment for License Amendment 19 of Cimarron Corporations License (SNM-928) Regarding License Conditions 22, 23, and 27e (ML052060071). If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's [[Page 57628]] Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O-1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of September, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Daniel M. Gillen, Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E5-5357 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 33 Madison Courier: Sodrel now addressing JPG cleanup www.madisoncourier.com Monday, October 03, 2005 Perhaps U.S. Rep. Mike Sodrel can succeed where others have failed. Sodrel has joined a group of House members trying to call attention to the unexploded weapons left behind at closed military bases. Sodrel’s interest is in the former Jefferson Proving Ground just north of Madison which is included in his congressional district. The bipartisan group Sodrel has joined was founded by fellow Republicans Don Manzullo of Illinois and George Miller of California and by Democrats Earl Blumenauer of Oregon and Sam Farr of California. We hope that Sodrel can help bring some closure to the JPG cleanup fiasco that has gone on far too long because of the U.S. Army’s failure to accept responsibility for the cleanup. “By working with my colleagues who represent military sites that have been used for ordnance exercises, we hope to be able to solve some of the long-term challenges facing these communities,” Sodrel said in a statement. He said safety, health and environmental issues continue to be a concern at JPG, as well as Big Oaks National Wildlife Refuge and Camp Atterbury. The U.S. Army, showing a total disregard for area residents’ safety, left unexploded ordnance at JPG, where munitions were tested from 1941 to 1994. The testing ground closed 10 years ago. We’re not talking about a few undetonated bombs. Army reports show about 1.5 million munitions fired for testing and evaluation did not detonate, and about 7 million inert rounds that were fired to test live detonators, primers or fuses also did not function as intended. Two thousand acres of the wildlife area also are contaminated with an estimated 77 tons of radioactive depleted uranium from weapons that were tested from 1983 to 1994. The Army has said it cannot remove the depleted uranium for safe disposal because of the danger posed by unexploded ordinance. Sodrel needs to move this project to the top of his list of priorities. We’ve lived too long with this danger in our backyard. Copyright 2005, The Madison Courier 310 Courier Square, Madison, IN 47250 (812) 265-3641 (800) 333-2885 Software © 1998-2005 ***************************************************************** 34 Nevada: Yucca Mountain Proposals Getting Curiouser And Curiouser DOE and NRC Seem Unwilling To Want Concept Of Good Science In Program Vol. 2, No. 23 October 1, 2005 Nevada's Online State News Journal CRIMINAL DEFENSE JOHN E. OAKES, ATTORNEY AT LAW 1188 California Ave., Reno, 775-324-6257 FREE CONSULTATION "Just Say No" COPYWRITING PROFESSIONAL FREELANCE COPYWRITER AVAILABLE. OVER 40 YEARS EXPERIENCE PUBLICITY, PROMOTIONS, ADVERTISING D.M.LOCKE SERVICES 775-786-3525 8 A.M. - 4 P.M. Former supporters of the federal attempt to create a single repository for nuclear waste developed from the manufacture of nuclear energy are bailing on the project. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has created radiation standards below anything in the world. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an arm of the energy companies that use nuclear energy in the their development of electricity totally supports the EPA. Department of Energy (DOE) officials more than just slow in meeting congressional demands for documents; some say the word should be sluggish. One of those in Congress who was considered a strong supporter of the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository is Utah Senator Bennett. He made an impassioned speech before the Senate recently and said he no longer supports the concept. "If we're going to have a single repository for nuclear waste, it appeared that the logical place to put it was Yucca Mountain," he said. "It is now clear that we are not going to have a single repository for nuclear waste." His comment came following testimony that the nuclear energy sites across the country, those that exist now and those that are in the process of being built will generate more high level nuclear waste than the repository in Nevada could ever hold. The senator said, "Yucca Mountain has been challenged on scientific grounds. Yucca Mountain has been challenged in the court on legal grounds. And as we look at the present state of our need for energy, Yucca Mountain will be challenged on practical grounds because it is very clear that we are going to need more, not less nuclear power." Bennett said the logical conclusion is for the high level waste to be stored at the various production sites. That is what is happening right now, and he feels it is the best. "I was assured by the scientists that it was safe in the dry-cask storage that had been prepared for its transportation and that it could be safely transported across the country to Yucca. My reaction to that was, if it's safe where it is, and it's safe to transport, why transport it at all? Why not leave it where it is? One of the most serious questions that have come up dealing with the storage of the casks is the infiltration of ground water and whether or not the casks could withstand thousands of years of water movement around and over them. United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologists working on a DOE contract have been under congressional review following disclosure of e-mails that give the impression that two sets of books were maintained dealing with water infiltration and its effects on the casks. One set of the books reportedly were legitimate and may have held information detrimental to DOE's efforts while the other set of books said the things about water infiltration that DOE wanted the public and congress to know about. Nevada Congressman Jon Porter's subcommittee has been demanding information from DOE and they have been putting him off for months. According to Porter's office, almost 5,000 pages of information have been brought to the committee recently, "but he is still waiting for the rest." The DOE is also being vague on when a copy of the draft license application for Yucca Mountain will be delivered to the subcommittee. A court has just demanded the release of the license application. The court said the document is not protected by any deliberative process or privilege. Porter has been demanding those papers as well and they have not been turned over to him. In the meantime the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, some say they are an arm of the nuclear energy industry, has attempted to issue radiation exposure rules that mimic those issued by the EPA recently. The EPA rules are the least protective standard in the world. Radiation standards issued by the National Academy of Sciences (NAC), a truly scientific organization, not controlled by industry or governmental influence, says the EPA standards exceed their recommended acceptable range of exposure. The NAC recommends a range of two to 20 millirems per year exposure while EPA's ruling is 17 to 52 times greater. Nuclear power is generated by many nations around the world and exposure limits have been established following many of the guidelines offered by the NAC. The EPA standards are 3.5 to 10.5 times greater which would lead to serious life-threatening problems. The previous EPA standards were tossed by a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. recently and EPA's new standards are less than what was tossed. DOE and NRC support EPA. According to the National Academy of Sciences, "In short, the (new) rule abandons any real radiation protection for citizens to make it expedient for DOE to overcome years of failed practices." One of the arguments that will be made in upcoming court procedures includes this: the new EPA rule abandons any long-term groundwater protection standard. It is groundwater infiltration that might create danger from failed casks stored underground that are at the head of Nevada's continuing court battles with DOE. It is the possibility of groundwater infiltration that caused Senator Bennett to change his mind and support on site storage of high level nuclear waste. It is one of the reasons that on site storage is most often used by nuclear power plants in every country around the world. France's power is about 80 percent nuclear generated and Senator Bennett feels that nuclear power generation in this country will become far more prevalent. "With the price of natural gas going as high as it is, it becomes increasingly economically unwise for us to continue to build gas-powered electric plants." The Senator, speaking from the floor of the Senate continued, "Nuclear power is something we should get involved in, in a big way in the future, and the energy bill that we passed prior to the August recess laid the groundwork for that." Bennett said that without a safe means of storage, this country will fall farther and farther behind the rest of the world, and that Americans will be paying a high price for their electrical energy. Besides on site storage, the Senator also called for the reprocessing of the waste. "Reprocessing is too expensive some say. But we know from a past experience that technology will find a way around that." He pointed out that we are already reprocessing nuclear warheads from the old Soviet Union. "As that activity goes forward we will learn how to do it faster, we will learn how to do it cheaper, and reprocessing will be available for the nuclear waste that is developed by our nuclear power facilities. Attorney General Brian Sandoval sent a letter to 22 AG's around the country recently. He said in his opening paragraph, "I am writing to alert you to a disturbing proposed rule that, if promulgated, has the clear potential to destabilize the cleanup standards for all Department of Energy facilities, including DOE facilities in your states." Sandoval believes the EPA standards discussed above will undermine the entire process of developing a safe way to store high level nuclear waste. One of the EPA standards recently suggested, "Assumes it is ethically permissible to expose future generations to radiation far higher than we would tolerate today." By suggesting that underground casks of high level spent nuclear waste might fail sometime after 10,000 years, the EPA standards are such that the radiation leaked into ground water or the air would be as safety standards far less than those acceptable today. National Academy of Scientists has said the stored nuclear waste would be at its highest level of potential contamination after 100,000 years and up to 250,000 years. Sandoval says, "DOE has provoked great controversy among host states for seeking to loosen its nuclear cleanup standards." The standard has long been 25 millirems per year or less. DOE, according to Sandoval wants that standard to be 100 millirems per year. "The new EPA standard," Sandoval says in his letter to other Attorneys General, " if promulgated, would drastically relax even that 100 Millirem standard. ••• ***************************************************************** 35 AU ABC: Birney rules out nuclear power, waste dump. 03/10/2005. ABC News Online The Western Australian Opposition Leader says the Liberals will not pursue the possibility of Australia using nuclear power nor a waste dump in the Goldfields, despite recommendations from the party's annual state conference. The conference yesterday unanimously urged Liberal MPs to consider storing Australia's nuclear waste at the Mount Walton facility, near Coolgardie. A motion for the feasibility of nuclear power to be investigated was overwhelmingly passed. Opposition Leader Matt Birney says he will only support a separate resolution for the party to pursue uranium mining. He says the conference was expressing an ideological point of view that nuclear power is okay. "Everybody that voted for that understands that we've got plenty of coal and we've got plenty of gas, and we don't have a requirement for any more energy," he said. "With respect to the waste repository, the Federal Government have made their decision and they have chosen the Northern Territory and so that motion is now irrelevant. "There were people that had a philosophical point of view about those two matters and state conference is a good forum for people to express those philosophical point of views." A resolution for the Liberals to pursue uranium mining is expected to be adopted in a party room meeting next week. Industry approval The resources sector has applauded the Liberals' decision to pursue uranium mining. The Chamber of Minerals and Energy's policy director, David Parker, says global demand for uranium is increasing every year and there are safeguards in place to control its use. "I suppose it's fair to say that the uranium mining industry in Australia is very strictly controlled and monitored by both state and federal government regulations, in states where it is undertaken," he said. "Like any mining project, uranium mines must have environmental approvals prior to commencing." He says the industry's safety record has improved significantly in the past few decades. "Uranium mining has been undertaken in Australia since the 1950s and we believe that our experience and capabilities in this field over a period of more than half a century makes Australia one of the world's leaders in uranium mining and processing as well as mine closure and rehabilitation," he said. New position Meanwhile, Mr Birney has created a new position designed to promote Western Australia's booming resources sector to Asia. Simon O'Brien will be the Opposition's spokesman for Asian economic development, aiming to strengthen trade links with India, China and Japan. Mr Birney says he and Mr O'Brien will travel to India in February to meet political leaders and sell Western Australia's export industry. "We are trading very well with Japan, we are trading very well with China," he said. "If we can create some trade links with India, we will have completed the trifecta and there will then be nothing to stop Western Australia from being catapulted into the economic stratosphere. "India is undergoing a massive industrialisation phase. "They have over a billion people and they have an insatiable demand for things like iron ore, gas and coal and to a lesser extent agricultural products." © 2005 ABC| Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 36 reviewjournal.com: Citizen Alert counting on fear, self-interest to help put a lid on Yucca Opinion - JANE ANN MORRISON: Oct. 03, 2005 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Environmental activists at Citizen Alert are hoping to grab your attention (and your money) by drawing parallels about what Hurricane Katrina did to New Orleans and what a nuclear waste accident could do to Southern Nevada. After seeing the flooded streets in New Orleans and streets filled with garbage but empty of people, Citizen Alert celebrates its 30th anniversary with a re-emphasis on people's fears and self-interest. A recent fundraising letter kicks off: "A threat every bit as large as Hurricane Katrina looms over Nevada -- the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Dump." The pictures from New Orleans can't help but make people here imagine what it would be like if something so dramatic occurred that the Strip was emptied of people, whether from a natural disaster or a nuclear accident. It's not a bad strategy, because fear and self-interest are tactics that clearly work. In its infancy, Citizen Alert's first major environmental victory was stopping the MX. Odds are you haven't a clue what the MX was. Citizen Alert formed something called the Great Basin MX Alliance, which in 1981 persuaded President Reagan and Congress to scrap plans for an MX missile system in Nevada. The government's plan was to hide 200 multiwarhead nuclear missiles among 4,600 shelters. The environmental types didn't like the idea and neither did ranchers and miners, and their unlikely coalition succeeded. It was heady stuff for a group that was started in 1975 by two women from Northern Nevada, Susan Orr and Katherine Hale, who traveled the state calling for closure of a low-level nuclear waste dump in Beatty. When it closed 20 years later, the group took credit. More importantly, during that early campaign, they found about 300 people who agreed with them. The heart of the organization was the idea that the federal government had been doing whatever it wanted in Nevada for years, without thinking of how the projects affected Nevadans. A Citizen Alert bumper sticker created later said it all: Nevada Is Not A Wasteland. One year after the MX victory, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 passed with the goal of finding a storage site for the nation's nuclear waste, and Nevada was the leading prospect. That kept the group invigorated to keep fighting nuclear waste, this time the high-level nuclear waste planned for Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The group's membership isn't huge, and often the "face" of Citizen Alert is one person. For the past four years, Executive Director Peggy Maze Johnson has been that face. Meanwhile, membership has tripled to 3,000, and the push is on to sign up more. "Nevadans United to Finish the Job" is the formal name of the Citizen Alert campaign kicking off with a fundraiser Dec. 1. The choice of locations is sweet -- the new Atomic Testing Museum. Johnson is hoping to raise $500,000 by asking businesses for contributions of $1,000 and $5,000, the largest fundraising effort in Citizen Alert's history. Once again, and this has been the emphasis for many years, Citizen Alert hopes to gain support across the nation and block nuclear waste in Nevada by focusing on the dangers of transporting it through other states. The goal is to gather national support for a bill expected to be introduced by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., to keep storing nuclear waste on-site where it is produced. Just like the plan to stop the MX, this effort focuses on drawing together diverse groups outside of environmentalists to oppose the Yucca Mountain Project, just like the ranchers and miners did in the MX fight. Johnson wants to build coalitions of people who may not be natural allies but have the same self-interest, whether it's to protect open spaces or protect the Strip. Johnson's a true believer. For the past year, she hasn't taken her $39,000-a-year salary. Not long ago, she put in for $1,000 in expenses. Her husband said, laughing, "Not bad for a year's work." Citizen Alert's critics dismiss the group as a bunch of environmental wackos who receive too much credence from the state's politicians. But nobody should sneer at Citizen Alert's past successes and perseverance for 30 years. Jane Ann Morrison's column appears Monday, Thursday and Saturday. E-mail her at jane@review-journal.comor call 383-0275. JANE ANN MORRISON Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2005 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement ***************************************************************** 37 Bellona: Equipment installation began at reactor compartment storage facility in Sayda bay Installation of the equipment delivered from Germany has begun at the long-term reactor compartment storage facility in Sayda bay, Murmansk region. 2005-10-03 18:36 The project is developed according to the agreement between the Russian Nuclear Federal Agency and the German Labour Ministry signed in October 2003, the chief engineer Rostislav Rimdenok said to Interfax. The German specialists are installing lifting equipment and testing it with light and heavy reactor compartments in various situations. According to Rimdenok, Germany is delivering to Nerpa shipyard equipment for the effective submarine dismantling and the complete facility for long-term storage of reactor compartments. He added that nine submarines and 48 reactor compartments are stored today in Sayda bay. More than half of them is filled with solid radioactive waste. The lack of space for more reactor compartments can seriously hinder the whole process of the nuclear submarine dismantling process. The date of start-up of the first part of the reactor storage facility is postponed from September until November 18. Such a decision was made at the meeting of the managing Russian-German Committee in August, Interfax reported. The initial agreement stipulated September 2005 as the completion date for the first part of the facility in Sayda bay. However, after geological research on the site, it turned out that the site is more complicated and therefore demands more work and money, Interfax reported referring to the source at the Nerpa shipyard. The first part of the facility should accommodate from 30 to 40 reactor compartments. The whole facility, which is to enter service in 2008, should contain 120 compartments as well as the waste from the nuclear service ships. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************