***************************************************************** 10/19/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.243 ***************************************************************** 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 IRNA: Dictated terms not the answer to Iran's nuclear program, says 2 Xinhua: Iran denies direct nuclear talks with US 3 AFP: Iran shares IAEA optimism over resumed talks with EU 4 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Chinese Envoy Visits N. Korea 5 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: No Role for Japan in Inter-Korean Peace T 6 Xinhua: DPRK accuses US of violating joint statement spirit 7 Guardian Unlimited: Richardson Tours N. Korean Nuke Facility 8 Times of India: Nuke deal: Russia may back India 9 RIA Novosti: Russian foreign minister to visit Central Asia 10 Independent: Britain will need to spend on nuclear weapons, PM insis 11 Bahrain News Agency: UAE: Israel's nuclear Arsenal threats stability 12 AFP: India to forge plan with US to separate civilian, military nucl 13 Guardian Unlimited: China Offers Nuclear Assurance to Rumsfeld NUCLEAR REACTORS 14 US: NRC: NRC Schedules Regulatory Conference to Discuss Watts Bar Nu 15 US: AP Wire: Upstate counties want Duke's new nuclear plant 16 AU ABC: Independent MP backs nuclear reactor for Australia 17 US: gainesvilletimes.com: Activist rips nuclear power - 18 US: NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet Nov. 3 19 Bellona: Chinese bank gives loan for floating NPP construction 20 US: Oregon State Daily Barometer: OSU defends nuclear reactor safety 21 EUPolitix.com: MEPs urge EU leaders to ‘get real’ on nuclear ene 22 EUPolitix.com: Nuclear energy: Real power, real solutions 23 EUPolitix.com: Nuclear energy: Open options 24 EUPolitix.com: Nuclear energy: A cocktail against climate change 25 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point 2 still leaking water 26 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Exec foes spar over Indian Point 27 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point sirens fail in Orange County 28 US: El Paso Times: Palo Verde restart eases EP Electric 29 Xinhua: Vietnam to build 1st nuclear power plant 30 US: NRC: Pa'ina Hawaii, LLC; Establishment of Atomic Safety and Lice 31 IRNA: MEPs say nuclear energy safest option in fighting climate chan 32 Bnn: Americas US companies interested in Bulgarian nuclear plant pro 33 AFP: Earthquake rocks Tokyo, nuclear reactor briefly shut down - 34 THISDAY ONLINE: Nigeria to Meet Nuclear Energy Soon 35 AFP: US support for India's nuclear programme is a one-off - officia 36 US: Arizona Republic: Palo Verde faces more tests NUCLEAR SECURITY 37 US: Journal and Courier: Beyond the fear factor on campus nuclear re 38 US: Eureka Alert: Stopping nuclear smugglers NUCLEAR SAFETY 39 US: Activist Seeks Protective Actions for 40 US: toledoblade.com: Radioactivity found in Lake Erie tributary 41 US: NRC: Proposed Generic Communication; Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Cir 42 US: Guardian Unlimited: Report: Navy Commander Blamed in Sub Crash NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 43 US: Bradenton Herald: DEP sets Tallevast meeting 44 Daily Yomiuri: Aomori govt OK's storage of N-fuel 45 reviewjournal.com: Nevada says DOE cut corners 46 US: Salt Lake City Weekly: Back-Door Waste 47 US: AU ABC: MP seeks uranium mining debate - 48 US: EPA NE: EPA Decision Brings Former Watertown Arsenal One Step Cl 49 Edmonton Journal: Canada hits bottom over nuclear waste - 50 United Press International: Britian's nuclear waste plan in danger PEACE 51 BBC: ON THIS DAY | 20 1986: Nuclear technician missing after secrets US DEPT. OF ENERGY 52 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Federal board says Hanford waste plant i 53 CE: Four atom bomb-related sites near Dayton get a clean bill ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 IRNA: Dictated terms not the answer to Iran's nuclear program, says Gorbachev - London, Oct 19, IRNA Iran-Nuclear-Gorbachev Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev has warned the US about its approach of trying to pressure Iran not to develop nuclear weapons. "We must not dictate our terms. We must conduct responsible dialogue with Iran," the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize winner said during a visit to London to attend an International Leadership Summit conference. Speaking on BBC's Newsnight Tuesday, he said that he did not think there were great differences between Russia and the USA on nuclear programs. The Russian leadership were "truly committed" in preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, Gobachev said, suggesting that the difference was in approach. During his interview, he also criticized the US for launching a military invasion of Iraq, warning that the "use of armed force was a great mistake" which the rest of the world will have to pay for. "It was a mistake to start this war and I think the British government had a part to play in it," the former Soviet leader said. He also believed that the US had the wrong approach in the way it was trying to force democracy on Iraq, saying that it was "counting on fast track solutions." The Middle East region was "very complicated" and needed help and assistance with democratic processes, "but not squeezed into patterns that are used by one country or another," Gorbachev said. ***************************************************************** 2 Xinhua: Iran denies direct nuclear talks with US www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-10-18 16:28:27 TEHRAN, Oct. 18 (Xinhuanet) -- Iran has rejected a report by an American daily saying that the Islamic Republic was ready for direct nuclear talks with Washington, the official IRNA news agency reported on Tuesday. USA Today, a widely circulated daily in the United States, reported on Monday that Iran's ambassador to France Sadeq Kharrazi had said Iran was open to one-on-one talks with the United States and Tehran is ready to hold negotiations with Washington in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Rejecting the report, Kharrazi reiterated that Iran "sees no urgency in holding talks with the United States" under the condition of mutual respect, said IRNA. "The official policy of the government is to have no direct and official talks with the US administration on nuclear issues," Kharrazi was quoted as saying. Washington and Tehran cut diplomatic relations after Iran's Islamic Revolution in 1979 and has imposed policy of hostility towards each other since then. The United States accuses Iran of developing nuclear weapons secretly and calls on the international community to impose economic sanctions on the country to prevent it from obtaining atomic weapons. Iran rejects the charge as politically motivated and has been holding talks on its nuclear program with the European Union. However, the bilateral nuclear negotiations have been stalled for about two months since Tehran defiantly resumed its highly sensitive nuclear activities in early August. Tehran has announced that it would like to resume the talks, suggesting to involve new members to the negotiations. Enditem Copyright 2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: Iran shares IAEA optimism over resumed talks with EU TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran said it shared the optimism of the head of the UN nuclear watchdog over a resumption of talks on its controversial nuclear programme with the Europeans. "I too am optimistic about a resumption of negotiations and I hope it will materialise," Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani told the official news agency IRNA from South Africa where he is on an official visit. But he warned that Iran would abandon the additional protocol of the Non-Proliferation Treaty that provides for snap inspections of its nuclear facilities if its programme is referred to the UN Security Council. "Iran will stop implementing the additional protocol, so there will be less inspections" by monitors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Larijani said. Iran signed the additional protocol in 2003 but it has yet to be ratified by parliament. Larijani said he nonetheless shared the optimism of IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei that talks on the nuclear programme would resume soon with Britain, France and Germany. Negotiations broke off in August after Tehran rejected a package of European incentives to suspend all work on the nuclear fuel cycle and instead resumed uranium ore conversion. ElBaradei had said Tuesday that "things are moving in the right direction," and identified South Africa as one of a number of third parties urging Tehran to return to the negotiating table. On Sunday, Iran said it was ready to resume meetings with negotiators but it also refused to suspend again its sensitive nuclear activities, which is one of the conditions set by the Europeans. The IAEA board has until November 24 to decide whether to refer Iran to the UN Security Council which could impose sanctions. Copyright 2005 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Chinese Envoy Visits N. Korea Home> National/Politics Updated Oct.19,2005 19:53 KST China has sent a special envoy to North Korea to discuss the countrys nuclear program. Li Bin, a former Chinese ambassador to South Korea, will also visit the U.S. from Oct. 24 and South Korea from Oct. 28. China's foreign ministry says Li's agenda is conferring with officials involved in talks on the nuclear dispute and prepare for the next round of the six-nation talks next month. At the last round of talks in September, North Korea agreed in principle to abandon its nuclear weapons program in return for economic aid and security guarantees but stopped short of specifying how the accord can be implemented. No date has been fixed for the negotiations in November. Arirang News ***************************************************************** 5 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: No Role for Japan in Inter-Korean Peace Talks - Song > Updated Oct.19,2005 20:01 KST South Korea's chief delegate to six-party nuclear talks with Pyongyang says the ultimate task of establishing a peace agreement between the two Koreas belongs to them. Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon made the remark to reporters in the U.S. in response to questions over a possible Japanese role in formulating a peace agreement on the peninsula. The prospect of North and South Korea signing a formal peace treaty to replace the armistice that ended the Korean War was raised in the last round of six-country nuclear talks. But Seoul is wary of the influence hawkish factions in the U.S. and Japanese governments could have in the push for a peace treaty. Asked about the possibility of the U.S. chief negotiator Christopher Hill making a visit to North Korea, Song said it was still too early to tell, but the possibility was being considered. Arirang News ***************************************************************** 6 Xinhua: DPRK accuses US of violating joint statement spirit www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-10-18 23:20:42 PYONGYANG, Oct. 18 (Xinhuanet) -- The Democratic People's Republicof Korea (DPRK) on Tuesday slashed the US for doing things contrary to the spirit of the joint statement of the recent six-party talks on the nuclear issue of the Korean peninsular. "If the United States persists in its hostile acts against the DPRK contrary to the spirit of the joint statement of the six-party talks, the DPRK will be left with no option but to take self-defense steps to cope with those acts," a spokesman of the DPRK's Foreign Ministry said. The official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported that "the United States was putting into practice sanctions blocking the legitimate financial transaction of the DPRK." "The diatribe is nothing but a version of the trite psychological warfare conducted by the US administration to justify its hostile policy toward the DPRK as the former has slandered the latter by attaching a variety of labels such as 'part of an axis of evil' and 'a rogue state'," the spokesman said. "The US administration's evermore undisguised smear campaign against the DPRK is aimed to put international pressure upon it ina bid to shake its 'system'. This indicates that the US remains unchanged in its real intention to 'bring down the system' in the DPRK," he added. The spokesman said that the Bush administration managed to put pressure upon the DPRK by applying sanctions in advance to compel Pyongyang to accept the US aim of DPRK's abandoning "nuclear program first" at the six-party talks. "This compels the DPRK to suspect whether the Bush administration has the willingness to implement the joint statement of the six-party talks or not," the spokesman stressed. "The DPRK has already declared it would regard the US sanctions against it as a declaration of war. The DPRK does not say empty words," he warned. The second phase of the fourth round of the six-party talks on the Korean Peninsula's nuclear issue ended on Sept. 19 in Beijing.A joint statement was released by the six sides during the round. Enditem Copyright 2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 7 Guardian Unlimited: Richardson Tours N. Korean Nuke Facility From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday October 19, 2005 6:01 PM AP Photo TOK112 By JOSEPH COLEMAN Associated Press Writer TOKYO (AP) - Bill Richardson, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, toured a North Korean nuclear facility Wednesday and held a second day of talks with government officials as part of his efforts to encourage Pyongyang to dismantle its atomic weapons program. The Democratic governor of New Mexico spent about two hours at North Korea's main nuclear research facility at Yongbyon, where the communist regime is known to have secretly processed plutonium for nuclear weapons, Richardson's chief of staff Billy Sparks told the Associated Press in a phone call from Pyongyang. Sparks also said Richardson met with officials but provided no details. Richardson said before his trip that he would push the North Koreans for specifics on how they plan to dismantle their weapons program and a commitment to allow outside verification of the process. He also said he will urge Northern officials to cooperate with humanitarian aid organizations and allow them to operate more freely in the country. The governor, who has been to North Korea several times before, was invited by the North Koreans in May but postponed his trip when Washington asked him to wait until the completion of the latest round of nuclear talks in Beijing. The talks ended last month with North Korea committing to abandon its nuclear program, which Pyongyang claims has already yielded a weapon. The next round of talks, which also involve China, Japan, South Korea and Russia, was scheduled for November but no date has been set. Richardson was accompanied by public health, energy and other officials from New Mexico; he said earlier he hopes their presence would show the North Koreans what kind of assistance they could expect in return for giving up nuclear weapons. The entourage arrived in North Korea Monday evening and was to stay until Thursday, travel next to Japan and South Korea to brief officials before returning to New Mexico on Oct. 22. Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 8 Times of India: Nuke deal: Russia may back India indiatimes.com [ Wednesday, October 19, 2005 12:19:14 pmPTI ] MOSCOW: Russia has indicated its willingness to back US amendments to Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines upholding the idea of enlarging civilian nuclear cooperation with India, a Russian foreign ministry expert has said. "Russia upholds the idea of enlarging cooperation with India in the sphere of atomic energy," Alexander Shilin, a Russian foreign ministry expert from the Department Of Security and Disarmament said at a seminar on Tuesday. "The United States of America has suggested three variants of amendments to nuclear suppliers group initial elements. “These amendments will be considered by Russia and other NSG member countries shortly," Shilin said at the seminar organised by Moscow-based non-proliferation think tank PIR centre. On the eve of his India visit last week, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said that the NSG guidelines need to be amended so as to meet India's energy needs. Copyright © 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 RIA Novosti: Russian foreign minister to visit Central Asia 19/ 10/ 2005 MOSCOW, October 19 (RIA Novosti) - Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will arrive in Uzbekistan on a routine visit October 21 to discuss regional integration, the political situation in the region, the fight against terrorism and drug-trafficking, and measures to enhance global strategic stability and disarmament. "Special attention will be paid to the military and political situation in Central Asia and joint efforts against international terrorism, extremism, and drug-trafficking," official spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry Mikhail Kamynin said Wednesday. He added that cooperation within the framework of the United Nations, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was essential to face these challenges. Regarding disarmament issues, the spokesman said emphasis would be placed on establishing a nuclear-free zone in Central Asia as soon as possible. The minister's visit will follow his talks with the president of Turkmenistan in Ashgabat October 20-21 on issues of bilateral relations, and regional and global problems, primarily defining the legal status of the Caspian Sea, a protracted process. On October 10, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice embarked on a trip to Central Asia, visiting Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan - a move to show U.S. support for those willing to bring about political and economic reform and build up democracy. Rice also discussed issues of regional security with the countries' leaders. In particular, Rice confirmed later that the U.S. was not planning to deploy new bases in Central Asia, except one in Manas (Kyrgyzstan), which she said had been designed to support anti-terrorism operations in Afghanistan. In September, Turkmenistan denied reports from Russian media sources that the country was willing to offer its airfield in the city of Mary for a U.S. military base, saying that Turkmenistan continued to honor its neutrality and fully observe its international commitments. 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 10 Independent: Britain will need to spend on nuclear weapons, PM insists www.independent.co.uk By Andy McSmith Published: 20 October 2005 Britain needs nuclear weapons even though they are no use against the threat of terrorism, Tony Blair has announced. His remarks yesterday were the most public indication yet that the Prime Minister has made up his mind to commit Britain to spending billions of pounds on a new generation of nuclear weapons to replace the ageing Trident fleet. Mr Blair also said that the decision would be made "in the current parliament" and dropped a strong hint that he means to do it without a Commons vote, implying that the issue will be settled before he leaves Downing Street. Rebel Labour MPs retaliated with plans to test the strength of opposition by forcing a vote at a private weekly meeting of Labour MPs on 31 October. The rebels claim that the only way the Government can avoid defeat will be for the whips to pull in the so-called "payroll vote" - the ministers, parliamentary secretaries and others who would face the sack if they voted against government policy. Mr Blair was challenged during Prime Minister's Questions by the Labour backbencher Paul Flynn, over revelations in The Independent that the decision to update Trident had in effect been made and that preparatory work at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston had begun. The Government said Aldermaston's budget had been doubled and scientists had been recruited to ensure that the Trident fleet was kept in working order, but a political decision to replace it had not yet been made. Mr Flynn asked Mr Blair whether he agreed with sentiments expressed by the former foreign secretary Robin Cook, who died in August, that nuclear weapons were "hopelessly irrelevant" for the task of combating terrorism and acting as an international peacekeeper. He also called for a Commons vote before an official decision was made. Downing Street had been given advance warning of Mr Flynn's question, so Mr Blair had a written statement prepared. But before he began, he made an unscripted comment. He said: "I'm sure there will be a debate and I have no doubt at all that there will be a great deal of discussion as the months and years unfold. Although I do not think anyone pretends that the independent nuclear deterrent is a defence against terrorism, nonetheless I do believe it is an important part of our defence." Mr Blair then read out the prepared line: "No decisions on replacing Trident have yet been taken but these are likely to be necessary in the current parliament. It is too early to rule in or rule out any particular option. "As we set out in our manifesto, we are committed to retaining the UK's independent nuclear deterrent. We will take our decision, ultimately, in the best interests of the country." Mr Flynn said afterwards: "I thought I asked a very reasonable question. It doesn't seem unreasonable that if you're going to spend between 10bn and 15bn, you should have a vote on it. Since he is not going to allow that, we will have to go about it in some other way to show the extent of opposition. "I cannot think of any conceivable use that nuclear weapons could have, apart from the prestige they give us. They also undermine our position in international talks. How dare we tell Iran not to develop nuclear weapons, when we are going ahead with updating ours?" 2005 Independent News & Media (UK) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 11 Bahrain News Agency: UAE: Israel's nuclear Arsenal threats stability date: 19 10, 2005 New York, Oct.19 ( BNA ) The United Arab Emirates warned of the danger of Israel's tenacity of its nuclear arsenal causing a threat to the Middle East peace and stability, calling upon the world community to vote in favor of two draft resolutions dealing with the danger of the Israeli Nuclear weapons and creating of the Middle East a free from nuclear weapon region. UAE also stressed on the international community to halt aids that enhance the development of Israel's Nuclear program in accordance with the related -international laws. This came in the UN General Assembly's First Committee discussions on disarmament worldwide. Member of the UAE delegation to the United Nations Ms.Hend Abdulaziz Al-Ewaiss said despite the trust measures adopted by the Arab countries including UAE particularly regarding the clearing the region from weapons of mass destruction, the Israeli Nuclear arsenal threatens peace and stability of the Middle East. Publishing Rights Reserved to Bahrain News Agency 2003 - 2004 Best viewed by IE 5.0 or later 800* 600 ***************************************************************** 12 AFP: India to forge plan with US to separate civilian, military nuclear programs Wed Oct 19,12:58 AM ET NEW YORK (AFP) - The United States and India will draw up a plan separating India's civilian and military nuclear facilities to pave the way for implementation of their landmark atomic energy cooperation deal by early 2006, a senior US official said. Nicholas Burns, undersecretary of state for political affairs, said he would discuss the separation plan with Indian officials during a trip to New Delhi this week. "Part of the purpose of my trip to Delhi this week is to work with the Indian government on a plan that will separate civilian and military nuclear (programs and facilities) of India over the coming years," he told a forum of the New York-based Asia Society. He said that the US Congress would be in a position to amend laws prohibiting US nuclear cooperation with India once New Delhi committed itself to the separation scheme. "Once that plan has been clearly enunciated and once it has been committed to by the Indian government, I think it will be a very short time before the United States Congress makes the necessary legislative changes to bring this into being and that would be a very welcome moment indeed," Burns said. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush " /> President George W. Bushagreed on a deal last July in which Washington would give India access to civil nuclear energy related technology once India agreed to separate civilian and military nuclear programmes and place its nuclear reactors under the International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) inspections. India is a nuclear-armed nation but not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The United States had placed sanctions on India after its second round of nuclear tests in May 1998, but agreed after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks to waive those and other sanctions in return for support in the war on terrorism. Under the July deal, the United States had agreed to lobby allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India. "I think by the time that President Bush " /> President Bushvisits New Delhi in early 2006 we will see that both of our countries would have met our commitment in this landmark agreement," Burn said as he gave a comprehensive account of US policy toward India in his speech to diplomats, analysts and government officials. The US-India nuclear deal was part of a groundbreaking pact on a wide range of cooperative initiatives and the launching of a new strategic partnership by Bush and Singh. Burns was instrumental in developing the partnership agreement, including civil nuclear energy cooperation, which he called "the high-water mark of bilateral relations in nearly 60 years. India last month was accused by some groups of caving in to US pressure in supporting a IAEA resolution that opens the door to reporting Iran " /> Iranto the UN Security Council for violating international nuclear safeguards. The vote came after US legislators warned that the nuclear cooperation deal could be jeopardized if India refused to back firm action against Iran, with which New Delhi has valuable energy ties. Burns said the vote was "a very important sign that India is a responsible nuclear power, that India agrees that non proliferation norms have to be respected. "Since the Indian government's very decisive and clear vote in the IAEA, that issue has disappeared in the US Congress and we now find substantial support in Congress for the agreement reached in July," he said. The United States has accused Iran of hiding secret nuclear weapons work, allegations denied by Tehran which insists it has a right to pursue a peaceful civilian nuclear program. Copyright 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: China Offers Nuclear Assurance to Rumsfeld From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday October 19, 2005 8:31 PM AP Photo TOK225 By ROBERT BURNS AP Military Writer BEIJING (AP) - The commander of China's nuclear missile forces told Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Wednesday that in an armed conflict China would not be the first to use nuclear weapons. Gen. Jing Zhiyuan, commander of the Second Artillery, which operates the country's growing arsenal of nuclear missiles, offered the assurance while hosting Rumsfeld as the first foreigner to visit his headquarters, according to two U.S. officials who participated in the meeting. The officials briefed reporters afterward only on condition of anonymity because of the visit's sensitivity. They said Jing told Rumsfeld no foreigner had entered the command headquarters in its 39-year history. Rumsfeld signed a large, new and otherwise empty guest book. The Chinese rejected a Rumsfeld request to visit their national military command center in the Western Hills. Jing disavowed a recent public suggestion by another Chinese general that the United States could be targeted for a nuclear strike if it intervened in a conflict over Taiwan. Rumsfeld aides who were present during the discussions quoted Jing as saying it was ``completely groundless'' to say China was targeting any country with its strategic nuclear forces. Jing's operations chief, Senior Col. Kang Hong Gui, gave Rumsfeld a briefing, complete with Microsoft PowerPoint graphics, on the command's structure and missile forces training, without details about the numbers of Chinese missiles, some of which could strike points inside the United States. Later, in a meeting with Rumsfeld at the Great Hall of the People, President Hu Jintao said the visit to the Second Artillery headquarters and Rumsfeld's other discussions in Beijing will ``help the military forces of our two countries to better enhance their mutual understanding and friendship.'' Hu and Rumsfeld also discussed President Bush's planned visit to Beijing in November, and they agreed to speed up plans to increase military educational exchanges, a goal Bush has endorsed. Earlier Wednesday, Rumsfeld complained of ``mixed signals'' from China and said the communist government must demonstrate more clearly its interest in improving U.S.-China relations. Rumsfeld cited a ``rapid, non-transparent'' buildup of the Chinese military and said this makes other countries, including the United States, wonder whether Beijing will hold to a peaceful path. On his first visit to China as defense secretary, Rumsfeld delivered an address to the Central Party School and fielded questions from several students and faculty members. The school is a key training ground for people the Communist Party considers its rising stars and future leaders. One professor told Rumsfeld that China hears ``different voices,'' or conflicting messages, from U.S. officials. Rumsfeld replied, ``I hadn't noticed that,'' and then said it is China, not the United States, that has sent conflicting signals about its intentions. ``So we see mixed signals and we seek clarification,'' Rumsfeld said. Chinese officials required U.S. reporters to leave the room after the initial exchange, as planned. In his prepared opening remarks, Rumsfeld said China is raising global suspicion about its military intentions by failing to acknowledge the true size of recent increases in its defense spending. Later, at a joint news conference at the Ministry of Defense, Rumsfeld's counterpart, Gen. Cao Gangchuan, said U.S.-China relations are strong, although he noted that it had been five years since an American secretary of defense visited China. He called Rumsfeld's visit a ``big event.'' Asked about the Pentagon's assertion in a report to Congress last July that China has vastly understated its defense spending, Cao said it would be ``simply impossible'' to increase the budget on the scale cited by the Pentagon because China is focusing its resources on fighting domestic poverty. ``It is not necessary and not possible, actually, for us to massively increase the defense budget,'' Cao said, speaking through an interpreter. He defended the accuracy of China's report that its 2005 defense budget is about $29 billion, compared with the $90 billion the Pentagon claims is the true figure. Even calculating it at a more recent exchange rate, the budget comes to $30.2 billion, Cao said. ``That is, indeed, the true budget we have today,'' he said. The atmosphere surrounding Rumsfeld's visit appeared friendly and optimistic, with Cao saying the two countries have a broad range of shared interests and a solid footing for building cooperation. Rumsfeld applauded China's dramatic economic successes, noting that when he first visited Beijing in 1974 as President Gerald R. Ford's chief of staff, the streets were filled with bicycles, not cars. At the same time, Rumsfeld made clear Washington's irritation with what he called China's ``seeming preference'' for organizations in the Asia-Pacific region that exclude the United States. He cited the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which in July issued a proclamation calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawing its military forces from Central Asia. A short time later, Uzbekistan ordered all U.S. troops to leave its Karshi-Khanabad air base. --- On the Net: U.S. Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil CIA Factbook on China: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 14 NRC: NRC Schedules Regulatory Conference to Discuss Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Concern News Release - Region II - 2005-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-05-040 October 18, 2005 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: regulatory conference with officials of the Tennessee Valley Authority on Oct. 25 in Atlanta to discuss the risk significance of an inspection finding at the companys Watts Bar nuclear power plant, located near Spring City, Tenn. NRC and TVA officials will discuss the significance of an NRC inspection finding related to events while the plant was shut down in February of this year. NRC inspectors found that operators at the Watts Bar plant made decisions which resulted in pressurizer valves lifting several times. The inspectors determined that the operators may not have adequately followed their procedures and their actions were an apparent violation of the plants technical specifications. The NRC evaluates regulatory performance at commercial nuclear power plants with a color- coded system which classifies findings as either green, white, yellow or red, in increasing order of safety significance. The NRCs preliminary evaluation determined that this issue at Watts Bar appears to be greater than green or, in other words, greater than very low safety significance. The meeting is open to public observation and is scheduled for 2:00 p.m. in the NRCs Region II office, located on the 24th floor of the Atlanta Federal Center at 61 Forsyth Street SW in Atlanta. No decisions on the final safety significance, apparent violations or possible enforcement action will be made during the conference. Those decisions will be made by NRC officials at a later time. Last revised Wednesday, October 19, 2005 ***************************************************************** 15 AP Wire: Upstate counties want Duke's new nuclear plant Posted on Wed, Oct. 19, 2005 Associated Press WALHALLA, S.C. - Three Upstate counties want Duke Power to build a new nuclear plant and bring jobs and tax revenues. Duke now operates three reactors on Lake Keowee at its Oconee Nuclear Station, on the border of Oconee and Pickens counties. The Charlotte, N.C.-based utility is considering 14 possible sites in North Carolina and South Carolina and should pick a location this year, spokeswoman Rita Sipe said. A new nuclear plant would take years to win approval. Sipe said it would likely be an investment worth up to $6 billion and could bring up to 1,000 full-time jobs varying from maintenance to engineering to office workers. Duke has asked "for an indication of interest," and "is certainly aware of our interest," Oconee County Administrator Ron Rabun said. Duke hasn't approached Pickens County Administrator Alan Ours. But Ours said he's contacted them and said he'd like Duke to build the plant in Pickens County. But Ours said his "take is that Pickens County is not under consideration." Still, if "Oconee is in the running, we are their best cheerleader," said Ray Farley, director of the Economic Development Alliance in Pickens County. On Monday, the Cherokee County Council approved gave second reading to incentives that include property tax breaks, said Jim Inman, director of the Cherokee County Development Board. That package requires one more reading. Information from: The Greenville News, http://www.greenvillenews.com ***************************************************************** 16 AU ABC: Independent MP backs nuclear reactor for Australia (AEDT)Thursday, 20 October 2005. 07:17 (AWST) An independent Member of the Northern Territory Parliament says importing radiopharmaceuticals from overseas is unsafe, unreliable and expensive. The independent Member for Nelson, Gerry Wood, says he has been advised by the chief scientist at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) that not all nuclear medicines can be flown into Australia. A letter from Dr Ron Cameron explains that radioactive medicines have short half-lives and often do not survive long flights intact. Mr Wood says that proves Australia is far better off building a new reactor. "Because of the unreliability of say the transport and the flexibility of the market, it's far better for Australia to have its own means of producing those radiopharmaceuticals and that's why we need Lucas Heights," Mr Wood said. A national nuclear waste facility is a prerequisite for the new reactor to be granted a license. ***************************************************************** 17 gainesvilletimes.com: Activist rips nuclear power - Wednesday, October 19, 2005 Physician co-founded group that won Nobel Peace Prize By DEBBIE GILBERT The Times [Photo] Paula Stuhr The Times Helen Caldicott speaks to an audience Tuesday at Gainesville State College. Caldicott is a physician who became an activist for nuclear and environmental issues. Amid looming fears of an energy crisis, the United States is taking a second look at nuclear power. But a noted environmentalist says nuclear is not the answer. Helen Caldicott, founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, spoke Tuesday to a standing-room-only crowd at Gainesville State College. In a lecture that was equal parts biology, chemistry and politics, she explained how decisions made by government officials threaten the health of ordinary residents. Sketching diagrams to illustrate concepts, she showed how radiation passing through a strand of DNA can trigger cancer. "It takes a single mutation in a single gene in a single cell to kill you," said Caldicott, who was a practicing pediatrician before turning to full-time activism. Another group she co-founded, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985. Children are much more susceptible to cancer than adults, she said. But because the disease usually takes many years to develop, it's impossible to prove the cancer was caused by a specific exposure to radiation. There are more than 100 nuclear plants in the United States, Caldicott said, and many are clustered in Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and South Carolina. "Congress has appropriated $13 billion for new nuclear reactors. That money could have been used to develop alternative energy sources," she said. She pointed out the irony that the Bush administration, which has denied the existence of global warming, now uses climate change as a justification for promoting nuclear power. "The nuclear industry says, 'We're the answer to global warming because we don't have any (carbon dioxide) emissions,'" Caldicott said. "They're lying. It takes a lot of fossil fuel to dig up uranium (ore), process and enrich it." Much of the world's supply of uranium is concentrated in Caldicott's home country, Australia. "(The Australian government) wants to sell uranium to anyone who will buy it," she said. "We're pushing cancer on the rest of the world." Caldicott said she gets "very passionate" about the issue and makes no apologies for it. She joked about being a "feisty Australian descended from Irish convicts," and she encouraged the audience to share her passion. "Be aggressive. Don't be polite. Speak from your gut. Appeal to people's better interests." Residents should express their concerns to their government, she said, because as the world's only superpower, the United States "is the country that decides whether everybody else lives or dies." Caldicott also worries about the security of nuclear plants, which generate both electricity and weapons-grade material. "If I was a terrorist, I could easily melt down a nuclear power plant," she said. "A friend of mine who works in the industry says it's not a matter of if, but when." Americans who think they can relax now that the Cold War is over should consider that all of the nuclear material ever made is still lying around, and some of it has a half-life of millions of years. Also, the U.S. and Russia still have weapons pointed at each other. "A Russian general told me, 'We're terrified we're going to blow (the U.S.) up by accident, because our early warning system is degrading and there's no money to pay the staff (to monitor nuclear facilities)," Caldicott said. Her remarks made a deep impression on Matt Kiser, a nursing student at Gainesville State. "I didn't realize what an impact this has on people," he said. "And I was unaware of the plans to build more reactors. If there's a meltdown, we're gone." Banks County resident Mary Ellen Meyers said she appreciated Caldicott's grasp of medical and scientific information. "We have to educate ourselves on these issues in order to vote for candidates who will understand the dangers," Meyers said. "What was inspiring for me was to see so many young people here today. We have to demand that it's time to change the way we do things." E-mail: dgilbert@gainesvilletimes.com Originally published Wednesday, October 19, 2005 Copyright 2004 The Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet Nov. 3-5 in Rockville, Maryland News Release - 2005-14 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 05-142 October 19, 2005 Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a public meeting Nov. 3-5 in Rockville, Md., to discuss, among other items, the license renewal application for the Point Beach nuclear power plant units 1 and 2 in Wisconsin. The committee will also discuss a generic letter on electrical grid reliability and the impact on nuclear plant risk, General Electrics new economic simplified boiling water reactor design, and an ACRS report on the NRC Safety Research Program. The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agencys Two White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. It will begin at 8:30 a.m. each day and end at 7 p.m. on Thursday and Friday; the session on Saturday will end at 1:30 p.m. A complete agenda is available on the NRCs Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs/agenda/2005/. Anyone with questions or those wanting to make public statements during the meeting should contact Sam Duraiswamy at 301-415-7364. The ACRS, as mandated by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, advises the Commission on licensing, the operation of nuclear power plants and related safety issues. Last revised Wednesday, October 19, 2005 ***************************************************************** 19 Bellona: Chinese bank gives loan for floating NPP construction Plans to begin construction of a floating nuclear power plant have been bolstered with the signing of a loan agreement with a Chinese bank. 2005-10-19 17:21 The venture is expected to see Russian nuclear agency Rosenergoatom invest some $35 million in the project next year, but some $14 million of this investment may come from the Chinese national EXIMBANK if domestic financing is insufficient. "We signed a contract with China on terms [for a potential loan if needed], Alexander Polushkin, head of development at Rosenergoatom is quoted as saying in local media. If the Russian government budget funds the project, the loan agreement will be abandoned, if not, under the terms of the loan, Chinese shipyards would build the main power plant housing, which would then be transported to Russia to be outfitted with the reactors. According to Polushkin, an $85m contract has already been signed with Bohai shipyards of China, which is to be enacted after the Chinese EXIMBANK extends the loan. The final contract with the bank is yet to be concluded but building the station could begin in January 2006. Construction is expected to take five years at a total cost of some $210 million. Izhora and Baltiysky plants in St Petersburg will manufacture reactor equipment. The floating nuclear plant will be placed at the Sevmash plant in Severodvinsk, Arkhangelsk region. 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 ***************************************************************** 20 Oregon State Daily Barometer: OSU defends nuclear reactor safety Interns working for ABC News were turned down for a tour of OSU’s nuclear reactor after By Amanda Robbins &Dan Traylor Radiation center staff makes adjustments to the 1.1 Megawatt TRIGA nuclear reactor housed in the facility. OSU’s reactor is one of 25 research reactors on college campuses around the nation. The facilities were subjects of an ABC investigation on security. In light of an ABC News report questioning the security at nuclear reactors on college campuses, OSU officials say they are confident in the safety of the 1,000-kilowatt reactor located on 30th Street and Jefferson Avenue. “We have never had a problem with the nuclear reactor — and it has been here for 38 years,” said Todd Simmons, an OSU spokesperson. The ABC News report, which aired last week on “Primetime Live,” alleged that the 25 college campuses in the nation which have nuclear facilities have lax security, making them vulnerable to terrorism. The report, available online at abcnews.go.com, said journalism students hired to do research found unmanned guard booths, unlocked doors and availability of guided tours that “provided easy access to control rooms and reactor pools that hold radioactive fuel.” The report added that none of the facilities had metal detectors and only two had armed guards. “Many of the schools permit vehicles in close proximity to the reactor buildings without inspection for explosives,” the report continued. Simmons said the major issues raised in the ABC report are not problems for OSU’s reactor. Simmons said that at OSU, ABC interns, who were “posing as students who wanted to tour the facility,” were turned away after OSU found out they were working for a news organization. He declined to say how OSU found out. “That’s part of the security procedures. We were able to know who they were and their purpose,” Simmons said. At other universities interns were able to get inside nuclear facilities. “At Florida, Wisconsin, Purdue and Ohio State, [interns] were able to gain access to high-security areas with no background checks, carrying large tote bags that were not inspected ...” the ABC News report said. Simmons said it’s more difficult to get into OSU’s facility. He said visitors must check in at a central entrance, show ID and announce the reason for their visit. As for the issue of cars getting close to the reactor, Simmons said OSU’s facility is protected adequately. “Security plans are such that the facility itself is safe from harm that might be directed at it in the parking lot,” he said. As for guards, Simmons declined to comment specifically. “Our radiation center interacts with the Oregon State Police as well as campus public safety,” he said. However, the ABC News report indicated the interns found no guards at OSU or Portland’s Reed College, the only other college in Oregon with a nuclear reactor. “Due to safety for employees and everyone on campus, it is not in anyone’s best interest to discuss the security steps we take,” Simmons said. Simmons said OSU takes security at the facility seriously. “We comply with all regulations including national, state, city and campus-wide,” Simmons said. Some college officials reacted with anger to the report even before it aired, The Associated Press reported. The dean of Kansas State University’s engineering school, Terry King, said ABC’s interns — who were college students or recent graduates — were “placed in a position where they were dishonest about their roles and intentions,”the AP reported. ABC countered that the interns were not told to lie, the AP said. “They were told to go to the reactor facilities, say they were graduate students interested in nuclear power and ask if they could look around,” the AP reported. “They carried regular cameras, not TV cameras, and did not say they were from ABC News.” At Kansas State, interns were given a tour even after being identified as working for ABC, but this was later cited in the report as a security risk, the AP said. “I think the ethics is somewhat questionable,” Ken Shultis, the school’s nuclear energy program director, told the AP. Dana Hughes, a Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism student who worked on the project, defended the tactics. “We were students,” she told the AP. “We were interested in the programs. We did not hide our cameras. We were hiding in plain sight. It wasn’t as sneaky as they were making it out to be.” Amanda Robins, staff writer Dan Traylor, managing editor campus@dailybarometer.com, 737-2231 2005 The Daily Barometer, Oregon State University ***************************************************************** 21 EUPolitix.com: MEPs urge EU leaders to ‘get real’ on nuclear energy Nuclear energy should play a central role in the EU’s battle against climate change, according to an influential cross-party group of MEPs. Presenting a joint declaration on climate change and nuclear energy, at a seminar organised by Foratom on Wednesday in the European Parliament, UK MEP Terry Wynn said that EU leaders had to “get real” about the benefits of nuclear energy in tackling climate change. “We can’t have a debate on climate change without discussing nuclear energy, and while I encourage renewable energy sources, let’s get real, none of them will ever run the Brussels metro system,” Said Wynn. The declaration, signed by 25 MEPs calls for EU leaders to recognise nuclear’s contribution in reducing CO2 emissions, and calls on politicians and decision-makers to back investment in low carbon energy technologies including nuclear power. And the MEPs want EU capitals to add their political weight to the argument that nuclear energy is essential if the EU is to meet its Kyoto protocol emissions reduction commitments. The declaration also argues that nuclear energy’s role in combating climate change should not be singled out because of purely ideological or political beliefs. “There is a perception that nuclear is unpopular…but this declaration can be a springboard for Europe’s politicians to lead from the front on nuclear energy,” said Wynn The British MEP said that the current impasse on developing nuclear power across Europe was not a technical or environmental problem, but a political one. And Spanish MEP Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca, told journalists at a later press conference that the MEP declaration reflected the growing political will across Europe to see nuclear energy play an increasingly central role as part of an EU energy mix, up to and beyond the Kyoto protocol. “Rarely has an issue concerned politicians at all levels as much as climate change,” said Roca. “The MEPs who signed the declaration today share a common conviction that nuclear energy is the safest, most cost effective and environmentally friendly energy option in that fight.” “It also offers countries the best opportunity of meeting their emissions reduction targets. Governments, environmentalists and the general public are increasingly acknowledging nuclear energy’s environmental credentials.” And chair of the seminar, Finnish MEP, Eija-Riitta Korhola said that the political abandonment of nuclear power had been all too easy for Europe’s politicians, and called for member states to “respond to reality” by using nuclear power to its full potential. “Energy cannot be just an ideological question, a wise politician should always be updating their views,” said Korhola. “Without nuclear power it will be difficult for the EU to meet its climate change goals. Nuclear power should be part of the solution to Europe’s energy problems.” Published: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:14:31 GMT+02 Author: Brian Johnson “We can’t have a debate on climate change without discussing nuclear energy, and while I encourage renewable energy sources, let’s get real, none of them will ever run the Brussels metro system.” Terry Wynn MEP 2005 EUpolitix.com ***************************************************************** 22 EUPolitix.com: Nuclear energy: Real power, real solutions Terry Wynn MEP says it’s time to have a real debate on climate change and nuclear power. This article first appeared in the October 17 edition of Parliament magazine. First, let’s get real about climate change. I’ve been an MEP almost since Adam was a lad, and in that time, the notion that climate change is both real and a serious threat to the lives of our children, grandchildren and beyond – if there is a ‘beyond’ – has become generally accepted. Now, let’s get real too, about what can be done to ensure that future generations will survive with a quality of life akin to ours. I’m not naturally a pessimist but, quite frankly, a lot of what I hear on this subject fills me with doubt – unless I put it all together alongside the maintenance of today’s nuclear share of the EU energy mix - around 30 per cent. For this reason, I wholeheartedly support the ‘declaration on climate change and nuclear energy’. I’ll explain why. In the simplest of terms, the phenomenon of climate change is all about management of waste from the energy, transport, household and industrial sectors. Carbon dioxide emissions have to be reduced to next to nothing if we are to halt this planet threatening process. The life cycle of a nuclear power plant, from conception to decommissioning, emits almost no CO2 to the atmosphere. All the other primary fuels capable of supplying a significant share of today’s energy needs (gas, oil & coal) cannot, as yet, be used without adding to the CO2 emissions problem. Opponents of nuclear power claim that nuclear waste is an unsolved problem. It is only a ‘problem’ at all because all the waste is captured and must be safely contained forever. Only when the equivalent ‘problem’ is solved for fossil fuels can they continue without spoiling our planet. I hope one day to see a working, commercially viable CO2 sequestration and storage plant – but today we do not have it. The same people who oppose nuclear power often promote energy saving, hydro-power, wind power, solar power, hydrogen and the rest. Well I support all those things too – don’t we all? But reality tells us that no new large hydro-power dams will be built because they cause other environmental damage. The same can be said for wind-power. Compare the new nuclear plant being built in Finland with a wind equivalent. The best performing wind turbines will achieve their maximum output for 30 per cent of their running time. So the 1600 MW nuclear unit being built in Finland would need at least a 5300 MW wind farm to replace it. The biggest wind turbines today can generate four MW – so who is ready for 1350 windmills next to where they live, where they take their holidays, or even next to where nobody lives? Again, wind can and must make a contribution but it does little to impact on the problem. Whilst I encourage all renewables, let’s get real again, none of them will ever run the Brussels metro system, and if you were going into hospital for an operation you would not like to ask the surgeon, “Is the wind blowing today or is it going to be sunny enough?”. A word on hydrogen: yes, hydrogen cells can produce energy without emissions – the problem is that hydrogen does not exist as a primary fuel. It has to be made and that process is very energy hungry. So unless hydrogen is made by use of nuclear or other non-emitting technologies, it does nothing to reduce the problem. Some other MEPs are promoting a Hydrogen Charter which omits to point this out. We should also go for more energy efficiency. However, it’s ironic that whilst each household and each factory can become more energy efficient, consumption by society as a whole continues to increase. The fact is that as energy efficiency leads to reduced costs, so the homeowner or factory owner buys more (energy or appliances) and the power sector increases production. I believe the problems and the solutions for nuclear power are not technical nor environmental but political ones. It’s the politicians who will decide the future of the nuclear industry on every continent. This underlines the importance of supporting the MEP declaration on climate change and nuclear energy. Why? Because, quite simply, nuclear power opponents will be active in the political debate and will tell you that nuclear power is dangerous, even though it kills fewer people per kWh than any other technology – almost zero in fact. They argue that it’s expensive even though, for new build, it is number two after combined cycle gas which pollutes and creates a dependency on Russia. Opponents say it has no answer to its waste problems even though it is the only bulk supply technology that contains and manages its waste safely, and they will tell you that nuclear is unpopular, yet in a recent opinion poll in Sweden, where they voted 20 years ago to close their nuclear plants, 80 per cent were supportive of nuclear. Even some Greens are aware of the urgency of the situation. James Lovelock, the Green Guru of the 80’s, and best know for his Gaia theory on sustainability, makes a powerful case for nuclear power largely on the ground that renewable resources could not be introduced quickly enough to avert a greenhouse catastrophe resulting from the use of fossil fuels. As a one-time marine engineer with a background in power production and, despite being a representative of a coal mining region - when we had pits in Lancashire - I am a supporter of nuclear energy. The problem is that my support is based on technical and practical arguments – but it is political ones that will win or lose the day. But I support nuclear power primarily from an environmental point of view and have done so long before Kyoto. You see I want my grandchildren and their grandchildren to live in a world which is clean and fit to live in. Published: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:22:49 GMT+02 Author: Terry Wynn is chairman of the MEP forum of nuclear energy "The problem is that my support is based on technical and practical arguments – but it is political ones that will win or lose the day." Terry Wynn MEP 2005 EUpolitix.com ***************************************************************** 23 EUPolitix.com: Nuclear energy: Open options Anders Wijkman MEP explains why we must keep all options open when it comes to the battle against climate change. This article first appeared in the October 17 edition of Parliament Magazine. The climate change debate is full of myths. One argument says that replacing fossil fuels by carbon-free or low-carbon technologies will be too expensive and constitutes a threat to European growth and competitiveness. Another argument is that we are short of alternatives to make the necessary transition possible. Both of these arguments are wrong in my opinion. We are still in the early phase of the necessary energy transition. Yet, it is interesting to note that quite a number of big companies have decided to take on a pro-active approach on climate change and joined the so-called Climate Group - a cooperative effort among businesses and cities around the world with the aim to take a lead in emissions reductions. Early results from within the Climate Group prove that it is, indeed, possible to significantly reduce emissions while at the same time saving a lot of money. Dupont reduced its greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by more than 70 per cent from 1990 and has saved $2 billion in total. British Telecom cut down on emissions by 62 per cent and saved £600 million. Alcoa has reduced emissions by 25 per cent saving $100 million. By this I do not mean to say that emissions reductions do not have a cost. But for society as a whole the costs are small compared to the benefits. There are indeed losers in a transition like this one, notably among some of the energy-intensive companies. But it should be relatively easy to compensate such companies. With regard to technology, there is a lot of pessimism around as well. We are often told that major technological breakthroughs are needed before we can begin in earnest to reduce carbon emissions. Or we are told that the only options available are clean coal and nuclear. While not excluding either clean coal or nuclear, I think the picture is a lot brighter than that. Senior researchers at Princeton University recently present- ed a most interesting paper identifying at least 15 existing technologies that could each prevent one billion tonnes of a year of carbon emissions over the next 50 years - one billion tonnes of carbon being roughly 15 per cent of total emissions as of now. Professors Pacala and Socolow have created a graph that divides the problem we face into seven, billion tonne per year ‘wedges’ which, according to them, are required to halt the rise in greenhouse gas emmissions and to stabilize their concentrations in the atmosphere. The technologies listed include: • Doubling fuel efficiency of two billion cars from 30 to 60 miles per gallon • Using best efficiency practices in all residential and commercial buildings • Increase the efficiency in coal-based electricity by a factor two • Replacing 1400 coal electric plants with natural gas- powered facilities • Capturing and storing emissions from 800 coal elec- tric plants • Increase wind electricity capacity by 50 times relative to today • Increase ethanol production 50 times • Use 40,000 square kilometers of solar panels to produce hydrogen for fuel cell cars • Add double the current global nuclear capacity • Halt tropical deforestation and create new planta- tions on non-forested land • Adopt conservation tillage in all agricultural soils worldwide According to Pacala and Solocow all the options mentioned should be considered. ‘There is no silver bullet’; what is needed is a combination of different technologies, while at the same time allocating con- siderably more resources in support of R&D to push costs down and to achieve breakthroughs in new technology areas. The role of nuclear energy is a special case. World- wide nuclear energy accounts for an estimated seven per cent of energy use and almost 20 per cent of electricity production. Although it dominates electricity generation in some countries, its initial promise has not been realised. Current projections of nuclear´s contribution to the total energy mix are that it will grow only slowly. The reasons are connected both to costs and safety concerns. Nuclear power is more costly than originally projected and competition from alternative technologies is increasing. Moreover, in many countries there has been a loss of public confidence because of concerns relating to safety, waste management and potential nuclear weapons proliferation. Add to that, concerns about terrorism, nuclear energy is definitely going to play a role in the future. Countries like France, Japan, the US as well as my own country Sweden do rely on nuclear for a sizeable part of its electricity generation. Carbon emissions would increase significantly if nuclear was to be phased out any time soon. However, looking at the world at large, it is difficult to recommend a major expansion of nuclear. A major reason is because the vast majority of the energy consumers in the future will be in developing countries. I strongly question whether it would be responsible to start large-scale production of fissionable material all over the world, in particular in countries where governance is weak and safety systems can be seriously questioned. What we talk about for nuclear to make a real difference would be several hundred big reactors under construction in different parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Efforts to strengthen the ‘non-proliferation regime’ leave a lot to be desired. If nuclear power is to expand, IAEA must be strengthened to maintain the separation between peaceful and military uses of nuclear materials. Opportunities to acquire nuclear weapons under the guise of peaceful energy applications or by stealing weapons-usable nuclear materials must be stopped. The big question is whether we will ever have the kind of safeguards needed to prevent nuclear materials to be used for the wrong purposes, ‘dirty bombs’ for instance. Nuclear power will continue to play a role in parts of the world. However, given all the other technology options at our disposable, it would be hard to argue in favour of a major expansion of nuclear capacity in order to reduce carbon emissions. We should, however, keep all options open and continue research to improve safety and hopefully solving the problem of waste disposal. Published: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 15:34:35 GMT+02 Author: Anders Wijkman MEP is the European Parliament's rapporteur on the battle against global climate change "Nuclear power will continue to play a role in parts of the world. However, given all the other technology options at our disposable, it would be hard to argue in favour of a major expansion of nuclear capacity in order to reduce carbon emissions." Anders Wijkman MEP 2005 EUpolitix.com ***************************************************************** 24 EUPolitix.com: Nuclear energy: A cocktail against climate change Nuclear power must be included in the EU’s future energy mix, argues Romana Jordan Cizelj MEP. This article first appeared in the October 17 edition of Parliament Magazine. The Earth’s climate has continually changed throughout its history and nature has always successfully adapted to these changes. However, in our contemporary industrial era climate change seems to be so much faster than it used to be. Clearly, we do not understand all the factors causing these climate changes, but we definitely know that greenhouse gas emissions are among them. In the EU the largest greenhouse gas emissions are generated by the electricity and heat sectors, closely followed by the transport sector. One of our main present political challenges is to preserve a healthy environment for the generations to come. As the climate changes and its effects transgress national borders, it should become one of the top political issues through international debate and agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol where contracting states pledged to limit or even reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. One must not forget that the Kyoto Protocol was ratified by the EU and all its member states as well. The European Parliament regularly discusses the potentially most promising approaches in limiting greenhouse gas emissions. The parliament’s industry, research and energy committee has recently concluded discussions on a report covering the ongoing battle against climate change, while MEPs at last month’s plenary session dealt with the European Commission’s communication on the renewable energy sector’s share across the EU and at proposals for concrete action. In this report, the commission estimates that for the EU-15, member states will accomplish by 2010, only ten per cent (and not 12 per cent as was originally planned) of the EU’s overall energy consumption produced from renewable sources. The parliament responded by providing a clear and decisive resolution which estimates that with a more systematic approach to energy policies by 2020 a share of 25 per cent of the EU’s overall energy consumption could be provided from renewable sources. I ask myself: did the parliament respond appropriately and responsibly? Was our common goal to reach the largest possible reduction of greenhouse gas emissions without being politically or ideologically biased? The answer is yes. The parliament has adopted a resolution which calls on the commission to set more ambitious goals. According to the parliament’s resolution, 60 per cent of the EU’s electricity demands should be supplied by ultra-low or non carbon emitting and CO2 neutral energy technologies by 2020. The term ‘energy technologies with extremely low greenhouse gas emissions’ refers not only to renewable energy sources but to nuclear energy as well. The latter already contributes to a safe and secure energy supply, is cost-effective, and promotes development of highly innovative technologies. Of course there are two sides to every coin and nuclear energy also has a shady side, which is public acceptance. In many member states support for nuclear energy is small, the main reasons for this are worries over radioactive waste and decommissioning of nuclear power plants. For low and intermediate level radioactive waste there are numerous disposal facilities that are the best proof of proper waste management. However, we are still waiting for a disposal facility for high-level radio. active waste, mostly due to opposition over the siting of disposal locations. Appropriate technical solutions have already been offered. Financial funds for decommissioning of nuclear power plants are another important issue, often referred to as problematic. This issue has been discussed in the industry committee and MEPs will vote on funding during the November plenary session. At European level we would like to ensure that the financial resources for decommissioning are accumulated in accordance with the ‘polluter pays’ principle. Resources should be earmarked and managed in a transparent way and should be adequate to realise the scheme’s goals. The responsibility for carrying out these tasks appropriately is, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, with individual member states. Unconvincing also are attempts to impose stricter requirements regarding insurance and responsibility-related matters in case of nuclear accidents – stricter than those in force elsewhere in the developed world or adopted by international agreements. I would like to underline that the efficient use of energy is additionally a horizontal mechanism, which can to some extent reduce our energy dependence. Therefore, promotion of the efficient use of energy should be integrated in energy-related plans as much as possible and should reflect itself in predictions of our future energy needs. It is our responsibility to provide future generations with the potential for at least the same if not better quality of life than we have now. ‘Quality of life’ includes a clean and healthy environment and appropriate living standards. In order to achieve this, our energy mix in the coming decades must be composed of energy resources that minimise environmental pollution, provide independence, security of supply and are reasonably priced. I can see only one way of achieving these highly interrelated requirements - by including nuclear power in the energy mix under the same conditions as other energy resources. Published: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 15:53:46 GMT+02 Author: Romana Jordan Cizelj is a member of the European Parliament's Committee on Industry, Research and Energy "Our energy mix in the coming decades must be composed of energy resources that minimise environmental pollution, provide independence, security of supply and are reasonably priced. I can see only one way of achieving these highly interrelated requirements - by including nuclear power in the energy mix under the same conditions as other energy resources." Romana Jordan Cizelj MEP 2005 EUpolitix.com ***************************************************************** 25 JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point 2 still leaking water By GREG CLARY What is tritium? Tritium is a radioactive isotope of the element hydrogen. It is naturally produced in the upper atmosphere when cosmic rays strike air molecules and as a byproduct in nuclear reactors that produce electricity. It readily forms water when exposed to oxygen and almost always is found as "tritiated" water. It primarily enters the body when people swallow tritiated water. People also may inhale tritium as a gas in the air or absorb it through their skin. Once tritium enters the body, it quickly disperses and is uniformly distributed. As with all ionizing radiation, exposure to tritium increases the risk of developing cancer. However, tritium is one of the least dangerous radionuclides because it emits very weak radiation and leaves the body relatively quickly. Since tritium almost always is found as water, it goes directly into soft tissues and organs. The associated dose to these tissues generally is uniform and dependent on the tissues' water content. People are exposed to small amounts of tritium every day. It is widely dispersed in the environment and in the food chain. (Original publication: October 19, 2005) Indian Point and federal regulatory officials confirmed yesterday that recent samplings of five underground wells around Indian Point 2 turned up trace amounts of tritium, a hydrogen isotope that may be carried in water that has been leaking from a spent-fuel storage tank since at least late August. Officials for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns the two working reactors at the Buchanan site, said the levels of tritium found are well below the amount allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency for drinking water and do not pose a threat to the public or to workers at the site. Tritium most commonly is found in self-illuminating watches or exit signs and gives off a relatively weak radiation that can increase the risk of cancer. Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials confirmed the concentrations of tritium found so far and participated in a multi-agency conference call yesterday in which Entergy detailed its plans to determine the cause of the leak and the effect of it on the surrounding area. Initially, the leak amounted to half a liter per day. Since the company changed its water collection system, the amount collected daily is about two liters. The company plans to take the following steps Drilling and testing eight more wells on the site around Indian Point 2, starting in about a month. Inspecting the liner of the spent-fuel pool, first with underwater cameras and then maybe with a diver who will descend into the pool to look for cracks. That should begin in the next two weeks. Developing a mitigation plan for the leak within two months that may include capturing the leaking water and having it removed from the site. Local elected and emergency officials, who initially were upset that it took weeks for Entergy to notify them about the leak, said they want some answers. C.J. Miller, a spokeswoman for Rockland County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef, said Vanderhoef is especially concerned that an earlier test sample closer to the reactor showed tritium concentrations 10 times higher than the acceptable levels. "Even though it's on Indian Point property, it's located in a densely populated area and right on the banks of the Hudson River," Miller said. She said Rockland officials asked for testing of the river's water during the conference call yesterday and supported Westchester County's request to involve the state Department of Environmental Conservation immediately. "Any level of contamination in the groundwater is unacceptable," Miller said. "Plus, we have no idea how long this has been going on." Officials from Entergy and the NRC said yesterday they were open to the DEC and other state agencies monitoring the leak. "Everyone is welcome to check the work we're doing," said Jim Steets, an Entergy spokesman. Copyright 2005 The Journal News,. Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the and , updated June 7, 2005. ***************************************************************** 26 JOURNAL NEWS: Exec foes spar over Indian Point By SARAH NETTER Next debateInside 2 p.m. Oct. 30 at the Suffern Library. Hosted by the League of Women Voters. Stony Point candidates debate, 3A (Original publication: October 19, 2005) WEST NYACK Several dozen students got an up-close look at democracy yesterday during a live TV debate between Republican County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef and Legislator Ellen Jaffee, the Democratic challenger. The debate, staged at Clarkstown South High School, was moderated by students, who also controlled the cameras and got it on the air. "It's a great way to show how students can be involved," student panelist Alex Weisler said. Carrie Filipetti, the other student panelist, questioned the candidates on Rockland's ability to respond to a disaster. Jaffee said the county is "absolutely not" prepared for a large-scale disaster. "We need to shut down Indian Point immediately and begin investing in renewable energy sources," she said, later chastising Vanderhoef for not forcefully demanding the closing of the nuclear plants. "That's just nonsense," Vanderhoef replied. "I asked for the closure of Indian Point before you were a legislator." Vanderhoef said the county also needs to be ready for natural disasters such as flooding. When Weisler asked about social services, Vanderhoef said the next county executive will have to deal with an aging population. "We need to deal with Alzheimer's," he said, "We need to deal with affordable housing." Jaffee criticized the county administration for what she says is a lack of coordination between departments. "This results in wasted funds," she said. She suggested creating a database of families and services to prevent duplicate funding. Both candidates agreed mass transit is in Rockland's future and that federal funding to expand the Tappan Zee Bridge is necessary to shuttle people between Rockland and New York City via a rail line or bus system. There currently are several options for the bridge's expansion. Jaffee said she is looking for all politicians to push the federal government into funding the option most appropriate for Rockland. Filipetti and Weisler, both juniors, said they were impressed with the candidates' ability to stay on track. "I thought both candidates answered the questions very well," Filipetti said, admitting that she went into the debate expecting Vanderhoef and Jaffee to dodge some of the tougher questions. Richard Stolbach, the independent candidate for county executive, did not attend yesterday's debate. He said he was not invited to the debate and is upset it fell on the Jewish holiday Sukkot. "I think people need to understand there's a large Orthodox Jewish population in Ramapo," he said. Hy Shuster, the school's television coordinator, said the debate was scheduled in May to secure appearances by Vanderhoef and Jaffee. Third-party candidates, he explained, typically aren't officially on the ballot until summer. The school's TV station only broadcasts on Tuesday nights, he added. In lieu of an appearance, Stolbach submitted a written statement that was read aloud. Copyright 2005 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms ***************************************************************** 27 JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point sirens fail in Orange County By GREG CLARY gclary@thejournalnews.com Stay informed Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano yesterday announced a plan to hook county residents up to information about possible emergencies via their e-mail and text messaging. Spano said residents who sign up would be able to receive information about major storms or some other disaster, including what they might need to do or where they should go. The system would supplement county information distributed through the media and other outlets. For more information, log on to www.westchestergov.comand click on the emergency banner at the top of the page. All information will be kept confidential. (Original publication: October 19, 2005) A four-county test of Indian Point's emergency siren system turned up problems for the second consecutive month yesterday when 10 of Orange County's 16 sirens failed to sound during a morning check of the notification network's backup system. All but four of the system's 156 sirens worked during a test of the primary network that was held 30 minutes later but officials from Westchester, Putnam, Rockland and Orange counties expressed concern about a wholesale failure for one county after a similar event occurred Sept. 14 in Rockland. "I'm outraged. We have to have this fixed immediately. We need redundancy in our system," Orange County Executive Edward Diana said late yesterday afternoon. "I'm sending a letter out now demanding another test in the next 30 days and a review by the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) of what is done on the system between now and then." Jim Steets, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns the Buchanan nuclear plants, said the company was still sorting out what went wrong yesterday. "He's right, of course," Steets said of Diana's comments. "We need to do something to reassure everyone that the siren system will work." Steets said the company had tracked down the causes of software problems from last month's failure and earlier siren problems and had rectified those, but yesterday's malfunction hadn't shown a definitive cause. Steets said the problem appears to have been with the backup radio transmission to the 10 malfunctioning sirens, which might indicate that there was a frequency problem. The sirens worked when the system was tested without the back-up radios. He acknowledged, however, that a problem with controlling the sirens cropped up when Orange County officials tried to push their backup system button a second time and ended up sounding Putnam County's sirens. "That will be thoroughly discussed (tomorrow) morning," said Adam Stiebeling, Putnam's top emergency management official for Indian Point. "We need to verify that the siren software is working properly." The four counties within the 10-mile evacuation zone of the nuclear plants have already agreed to meet with Entergy officials on the sirens, to see what progress the company has made in its vow to replace the decades-old system. Now that meeting will include significant discussion of the past as well as the future. Anthony Sutton, Westchester's top emergency management official, said the mix-up of which county could activate which sirens presents a new problem. "That's disturbing to us," Sutton said. "We want to get to the root cause of what happened in that case, and we want to ensure that no one else can break into the system and set off the sirens." In an emergency, the sirens are supposed to rotate several times, notifying residents in all directions to turn on radios and televisions for more information. Rockland officials were visibly relieved yesterday as they tested the sirens at the county's emergency management center and were able to hear the undulating high-pitched hum out the back door of the building. However, they weren't happy to learn that the Lower Hudson Valley's problem had moved from them to their neighbors in Orange County. "They have a real problem with the system," Rockland emergency official Dan Greeley said of Entergy. "And they're going to have to do something to repair it until it can be replaced." Copyright 2005 The Journal News, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms ***************************************************************** 28 El Paso Times: Palo Verde restart eases EP Electric Wednesday, October 19, 2005 Powered up Vic Kolenc El Paso Times El Paso Electric CEO Gary Hedrick is breathing easier now that the Palo Verde nuclear power plant is powering up again after an almost weeklong shutdown due to safety concerns. "We're pretty happy, obviously," Hedrick said Tuesday. The plant shutdown was "probably costing us about $750,000 a day" in additional power costs, Hedrick said. Those are costs that will eventually be passed on to customers through bill increases. El Paso Electric owns 15.8 percent of Palo Verde, which usually supplies about half the utility's electricity during the course of a year. The power it provides is extremely cheap. Palo Verde's shutdown had the utility "bleeding cash," Hedrick said Monday before it was known when Palo Verde's problem would be resolved. "It won't put us in bankruptcy, but it's never good to be spending money you're not collecting." Gary Hovis, an electric utility analyst for Argus Research, a New York investment research company, said the shutdown of Palo Verde won't affect the stability of El Paso Electric. "The company will eventually recoup its costs," Hovis said. "The benefits of nuclear power outweigh the negatives by a tremendous amount. It was a wise decision by El Paso Electric to invest in it 30 years ago." However, the utility's stock declined during the shutdown. It closed at $20.58 a share Tuesday -- down $1.33 a share from Oct. 10, a day before the shutdown. Electricity from Palo Verde costs about a half-cent per kilowatt-hour, compared with about 10 cents per kilowatt-hour today for electricity produced by natural-gas-fired power plants, Hedrick said. When the company doesn't get its full 600 megawatts a day from Palo Verde, it has to get more power from its local natural-gas-fueled power plants and from the open electricity market, which is largely tied to natural-gas-fueled power prices, Hedrick said. Arizona Public Service, the Palo Verde operator, shut down the plant Oct. 11 after it could not immediately validate a 30-year-old mathematical calculation for federal regulators to prove the plant's emergency core cooling system would operate as expected. "Additional analysis performed over the past six days proves conclusively that the (emergency cooling system) would perform as intended under all possible scenarios," the company reported late Monday night in a statement. Victor Dricks, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, told the Associated Press, "We reviewed their analysis and we have no problems with either the methodology or the conclusion, but we want to independently verify the operability of that key safety system and answer any other unresolved questions. They did the prudent thing in shutting down, and we're doing the prudent thing in checking them." Arizona Public Service expects two of the plant's three generating units to be "delivering power to the (power) grid this week," said Jim McDonald, a company spokesman. The units "may be at full power by the end of the week, but it's not guaranteed." Getting the units back online is a slow process, which phases power back onto the grid, he said. The third generating unit was shut down Oct. 8 for refueling and maintenance and is expected to return to operation by the end of December. "Palo Verde has been one of the top-performing (nuclear power) plants in the world in the last 10 years," McDonald said. "The last two years have been a little tougher" as the plant has had more unplanned generating unit shutdowns than usual due to various mechanical problems, he said. Palo Verde had 21 unit shutdowns last year and so far this year, including four for scheduled refueling, McDonald said. Palo Verde outages, especially unplanned outages, add to the power costs of El Paso Electric and several other utilities that get power from Palo Verde. Arizona Public Service recently filed a request with Arizona regulators to increase charges to customers to cover uncollected energy costs, including increased costs due to Palo Verde outages. It estimated that unplanned Palo Verde outages from April through August cost it an additional $30.5 million in power costs, the Arizona Republic reported. The Arizona utility owns 29.1 percent of Palo Verde and gets about a third of its power from the plant, McDonald said. El Paso Electric has not calculated how much Palo Verde's unplanned outages have cost the company this year, Hedrick said. But uncollected fuel costs eventually are collected through fuel surcharges. El Paso Electric this month increased the average residential electric bill in El Paso almost 10 percent to recover millions of dollars in uncollected fuel charges and to slightly increase customers' fuel charges mostly due to the utility's rising natural gas costs. The utility can ask state regulators and the city of El Paso for fuel charge adjustments twice a year. The next fuel adjustment can be requested in January. In New Mexico, the utility can collect increased fuel costs immediately, so Las Cruces-area customers are likely to see fuel increases next month tied to the Palo Verde shutdown, Hedrick said. Every three years, El Paso Electric reconciles its fuel charge collections through the Texas Public Utility Commission. In those cases, the utility and the city of El Paso and others argue over exactly how much money should have been collected and an order or agreement is made on what amount is owed to the company or must be refunded to customers. Those are the cases in which Palo Verde outages enter more into the equation, Hedrick said. Vic Kolenc may be reached at vkolenc@elpasotimes.com; 546-6421. For more information: www.epelectric.com; www.aps.com. Associated Press file photo National Guard troops stand guard outside the Palo Verde nuclear power plant in March 2003. The plant provides about half of El Paso Electric's power. Palo Verde facts + The Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, the nation's largest nuclear plant complex, is in Wintersburg, Ariz., about 50 miles west of Downtown Phoenix. + It produces 3,812 megawatts of electricity and supplies electricity to about 4 million customers in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California. + Construction began in 1976, and the first unit came online in 1986. The third and final unit went online in 1988. It cost $5.9 billion for construction and startup testing. + It's owned by a consortium of seven electric utilities, including El Paso Electric, which owns 15.8 percent of the plant. Source: Associated Press. Copyright 2005 El Paso Times, a Gannett Co., Inc. newspaper. ***************************************************************** 29 Xinhua: Vietnam to build 1st nuclear power plant www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-10-19 19:19:40 HANOI, Oct. 19 (Xinhuanet) -- Vietnam is likely to pour 3.4 billion US dollars into constructing its first nuclear power plant in central Ninh Thuan province, which is scheduled to become operational in the 2017-2020 period, a local official said here Wednesday. "We've submitted to the government a pre-feasibility study on building a 2,000-MW nuclear power plant either in Ninh Phuoc or Ninh Hai (two districts of Ninh Thuan). Total investment for it is 3.4 billion dollars," chief of the International Cooperation Department under the Vietnam Institute of Energy, Tran Thanh Lien, said at a press conference held after a Vietnam-France seminar on selecting technology and location for the plant. Vietnam's energy demand is estimated at 230 billion kwh in 2020, of which 165 billion kwh will be met by domestic primary sources like fossil fuel, some 5 billion kwh by renewable sources, 20 billion kwh by imports, and 40 billion kwh by nuclear energy and thermoelectricity generated from plants using imported coal, he said. "Because the power plant will generate only 14 billion kwh, or even the output doubles (28 billion kwh), we'll still face power shortage in 2020. So, we plan to import electricity and some 4-5 million tons of coal to feed our thermoelectric plants," he said, noting that Vietnam will purchase electricity with output of 2,000mw from Laos, and of 1,000 mw from China and Cambodia each. "We're building a legal corridor for nuclear energy development. Besides, we'll hold more international seminars on the issue. A seminar on nuclear energy's safety and economic aspects will be held in the first quarter of next year," Hong said, adding that Vietnam will organize more nuclear energy exhibitions in 2006 to gain stronger public acceptance of the energy. Vietnam has yet to select a foreign partner for its nuclear power project. "We will have to import all fuel rods and equipment for the first plant with two reactors, but will strive to locally produce them for following reactors and plants. Potential foreign suppliers are France, the United States, Japan, Russia and Canada," VAEC director Vuong Huu Tan told Xinhua recently. Vietnam's sole nuclear reactor has a capacity of 500 kw, and isused for training and research purposes, especially medical ones, Tan said. Located in the central highlands province of Lam Dong, it officially became operational in 1984. Enditem Copyright 2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 30 NRC: Pa'ina Hawaii, LLC; Establishment of Atomic Safety and Licensing FR Doc E5-5751 [Federal Register: October 19, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 201)] [Notices] [Page 60858-60859] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19oc05-106] Board Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29, 1972, published in the Federal Register, 37 FR 28,710 (1972), and the Commission's regulations, see 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 2.318, and 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is being established to preside over the following proceeding: Pa'ina Hawaii, LLC (Honolulu, Hawaii Irradiator Facility) A Licensing Board is being established pursuant to a July 26, 2005 notice of opportunity for hearing, 70 FR 44,396 (Aug. 2, 2005), regarding the June 27, 2005 application of Pa'ina Hawaii, LLC, for authorization to build and operate a commercial pool-type industrial irradiator in Honolulu, Hawaii, near the Honolulu International Airport. This proceeding concerns an October 3, 2005 request for hearing regarding the application submitted by the Concerned Citizens of Honolulu. The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges: Thomas S. Moore, Chair, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. [[Page 60859]] Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Dr. Paul B. Abramson, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Dr. Anthony J. Baratta, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed with the administrative judges in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302. Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of October 2005. G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. [FR Doc. E5-5751 Filed 10-18-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 31 IRNA: MEPs say nuclear energy safest option in fighting climate change Brussels, Oct 19, IRNA EU-Nuclear Energy Twenty-five Members of the European Parliament (MEP) Wednesday signed a joint declaration saying that nuclear energy should play an increasingly central role in the global fight against climate change. The ''declaration on climate change and nuclear energy'' stressed that nuclear energy remains a pillar of the EU's energy and environmental policy planning. The signed Declaration by the MEPs of different groups was presented at a press conference Wednesday afternoon following a seminar entitled "Nuclear Energy: Meeting the challenge of climate change," which was attended by over 150 people, including parliamentarians, officials from the European Commission and the Council, industry representatives, NGOs and academics. It was organized by FORATOM, the trade association of the European nuclear industry, in the European Parliament in Brussels. ''Nuclear energy is the safest, most cost-effective and environmental-friendly energy option in the fight against climate change,'' Spanish MEP and First Vice President of the European Parliament, Dr.Alejo Vidral-Quadras Roca, told the press conference. Dr. Roca who used to teach nuclear physics in Barcelona, Spain, said it was his firm belief that ''no single power generation technology should be ruled out or prioritized - for ideological or political reasons - that might prove essential in the future.'' The seminar focused on global and EU climate change policies and on nuclear energy's role in a post-2012 international climate change framework. The Declaration adds political weight to the shared conviction among an increasing number of MEPs, as well as European politicians, scientists and NGOs that nuclear energy can help the EU to meet its Kyoto Protocol C02-reduction commitments and reduce the effects of climate change. The signatories recommend, therefore, that nuclear energy should play a leading role in the post-Kyoto climate change policy framework. The chairperson of the seminar, Finnish MEP Eija-Riitta Korhola, said ''what we need now is a whole new way of energy thinking, which instead of being based upon fossil fuels is based instead upon energy efficiency and savings.'' Following the EU enlargement in 2004, there are more than 150 nuclear power reactors in operation across the EU. ***************************************************************** 32 Bnn: Americas US companies interested in Bulgarian nuclear plant project Bulgarian news network - online news agency \ , ['www.bgnewsnet.com / Bulgarian News network' ] [bnn 23:11 - 19.10.2005 WORLD\ Georgi Parvanov SOFIA (bnn)- U.S. companies have expressed interest to participate in the construction of the future Bulgarian nuclear plant Belene, daily Trud reported Wednesday. Bulgarian President Georgi Purvanov and Economy Minister Rumen Ovcharov conferred with the U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman and the Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff during their visit in the United States. more... Copyright 2002-2004 bnn ***************************************************************** 33 AFP: Earthquake rocks Tokyo, nuclear reactor briefly shut down - Wed Oct 19,12:10 PM ET TOKYO (AFP) - An earthquake measuring 6.3 on the Richter scale has rocked Tokyo and the surrounding area, briefly shutting down an experimental nuclear reactor, officials said. There were no fears of tsunami waves resulting from the quake which occurred at 8:44 pm (1144 GMT) on Wednesday, the Japan Meteorological Agency said. The magnitude had been initially estimated at 6.2 by the agency. There were no immediate reports of casualties or property damage. The epicenter of the quake was located off the Pacific coast of Ibaraki prefecture, some 150 kilometers (90 miles) northeast of Tokyo, the agency said. Its focus was about 48 kilometers (30 miles) below sea. The experimental nuclear reactor in Tokai Mura, located near the epicenter, shut down on impact as it is programmed to do, a spokesman for the government-backed Japan Atomic Energy Agency said. It was manually re-started 80 minutes later following safety checks, according to the spokesman, Shinichi Nishikawa. "The building rolled for 40 seconds or so but no objects fell from shelves or racks," he said. Some night train runs, including high-speed bullet-train services, were temporarily halted for checks on rails, the public broadcaster NHK reported. The two runways at Narita airport outside Tokyo were closed for about 10 minutes, airport officials said. Japan endures 25 percent of the world's major earthquakes and has built its infrastructure accordingly, with Tokyo's high-rises designed to withstand powerful tremors. Copyright 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 34 THISDAY ONLINE: Nigeria to Meet Nuclear Energy Soon From Onyebuchi Ezigbo in Abuja, 10.18.2005 Nigeria could hope to satisfy all requirements for effective monitoring and regulatory practices in relation to application of nuclear energy sources to power her economic growth. However sources at the Nigerian Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NNRA) the organisation responsible for steering the country’s nuclear energy programme, added that it could take upwards of 10 years to actualise the dream of having a nuclear energy plant in the country. Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum Resources, Amina Lawan Ali said the Federal Government was determined to fulfill all that was needed to ensure development of nuclear energy technology in the country. Ali said this when she opened a training workshop organised by the NNRA yesterday in Abuja. She expressed government's satisfaction at the steady progress being made by NNRA to tackle the sensitive issues that affectednuclear development. Director General of NNRA, Prof. Samuel Elegba on his part, said the workshop was intended to create awareness among stakeholders on the obligatory regulatory requirements for authorisation, inspection and enforcement in the use and control of radiation sources within the country. He said many operators were hardly aware of the best way to protect people from the dangerous effects of radioactive materials. In line with the standard requirements of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) the country said it had attained half of the stipulated milestones, which included the establishment of a regulatory framework, occupational exposure control (developing capacity for protection of health personnel from ionizing radiation) and medical exposure control practices. Nigeria had embarked on a journey towards the actualisation of nuclear energy plant as a more viable means of electricity generation for teaming energy users in the country. However, conditions inherent in getting the plan off the ground included adhering strictly to tight security and safety guarantees on its application set by the international community.For instance, he said the use of radiotherapy machines in the treatment of cancer patients could lead to further damages to the tissues if not properly handled. Who We Are About THISDAYOnLine.com --> | THISDAY People | Copyright 2000-2005 Leaders & Company Limited ***************************************************************** 35 AFP: US support for India's nuclear programme is a one-off - official Wed Oct 19, 3:14 PM ET PARIS (AFP) - Washington's moves to cooperate with India in developing nuclear energy is a one-off situation based on India's "responsible" track record which sets it apart from other aspiring nuclear powers, a senior US official said. "This cooperation that we're extending to India is unique to India. It is not going to be replicated to other countries," Nicholas Burns, the US under secretary of state for political affairs, said in Paris on the eve of a trip to India. He said that India differed markedly from Iran " /> Iranor Pakistan in that it has not been a source of nuclear proliferation and had been "transparent" about its programme. He denied that Washington was employing double standards by opposing Iran's nuclear activities while offering to help India with its own. "If you look at India's record, actually it's the reverse of Iran's record. India has been a responsible country in safeguarding its nuclear technology over the past 30 years," he told reporters at the US embassy in Paris. Burns added that, even though India was not a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, a deal to promote India's civil nuclear energy programme would bring the country "into effective compliance with all the international norms" of non-proliferation. India's arch-rival in the region, Pakistan -- though "an important country in the war against Al-Qaeda" -- was, he said, "a country that has proliferated in the past to a major degree." He added that "we have a relationship with Pakistan, but it doesn't extend to the kind of civil nuclear energy cooperation we intend to have with India." The United States and India are to draw up a plan separating India's civilian and military nuclear facilities to pave the way for implementation of their atomic energy cooperation deal by early 2006. US sanctions were imposed on India after its second round of nuclear tests in May 1998, but, after the September 11, 2001 attacks, Washington agreed to waive them in return for support its so-called "war on terrorism." Under a July deal struck between President George W. Bush " /> President George W. Bushand Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the United States agreed to lobby allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India. Copyright 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 36 Arizona Republic: Palo Verde faces more tests October 19, 2005 Palo Verde faces more tests Nuke agency to rule on emergency system Ken Alltucker The Arizona Republic Operators of the Palo Verde nuclear power plant still must prove to regulators that an emergency cooling system would function properly in the event of a crisis. Arizona Public Service Co. said a battery of tests performed over the past week shows that the plant's cooling system would perform as expected during an emergency. APS used those test results as the basis for restarting two of three nuclear reactors on Monday. But a three-person investigative team dispatched by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will have the final say on the viability of Palo Verde's emergency systems after it reviews the utility's tests this week. "We saw no problem with their methodology or their conclusions," said Victor Dricks, an NRC spokesman in Arlington, Texas. "We will draw our own conclusions based on our review." Palo Verde's latest shutdown, expected to cost millions of dollars in lost power, is one of several this year at the nation's largest nuclear power plant, located about 50 miles west of Phoenix. The outages have caught the attention of federal and state regulators as well as Palo Verde's other owners. On Tuesday, an Arizona Corporation Commission member asked for a hearing at which APS officials would be asked to discuss whether they intended to pass along costs associated with the shutdown to ratepayers. The utility is in the process of executing management changes at the plant with an eye toward improving the plant's performance. APS was forced to shut down Palo Verde units 2 and 3 last week after it was unable to answer regulators' questions about the emergency cooling system. It was thought that a design flaw in the cooling system could have prevented the proper flow of water to the reactors if coolant lines ruptured or otherwise failed. Jim Levine, APS executive vice president overseeing generation, said that tests performed over the past week show there is no problem with the plant's design and that the system would work as expected. Dricks said the federal investigative team, consisting of a nuclear power plant inspector, an engineer and an NRC manager overseeing engineering, would review the APS tests. The team will issue a written report based on the findings unless it declares swifter emergency action is needed. APS officials expressed confidence that two reactors will be operating at full tilt by the end of the week. A third reactor, Unit 1, will remain out of service as part of a planned two-month refueling and maintenance outage. Palo Verde churns out about 4,000 megawatts of juice when it is running at full capacity and is a critical source of inexpensive electricity for the Southwest. During Palo Verde outages, utilities are forced to purchase or use more expensive types of electricity such as coal and natural gas. APS already has told state regulators that Palo Verde outages from April through August cost it $30.5 million - an expense it wants to recover from ratepayers. Corporation Commissioners Bill Mundell and Kris Mayes wrote letters on Tuesday asking whether the utility intends to ask ratepayers to help pick up the tab for the latest outage. "Nobody envisioned we would experience the frequency and duration of these outages," Mundell said. "I will request we have an open meeting to discuss the issue and ask APS: Do you intend to ask customers to pay for these outages?" APS said it was too early to calculate a cost associated with the outages and to decide whether it would seek to recover the money from ratepayers. Salt River Project, which owns the second-largest stake of Palo Verde at 17.5 percent, estimated the plant's outage costs $900,000 per day. That figure includes the extra cost associated with purchasing power from the spot market and potential loss of money generated from sales of excess power. Meanwhile, APS is realigning its Palo Verde management team to improve the plant's performance. "Part of the issue is we needed more focused attention on the part of the main players," said Levine, who has assumed day-to-day management of the plant following last month's retirement of plant manager Gregg Overbeck. APS also has filled a key position that had been vacant over the past two years. Cliff Eubanks, a nuclear industry veteran who most recently worked as a manager at Entergy's Arkansas Nuclear One plant, was named vice president of operations. The changes affect two other management positions. Craig Seaman will oversee regulation and plant improvement initiatives. A yet-to-be-named internal candidate will oversee finance, information technology and records. Reach the reporter at ken .alltucker@arizonarepublic.comor (602) 444-8285. Copyright 2005, azcentral.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 37 Journal and Courier: Beyond the fear factor on campus nuclear reactors Online - Editorial PUBLISHED: 10-19-05 6:00 AM EST As offended Purdue University nuclear scientists pointed out last week, ABC News' reporting about alleged security lapses at research nuclear reactors on U.S. campuses tapped genuine nuclear fears harbored by the American public. Could terrorists blow up nuclear reactors on our campuses, including a relatively low-powered one at the West Lafayette university? Worse, could terrorists steal the material and use it to create a "dirty bomb" and blow up something else? Hidden camera work showing graduate students getting what looked like relatively easy access to tours from seemingly overly accommodating campus guides aimed straight for high fear-factor marks. The report didn't have Purdue student running through campus, waving their arms in the air. But it did get a rise out the administration, which quickly dismissed a report that also was derided as overblown and sensational by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. If anything, the ABC report served as an entry into what Purdue is doing with a research reactor that the university says has the power to run 10 light bulbs -- not exactly making it a prime candidate for a would-be terrorist's interest. And it revealed again how touchy the subject is to a public wary of nuclear power. Purdue can't take any precautions lightly, no matter how low-powered its nuclear research facility is and no matter how shaky the reporting into security might be. But the explanations from Lefteri Tsoukalas, head of Purdue's School of Nuclear Engineering, and others were enough to instill a measure of confidence that the university is living up to national standards on protecting its research facility. And by this week, ABC's Primetime was on to the next shocking story, touting a story about singing twins ... with a white-power twist. (They look like the Olsen twins, a promo run this week teased, but wait until you hear what they're singing.) If nuclear swindles waiting to happen didn't grab the American public, aspiring Hitler youth just might. Copyright 2005, Federated Publications, Inc. A Gannett Site. ***************************************************************** 38 Eureka Alert: Stopping nuclear smugglers EurekAlert! ]] Public release date: 19-Oct-2005 UK contact: Claire Bowles 44-20-7611-1210 US contact: Kyre Austin 1-617-558-4939 It's been a long day at the Port of New York and New Jersey. Officials have wasted precious time and money opening up or X-raying at least 150 incoming freight containers. They turn out to be full of cat litter, ceramic tiles or bananas -- all of which happen to be naturally radioactive. What they don't realise is that they have also nodded through a container in which is stowed a 50-kilogram canister of stolen highly-enriched uranium. Unlike the bananas, the low-energy gamma rays it emits are easily absorbed by the 2-centimetrethic sheet of lead around it, so it passes through the radiation monitors unnoticed. Some time later, home-grown terrorists build two nuclear bombs, take one across the country in a car and set off simultaneous explosions in New York and San Francisco. Nightmare scenarios like this have already prompted the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend $300 million installing radiation detection equipment at the nation's ports. But despite this, US ports remain vulnerable, according to the many scientists, government and port officials who testified on the technology for detecting smuggled nuclear materials before a special hearing of the House Committee on Homeland Security in June. "We'd be crazy to assume that the bad guys aren't thinking of this," says Bruce Schneier, a security expert based in Mountain View, California. Around 80 per cent of freight containers coming into the US are already screened by a radiation portal monitor, which detects any gamma rays and neutrons that escape from the container, and that figure is expected to rise to 100 per cent by the end of the year. But these scanners have significant limitations. Firstly, they wrongly flag around 2 per cent of all containers as suspect, mainly because they cannot distinguish between a plutonium bomb and the radioactive potassium-40 found in bananas. More importantly, they fail to detect the most dangerous nuclear material of all: highly enriched uranium (HEU). Unlike plutonium, which emits neutrons and high-energy gamma rays that are almost impossible to shield, HEU emits only low-energy gamma rays. The monitor detects gamma rays using a piece of plastic called a scintillator, which emits photons when it is hit by gamma rays. These photons are then converted into an electrical signal. But if the uranium is shielded by just a thin layer of lead, or even wood, the detectors miss it. And HEU is much easier to turn into a bomb than plutonium. The number of false positives may be reduced by a new set of detectors known as the Advanced Spectroscopic Portal, to be introduced in 2006. These will distinguish between radioactive isotopes such as plutonium and the potassium-40 in bananas by replacing the plastic scintillator with an inorganic crystal such as sodium iodide. These crystals also emit photons when hit by gamma rays, but the photons have different, clearly defined energies depending on which isotope the gamma rays come from, allowing the isotope's identification. But even this detector will not be able to detect uranium. So the DHS is devoting further millions to fund the development and testing of a new generation of active screening technologies that bombard containers with high energy particles or rays and then scan for the resulting signature emissions. Instead of relying on the low-energy gamma rays that uranium naturally emits, the bombardment will spark the emission of higher-energy neutrons or gamma rays that can penetrate lead shields and be picked up by the detectors. One idea being tested by Dennis Slaughter at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California is to bombard the container with a beam of neutrons (New Scientist, 16 July, p 8). If the neutrons hit uranium or plutonium, they induce fission reactions that split the nuclei into smaller fragments, but do not start a chain reaction as the density of neutrons is too low. These fragments emit high energy gamma rays as they decay. Meanwhile James Jones of Idaho National Laboratory in Idaho Falls is using a similar idea in reverse. He bombards the containers with high-energy X-rays to induce fission reactions in uranium and plutonium and then looks for the neutrons that are emitted in the process (New Scientist, 11 January 2003, p 17). Both these technologies have been used to detect HEU behind lead shields and have been developed to prototype stage. But both have their drawbacks. Neutrons are scattered by materials rich in hydrogen, such as food, fuel, clothes and wood. As a result, the illuminating beam in Slaughter's system was unable to get to the sample in tests on cargoes containing any of these common materials, and the signature emissions of Jones's technology could not pass out of the container. Both have come up with methods to overcome this problem (see "Fission or food?", opposite), but others think that since much of the freight passing through ports every day contains hydrogen-rich material, the answer lies not in neutrons but in photons. "Photons are much more penetrating of hydrogenous materials," says physicist William Bertozzi at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Bertozzi has set up a company called Passport Systems, based in Acton, Massachusetts, which is working on a rival technology known as nuclear resonance fluorescence imaging. In NRFI, an X-ray beam excites all the nucle of all the atoms in the container. A gamma-ray detector then identifies the atoms according to the unique energies and intensities of the photons emitted as the nuclei return to their original state without undergoing fission. Bertozzi decided to apply NRFI to cargo containers when he realised that an X-ray beam of high enough energy to penetrate a lead shield would also span the range of energies needed to excite each of the atoms in the periodic table -- between 2 and 9 million electronvolts. Unlike its rivals, Bertozzi's technique can identify both radioactive and non-radioactive isotopes in a container. All nuclei are made up of clouds of protons and neutrons that rotate and vibrate with respect to one another when they are hit by photons at their resonant energy. The exact energies emitted when the nuclei fall from these different energy states depends on the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus, and provides a unique signature for every element and isotope. By carefully positioning the detectors and the beam, Bertozzi can illuminate each 20-centimetre cube of the space within the container individually, so putting the resulting images together will give a 3D image of the location of all the radioactive and nonradioactive isotopes in the cargo (see Diagram). This means the system can be used to detect traditional explosives or contraband as well as nuclear materials, and could be useful to customs officials who simply want to ensure that a container holds what its owners claim it does. Being able to pinpoint the location of the various contents within the container might also allow a more intelligent analysis of its contents. Robert LeDoux, CEO of Passport Systems, intends to program the system to distinguish between a nuclear bomb, which would be attached to a traditional explosive and require a higher alert, and the components for a bomb, which might simply be surrounded by a lead shield. But Jones regards this as a waste of time, preferring to simply pinpoint the nuclear material. "I don't need to know what the element is at every single point," he says. "If there is no nuclear material declared at all in this cargo I don't care what else there is." His detector is able to find the approximate location of the nuclear signals. The three technologies will be tested against each other in late 2006, at a site being built in Nevada by the DHS. Slaughter also helped write a report on technologies for detecting smuggled nuclear materials, commissioned by the DHS but not yet released. It concludes that the final system is likely to be a combination of all the technologies being developed. "There is no silver bullet that works for all cargo mixes," Slaughter says. Preventing a terrorist nuclear attack is obviously about more than scanning containers. Increasing security at reactors so that the material cannot be stolen in the first place will be a major part of the equation. But should terrorists get their hands on any uranium, Schneier is confident the technology to prevent it being smuggled is within reach. "It's the kind of thing that technology can actually help with, unlike so many security problems." ### "This article is posted on this site to give advance access to other authorised media who may wish to quote extracts as part of fair dealing with this copyrighted material. Full attribution is required, and if publishing online a link to is also required. The story below is the EXACT text used in New Scientist, therefore advance permission is required before any and every reproduction of each article in full. Please contact . Please note that all material is copyright of Reed Business Information Limited and we reserve the right to take such action as we consider appropriate to protect such copyright." THIS ARTICLE APPEARS IN NEW SCIENTIST MAGAZINE ISSUE: 22 OCTOBER 2005 ***************************************************************** 39 Activist Seeks Protective Actions for Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 14:52:19 -0700 X-Sender-host-address: 63.203.231.61 X-Temp-Whitephrase: YES Nuclear X-Spamprobe: ham-extreme * 0.0001258 OK Subject: FW: Activist Seeks Protective Actions for Children During Nuclear Evacuation PRESS RELEASE October 19, 2005 Contact: (717)-541-1101 Eric J. Epstein ericepstein@comcast.net Activist Seeks Protective Actions for Children Petition Addresses Flawed Nuclear Emergency Plans Harrisburg, PA. - Eric J. Epstein* submitted a Petition for Rulemaking to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which seeks to codify Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMAs) 1986 Guidance Memorandum EV-2 Protective Actions for School Children into the NRCs emergency planning regulations. Epstein stated, Failure to act may endanger the licenses of all five nuclear generating stations in Pennsylvania since FEMA has been reaching a false finding for emergency planning compliance for the past 19 years. Epstein added, Inaction is not an option. The status quo is unacceptable. Moreover, an NRC Review of Public Comments on PRM 50-79 makes it clear that this violation is shared by other reactor states. Background: On September 29, 2005, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Senior Nuclear Engineer Michael Jamgochian issued a Differing Professional Opinion (DPO). In the DPO, Mr. Jamgochian concluded that the criteria in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) GM EV-2 must be codified into the NRCs emergency planning regulations in order to permit the NRC to make a finding that there is reasonable assurance that protective measures can and will be taken (p. 1, Block #10). _____ * Mr. Epstein is Chairman of Three Mile Island Alert , Inc., (tmia.com) a safe-energy organization based in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and founded in 1977. TMIA monitors Peach Bottom, Susquehanna, and Three Mile Island nuclear generating stations. Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\Petiton for Rulemaking.pdf" Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\Petiton for Rulemaking 1" ***************************************************************** 40 toledoblade.com: Radioactivity found in Lake Erie tributary Article published Wednesday, October 19, 2005 SANDUSKY'S PLUM BROOK Contamination is linked to former NASA reactor [Photo] NASA's Keith Peecook explains decommissioning operations for the station, where a nuclear reactor once was in use. ( THE BLADE/ALLAN DETRICH ) By TOM HENRY BLADE STAFF WRITER SANDUSKY - One of Lake Erie's smallest tributaries has been radioactive for at least 32 years. NASA officials revealed yesterday that a one-mile stretch of Plum Brook, between Pentolite Ditch and Bogart Road, has soil with isotopes of radioactive Cesium 137 that are barely above natural background levels. To a much lesser extent, there also are microscopic traces of radioactive Cobalt 60. They attributed the contamination to past activities at NASA's former Plum Brook nuclear test reactor, four miles south of Sandusky. It operated between 1961 and 1973. Keith Peecook, a senior NASA engineer and acting project manager of the site's decommissioning effort, said there likely was a pinhole leak that was never detected. NASA stopped discharging waste into Pentolite Ditch once the reactor was shut down in 1973, he said. The effect of the discovery was not immediately clear. [Photo] The reactor vessel once was housed in this receptacle. The reactor was built in 1958 and operated until 1973. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Ohio Department of Health both agreed with NASA that there does not appear to be an imminent public health threat. Neither was sure if a cleanup would be necessary until further testing is completed. The state health department is not even sure if the contamination - which may not even have been caught without modern detection equipment - is significant enough for warning signs to be posted, Bret Atkins, an agency spokesman, said. NASA has agreed to split new samples it takes with the state health department. Both will run separate tests and compare results, Mr. Atkins said. NASA will, if necessary, spend the money it takes to clean up the creek. It will release its plan for the added sampling in about three weeks, Mr. Peecook said. Results from preliminary tests were done at depths of up to 18 inches. NASA went outside its property after finding elevated levels of those radioactive materials near its gate at Pentolite Ditch, which flows into Plum Brook, he said. Plum Brook flows into Lake Erie's Sandusky Bay. None of the water has radioactive material beyond permitted levels, though that doesn't mean the material is never stirred up. "Obviously, there has been some movement over the years," Jan Strasma, an NRC spokesman, said. U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D., Toledo) yesterday said she is trying to get NASA Administrator Michael Griffin and NRC Chairman Nils Diaz to visit the region because it is "no stranger to safety and environmental concerns over nuclear issues." "The recent meltdown threat at the Davis-Besse nuclear reactor was ranked as one of the most serious nuclear threats in U.S. history. News of radioactive contamination spreading off-site will be troubling to many, and it is paramount that we keep the public educated throughout this process," she said. At 60 megawatts, NASA's Plum Brook reactor was a fraction of today's utility-scale reactors that generate electricity, which often are 900 to 1,000 megawatts. Yet during its heyday, the Plum Brook test reactor was one of America's 10 largest for nuclear research. It focused on nuclear-powered rocket propulsion. The reactor, built for $15 million in 1958, sat in a mothballed state for years. NASA got the NRC's authorization to start dismantling it in March, 2002. The dismantling effort originally was to be completed in 2007 at a cost of $160 million. It will take until at least 2010 and now could potentially cost "tens of millions" more, Mr. Peecook said as he discussed the anticipated budget shortfall while leading reporters on a tour. He said NASA remains committed to restoring the site to "greenfield" status - that is, restoring it so it is clean enough for farming or residential use. Mr. Peecook said NASA has spent all but $20 million so far. It has excavated more than 10 million pounds of contaminated soil from its 6,000-acre site and eight million pounds of low-level radioactive waste. The spent reactor fuel, the only high-level radioactive waste, was sent for reprocessing at the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River complex in South Carolina in 1973. Much of the other metal-based material went to that state's Barnwell dump, one of the nation's few licensed to accept low-level waste. Everything still on the site, including contaminated soil, can be sent to the Envirocare facility in Utah, Mr. Peecook said. Contact Tom Henry at: thenry@theblade.com or 419-724-6079. The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000 ***************************************************************** 41 NRC: Proposed Generic Communication; Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Circuit FR Doc E5-5752 [Federal Register: October 19, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 201)] [Notices] [Page 60859-60864] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19oc05-107] Analysis Spurious Actuations AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public comment. SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to issue a generic letter (GL) to: (1) Request addressees to review their fire protection program to confirm compliance with existing applicable regulatory requirements regarding their assumptions of the phrase ``one-at-a-time'' in light of the information provided in this GL and, if appropriate, take additional actions to return to compliance. Specifically, although some licensees have performed their post-fire, safe-shutdown circuit analyses based on an assumption of only a single spurious actuation per fire event or that spurious actuations will occur ``one-at-a-time,'' recent industry cable fire test results demonstrated that these assumptions are not valid. (2) Require addressees to submit a written response to the NRC in accordance with NRC regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 50.54(f) (10 CFR 50.54(f)). This Federal Register notice is available through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under accession number ML051650017. DATES: Comment period expires [60 days after FRN is published]. Comments submitted after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T6-D59, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to NRC Headquarters, 11545 Rockville Pike (Room T-6D59), Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Robert Wolfgang at 301-415-1624 or by e-mail or Chandu Patel at 301-415-3025 or by e-mail at SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NRC Generic Letter 2005-Xx; Post-Fire Safe- Shutdown Circuit Analysis Spurious Actuations. Addresses All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors, except those who have permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor vessel. Purpose The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this generic letter (GL) to: (1) Request addressees to review their fire protection program to confirm compliance with existing applicable regulatory requirements regarding their assumptions of the phrase ``one-at-a-time'' in light of the information provided in this GL and, if appropriate, take additional actions to return to compliance. Specifically, although some licensees have performed their post-fire, safe-shutdown circuit analyses based on an assumption of only a single spurious actuation per fire event or that spurious actuations will occur ``one-at-a-time,'' recent industry cable fire test results demonstrated that these assumptions are not valid. (2) Require addressees to submit a written response to the NRC in accordance with NRC regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 50.54(f) (10 CFR 50.54(f)). The reason for this request is that the results from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)/Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) cable fire tests showed a relatively high probability of multiple spurious actuations occurring simultaneously or in rapid succession during or after a fire (ref. EPRI Report No. 1006961, ``Spurious Actuation of Electrical Circuits Due to Cable Fires: Results of an Expert Elicitation,'' dated May 2002 and NUREG/CR-6776, ``Cable Insulation Resistance Measurements Made During Cable Fire Tests,'' dated June 2002). Some licensees have assumed only a single spurious actuation, and others have assumed that multiple spurious actuations can only occur ``one-at-a-time,'' with sufficient delay between actuations to allow for mitigation. The EPRI/NEI test data clearly show that the use of ``one-at-a-time'' spurious actuations assumption is not credible. If multiple spurious actuations occurring simultaneously or in rapid succession during or after a fire have not been considered by licensees in their post-fire safe-shutdown circuit analysis, it is possible that they are not in compliance with 10 CFR 50.48 and 10 CFR Part 50, General Design Criterion (GDC) 3. The licensees who conclude that they are no longer in compliance with 10 CFR 50.48 and 10 CFR Part 50, GDC 3, based on the information provided in this GL, are expected to come into compliance with 10 CFR 50.48 and 10 CFR Part 50, GDC 3, using risk-informed or deterministic methods as appropriate to their licensing basis. Background The regulatory requirements for post-fire safe shutdown are given in 10 CFR 50.48 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, GDC 3. Additionally, all nuclear power plants (NPPs) licensed to operate before January 1, 1979, are required to comply with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G, ``Fire Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability.'' All NPPs licensed to operate after January 1, 1979, were evaluated against Section 9.5.1 of NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan (SRP). The fire protection plan (FPP) and the associated safety evaluation report (SER) are specifically incorporated into those plants' licensing bases. All NPP licensees are responsible for meeting fire protection commitments and license conditions made during the establishment of their fire protection program. The objective of the fire protection requirements and guidance is to provide reasonable assurance that one train of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown is free of fire damage. This includes protecting circuits whose fire-induced failure could prevent the operation, or cause maloperation, of equipment necessary to achieve and maintain post-fire safe shutdown. As part of its fire protection program, each licensee performs a [[Page 60860]] circuit analysis to identify these circuits and to provide adequate protection against fire-induced failures. Beginning in 1997, the NRC staff noticed that a series of licensee event reports (LERs) identified plant-specific problems related to potential fire-induced electrical circuit failures that could prevent operation, or cause maloperation, of equipment necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown. The staff documented these problems in Information Notice 99-17, ``Problems Associated With Post-Fire Safe- Shutdown Circuit Analysis.'' Based on the number of similar LERs, the NRC treated the issue generically. In 1998 the NRC staff started to interact with interested stakeholders in an attempt to understand the problem and develop an effective risk-informed solution to the circuit analysis issue. NRC also issued Enforcement Guidance Memorandum (EGM) 98-002, Rev. 2 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003710123), to provide a process for treating inspection findings while the issues were being clarified. Due to the number of different stakeholder interpretations of the regulations, the NRC decided to temporarily suspend the associated circuit part of fire protection inspections. This decision is documented in an NRC memorandum from John Hannon (Chief, Plant Systems Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)) to Gary Holahan (Director, DSSA, NRR) dated November 29, 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003773142). In 2001 EPRI and NEI did a series of cable functionality fire tests to further the nuclear industry's understanding of fire- induced circuit failures, particularly spurious equipment actuations initiated by hot shorts. EPRI coordinated this effort and issued the final report (EPRI Report No. 1006961). Additional analysis of the EPRI/NEI test results can be found in NUREG/CR-6776. Based on the test results, the NRC staff and NEI concluded that the probability of fire- induced circuit failures can be relatively high and that there can be a relatively high probability of multiple spurious actuations occurring simultaneously or in rapid succession. Discussion Although both the NRC and the industry have used the phrase ``one- at-a-time'' in connection with post-fire spurious actuations caused by hot shorts, it is not defined in 10 CFR 50 regulations or guidance documents for fire protection. The phrase has been interpreted in at least two different ways. Some licensees have interpreted ``one-at-a- time'' to mean that only one spurious actuation need be postulated for any single fire event. Other licensees have interpreted the term to mean that multiple spurious actuations do not occur simultaneously, and that there would be sufficient time between spurious actuations to allow operators to take corrective actions. NRC has issued SERs that accepted both interpretations for specific situations in specific plants (e.g., NUREG-0876, Supplement No. 6, ``Safety Evaluation Report related to the operation of Byron Station, Units 1 and 2,'' ADAMS Accession No. 8411200507). However, current NRC regulations only allow these interpretations with respect to the design of alternate shutdown capability. The EPRI/NEI cable fire testing conducted in 2001 demonstrated that neither interpretation conforms with the likely effects of a fire in an area containing safe-shutdown cables. Therefore, these interpretations do not ensure safe shutdown. In a S.J. Collins (NRC) letter to R.E. Beedle (NEI) dated March 11, 1997 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003716454), the NRC reiterated its position that multiple spurious actuations must be considered and evaluated. Subsequent to the Collins letter, the 2001 EPRI/NEI fire testing demonstrated that multiple spurious actuations can occur with a relatively high likelihood and that they can occur simultaneously or in rapid succession without sufficient time for mitigation between actuations. One of the key observations of the test report was that, ``given that a hot short occurs in a multi-conductor cable, it is highly probable (over 80 percent) that multiple target conductors will be affected (i.e., multiple simultaneous dependent hot shorts).'' The testing covered most of the types of cable insulation and jacketing materials and types of raceways commonly used in nuclear power plants. During the testing, numerous variables were introduced to investigate the impact of various factors on cable performance and failure characteristics. While the staff has maintained that post-fire multiple spurious actuations should be considered, the number of actuations that must be considered has not been defined. Since the deterministic approach to post-fire safe-shutdown analyses assumes that all cables in a fire area are damaged by the fire (except where protection is provided in accordance with Section III.G.2 of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R), it follows that all possible spurious actuations, as well as the cumulative effect of the actuations, should be considered. The SERs incorporated into the licensing bases of some plants (for example, Byron and Braidwood) specifically allow a design assumption of a single spurious actuation per fire event when performing the post- fire safe-shutdown circuit analysis. However, most plants postulated in their licensing basis that multiple spurious actuations occur one-at-a- time. All plants must review their circuits analysis, assuming possible multiple spurious actuations occurring simultaneously from a fire. Depending on the results of this review, licensees may conclude that they are no longer in compliance with the fire protection regulations. Those licensees who determine that they are no longer in compliance will either have to make plant modifications to protect against possible multiple spurious actuations or request an exemption (or license amendment, as applicable) as described in the ``METHODS OF COMPLIANCE'' section of this GL. An NEI letter dated May 30, 1997, presents the industry's position on the phrase ``one-at-a-time.'' The industry's position is that ``possible functional failure states from a single hot short in the component's control circuitry should be analyzed one-at-a-time (not sequentially nor with cumulative consequences) for a fire in a certain fire area.'' As one basis for this position, the letter references the Response to Question 5.3.10 in GL 86-10, ``Implementation of Fire Protection Requirements.'' Although this response states that ``the safe shutdown capability should not be adversely affected by any one spurious actuation or signal resulting from a fire in any plant area,'' per Question 5.3.10, the response applies only to Appendix R, Section III.L, ``Alternative and Dedicated Shutdown Capability.'' The NRC emphasized this position in a letter from Dennis M. Crutchfield (Chief, Operating Reactors Branch 5, Division of Licensing) to P.B. Fiedler (Vice President & Director--Oyster Creek) dated April 30, 1982 (ADAMS Accession No. ML011150521) by stating that ``it is essential to remember that these alternative requirements (i.e., III.G.3 and III.L) are not deemed to be equivalent'' to III.G.2 protection. As noted in the attachment to a February 6, 1997, memorandum from L.B. Marsh (Chief, Plant Systems Branch, NRR) to J.F. Stolz (Director, Project Directorate I-2) regarding the NRC policy on the interpretation of NRC GL 86-10 guidance on spurious valve actuation, the reference to ``any one spurious actuation'' in the response to Question 5.3.10 is intended to provide [[Page 60861]] a design basis for determining the capacity and capability of the alternative or dedicated shutdown train (e.g., size of the pump and the support systems needed to maintain reactor coolant inventory, the scope of onsite electrical power distribution and power needs, and an operational baseline and set of plant conditions to define the scope of initial manual actions to restore systems necessary to accomplish the required reactor performance goals). Again, these alternative requirements do not provide the same level of protection as III.G.2. NEI also stated in the May 30, 1997, letter that ``any other interpretation leads to complex and costly analysis which is not justified for the very small safety benefit.'' The NEI letter offered no assessment of the safety significance of multiple sequential and cumulative failures. It is important to note that the NEI letter of May 30, 1997, preceded the 2001 EPRI/NEI fire testing, and that before the testing, the industry had long claimed that spurious actuations were not credible. As noted above, the cable functionality fire testing demonstrated that multiple spurious actuations can occur and that they can occur in rapid succession without sufficient time for mitigation. Therefore, if a licensee does not account for multiple spurious actuations in their circuits analysis, they are not in compliance with 10 CFR 50.48 and 10 CFR part 50, GDC 3, which require that a licensee is to provide reasonable assurance that one train of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown is free of fire damage. Methods of Compliance Based on the information provided in this GL, if a licensee concludes that they are no longer in compliance with the fire protection regulations, there are several acceptable methods for them to re-establish full regulatory compliance. One way is to re-perform the post-fire safe-shutdown circuit analysis based on guidance provided in this GL and make modifications necessary to come into compliance. Another method to address this issue is to perform either a risk- informed evaluation that considers defense-in-depth and safety margins or a deterministic evaluation: If a licensee proposes to use a risk-informed approach to justify an exemption in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, then this approach should follow the guidance of RG 1.174, ``An Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis.'' For those licensees who have adopted the standard fire protection license condition as promulgated in GL 86-10, changes to the approved fire protection program can be made without prior staff approval if those changes would not adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire. GL 86-10, ``Implementation of Fire Protection Requirements,'' provides guidance on performing and documenting these changes. Plants licensed after January 1, 1979, that use a risk-informed approach must submit a license amendment in accordance with 10 CFR 50.90. The exception to 10 CFR 50.90, provided in the standard license condition and in 10 CFR 50.48(f)(3), does not apply because the risk assessment approaches used by plants deviate from the approved deterministic approaches used in their licensing basis. Furthermore, the licensees' risk assessment tools have not been reviewed or inspected against quality standards found acceptable to the NRC staff. Consequently, the staff believes that the use of risk informed approaches without prior NRC approval may result in changes that could adversely affect safe shutdown. Fire modeling and risk techniques acceptable to the staff should be used when performing risk-informed evaluations. An additional method to achieve compliance is the adoption of a performance-based fire protection program in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c), ``National Fire Protection Association Standard NFPA 805.'' The Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1139, ``Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection for Existing Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants,'' dated September 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML042740308) and NEI 04-02, ``Guidance for Implementing a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection Program Under 10 CFR 50.48(c),'' Rev. 0, dated May 2005 (ADAMS Accession No. ML051440805), provide additional guidance to licensees who plan to use this option. Applicable Regulatory Requirements NRC regulations in 10 CFR 50.48 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, GDC 3, require each operating NPP (licensed before or after issuance of GDC 3) to have a FPP providing post-fire safe shutdown capability. That is, a means must be provided of ensuring that one of the redundant trains of safe shutdown structures, systems, and components must be protected so that it remains free of fire damage, allowing safe shutdown of the plant. The regulation in 10 CFR 50.90 requires a licensee who desires to amend their license, to submit an amendment request to the NRC. A NPP licensed to operate before January 1, 1979, may submit an exemption request in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12. All NPPs licensed to operate before January 1, 1979 (pre-1979 plants), are required to comply with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, paragraph III.G, ``Fire Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability.'' Paragraph III.G states, in part, that ``one train of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown conditions from either the control room or emergency control station(s) is free of fire damage.'' Paragraph III.G.2 states, in part, ``where cables or equipment, including associated non-safety circuits that could prevent operation or cause maloperation due to hot shorts, open circuits, or shorts to ground, of redundant trains of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown conditions are located within the same fire area outside of primary containment, one of the following means of ensuring that one of the redundant trains is free of fire damage shall be provided:'' All NPPs licensed to operate after January 1, 1979, are required to comply with 10 CFR 50.48(a), which requires that each operating NPP have a FPP that satisfies GDC 3. The FPP is incorporated into the operating license for post-1979 plants as a license condition. This license condition specifically cites the staff SER in the licensee's FPP, to demonstrate that the license condition has been met (although licensees may modify their FPP as long as there is no adverse effect on safe shutdown). Based on the new information provided by the EPRI/NEI cable fire tests, approved fire protection programs that do not include protection against possible multiple spurious actuations occurring simultaneously (including programs for plants with SERs that specifically approve an assumption of one-only spurious actuation per fire event) may not comply with these regulatory requirements. Applicable Regulatory Guidance Fire-induced hot shorts that cause spurious actuations can prevent a train from performing its post-fire safe-shutdown function. NRC regulations, while noting that spurious actuations must be considered, do not set a limit on the number of spurious actuations that can occur. In addition, NRC regulations do not state whether multiple spurious actuations should be assumed to occur simultaneously or sequentially. Any limits or assumptions used by the licensee in performing the post-fire safe-shutdown circuit analysis should be adequately justified. [[Page 60862]] In order to demonstrate compliance with the regulatory requirement that one safe shutdown train remain free of fire damage, licensees must address the potential for multiple, concurrent spurious actuations by analyzing for these failures and providing adequate protection where required. Fire modeling techniques and risk analysis techniques which the staff has found acceptable are provided in Section 4.0 of Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1139, ``Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection for Existing Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants,'' dated September 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML042740308) and may be used in the evaluations. The deterministic methodology in NEI 00-01, Rev. 1 (January 2005), ``Guidance for Post-Fire Safe Shutdown Circuit Analysis,'' Chapter 3, for analysis of post-fire safe-shutdown circuits, in conjunction with the guidance provided in this GL, is one acceptable approach to achieving regulatory compliance with post-fire safe-shutdown circuit protection requirements for multiple spurious actuations. Licensees should assume that the fire may affect all unprotected cables and equipment within the fire area and address all cable and equipment impacts affecting the required safe shutdown path in the fire area. All potential impacts within the fire area must be addressed. The risk significance analysis methodology provided in Chapter 4 of NEI 00-01 should not be applied as a basis for regulatory compliance, except where a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 805 licensing basis has been adopted in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c). Risk-informed or performance-based methodologies that use the methods and information provided in NEI 00-01 (e.g., Chapter 4 and Appendix B- 1) may be used to support exemption requests for plants that have not adopted an NFPA licensing basis. Furthermore, regardless of the plant licensing basis, the NRC agrees with the NEI 00-01 guidance that ``all failures deemed to be risk significant, whether they are clearly compliance issues or not, should be placed in the Corrective Action Program with an appropriate priority for action.'' The remaining sections of NEI 00-01 provide acceptable circuit analysis guidance on both the deterministic approach and the risk-informed, performance- based approach. Requested Actions Within 90 days of the date of this letter, all addressees are requested to take the following actions: (1) Assess plant post-fire safe-shutdown circuit analyses for regulatory compliance in accordance with the information contained in this GL. The NRC informed licensees of these compliance expectations in a public meeting in October 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML043290020). (2) Take appropriate compensatory measures in accordance with plant fire protection programs if the addressees' interpretation and use of multiple spurious actuations in their circuits analysis leads to the conclusion that the addressee is no longer in compliance with the fire protection regulations. (3) Submit licensee's plans for plant modifications, license amendments or exemption requests that the above evaluation identifies as necessary to re-establish compliance with regulatory requirements and the plant's licensing basis in accordance with the information contained in this GL. Requested Information All addressees are requested to provide the following information: (1) Within 90 days of the date of this GL, provide a statement on whether or not you conclude you are in compliance with the regulatory requirements as described in the Applicable Regulatory Requirements section of this GL. Addressees who conclude that they continue to be in compliance with the regulatory requirements in light of the information provided in this GL should state the basis for their conclusion. (2) Addressees who conclude that they are not in compliance with the regulatory requirements as described in the Applicable Regulatory Requirements section of this GL, provide the following information: a. An assessment of the functionality of affected structures, systems, and components that addresses the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in light of multiple spurious hot shorts as a result of a fire. An acceptable assessment would be consistent with an evaluation performed for GL 91-18, Rev. 1. b. A detailed description of the compensatory measures in place to maintain the safe shutdown function of affected areas of the plant, and an explanation of how the compensatory measures provide adequate protection. c. A general description and planned schedule for any plant modifications made to ensure compliance with the regulatory requirements listed in the Applicable Regulatory Requirements section of this GL. d. A general description and planned schedule for any changes to the plant licensing bases resulting from any evaluation performed to ensure compliance with the regulatory requirements listed in the Applicable Regulatory Requirements section of this GL. Include a discussion and schedule for any license amendment or exemption requests needed to support changes to the plant licensing basis. e. Where the licensee plans no action under (a) or (b) or (c) or (d), provide a justification for not assessing safety significance or taking compensatory and corrective actions. Required Response In accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f), in order to determine whether a facility license should be modified, suspended, or revoked, or whether other action should be taken, an addressee is required to respond as described below. Within 30 days of the date of this GL, an addressee is required to submit a written response if it is unable to provide the information or it cannot meet the requested completion date. The addressee must address in its response any alternative course of action that it proposes to take, including the basis for the acceptability of the proposed alternative course of action. The required written responses should be addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, under oath or affirmation under the provisions of Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 10 CFR 50.54(f). In addition, submit a copy of the response to the appropriate regional administrator. Reason for Information Request As discussed above, EPRI/NEI-performed cable fire testing in 2001 demonstrated that multiple spurious actuations can occur with relatively high likelihood and that they can occur simultaneously or in rapid succession without sufficient time for mitigation between actuations. However, many licensees' circuits analysis and/or safe-shutdown analysis did not consider this relatively high probability. The NRC staff will review the responses to this GL and will notify affected addressees if concerns are identified regarding compliance with NRC regulations. The staff may also conduct inspections to determine addressees' effectiveness in addressing the GL. Related Generic Communications GL 86-10, ``Implementation of Fire Protection Requirements,'' April 24, 1986. [[Page 60863]] GL 91-18 Rev. 1, ``Information to Licensees Regarding NRC Inspection Manual Section on Resolution of Degraded and Nonconforming Conditions,'' October 8, 1997. Information Notice (IN) 92-18, ``Potential for Loss of Remote Shutdown Capability During a Control Room Fire,'' February 28, 1992. RIS 2004-03, ``Risk-Informed Approach for Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Associated Circuit Inspections,'' March 2, 2004. RIS 2004-03 Rev. 1, ``Risk-Informed Approach for Post-Fire Safe Shutdown Circuit Inspections,'' December 29, 2004. RIS 2005-XXX, ``Clarification of Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Circuit Regulatory Requirements'' (Draft issued for public comment on May 13, 2005). Backfit Discussion Under the provisions of Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 10 CFR 50.109(a)(4)(I), and 10 CFR 50.54(f), this GL requests addressees to evaluate their facilities to confirm compliance with the existing applicable regulatory requirements as discussed in this GL. The fundamental regulatory requirement is that at least one safe-shutdown path be maintained free of fire damage in the event of fire. The NRC's position concerning this regulatory requirement has not changed. All NPPs licensed to operate before January 1, 1979, (pre-1979 plants) are required to comply with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, paragraph III.G, ``Fire Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability,'' including Paragraph III.G.2. Paragraph III.G states, in part, that ``one train of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown conditions from either the control room or emergency control station(s) is free of fire damage.'' Paragraph III.G.2 states, in part, ``where cables or equipment, including associated non-safety circuits that could prevent operation or cause maloperation due to hot shorts, open circuits, or shorts to ground, of redundant trains of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown conditions are located within the same fire area outside of primary containment, one of the following means of ensuring that one of the redundant trains is free of fire damage shall be provided:'' All NPPs licensed to operate after January 1, 1979, are required to comply with 10 CFR 50.48(a), which requires that each operating nuclear power plant have a FPP that satisfies GDC 3. The fire protection plan is incorporated into the operating license for post-1979 plant as a license condition. This license condition specifically cites the staff SER on the licensee's FPP, to demonstrate that the license condition has been met (although licensees may modify their FPP as long as there is no adverse effect on safe shutdown). All NPP licensees are required to implement their approved fire protection program, considering multiple spurious actuations, in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements. Fire-induced hot shorts that cause spurious actuations can prevent a train from performing its post-fire safe shutdown function. The regulations note that spurious actuations must be considered. Prior to the EPRI/NEI cable fire tests in 2001, very little data was available to provide a basis for predicting the extent or behavior of spurious actuations during a fire. Based on the available data and expert opinion, the industry assumed and, in some specific cases, the NRC accepted that spurious actuations that could prevent safe shutdown were highly improbable. Consequently, some licensees assumed only a single spurious actuation per fire event. Others assumed multiple spurious actuations, but assumed that they would only occur ``one-at-a-time'' with time between actuations to take corrective actions. These assumptions were never included in the regulations or generally adopted by the NRC. The 2001 EPRI/NEI fire test program demonstrated that the previous assumptions regarding spurious actuations do not adequately address the potential risk to safe shutdown. The EPRI/NEI cable fire tests clearly showed, during and after a fire, a relatively high probability that multiple spurious actuations will occur simultaneously or in rapid succession. Consequently, to demonstrate compliance with the regulatory requirement that one safe shutdown train remain free of fire damage (which has always been the NRC's position), and with licensees' licensing bases, licensees must address the potential for multiple concurrent spurious actuations by analyzing these failures and providing adequate protection where required. The information requested by this GL is therefore considered a compliance exception to the rule in accordance with 10 CFR 50.109(a)(4)(I), as the staff's position set out in this GL regarding the term ``one-at-a-time'' is necessary for compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Paragraph III.G (with respect to pre-1979 plants) and, with respect to post-1979 plants, is necessary for compliance with the plants' license conditions regarding fire protection. With regard to plants for which the NRC had in the past specifically accepted the assumption that only a single spurious actuation would occur per fire event, or that multiple spurious actuations would occur ``one-at-a-time'' with time between actuations to take corrective actions, this GL is considered a compliance exception to the backfit rule, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.109(a)(4)(I). New information from the 2001 EPRI/NEI cable fire tests has shown that multiple, simultaneous spurious actuations must be considered for these licensees to be in compliance with NRC's unchanged interpretation of its fire protection requirements, which require that one safe shutdown train remain free of fire damage. Federal Register Notification A notice of opportunity for public comment on this GL was published in the Federal Register (XX FR XXXXX) on October XX, 2005. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act The NRC has determined that this action is not subject to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This GL contains information collections that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). These information collections were approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), clearance number 3150-0011, which expires on February 28, 2007. The burden to the public for these mandatory information collections is estimated to average 300 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the information collection. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public comment on the potential impact of the information collections contained in the GL and on the following issues: 1. Is the proposed information collection necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the NRC, including whether the information will have practical utility? 2. Is the estimate of burden accurate? 3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected? 4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques? [[Page 60864]] Send comments on any aspect of these information collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Records and FOIA/ Privacy Services Branch (T5-F52), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by Internet electronic mail to ; ; and to the Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202 (3150-0011), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Public Protection Notice The NRC may not conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control number. Contact Please direct any questions about this matter to the technical contact or the Lead Project Manager listed below, or to the appropriate Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager. Bruce A. Boger, Director, Division of Inspection Program Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Technical Contact: Robert Wolfgang, NRR, 301-415-1624, E-mail: . Lead Project Manager: Chandu Patel, NRR, 301-415-3025, E-mail: . Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections. End of Draft Generic Letter Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, . If you do not have access to ADAMS or if you have problems in accessing the documents in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of October 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael J. Case, Deputy Director, Division of Inspection Program Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-5752 Filed 10-18-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 42 Guardian Unlimited: Report: Navy Commander Blamed in Sub Crash From the Associated Press [UP] Thursday October 20, 2005 12:01 AM By LESLIE MILLER Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - A Navy nuclear submarine commander was largely responsible for a 2001 collision with a Japanese fishing boat that killed nine people, according to a federal investigation requested by victims' families upset with the Pentagon's handling of the incident. The National Transportation Safety Board report, released Wednesday, largely mirrors the findings of a Navy court of inquiry conducted months after the accident. The NTSB concluded that Cmdr. Scott Waddle's hasty order to conduct an emergency surfacing drill off the Hawaii coast caused the submarine's rudder to slice into the hull of the Ehime Maru - a vessel used to train teenagers to fish commercially. Also responsible were the crew's failure to communicate and to manage 16 civilian visitors so they didn't get in the way, the report said. The Navy has acknowledged that the emergency maneuver was performed for the benefit of the civilians. The safety board concluded that the Navy has adequately overhauled its training and oversight procedures since the accident. The Navy has also placed strict restrictions on visitors who embark on submarines. For example, civilians are no longer allowed to sit at the controls, crowd into the control room or talk to crew while their operating the submarine as they did during the Ehime Maru accident. ``The Navy has recognized the detrimental operating conditions that existed on the board the Greeneville and has taken additional measures to address the safety of operations on board its submarines,'' the NTSB report said. ``No further action is warranted.'' The report found that Waddle rushed through maneuvers in the afternoon because the 16 ``distinguished visitors'' aboard had lingered over lunch and they were running behind schedule. Most importantly, he didn't allow enough time to search the area for other vessels, the report said. ``The commanding officer continued to rush, pushing his crew and truncating recommended steps for safe operation,'' the NTSB report said. The Navy's court of inquiry decided against a court martial for Waddle and let him retire at full rank and pension. In Japan, people were outraged that Waddle wasn't punished more severely. In Dec. 2003, the families of two of the victims sent a letter requesting that the NTSB scrutinize the Pentagon's program allowing civilians on board military equipment. Lt. Ryan Perry of the Pacific Fleet said the Navy continues to extend its condolences to the families of the victims and to the Japanese people. ``We continue to be very remorseful and regret the accident,'' he said. Waddle has since written a book about the tragedy in which he takes responsibility for it. He also visited Japan in December 2003 to place flowers at a memorial for the dead and met four young survivors and their families. ^--- On the Net: National Transportation Safety Board: http://www.ntsb.gov Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 43 Bradenton Herald: DEP sets Tallevast meeting Posted on Wed, Oct. 19, 2005 HERALD WATCHDOG DONNA WRIGHT Herald Staff Writer TALLEVAST - Agency's secretary to hear residents' concerns, complaints The secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the state agency overseeing Lockheed Martin Corp.'s cleanup of toxins in Tallevast, will travel to the community Thursday. FDEP Secretary Colleen Castille requested the meeting with Tallevast leaders to hear their concerns. "This will be a conversation," said Pamala Vazquez, spokeswoman for the DEP Southwest District Office in Tampa. "This is an opportunity for the secretary to listen to their concerns and hear their thoughts." Castille wants to meet with Laura Ward, president of Family Oriented Community United Strong (FOCUS), and Laura Washington, vice president. FOCUS is an advocacy group representing Tallevast residents. The 4 p.m. meeting will be held at the FOCUS office, Washington said. An underground plume of toxic waste threatens the small historical community in southern Manatee County. The plume has been traced back to the former Loral American Beryllium Co. plant at 1600 Tallevast Road. Loral operated the plant from 1961 to 1996, and most of its precision machine work was done for the federal government. Many Tallevast residents worked at the plant. Now, workers and residents fear they were exposed to toxic dust and chemicals while the plant was in operation. Also, residents have concerns about dangerous chemicals and solvents found in the soil and groundwater surrounding the plant. Lockheed assumed ownership of the Tallevast plant in 1996 in a corporate buyout of Loral. In 2000, while preparing to sell the Tallevast facility, Lockheed discovered underground contamination of potentially cancer-causing solvents and degreasers that had leaked from a broken sump. While Lockheed reported the contamination - then thought to cover just the five-acre plant site - to Manatee County and the DEP, residents did not learn of the toxins in their backyards until almost four years later. Although the plant is now owned by BECSD, a limited holding company operated by Wire Pro Inc., Lockheed has assumed responsibility for investigating the plume and cleaning up the toxic mess, and DEP is overseeing Lockheed's work. The state agency recently released a critical review of Lockheed's latest test data. Lockheed believes it has defined the extent of the plume, now known to cover more than 131 acres. Also, Lockheed has repeatedly said its tests indicate no health risk to residents who believe the chemicals in the ground beneath their homes have caused widespread illness and even death in their community. But the DEP and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency say that Lockheed's data raises more questions than it answers and that more monitoring wells and sampling are necessary to know the plume's true extent. FOCUS, meanwhile, has been doing its own testing of private drinking water and irrigation wells in Tallevast. Results of those tests are expected to be released within the next week, Washington said. DEP plans no presentation for Thursday's meeting, said Vazquez. "The secretary just wants to sit down with Mrs. Ward and Mrs. Washington and listen to their concerns," Vazquez said. Donna Wright, health and social services reporter, can be reached at 745-7049 or at . ***************************************************************** 44 Daily Yomiuri: Aomori govt OK's storage of N-fuel The Yomiuri Shimbun Aomori Gov. Shingo Mimura officially announced Wednesday that the prefecture would allow the construction of facilities to temporarily store spent nuclear fuel in the city of Mutsu. The Aomori prefectural government and the Mutsu city government signed an accord later in the day with Tokyo Electric Power Co. and Japan Atomic Power Co., which would build and operate the facilities, the first of their kind in the nation, agreeing to the companies' plan to construct the facilities in the city by 2010. The intermediate storage facilities would be used to store spent nuclear fuel taken from a nuclear power plant before it is reprocessed. The facilities are considered important to the nation's nuclear fuel cycle policy. After making the announcement, the Aomori governor, together with Mutsu Mayor Masashi Sugiyama, presented a draft agreement on the construction in a meeting with TEPCO President Tsunehisa Katsumata and JAPC President Yukinori Ichida. The draft agreement stipulates that the prefectural and city governments will approve construction of the facilities in the city. The agreement also said that the two companies would remove spent nuclear fuel from the storage facilities before the term for storage, up to 50 years, expires. Mimura said at a press conference, "[The prefecture] will accept [the planned construction of storage facilities], and we believe safety should be given top priority." Under the two companies' plan, two storage buildings would be built in an area near Sekinehama Port in Mutsu. A total of 5,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel would be kept in the facilities for up to 50 years. The construction cost is expected to be about 100 billion yen. After the city government announced in June 2003 that it would invite the companies to build such facilities in the city, the two firms asked the prefectural government in February 2004 to approve the construction plan. === MOX use controversial The Yomiuri Shimbun The government has been pushing as a national energy policy the nuclear fuel cycle, which takes plutonium from spent nuclear fuel and reuses it as mixed plutonium-uranium oxide fuel (MOX). But due to a series of accidents at nuclear power plants and other mishaps involving plant operations since the mid-1990s, the fuel cycle policy has been virtually suspended. As a result, storage facilities at some of TEPCO's nuclear power plants have reached almost full capacity. The nation has reached a critical point at which nuclear power plants could be forced to suspend operations unless intermediate storage facilities outside plants are built by 2010. The prefecture's announcement that it will allow the construction of intermediate storage facilities is a significant step forward for the promotion of a nuclear fuel cycle policy. But concern over overaccumulation of spent nuclear fuel still remains. The processing capacity at Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd.'s reprocessing plant in Rokkashomura in the prefecture, which is expected to start operations in 2007, stands at 800 tons per year. But spent fuel generated at 53 reactors across the nation totals 900 to 1,000 tons annually. Another issue of concern in the fuel cycle system is the use of plutonium. There is about 43 tons of plutonium in the nation. If it is kept as it is, other nations might suspect that Japan of harboring nuclear development programs. Observers have said that the nation should hurry in implementing the plutonium thermal project, under which MOX fuel is processed at existing nuclear power plants, and that operations of the Monju fast-breeder reactor in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture, which is currently undergoing improvement work, should be resumed as soon as possible. (Oct. 20, 2005) + THE YOMIURI SHIMBUN + THE DAILY YOMIURI Copyright The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 45 reviewjournal.com: Nevada says DOE cut corners Oct. 19, 2005 Judges hear state's latest bid to stop Yucca project WASHINGTON -- An attorney for Nevada on Tuesday set out to persuade a panel of federal judges that the Department of Energy cut corners in its initial planning to ship nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain. In the state's latest bid to stop the proposed waste repository, attorney Joseph Egan argued DOE violated environmental law by neglecting to perform adequate studies of how it would move radioactive spent fuel through Nevada if it could not build a railroad to the site in time. Egan, the state's chief nuclear waste lawyer, also said DOE exceeded its authority by selecting a 318-mile rail corridor from Caliente to the site in April 2004 without involving the Surface Transportation Board. The board is a federal agency with specific responsibility and expertise on railroads. "It's like somebody trying to site an airport without the FAA," Egan said in remarks before three judges sitting at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Justice Department attorney John Bryson defended the Energy Department, saying it followed "fully established procedures" when it set out to devise a Yucca Mountain transportation strategy. Bryson said the state's objections were not sufficient to merit tossing out DOE's work to date for shipping 77,000 tons of spent power plant fuel and government nuclear waste to the Yucca site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The attorneys appeared before U.S. Circuit Judges Harry T. Edwards, Karen LeCraft Henderson and A. Raymond Randolph, who posed few questions during a 30-minute hearing. Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval accompanied Egan, in what might have been his final court appearance as the state's chief law officer and legal representative. The U.S. Senate was expected to complete Sandoval's confirmation to U.S. district judge in the coming days. "I didn't hear any questions that were critical of Nevada's position," Sandoval said after the hearing. "We always had been waiting for Yucca Mountain to get into a legal position, where we have had victories that have exposed the government's inability to follow the law." The state has filed nine lawsuits involving Yucca Mountain since the repository plan began forming its current shape in 2001. The government has prevailed on some consequential issues, while the state won a July 2004 ruling involving radiation safety standards that have caused delays in the program. Facing a variety of legal and technical challenges, the Energy Department has abandoned 1998 and 2010 planned repository openings. While a ruling against the government in the latest case might not kill the Yucca project, Nevada officials maintain it could cause DOE to reconsider ambitious construction of a Nevada railroad and lead to even further delays. During his presentation, Egan said DOE performed merely a "back of the envelope" assessment of a plan to load nuclear waste into truck casks at power plants, then ship them on trains to Nevada, where they would be transferred onto tractor-trailers for a final travel leg to Yucca Mountain. The department said it may employ that method for the first half-dozen years of repository operations if a railroad cannot be built on time. Egan said the plan raises a host of safety issues "unconsidered by DOE." Bryson said DOE studied the plan previously and was not required to perform an extensive new review given the relatively short period the truck-rail strategy might be employed. "DOE's evaluation of impacts were reviewed under the rule of reason," he said. "They did not present a greatly different environmental landscape." Egan also accused DOE of acting coy about its intentions for a Nevada rail line so as not to trigger early involvement by the Surface Transportation Board. The board would gain jurisdiction if the Yucca Mountain railroad were declared a "common carrier" that would be utilized by Nevada shippers. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2005 ***************************************************************** 46 Salt Lake City Weekly: Back-Door Waste Politics - October 20, 2005 If Utah’s politicians don’t want U.S. nuclear waste, why do they want Japan’s? by Ted McDonough As you read this, enough foreign radioactive dirt to fill 1,000 trucks is motoring toward southeast Utah for disposal. In sharp contrast to hair-pulling over the Goshute Indians proposal to bring outside nuclear waste to Utah, no politicians are threatening to link arms and stand on the road. The only people who seem the least bit upset about the pending arrival of the uranium-laced dirt from a court-ordered clean up in Japan are some Ute and Navajo tribal members whose homes sit next to the International Uranium Corporation’s White Mesa Mill, near Blanding. Native Americans near the Four Corners region have been fighting the mill for more than a decade. The White Mesa community of the Ute Mountain Utes worry about the future of ground water from long-term storage of mill residue. With uranium prices climbing, some members of the Ute and Navajo tribes fear they are in for it, even with a new reservation-wide ban on uranium mining recently enacted by the Navajo Nation. “Uranium has been mined on our reservation since the 1930s, and our people are dying from cancer. A lot of our children have birth defects,” said Anna Frazier, a Navajo who coordinates Diné Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment. “We say we don’t want any more uranium.” Utah politicians have been increasingly vocal about stopping importation of waste from nuclear power plants but are so far silent about a loophole large enough to drive at least 500 tons of uranium rock into the state. The incoming Japanese dirt, once labeled “waste rock” in Japan, is called uranium ore when it gets here. As such, it hasn’t registered with any of the government groups charged with regulating nuclear leftovers. With uranium prices low, the White Mesa Mill has kept itself alive processing waste material under the guise of ore since 1997, when federal nuclear regulators desperate to find a home for material left over from America’s first nuclear bombs reclassified the waste as ore and sent it to Utah. The White Mesa Mill removes the uranium from such “alternate feed” material and dumps what’s left over in disposal ponds. Often, there is so little uranium in the material, it wouldn’t make sense to ship it to Utah, unless the shipper just wanted to get the stuff off its hands. The state of Utah contended as much in 1998 when it protested as “sham disposal” IUC’s bid to take low-level radioactive waste from New York. The state estimated the material contained less than $600,000 worth of uranium. IUC was paid about $4 million for processing. The Japanese material isn’t the same kind of leftovers from nuclear power plants or weapons programs. It’s radioactive dirt from an abandoned uranium mine. But it seems clear a similar dumping process is occurring. Steve Erickson, director of the Utah-based Citizens Education Project estimated there is only about $9,300 worth of uranium in the dirt, based on current uranium prices and the amount of uranium, three-hundredths of 1 percent, in the dirt. The Japanese Atomic Energy Agency estimated the cost of removing, transporting and processing the material at more than $5.5 million. The amount IUC is to be paid for taking the material is blocked out of a copy of a contract the Japanese government gave to the Japanese anti-nuclear group Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center. Perhaps more telling is the fact that Japan doesn’t want the uranium back after processing. Under terms of the disposal contract, IUC is to be paid for processing and IUC will buy the uranium back from the Japanese. IUC Development Vice President Harold Roberts called accounts claiming IUC will be paid more than $5 million “wildly exaggerated, absurd.” He won’t say how much IUC is receiving. “People are trying to misconstrue this, to make more of it than it really is,” he said. “We didn’t solicit this. With the price of uranium ore headed up, it made sense for [the Japanese].” To the charge of “sham disposal,” Roberts said valuable “yellow cake” for running nuclear power plants is recovered in the recycling process. A current batch of used Canadian material will yield 500,000 pounds, enough to fuel a reactor for several years. In Japan, there is no doubt it’s a put-up job. The Japanese government once called the material being sent to Utah “uranium-contaminated soil,” noted the Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center. When it came time to ship it to the United States, the government changed the term to “quasi-ore.” “No doubt [the Japanese government] is eager to present its merchandise in the best possible light to potential buyers, but the reality is that it is radioactive waste,” the anti-nuke group said in a statement. Erickson said the amount of uranium is so low that Utah doesn’t have regulatory authority to stop it, and it’s not radioactive enough to be considered dangerous by the feds. But Erickson notes that the mill in the past has processed dubious ore that is highly radioactive and worries about the precedent set by the Japanese shipment. After losing its 1998 court bid to stop IUC, Utah set about gaining federal permission to regulate uranium tailings itself. The state got that permission last year. The Japanese shipment is the first test of Utah’s new regulatory role, and Erickson thinks state regulators didn’t do enough. “The question is, really, is it waste or ore? Who gets to make this decision?” he said. “If they took the Japanese and IUC’s word for it, I don’t think that’s the way to do policy.” He is calling on the Utah’s Division of Radiation Control to test material sent to Utah and set up a new public process for determining when uranium ore is really ore. “This may be the first, but it won’t be the last of these sorts of questionable deals,” Erickson said. Japan’s Atomic Energy Agency still has about 3,000 tons of radioactive soil from the same old uranium mine that it must get rid of under court order. That’s about 10 times the amount it’s currently shipping to Utah. story search slweekly.com 1996-2005 Copperfield Publishing, Inc.. All rights reserved. offices: 248 S. Main Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 801-575-7003 ***************************************************************** 47 AU ABC: MP seeks uranium mining debate - 19/10/2005 The Queensland Government appears to be softening its stance on uranium mining. The Labor Party's national three-mine policy opposed further uranium mining and that recently prompted the Federal Government to take control of uranium mining in the Northern Territory. State Labor MP Tony McGrady, whose western Queensland electorate includes some of the country's richest uranium deposits, has long been opposed to uranium mining but now he says it is time to debate the issue. + ABC Online Home Page© 2005 ABC| Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 48 EPA NE: EPA Decision Brings Former Watertown Arsenal One Step Closer to Removal from Superfund Program EPA New England Press Releases Serving Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont & 10 Tribal Nations Contact: Sheryl Rosner(rosner.sheryl@epa.gov), EPA Office of Public Affairs, (617) 918-1865 For Immediate Release: October 18, 2005; Release # sr051011 (Boston) The US Environmental Protection Agency recently issued the Final Closeout Report in which the agency determined all cleanup actions at the Army Materials Technology Laboratory (AMTL) Superfund site undertaken by the US Army have been implemented and are working successfully. The report focuses on the Outdoor Areas Parcel and the Area I Parcel. For the Charles River Operable Unit it was determined in the Record of Decision signed September 30, 2005 that no further cleanup action is needed. This decision is based on the determination that no threat to human health and the environment is attributable to the site. As part of the No Further Action Record of Decision, in spring 2006 the Army agreed to undertake a wetland restoration project which involves expansion of the wetlands adjacent to Squibnocket Park in order to stabilize the bank, control erosion, and further enhance the wetland. "This milestone was achieved as a direct result of a collaborative effort between the community, the regulators and the Army, said Robert W. Varney, administrator of EPAs New England regional office. The recent agreement by the Army to conduct a major bank restoration project at Charles River Park is a great example of the successful team effort by local citizens, including the tireless work of the members of the Restoration Advisory Board, who provided extensive input into the project that resulted in an invaluable service and resource to the community." With the issuance of the Final Closeout Report and the No Further Action Record of Decision, EPA expects to issue a notice of its intent to delete AMTL from the National Priorities List (NPL) in 2006. Former areas of the AMTL Superfund Site were deleted from the NPL in September 1999, namely, the Watertown Arsenal Development Corporation Parcel and the Commanders Quarters Parcel. The General Services Administration (GSA) property, an area close to the site but not part of the AMTL Site, is not affected by the Final Closeout Report. The GSA cleanup is nearing completion and is being overseen by MA Department of Environmental Protection. The NPL known commonly as Superfund, represents hazardous waste sites throughout the country that are in most need of long-term clean up due to risk concerns for human health and the environment. Superfund makes public funds available to clean up toxic waste sites when private financing is unavailable. The AMTL facility was established in 1816 and was originally used for the storage, cleaning, repair, and issuance of small arms. During the mid-1800s, the mission was expanded to include ammunition and pyrotechnics production; materials testing and experimentation with paints, lubricants, and cartridges; and the manufacture of breech loading steel guns and cartridges for field and siege guns. The mission, staff, and facilities continued to expand until after World War II, at which time the facility encompassed 131 acres, including 53 buildings and structures, and employed 10,000 people. Arms manufacturing continued until an operational phasedown was initiated in 1967. In 1960, the Army's first material research nuclear reactor was completed at AMTL. The reactor was used actively in molecular and atomic structure research activities until 1970 when it was deactivated; it was decommissioned in 1992 and demolished in 1994. AMTL was officially closed in 1995. Contaminants of concern included: polyaromatic hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, metals, semi-volatiles and volatile organics, and pesticides. The Final Close Out Report and the Charles River Operable Unit Record of Decision documents are available for public review at the Watertown Free Public Library, (617)-972-6431, at the EPAs Boston Records Center, 617-918-1440, and are posted on-line. METADATA 1. TITLE: EPA Decision Brings Former Watertown Arsenal One Step Closer to Removal from Superfund Program 2. ABSTRACT: The US Environmental Protection Agency recently issued the Final Closeout Report in which the agency determined all cleanup actions at the Army Materials Technology Laboratory (AMTL) Superfund site undertaken by the US Army have been implemented and are working successfully. The report focuses on the Outdoor Areas Parcel and the Area I Parcel. 3. PURPOSE: Public Information 4. ORIGINATOR: Regional Administrator's Office 5. PUBLICATION DATE: October 18, 2005 6. ACCESS CONSTRAINTS: N/A 7. AVAILABILITY: N/A a. Distributor: b. Order Process: c. Technical Prerequisites: d. Automated Linkage: e. Downloadable Files: 8. COVERAGE: N/A 9. TIME PERIOD OF COVERAGE: N/A 10. POINT OF CONTACT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Sheryl Rosner Office of Public Affairs EPA New England 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100 (RAA) Boston, MA 02114-2023 (617) 918-1865 11. RESPONSIBLE PARTY: Sheryl Rosner, (617) 918-1865 Office of Public Affairs 12. DATE OF CREATION: October 18, 2005 13. AGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: N/A 14. EXPIRATION DATE: November 18, 2005 Serving Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, & 10 Tribal Nations ***************************************************************** 49 Edmonton Journal: Canada hits bottom over nuclear waste - James Gordon canada.com network October 19, 2005 OTTAWA - Canada's environmental performance ranks almost dead last among major industrialized countries, according to a sweeping new study. The report, prepared by Simon Fraser University and published Tuesday by the David Suzuki Foundation, puts Canada 28th among 30 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Turkey, Switzerland and Denmark took top honours. Only Belgium and the United States performed worse than Canada. Researchers looked at 29 environmental indicators to make their determinations, placing Canada 26th or lower in 12 categories. It ranked Canada dead last in the production of nuclear waste, carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds. It was 29th in per-capita water consumption, sulphur oxide emissions and energy use. Suzuki, the high-profile scientist and broadcast personality said: "I think (the report) is going to come as a shock to Canadians who think that we're world leaders in environmental protection," he said. Suzuki called the idea that environmental measures hurt the economy "a myth," adding Canada is far behind European countries on sustainable development. He called on the government to implement a national sustainability act that would give the country hard pollution-reduction targets, timelines to reach them and a method to monitor progress. Suzuki added citizens have a duty to dump "so-called" political leaders who don't make the environment a priority. Environment Minister Stephane Dion dismissed the study Tuesday, suggesting the David Suzuki Foundation was slagging Canada with fuzzy science. "Who can give a lot of confidence in a study that said the country that had the best performance regarding the environment is Turkey," he asked in mock amazement. "Mexico is 13th ... Mexico! Would you drink Mexico City water from the tap?" He pointed out a number of other studies by the likes of the World Economic Forum and Conference Board of Canada that have ranked this country in the middle of industrialized nations, and one put it as high as second. "I'm not saying we're second, I'm saying we are better than Mexico," Dion said. He admitted "the bottom line is we need to do much more -- we need to have a greener economy, a greener Canada, more energy efficiency," but argued Canada is aggressively pursuing environmental protection through the Kyoto accord. Some other findings of the report, which was endorsed by all three federal opposition parties: - Canada did not finish first in any environmental performance category and got failing grades in 24 of 29 indicators. - Its best ranking was second in the volume of timber harvested per square kilometre and fifth in the ratio of timber harvest to forest growth. - Canada has not improved its environmental performance relative to other OECD countries since 1992, when it was also 28th. "Canada's poor environmental performance could be caused by a number of factors including geography, climate, economic structure, and poor public policy," said the report. The study highlighted poor public policy. It said there is a wide disparity between Canadian values and the country's environmental performance. It said Canadians have the strongest environmental values in the OECD. More... 1 | 2 | NEXT >> Search canada.com About Us Advertise Site Map Privacy Terms FAQ Our Partners Copyright CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc.All rights reserved. Copyright &Permission Rules [ /] ***************************************************************** 50 United Press International: Britian's nuclear waste plan in danger 10/19/2005 12:57:00 PM -0400 Newstrack: Hurricane Wilma weakened barely to a LONDON, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- Plans to privatize the cleanup of Britain's nuclear waste face possibly insurmountable opposition, the Financial Times reported Wednesday. British Nuclear Fuels last month announced plans to sell its decommissioning and cleanup arm, British Nuclear Group. The government wants to limit exposure from an estimated $98 billion in existing nuclear waste to pave the way to build new nuclear power plants. British Nuclear Fuels Wednesday met with unions, whose backing is seen as essential for the sale to go forward. However, regulatory and industry insiders said opposition may scuttle the sale to raise an estimated $264 million. Brussels is to rule by next June whether the restructuring is legal. The European Commission is investigating whether British Nuclear Fuels' transfer of liability to the new Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, or NDA, broke European Union rules. NDA and safety regulators have warned Britain the sale should not be finalized until a leak at a Sellafield, England, reprocessing plant is resolved. That could take up to a year, the newspaper reported. International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 51 BBC: ON THIS DAY | 20 1986: Nuclear technician missing after secrets leak 1986: Nuclear technician missing after secrets leak Fears are growing for the missing nuclear technician who disappeared in London after revealing details of Israel's nuclear weapons programme. The American magazine, Newsweek, claimed earlier this week that Mordechai Vanunu had been abducted from a yacht in the Mediterranean by agents of the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad. But these reports have been rejected by a close friend of Mr Vanunu. The Rev John McKnight, who is an Australian priest, says he believes the nuclear technician was kidnapped in London and is now being held for trial in Israel for treason. So far Israeli officials have refused to confirm reports Mr Vanunu is being held on remand at Gadera military prison near Jerusalem, a jail normally used to house Palestinian rebels. He is being held probably for trial for treason for disclosing nuclear arms' secrets Rev John McKnight Scotland Yard confirmed Mr Vanunu left a London hotel on 30 September in unexplained circumstances. On 5 October an article appeared in The Sunday Times newspaper based on an interview with Mr Vanunu in which he gave details of Israel's nuclear weapons stockpile, with photographs of the research plant at Dimona in the Negev desert. Mr Vanunu, who was born in Morocco, moved to Israel with his family in 1963 and spent almost 10 years working at the Dimona plant. He came to the attention of the Israeli authorities for his affiliation to a group called Movement for the Advancement of Peace and his alleged sympathies for the Palestinians. He was sacked from Dimona and set off round the world, arriving in Sydney, Australia, where he was befriended by Rev McKnight and converted to Christianity. Mr McKnight said his friend had spoken to him of his fears he would be captured and returned to Israel after his newspaper interview. He said: "My sources in the media in Israel tell me that he is being held probably for trial for treason for disclosing nuclear arms' secrets." Mr McKnight also rejected suggestions Mr Vanunu was a Palestinian sympathiser, saying: "He was at the crossroads of his life and started becoming involved with peace groups and was concerned about nuclear weapons and Israeli policies. "He did what he did for his own reasons, because he felt he had to give details about Israel's nuclear arsenal." The vicar said he would remain in Britain until he had discovered the whereabouts of his friend. [Mordechai Vanunu] Mordechai Vanunu disappeared from a London hotel on 30 September In Context It was later confirmed Mordechai Vanunu had been befriended in London by an American Mossad agent, Cheryl Bentov, who was masquerading as an American tourist. She lured him to Rome with her on holiday on 30 September. Once there he was kidnapped and drugged and returned to Israel on a freighter. The details were revealed by Mr Vanunu himself, who wrote them on the palm of his hand which he held up against the window of a van while being transported from prison so waiting journalists could get the information. The Sunday Times article based on an interview with Mr Vanunu contained the most substantive evidence at the time of Israel's nuclear weapons programme. It led the international community to revise sharply upwards the number of weapons it believed Israel held in its stockpile. Mr Vanunu was subsequently put on trial in March 1987 on charges of treason and espionage and sentenced to 18 years in prison. Eleven of those were spent in solitary confinement. He was freed on 21 April 2004 and has since been refused permission to leave Israel. [0] [Mordechai Vanunu] 29 May 2004 Vanunu wanted 'to avert holocaust' ***************************************************************** 52 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Federal board says Hanford waste plant is moving forward [seattlepi.com] Tuesday, October 18, 2005 Last updated 8:22 p.m. PT THE ASSOCIATED PRESS RICHLAND, Wash. -- The U.S. Department of Energy is resolving safety issues on a multi-billion-dollar waste treatment plant at the Hanford nuclear reservation and could continue with design and construction of the plant, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board said. The board provides independent oversight of Hanford, the 586-square-mile nuclear reservation created as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb. Today it is the nation's most contaminated nuclear site, with cleanup expected to continue until 2035. The cornerstone of that cleanup effort has long been considered the waste treatment plant, which will turn highly radioactive waste stored in underground tanks into glasslike logs for permanent disposal in a nuclear waste repository. In a letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman on Monday, the board noted that the Energy Department has responded to safety issues raised by the board, though not always in a timely manner, and has provided technically sound paths for their resolution. The board had raised concerns about the earthquake design standards for the plant as early as 2002. The Energy Department halted construction on major portions of the plant, which will treat the most dangerous waste, in September amid skyrocketing costs and construction problems, as well as seismic issues raised in a new review in 2004. Since then, the agency is approving construction only in certain areas of the high-activity waste and waste pretreatment buildings. Construction on the portion of the structure that will treat low-activity waste, which is considered less radioactive, as well as an analytical laboratory and related buildings, has continued at a normal pace. The cost of the plant, already tagged at $5.8 billion, is expected to rise by at least 25 percent, the Energy Department has said. The agency recently notified Washington state officials that a new schedule and cost estimate for the plant likely would not be completed before June 2006. The Energy Department has said the construction slowdown allowed time to resolve some technical issues and to move engineering and purchasing further ahead of construction. No further slowdown of construction is planned, said Erik Olds, a spokesman for the Energy Department in Richland. According to the letter, the board believes that the interim criteria provide a reasonable conservative basis for continuing with the plant design, though some important uncertainties remain. More measurements need to be taken of the soil and rock properties beneath the plant, the letter said. More bore holes will be drilled at the plant site in a two-year effort to develop a final earthquake design standard, according to the board and the Energy Department. The board does not believe that significant reconstruction of work already completed at the plant will be required, but it won't know for certain until the additional analysis is completed, the letter said. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com 1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 53 CE: Four atom bomb-related sites near Dayton get a clean bill cincinnati enquirer Wednesday, October 19, 2005 Four atom bomb-related sites near Dayton get a clean bill Army Corps of Engineers says all safety guidelines are met The Associated Press DAYTON, Ohio - Residents worried that four places used to help develop the atomic bomb during the 1940s still might have radioactive contamination have been assured by the federal government that the sites are safe. The sites are a laboratory, a warehouse, a former seminary and a former playhouse that were used to produce, refine and store a radioactive substance. Sampling shows the sites meet all safety guidelines and pose no threat to people or the environment, David Romano, project manager for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, said Monday. Radiation and lead levels proved no different than the average levels for other sites sampled in Southwest Ohio, the corps said. The corps' study was done at the request of state and local officials and residents who were concerned the sites might not have been properly cleaned up in the 1940s, following the work there during World War II. The sites had been contaminated with polonium - the radioactive material used to trigger the chain reaction in the atomic bomb. Public concern was heightened in 1997, when the U.S. Department of Energy proposed taking the sites off its cleanup list. The agency said the sites had been checked in the 1970s and there was no evidence of a hazard. And they said polonium has a half-life - the time needed for half of the atoms to disintegrate - of only 138 days and had long since decayed. But local officials wanted to make sure the sites had been cleaned to current standards before the government crossed them off the list. The sites are: The former Bonebrake Theological Seminary in west Dayton. The three-story building was decontaminated in the 1940s, and 100 truckloads of debris were dumped at the Mound nuclear weapons plant south of Dayton. The building was returned to the Dayton Board of Education in 1950 and later used as a maintenance and machine-repair building for the school district. A private recreational facility known as the Runnymede Playhouse in suburban Oakwood. The facility, which included a ballroom, indoor tennis courts and a stage for community theater, was dismantled. Wood flooring and metal materials were burned, and 160 truckloads of contaminated materials were sent to the Mound plant. The property was transferred back to the original owners in 1950. Single-family homes now sit on the site. A laboratory in south Dayton. The lab was demolished and the property sold to a chemical company in the 1980s. A warehouse in downtown Dayton. The building was cleaned and returned to its owner in 1949. The corps' sampling results are good news for the National Park Service, which will include Dayton among the sites to be studied this year for a new park system devoted to the history of the development of the atomic bomb. Under the plan, the Park Service would maintain buildings used to develop the bomb and open them for public tours. Nuclear sites around the country are being cleaned up and transformed into other uses. Cleanup of the Mound plant is expected to be complete next year. The site is being developed as a technology center. And last week, the company cleaning up the old Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant near Denver said the $7 billion project was finished and the site was ready for conversion to a wildlife refuge. Copyright1995-2005. The Cincinnati Enquirer, a Gannett Co. Inc.newspaper. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************