***************************************************************** 10/25/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.248 ***************************************************************** 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 Bush at Bay: Fitzgerald Looks at Niger Forgeries 2 [du-list] Bushorcs trapped by U lie. 3 US: [du-list] Wargate - Italian intelligence may have been used 4 Xinhua: Putin urges closer co-op between Iran, IAEA 5 Iran Mania: "Iran N-dossier to be merely assessed by IAEA" 6 Iran Mania: UK warns Iran on dangers of isolation from West 7 Sify: Iran may get reprieve on nuke issue 8 AFP: West seeks Russian backing over Iran nuclear program - diplomat 9 Mos News: Russia Pledges Support to Iran Nuclear Program 10 Scotsman.com: Warning on Iran nuclear ambitions 11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Six-Party Talks to Resume Nov. 8: Officia 12 AFP: China says timing of next round of NKorea talks not decided yet 13 Online NewsHour: North Korea Commits to Continue Nuclear Talks 14 CNIC: Oppose South Korean Nuclear Waste Dump 15 [NYTr] Bush Duped the Entire World, Says Blix 16 US: ABQJOURNAL: Nuclear Bunker-Buster Project Dead 17 US: AFP: White House defends Cheney - 18 US: UPI: Security &Terrorism - Libby, Rove await indictment decision 19 US: UPI: NewsTrack - Physicists oppose U.S. nuclear policy 20 [NYTr] Tony Blair's Trident Missiles 21 Moscow Times: Nukes Giving Old Rivals a Rough Ride 22 Bellona: Nuclear Official: ‘Everything Should be Transparent’ 23 BBC: Five charged over nuclear protest 24 Daily Times: Pakistan has dismantled AQ Khan network: FO 25 AFP: EDF workers protest part-privatisation 26 Indian Express: A new nuclear realism NUCLEAR REACTORS 27 US: [NukeNet] TVA New Reactor Study Released 28 Nukes put big O in Ontario: Straightgoods.com 29 US: TMI shuts down for refueling 30 Guardian Unlimited: The chief scientific adviser has become a govern 31 London Times: Nuclear option is at least 20 years away - 32 US: Arizona Republic: Outages at Palo Verde cost APS $40 mill since 33 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Public Comment on Implementation of Reactor Overs 34 Washington Times: Chernobyl exposed - Editorials/Op-Ed - 35 allAfrica.com: Angola: International Atomic Energy Agency Approves P 36 (China Daily): US to transfer nuclear reactor tech to China 37 US: NRC: Hurricane Update - Wilma 38 US: NRC: Amergen Energy Company, LLC; Clinton Power Station, Unit 1; 39 US: Hudson Valley News: NRC chairman gives Senator Clinton commitmen 40 US: Daily Free Press: MIT nuclear reactor scrutinized 41 US: Newsday: NRC chair pledges greater oversight of nuclear plant 42 asahi.com: EDITORIAL/ Nuclear energy policy 43 US: UPI: Security & Terrorism - Clinton pressures NRC over nuke fuel 44 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting NUCLEAR SECURITY 45 RIA Novosti: European Commission to grant Armenia food and nuclear s 46 UPI: Intl. Intelligence - U.S. works with China on nuke security NUCLEAR SAFETY 47 US: [du-list]Nuclear Regulatory Commission Deals Blow to Depleted 48 US: Deseret News: Downwinder clinic's funding renewed 49 US: SU: Radiologist contributed to landmark study showing even low 50 US: DVA: Veterans' Advisory Committee on Environmental Hazards; Noti NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 51 AU SMH: Nuclear waste 'can be stored safely' - 52 US: Deseret News: Envirocare expansion is not done deal, state offic 53 US: Deseret News: Mum's the word as USS Salt Lake sails to junk yard 54 SignOnSanDiego.com: DOE changes approach to transporting waste to Yu 55 US: WNYC: Radioactive Material in Groundwater at Indian Point 56 US: Gilroy Dispatch: Fish Bones, Manure Help Rid Groundwater of Perc 57 US: NRC: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impa 58 US: Cibola County Beacon: Poisoned water leaves bad taste PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 59 DUF6 cylinders stored at Portsmouth, Paducah, OakRidge 60 Rocky Mountain News: Memo spurred FBI's Flats probe in 1989 61 AP Wire Report: Toxic gas may be in cylinders with depleted uranium 62 Courier-Journal: Uranium-filled cylinders at plants may be corroding 63 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Fernald 64 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho 65 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridg ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Bush at Bay: Fitzgerald Looks at Niger Forgeries Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 02:10:54 -0500 (CDT) X-Fingerprint: owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu-127.127 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/102405A.shtml Bush at Bay: Fitzgerald Looks at Niger Forgeries By Martin Walker UPI Monday 24 October 2005 Washington - The CIA leak inquiry that threatens senior White House aides has now widened to include the forgery of documents on African uranium that started the investigation, according to NAT0 intelligence sources. This suggests the inquiry by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald into the leaking of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame has now widened to embrace part of the broader question about the way the Iraq war was justified by the Bush administration. Fitzgerald's inquiry is expected to conclude this week and despite feverish speculation in Washington, there have been no leaks about his decision whether to issue indictments and against whom and on what charges. Two facts are, however, now known and between them they do not bode well for the deputy chief of staff at the White House, Karl Rove, President George W Bush's senior political aide, not for Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby. The first is that Fitzgerald last year sought and obtained from the Justice Department permission to widen his investigation from the leak itself to the possibility of cover-ups, perjury and obstruction of justice by witnesses. This has renewed the old saying from the days of the Watergate scandal, that the cover-up can be more legally and politically dangerous than the crime. The second is that NATO sources have confirmed to United Press International that Fitzgerald's team of investigators has sought and obtained documentation on the forgeries from the Italian government. Fitzgerald's team has been given the full, and as yet unpublished report of the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the affair, which started when an Italian journalist obtained documents that appeared to show officials of the government of Niger helping to supply the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein with Yellowcake uranium. This claim, which made its way into President Bush's State of the Union address in January, 2003, was based on falsified documents from Niger and was later withdrawn by the White House. This opens the door to what has always been the most serious implication of the CIA leak case, that the Bush administration could face a brutally damaging and public inquiry into the case for war against Iraq being false or artificially exaggerated. This was the same charge that imperiled the government of Bush's closest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, after a BBC Radio program claimed Blair's aides has "sexed up" the evidence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. There can be few more serious charges against a government than going to war on false pretences, or having deliberately inflated or suppressed the evidence that justified the war. And since no WMD were found in Iraq after the 2003 war, despite the evidence from the U.N. inspections of the 1990s that demonstrated that Saddam Hussein had initiated both a nuclear and a biological weapons program, the strongest plank in the Bush administration's case for war has crumbled beneath its feet. The reply of both the Bush and Blair administrations was that they made their assertions about Iraq's WMD in good faith, and that other intelligence agencies like the French and German were equally mistaken in their belief that Iraq retained chemical weapons, along with the ambition and some of technological basis to restart the nuclear and biological programs. It is this central issue of good faith that the CIA leak affair brings into question. The initial claims Iraq was seeking raw uranium in the west African state of Niger aroused the interest of vice-president Cheney, who asked for more investigation. At a meeting of CIA and other officials, a CIA officer working under cover in the office that dealt with nuclear proliferation, Valerie Plame, suggested her husband, James Wilson, a former ambassador to several African states, enjoyed good contacts in Niger and could make a preliminary inquiry. He did so, and returned concluding that the claims were untrue. In July 2003, he wrote an article for The New York Times making his mission - and his disbelief - public. But by then Elisabetta Burba, a journalist for the Italian magazine Panorama (owned by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi) had been contacted by a "security consultant" named Rocco Martoni, offering to sell documents that "proved" Iraq was obtaining uranium in Niger for $10,000. Rather than pay the money, Burba's editor passed photocopies of the documents to the U.S. Embassy, which forwarded them to Washington, where the forgery was later detected. Signatures were false, and the government ministers and officials who had signed them were no longer in office on the dates on which the documents were supposedly written. Nonetheless, the forged documents appeared, on the face of it, to shore up the case for war, and to discredit Wilson. The origin of the forgeries is therefore of real importance, and any link between the forgeries and Bush administration aides would be highly damaging and almost certainly criminal. The letterheads and official seals that appeared to authenticate the documents apparently came from a burglary at the Niger Embassy in Rome in 2001. At this point, the facts start dribbling away into conspiracy theories that involve membership of shadowy Masonic lodges, Iranian go-betweens, right-wing cabals inside Italian Intelligence and so on. It is not yet known how far Fitzgerald, in his two years of inquiries, has fished in these murky waters. There is one line of inquiry with an American connection that Fitzgerald would have found it difficult to ignore. This is the claim that a mid-ranking Pentagon official, Larry Franklin, held talks with some Italian intelligence and defense officials in Rome in late 2001. Franklin has since been arrested on charges of passing classified information to staff of the pro-Israel lobby group, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee. Franklin has reportedly reached a plea bargain with his prosecutor, Paul McNulty, and it would be odd if McNulty and Fitzgerald had not conferred to see if their inquiries connected. Where all this leads will not be clear until Fitzgerald breaks his silence, widely expected to occur this week when the term of his grand jury expires. If Fitzgerald issues indictments, then the hounds that are currently baying across the blogosphere will leap into the mainstream media and whole affair, Iranian go-betweens and Rome burglaries included, will come into the mainstream of the mass media and network news where Mr. and Mrs. America can see it. If Fitzgerald issues no indictments, the matter will not simply die away, in part because the press is now hotly engaged, after the new embarrassment of the Times over the imprisonment of the paper's Judith Miller. There is also an uncomfortable sense that the press had given the Bush administration too easy a ride after 9/11. And the Bush team is now on the ropes and its internal discipline breaking down, making it an easier target. Then there is a separate Senate Select Intelligence Committee inquiry under way, and while the Republican chairman Pat Roberts of Kansas seems to be dragging his feet, the ranking Democrat, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, is now under growing Democratic Party pressure to pursue this question of falsifying the case for war. And last week, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, introduced a resolution to require the president and secretary of state to furnish to Congress documents relating to the so-called White House Iraq Group. Chief of staff Andrew Card formed the WHIG task force in August 2002 - seven months before the invasion of Iraq, and Kucinich claims they were charged "with the mission of marketing a war in Iraq." The group included: Rove, Libby, Condoleezza Rice, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and Stephen Hadley (now Bush's national security adviser) and produced white papers that put into dramatic form the intelligence on Iraq's supposed nuclear threat. WHIG launched its media blitz in September 2002, six months before the war. Rice memorably spoke of the prospect of "a mushroom cloud," and Card revealingly explained why he chose September, saying "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." The marketing is over but the war goes on. The press is baying and the law closes in. The team of Bush loyalists in the White House is demoralized and braced for disaster. ***************************************************************** 2 [du-list] Bushorcs trapped by U lie. Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:32:19 -0700 Intl. Intelligence Walker's World: Bush at bay By MARTIN WALKER UPI Editor http://www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20051023-104217-9679r WASHINGTON, Oct. 23 (UPI) -- The CIA leak inquiry that threatens senior White House aides has now widened to include the forgery of documents on African uranium that started the investigation, according to NAT0 intelligence sources. This suggests the inquiry by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald into the leaking of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame has now widened to embrace part of the broader question about the way the Iraq war was justified by the Bush administration. Fitzgerald's inquiry is expected to conclude this week and despite feverish speculation in Washington, there have been no leaks about his decision whether to issue indictments and against whom and on what charges. Two facts are, however, now known and between them they do not bode well for the deputy chief of staff at the White House, Karl Rove, President George W Bush's senior political aide, not for Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby. The first is that Fitzgerald last year sought and obtained from the Justice Department permission to widen his investigation from the leak itself to the possibility of cover-ups, perjury and obstruction of justice by witnesses. This has renewed the old saying from the days of the Watergate scandal, that the cover-up can be more legally and politically dangerous than the crime. The second is that NATO sources have confirmed to United Press International that Fitzgerald's team of investigators has sought and obtained documentation on the forgeries from the Italian government. Fitzgerald's team has been given the full, and as yet unpublished report of the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the affair, which started when an Italian journalist obtained documents that appeared to show officials of the government of Niger helping to supply the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein with Yellowcake uranium. This claim, which made its way into President Bush's State of the Union address in January, 2003, was based on falsified documents from Niger and was later withdrawn by the White House. This opens the door to what has always been the most serious implication of the CIA leak case, that the Bush administration could face a brutally damaging and public inquiry into the case for war against Iraq being false or artificially exaggerated. This was the same charge that imperiled the government of Bush's closest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, after a BBC Radio program claimed Blair's aides has "sexed up" the evidence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. There can be few more serious charges against a government than going to war on false pretences, or having deliberately inflated or suppressed the evidence that justified the war. And since no WMD were found in Iraq after the 2003 war, despite the evidence from the U.N. inspections of the 1990s that demonstrated that Saddam Hussein had initiated both a nuclear and a biological weapons program, the strongest plank in the Bush administration's case for war has crumbled beneath its feet. The reply of both the Bush and Blair administrations was that they made their assertions about Iraq's WMD in good faith, and that other intelligence agencies like the French and German were equally mistaken in their belief that Iraq retained chemical weapons, along with the ambition and some of technological basis to restart the nuclear and biological programs. It is this central issue of good faith that the CIA leak affair brings into question. The initial claims Iraq was seeking raw uranium in the west African state of Niger aroused the interest of vice-president Cheney, who asked for more investigation. At a meeting of CIA and other officials, a CIA officer working under cover in the office that dealt with nuclear proliferation, Valerie Plame, suggested her husband, James Wilson, a former ambassador to several African states, enjoyed good contacts in Niger and could make a preliminary inquiry. He did so, and returned concluding that the claims were untrue. In July 2003, he wrote an article for The New York Times making his mission -- and his disbelief -- public. But by then Elisabetta Burba, a journalist for the Italian magazine Panorama (owned by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi) had been contacted by a "security consultant" named Rocco Martoni, offering to sell documents that "proved" Iraq was obtaining uranium in Niger for $10,000. Rather than pay the money, Burba's editor passed photocopies of the documents to the U.S. Embassy, which forwarded them to Washington, where the forgery was later detected. Signatures were false, and the government ministers and officials who had signed them were no longer in office on the dates on which the documents were supposedly written. Nonetheless, the forged documents appeared, on the face of it, to shore up the case for war, and to discredit Wilson. The origin of the forgeries is therefore of real importance, and any link between the forgeries and Bush administration aides would be highly damaging and almost certainly criminal. The letterheads and official seals that appeared to authenticate the documents apparently came from a burglary at the Niger Embassy in Rome in 2001. At this point, the facts start dribbling away into conspiracy theories that involve membership of shadowy Masonic lodges, Iranian go-betweens, right-wing cabals inside Italian Intelligence and so on. It is not yet known how far Fitzgerald, in his two years of inquiries, has fished in these murky waters. There is one line of inquiry with an American connection that Fitzgerald would have found it difficult to ignore. This is the claim that a mid-ranking Pentagon official, Larry Franklin, held talks with some Italian intelligence and defense officials in Rome in late 2001. Franklin has since been arrested on charges of passing classified information to staff of the pro-Israel lobby group, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee. Franklin has reportedly reached a plea bargain with his prosecutor, Paul McNulty, and it would be odd if McNulty and Fitzgerald had not conferred to see if their inquiries connected. Where all this leads will not be clear until Fitzgerald breaks his silence, widely expected to occur this week when the term of his grand jury expires. If Fitzgerald issues indictments, then the hounds that are currently baying across the blogosphere will leap into the mainstream media and whole affair, Iranian go-betweens and Rome burglaries included, will come into the mainstream of the mass media and network news where Mr. and Mrs. America can see it. If Fitzgerald issues no indictments, the matter will not simply die away, in part because the press is now hotly engaged, after the new embarrassment of the Times over the imprisonment of the paper's Judith Miller. There is also an uncomfortable sense that the press had given the Bush administration too easy a ride after 9/11. And the Bush team is now on the ropes and its internal discipline breaking down, making it an easier target. Then there is a separate Senate Select Intelligence Committee inquiry under way, and while the Republican chairman Pat Roberts of Kansas seems to be dragging his feet, the ranking Democrat, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, is now under growing Democratic Party pressure to pursue this question of falsifying the case for war. And last week, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, introduced a resolution to require the president and secretary of state to furnish to Congress documents relating to the so-called White House Iraq Group. Chief of staff Andrew Card formed the WHIG task force in August 2002 -- seven months before the invasion of Iraq, and Kucinich claims they were charged "with the mission of marketing a war in Iraq." The group included: Rove, Libby, Condoleezza Rice, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and Stephen Hadley (now Bush's national security adviser) and produced white papers that put into dramatic form the intelligence on Iraq's supposed nuclear threat. WHIG launched its media blitz in September 2002, six months before the war. Rice memorably spoke of the prospect of "a mushroom cloud," and Card revealingly explained why he chose September, saying "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." The marketing is over but the war goes on. The press is baying and the law closes in. The team of Bush loyalists in the White House is demoralized and braced for disaster. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved Want to email or reprint this story? Click here for options. ---------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.361 / Virus Database: 267.12.4/146 - Release Date: 10/21/05 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 3 [du-list] Wargate - Italian intelligence may have been used Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:34:13 -0700 http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10506 Italy's intelligence chief met with Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley just a month before the Niger forgeries first surfaced. By Laura Rozen Web Exclusive: 10.25.05 Print Friendly | Email Article With Patrick Fitzgerald widely expected to announce indictments in the CIA leak investigation, questions are again being raised about the intelligence scandal that led to the appointment of the special counsel: namely, how the Bush White House obtained false Italian intelligence reports claiming that Iraq had tried to buy uranium "yellowcake" from Niger. The key documents supposedly proving the Iraqi attempt later turned out to be crude forgeries, created on official stationery stolen from the African nation's Rome embassy. Among the most tantalizing aspects of the debate over the Iraq War is the origin of those fake documents -- and the role of the Italian intelligence services in disseminating them. In an explosive series of articles appearing this week in the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, investigative reporters Carlo Bonini and Giuseppe d'Avanzo report that Nicolo Pollari, chief of Italy's military intelligence service, known as Sismi, brought the Niger yellowcake story directly to the White House after his insistent overtures had been rejected by the Central Intelligence Agency in 2001 and 2002. Sismi had reported to the CIA on October 15, 2001, that Iraq had sought yellowcake in Niger, a report it also plied on British intelligence, creating an echo that the Niger forgeries themselves purported to amplify before they were exposed as a hoax. Today's exclusive report in La Repubblica reveals that Pollari met secretly in Washington on September 9, 2002, with then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Their secret meeting came at a critical moment in the White House campaign to convince Congress and the American public that war in Iraq was necessary to prevent Saddam Hussein from developing nuclear weapons. National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones confirmed the meeting to the Prospect on Tuesday. Pollari told the newspaper that since 2001, when he became Sismi's director, the only member of the U.S. administration he has met officially is his former CIA counterpart George Tenet. But the Italian newspaper quotes a high-ranking Italian Sismi source asserting a meeting with Hadley. La Repubblica also quotes a Bush administration official saying, "I can confirm that on September 9, 2002, General Nicolo Pollari met Stephen Hadley." The paper goes on to note the significance of that date, highlighting the appearance of a little-noticed story in Panorama a weekly magazine owned by Italian Prime Minister and Bush ally Silvio Berlusconi, that was published three days after Pollari's meeting with Hadley. The magazine's September 12, 2002, issue claimed that Iraq's intelligence agency, the Mukhabarat, had acquired 500 tons of uranium from Nigeria through a Jordanian intermediary. (While this September 2002 Panorama report mentioned Nigeria, the forgeries another Panorama reporter would be proferred less than a month later purportedly concerned Niger.) The Sismi chief's previously undisclosed meeting with Hadley, who was promoted earlier this year to national security adviser, occurred one month before a murky series of events culminated in the U.S. government obtaining copies of the Niger forgeries. The forged documents were cabled from the U.S. embassy in Rome to Washington after being delivered to embassy officials by Elisabetta Burba, a reporter for Panorama. She had received the papers from an Italian middleman named Rocco Martino. Burba never wrote a story about those documents. Instead her editor, Berlusconi favorite Carlo Rossella, ordered her to bring them immediately to the U.S. embassy. Although Sismi's involvement in promoting the Niger yellowcake tale to U.S. and British intelligence has been previously reported, the series in La Repubblica includes many new details, including the name of a specific Sismi officer, Antonio Nucera, who helped to set the Niger forgeries hoax in motion. What may be most significant to American observers, however, is the newspaper's allegation that the Italians sent the bogus intelligence about Niger and Iraq not only through traditional allied channels such as the CIA, but seemingly directly into the White House. That direct White House channel amplifies questions about a now-infamous 16-word reference to the Niger uranium in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address -- which remained in the speech despite warnings from the CIA and the State Department that the allegation was not substantiated. Was the White House convinced that the Niger yellowcake report was nevertheless true because the National Security Council was getting its information directly from the Italian source? Following the exposure of the discredited Niger allegations in the summer of 2003 by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, White House officials at first sought to blame the CIA for the inclusion of the controversial "16 words" in the president's speech. Although then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and her deputy Hadley eventually accepted some responsibility for the mistake, the White House undertook a covert campaign to discredit Wilson and exposed the CIA affiliation of his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson. Yet if anyone knew who was actually responsible for the White House's trumpeting of the Niger claims, it would seem from the Repubblica report that Hadley did. He also knew that the CIA, which had initially rejected the Italian claims, was not to blame. Hadley's meeting with Pollari, at precisely the time when the Niger forgeries came into the possession of the U.S. government, may explain the seemingly hysterical White House overreaction to Wilson's article almost a year later. While the Niger yellowcake claims have provoked much drama in American politics, their provenance is decidedly Italian. The Repubblica investigation offers new insights into what motivated the Berlusconi government and its intelligence chief Pollari to go to so much trouble to bring those claims to the attention of their allies in Washington. For Berlusconi and Pollari, according to La Repubblica, the overriding motive was a desire to win more appreciation and prestige from the Americans, who were seen as eager for help in making their sales pitch for war. On Monday, the newspaper described the atmosphere in 2002: "Berlusconi wants Sismi to be big players on the international security scene, to prove themselves to their ally, the United States, and the world. Washington is looking for proof of Saddam's involvement . and wants info immediately." For the Italian middleman Rocco Martino, who acquired the documents from a Sismi mole at the Niger embassy in Rome, the motive described by La Repubblica is primarily mercenary. He wanted to be paid for the forgeries. According to the Repubblica account, Martino was a former carabinieri officer and later a Sismi operative who by 1999 was making his living based in Luxembourg, selling information to the French intelligence services for a monthly stipend. The story goes on to explain how Martino renewed his contacts with Sismi officer Antonio Nucera, an old friend and former colleague, who was a Sismi vice-captain working in the intelligence agency's eighth directorate, with responsibilities involving weapons of mass destruction and counter-proliferation. Precisely how Nucera, Martino, and two employees of the Niger embassy in Rome came together sometime between 1999 and 2000 to hatch the Niger forgeries plan is still somewhat mysterious. The newspaper's reports that Nucera introduced Martino to a longtime Sismi asset at the Niger embassy in Rome, a 60 year-old Italian woman described in La Repubblica only as "La Signora." Sismi chief Pollari, who granted the newspaper an interview (as he tends to do when he fears that breaking news could taint his agency), suggests that Nucera simply wanted to help out Martino, his old friend and colleague. But as the Italian reporters suggest, that sounds like a very convenient excuse for the chief of an agency that was engaged in promoting the bogus Niger claims from their inception, all the way to the White House. The picture that emerges of Sismi's relationship with Martino is that the agency used him as a "postman" -- a cut-out to sell the bogus intelligence to allied intelligence services. At the same time, Sismi possessed enough information about Martino to claim that he was simply a rogue agent on the French payroll. La Repubblica's noirish portrait of Martino as a convenient vehicle for plausible deniability is given further resonance by the recent news that a Roman prosecutor has ended his investigation into Martino's role in the Niger hoax without filing any charges or issuing any report. Although Berlusconi's government clearly sought deniability while pushing the Niger uranium claims, the Bush White House went still further by trying to blame its citation of exaggerated and discredited Iraq WMD claims on the CIA, the very same agency that consistently discounted the Niger claims. The White House's war on the CIA and on the Wilsons --the extent of which has been revealed in recent news reports emerging from the Fitzgerald investigation -- has always had an excessive and almost hysterical quality. Why was the White House so worked up over Wilson and the Niger hoax, when there was so much evidence that the administration had based its drive for war on claims that were so thoroughly discredited from top to bottom? Why did Wilson and his CIA wife become the primary targets, when Wilson was hardly alone in pointing out that the White House should have known better about the Niger claims? News of the secret meeting between the Italian Sismi chief and the White House deputy national security adviser -- during the period when the White House was assembling its flawed case for war -- provides an important new piece of that puzzle. Laura Rozen reports on foreign-policy and national-security issues from Washington, D.C., as a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, a contributor to The Nation and other publications, and for her blog, War and Piece. Copyright © 2005 by The American Prospect, Inc. Preferred Citation: Laura Rozen, "La Repubblica's Scoop, Confirmed", The American Prospect Online, Oct 25, 2005. This article may not be resold, reprinted, or redistributed for compensation of any kind without prior written permission from the author. Direct questions about permissions to permissions@prospect.org. ---------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.361 / Virus Database: 267.12.4/146 - Release Date: 10/21/05 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 4 Xinhua: Putin urges closer co-op between Iran, IAEA www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-10-25 03:13:57 MOSCOW, Oct. 25 (Xinhuanet) -- President Vladimir Putin urged closer cooperation between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) over the country's nuclear dossier in a telephone conversation Tuesday with his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The presidents discussed Iran's nuclear dossier in light of the upcoming session of the IAEA board of governors, scheduled for late November, the Kremlin press service said in a statement. "The conversation addressed the need to resolve all issues within the IAEA's legal jurisdiction through political means. In that context, Putin spoke for closer relations between Iran and the IAEA, taking into account the possibility of resuming the negotiating process," the Kremlin said. The conversation was initiated by the Iranian side, it added. Putin's conversation with the Iranian leader came just a day after talks between the foreign ministers of the two countries in Moscow. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki, agreed in the talks Monday that asolution to the dispute over Iran's nuclear program should be sought within the IAEA. The United States accuses Iran of seeking nuclear weapons underthe guise of a civilian nuclear program. Iran, however, says its nuclear program is dedicated exclusively to power generation. Germany, France and Britain, representing the European Union (EU), had been negotiating with Iran to persuade it to scrap uranium enrichment, but the talks collapsed after Iran ended a freeze on uranium conversion in August. The EU trio have warned of hauling Iran before the UN Security Council for possible sanctions. If they do, Iran has said, it would not back down. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Iran Mania: "Iran N-dossier to be merely assessed by IAEA" Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - ©2005 IranMania.com [Archived Picture - The foreign ministers of Iran and Russia, addressing a joint press conference after their two-hour meeting in Moscow, underlined that Iran's nuclear issue can merely be examined within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regulations.] Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters that during the meeting cooperation between the two countries in all domains were discussed, which followed the recent talks held by President Vladimir Putin and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.] [Archived Picture - Mottaki arrived in Moscow this morning to meet Russian officials and exchange views on bilateral and international developments.] LONDON, October 25 (IranMania) - The foreign ministers of Iran and Russia, addressing a joint press conference after their two-hour meeting in Moscow, underlined that Iran's nuclear issue can merely be examined within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regulations. For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters that during the meeting cooperation between the two countries in all domains were discussed, which followed the recent talks held by President Vladimir Putin and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "Collaboration on the affairs related to the Caspian Sea, known as the sea of peace and friendship, promotion of security and blocking any subversive measures in the sea were stressed during the meeting," he added. Turning to Iran-Russia collaboration within the framework of Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), he noted that both countries' approach towards Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Lebanon, in particular with respect to smuggling of drugs, were among the matters on which both sides share common views. Urging that all the issues related to Iran's atomic dossier should be solved through the UN nuclear watchdog, he said, "We should use all facilities towards restoring Iran's inalienable rights for access to peaceful use of nuclear technology. Meanwhile, attempts should be made to put an end to any relevant suspicions. "We decided to further discuss the matter with the three European Union members, including Britain, France and Germany, in order to come up with a proper outcome. Addressing the media, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said that the heads of the two states are determined to raise the level of bilateral relations and that exchange of political visits would contribute to this end. He pointed to cooperation on the Caspian Sea affairs, campaign against narcotics, cooperation with SCO and the eastern states as some of the joint approaches of the two states. "Concerning nuclear issue, peaceful use of atomic energy was discussed during the meeting and an agreement was reached on assessment of the relevant dossier only within the IAEA framework. "According to our doctrine, nuclear weapons are banned and we do not plan to develop nuclear weapons. However, we would insist on our rights to nuclear technology based on NPT," he added. Mottaki arrived in Moscow this morning to meet Russian officials and exchange views on bilateral and international developments. & Display. ©1999-2005 IranMania.com. Terms & Conditions. ***************************************************************** 6 Iran Mania: UK warns Iran on dangers of isolation from West IranMania.com Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - ©2005 IranMania.com [Archived Picture - The United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair warned Iran that the country would face "a much more difficult life" if it did not improve its relations with Western states.] LONDON, October 25 (IranMania) - The United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair warned Iran that the country would face "a much more difficult life" if it did not improve its relations with Western states, AFP reported. "Iran has to realise that there is the possibility of having a different relationship with the Western world but only on the basis of certain very clear things," Blair said in an interview broadcast on Sky News television at 8:00 pm (1900 GMT). "If they don't do this then I think they should understand it is very difficult for people to have a different relationship with them," Blair said. "And if they continue to do it, they continue to really defy proper rules of behaviour in the international community, then life will become a lot more difficult." However Blair attempted to play down fears of military action against Tehran while not excluding it totally. "People are asking 'are we about to go and invade Iran?' It is important that fear is laid to rest. Nobody is talking about that, nobody is planning for it, nobody is wanting to do it," the British prime minister said. However Blair added: "You don't ever take any option off the table." Iran denies allegations by the United States that it has sought to develop nuclear weapons, and insists it needs nuclear energy to replace oil stocks when they run out. Talks on the nuclear issue between Iran and the so-called EU-3 -- Britain, France and Germany -- broke down in August after Tehran ended a freeze on uranium fuel cycle work. Earlier this month Iran reiterated its refusal to suspend uranium fuel work, as sought by the three European states as a precondition of resuming talks with Tehran. The United States and the EU-3 have been lobbying members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog, to refer Iran to the UN Security Council over its nuclear activities. ***************************************************************** 7 Sify: Iran may get reprieve on nuke issue By Michael Adler in Vienna Tuesday, 25 October , 2005, 17:44 The United States and the European Union will hold off taking Iran before the UN Security Council over its nuclear program until they get the Russian backing and may even allow Tehran to do some nuclear fuel work, diplomats told AFP. "If the Russians don't come around, there could not be referral in November," a European diplomat said, referring to a November 24 meeting of the Vienna-based UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which could send Iran to the Security Council. “The next month is all about Russia handling," a Western diplomat said about efforts to win Moscow's support. The United States and EU negotiators Britain, France and Germany fear Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons and want it brought before the Security Council, which has the power to impose penalties such as trade sanctions. But Russia, which has a lucrative contract to build Iran's first nuclear power reactor, has a veto on the Security Council. The IAEA's 35-nation board of governors in September found Iran in non-compliance with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, paving the way for the matter to be referred to the Security Council if Iran does not halt nuclear fuel work and cooperate fully with an IAEA investigation. Diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. Russia reiterated its support Monday for Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran says is a peaceful effort to generate electricity, and said all questions about it should be handled by the IAEA. "This way we can find a decision acceptable by all sides that, on the one hand, allows Iran its lawful right to a peaceful nuclear energy program and, on the other hand, does not allow any doubts about the peaceful character of this activity," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said after talks in Moscow with his Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki. Earlier this month, Lavrov and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice openly aired their differences over the issue. The Russian minister defended Tehran's "right" to nuclear energy, while Rice retorted that Iran also had "obligations" under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Diplomats said a compromise might be for Iran to be allowed to do preliminary nuclear fuel work, something the EU has so far refused. Under such a deal, Iran would be allowed to convert uranium ore into the gas that is the feedstock for making enriched uranium but not to take the next step and enrich uranium. Enriched uranium is fuel for civilian nuclear power reactors but can also be the raw material for atom bombs. Iran-EU talks broke down in August when Tehran slammed the door on an offer of incentives in exchange for a cessation of fuel work, namely uranium conversion it had resumed that month. "A compromise would involve Iran keeping some conversion capability eventually," the Western diplomat said. But the diplomat said Iran would still have to halt this work in order for talks with the EU-3 to resume and would not be allowed to do actual enrichment. Iran has refused to halt conversion work. The diplomat said Tehran had also rejected a compromise proposal for South Africa to hold for safekeeping uranium gas converted by Iran. "The idea is to sweeten the EU-3 offer as Russia is trying to do everything to keep some conversion for Iran," the diplomat said. The diplomat said the West wanted diplomacy with Iran to effectively "be an EU3-Russia-US effort from now on." "But if Iran resumes uranium enrichment, Russia will not stop them going to the Council," the diplomat said. US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns said in Paris on October 19 that "Russia has to be part of the solution to this problem. And I think Russia will be. We haven't come to the end of our talks with Russia and other countries on this." Rice has said that Iran must eventually face the Security Council but that there is no deadline for November. Sify © Copyright Sify Ltd, 1998-2004. All rights reserved. Sify.comhosted at SifyHosting India's first Level 3 Internet ***************************************************************** 8 AFP: West seeks Russian backing over Iran nuclear program - diplomats Tue Oct 25, 2:42 PM ET VIENNA (AFP) - The United States and the European Union will hold off taking Iran before the UN Security Council over its nuclear program until they get Russia to back them and may even allow Tehran to do some nuclear fuel work, diplomats told AFP. "If the Russians don't come around, there could not be referral in November," a European diplomat said, referring to a November 24 meeting of the Vienna-based UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which could send Iran to the Security Council. "The next month is all about Russia handling," a Western diplomat said about efforts to win Moscow's support. The United States and EU negotiators Britain, France and Germany (EU3) fear Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons and want it brought before the Security Council, which has the power to impose penalties such as trade sanctions. But Russia, which has a lucrative contract to build Iran's first nuclear power reactor, has a veto on the council. The IAEA's 35-nation board of governors in September found Iran in non-compliance with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, paving the way for the matter to be referred to the council if Iran does not halt nuclear fuel work and cooperate fully with an IAEA investigation. Diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. Russia reiterated its support Monday for Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran says is a peaceful effort to generate electricity, and said all questions about it should be handled by the IAEA. "This way we can find a decision acceptable by all sides that, on the one hand, allows Iran its lawful right to a peaceful nuclear energy program and, on the other hand, does not allow any doubts about the peaceful character of this activity," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said after talks in Moscow with his Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki. Earlier this month, Lavrov and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice openly aired their differences over the issue. The Russian minister defended Tehran's "right" to nuclear energy, while Rice retorted that Iran also had "obligations" under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Diplomats said a compromise may be for Iran to be allowed to do preliminary nuclear fuel work, something the EU has so far refused. Under such a deal, Iran would be allowed to convert uranium ore into the UF6 (uranium hexafluoride) gas that is the feedstock for making enriched uranium but not to take the next step and enrich uranium. Enriched uranium is fuel for civilian nuclear power reactors but can also be the raw material for atom bombs. Iran-EU talks broke down in August when Tehran slammed the door on an offer of incentives in exchange for a cessation of fuel work, namely uranium conversion it had resumed that month. "A compromise would involve Iran keeping some conversion capability eventually," the Western diplomat said. But the diplomat said Iran would still have to halt this work in order for talks with the EU-3 to resume and would not be allowed to do actual enrichment. Iran has refused to halt conversion work. The diplomat said Tehran had also rejected a compromise proposal for South Africa to hold for safekeeping UF6 gas converted by Iran. "The idea is to sweeten the EU3 offer as Russia is trying to do everything to keep some conversion for Iran," the diplomat said. Another diplomat said Russia was proposing to supply Iran with natural uranium and take back the UF6 gas made through conversion and for there possibly to be a joint venture in Russia with Iran for further processing of nuclear fuel. The diplomat said the West wanted diplomacy with Iran to effectively "be an EU3-Russia-US effort from now on." "But if Iran resumes uranium enrichment, Russia will not stop them going to the council," the diplomat said. US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns said in Paris on October 19 that "Russia has to be part of the solution to this problem. And I think Russia will be. We haven't come to the end of our talks with Russia and other countries on this." Rice has said that Iran must eventually face the security council but that there is no deadline for November. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 Mos News: Russia Pledges Support to Iran Nuclear Program MOSNEWS.COM Created: 25.10.2005 09:38 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 09:56 MSK MosNews Russia reiterated its support for Iran’s nuclear program and said all questions about it should be handled by the international nuclear watchdog agency in Vienna. “Our common position is that we have to continue to deal with all the questions raised through the IAEA,” the International Atomic Energy Agency, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was quoted as saying by the AFP news agency after holding talks in Moscow with his Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki. “This way we can find a decision acceptable by all sides that, on the one hand, allows Iran its lawful right to a peaceful nuclear energy program and, on the other hand, does not allow any doubts about the peaceful character of this activity,” Lavrov said. Mottaki offered a similar view. “Iran’s nuclear aims should not be politicized,” he said, adding: “All Iranian nuclear questions should be resolved through the IAEA.” The United States and the European Union fear that Tehran could use a nuclear energy program to camouflage development of nuclear weapons. Russia is the main foreign contractor in construction of Iran’s first nuclear power station and has defended Tehran’s right to develop nuclear energy. Earlier this month, Lavrov and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice openly aired their differences over the issue. The Russian minister defended Tehran’s “right” to nuclear energy, while Rice retorted that Iran also had “obligations” under nuclear the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Diplomats in Vienna said on Thursday that Iran has provided new information about its controversial uranium enrichment program to visiting international nuclear inspectors. Write us: info@mosnews.com Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM ***************************************************************** 10 Scotsman.com: Warning on Iran nuclear ambitions Tue 25 Oct 2005 Failure to halt Iran's ambitions to develop a nuclear bomb could lead other countries in the region to acquire nuclear weapons of their own, a leading international affairs think tank has warned. Dr John Chipman, director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), said Turkey and Saudi Arabia could be among the countries that would "reconsider their options" if Tehran succeeded in building a bomb. His comments, at the launch of the IISS's annual Military Balance report for 2005/06, came after Prime Minister Tony Blair warned on Monday night that life for the Islamic republic could become "a lot more difficult" if it continued to defy the international community. The IISS report said it now appeared "unlikely" that diplomatic efforts by the EU3 of Britain, France and Germany to persuade Iran to give up its uranium enrichment programme - a key stage in developing a weapon - would succeed. Dr Chipman said it was now essential that other countries joined in the international pressure on Iran. "It would be desirable for regional states, especially the Gulf Arab states, also to express more openly their concerns about how Iran's possible acquisition of a nuclear capacity would change strategic perceptions and the regional balance of power," he said. With Iran still thought to be a decade away from acquiring a nuclear weapon, he said there was still time for diplomacy to succeed. The next step could be a referral by the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) - the world nuclear watchdog - to the United Nations Security Council, which in turn could impose sanctions. Such a move has so far been opposed by Russia, China and India amid fears that it could begin "a slippery slide down the road to war". Dr Chipman said that could change if IAEA director general Mohammed El Baradei was able to present evidence on the development of Iran's Shahab-3 missile which has "a payload ideally suited to a nuclear weapon". © Copyright Press Association Ltd 2005, All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Six-Party Talks to Resume Nov. 8: Official Home> National/Politics Updated Oct.25,2005 21:02 KST Six-party talks on North Korea¡¯s nuclear arms program could reconvene on Nov. 8 in the Chinese capital Beijing, a government official said Tuesday. He said the participating nations are negotiating about a date before the middle of the month, with Nov. 8 as the opening date pending confirmation in a few days. The fifth round of the six-nation conference will discuss the details of Pyongyang¡¯s dismantlement of its nuclear program agreed in principle in the last round, in what U.S. officials have called the ¡°action-for-action¡± part of the negotiations. Officials say any dramatic conclusion is unlikely in this round, which is tipped to adjourn for the duration of the APEC forum in Busan on Nov. 12-19. (englishnews@chosun.com ) ***************************************************************** 12 AFP: China says timing of next round of NKorea talks not decided yet Tuesday October 25, 11:37 AM BEIJING (AFX (NASDAQ: - ) ) - China said the exact timing of the next round of six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program has still not been decided, but it should be in November. 'The schedule of the fifth round of six-party talks is under discussion,' foreign ministry spokesman Kong Quan said, according to Agence France-Presse. 'In the statement issued at the last round, it was agreed to hold it in November. We hope this schedule will be realized and that the talks will achieve positive results,' he said. A South Korean official said earlier that the next round of talks -- involving the two Koreas, China, the US, Japan and Russia -- would take place in the second week of November. 'The fifth round of six-party talks, which will be held in early November, probably in the second week, will focus on how to implement the joint statement,' South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-Young said. Copyright © 2005 AFP AFX. All rights reserved. Republication or ***************************************************************** 13 Online NewsHour: North Korea Commits to Continue Nuclear Talks - October 24, 2005 [a NewsHour with Jim Lehrer Transcript] NORTH KOREA'S NUCLEAR PROGRAM [Bill Richardson] New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who recently returned to the United States from an unofficial visit to Pyongyang, discusses the North Korea's pledge on Monday to continue with six-party negotiations over its nuclear weapons program. Online NewsHour Special Report: [Margaret Warner] MARGARET WARNER: New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is no stranger to North Korea. The former U.N. ambassador visited the isolated country several times as a congressman during the 1990's to negotiate the release of missing the release of missing Americans or their remains. Last week he was there again in an unofficial capacity. And as he left last Friday, he predicted Pyongyang would return to the six-nation talks with the US and others over its nuclear program. Today, the North Koreans announced they would. Gov. Richardson joins us now. Returning to nuclear talks MARGARET WARNER: And, welcome Governor. MARGARET WARNER: Let's start first of all with your view of how significant this announcement is today, the North Koreans saying they will return to the talks early next month? [Bill Richardson] GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: Well, it is significant because it means that they are returning to the talks unconditionally. Frequently the North Koreans play around with the dates. This time they committed to me that they would come and fully participate, that they would abide by the statement of principles which basically calls for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula; that they would rejoin the nonproliferation treaty, have a safeguards again, but at the same time, indicating that there had to be in the communiqué of the statement of the principles words for words, actions for actions. It shows that they want to go into the talks, I believe in a constructive way. Admittedly the rhetoric is going to be very bombastic, very strong, but they are returning to the talks. And that's a very good sign. MARGARET WARNER: So based on your conversations, do you believe that they have truly made the decision to dismantle the program versus the opposite view which some hardliners here hold, which is they are really just stalling for time; there are no inspectors there in North Korea and they are continuing to work on their weapons program? GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: Well, with the North Koreans you can't predict anything certain. But I was encouraged, for instance, they did allow me to see their nuclear reactor in Yongbyon where I saw a five megawatt reactor. I saw the reprocessing be shifted from that reactor to another place. That was a show, I believe, of transparency. Now again, I do believe they've made that commitment to dismantle their nuclear weapons in exchange for basically wanting the six-party nations to guarantee their security, no attacks, substantial amounts of fuel and energy and other economic assistance. [Bill Richardson] But again, the light water reactor issue, they maintain that they need a light water reactor as part of their dismantling, and that, I believe, is going to be what settles this issue. I don't believe that the settlement will come at the next round of six-party talks. But I do believe they're sincere. They were trying to send a message that they are ready to negotiate. Are they going to be caving in immediately to the other five countries demands? I'm not sure. But at least I believe that the Bush administration has made a strategic decision to negotiate, to engage the North Koreans, to do it through diplomacy, through this statement of principles, which I believe is in everybody's interest. Changes in North Korean policy MARGARET WARNER: You have been talking to the North Koreans for more than ten years off and on. What is it like to talk with them? How do you know if they are leveling with you? And was it any different this time? [Bill Richardson] GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: Well, I noted on this trip a lot less hostility. I noticed around Pyongyang and the rural areas that we visited the vitriolic anti-American signs weren't there. They seemed to be for the first time respecting the American negotiators had that they have to deal with. Sure, there is a lot of mutual distrust, suspicion. But I found that being a marked change from the past. Secondly, I do believe they've made a fundamental decision that it is in their interest to rejoin the international community or to join it for the first time, to not be so isolated. They know they have to rebuild their economy. They know they've got to find a way to feed their people, many that are starving. But at the same time, they realize that the nuclear weapons card is their only card. And so they use it strategically to advance their interests. MARGARET WARNER: But I mean -- GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: I do believe --. [Margaret Warner] MARGARET WARNER: I'm sorry. But what happened or what did they say, was there anything you can point to on this trip that persuaded you of that? I mean why is it any different than eight years ago when their people were also starving? GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: Because I believe number one that they've made a fundamental decision that they've got to coexist with the five countries surrounding them. When China, when Japan, when South Korea, the main countries that basically feed them, give them international assistance, and the fact that they want a strategic relationship with the United States has convinced them that this is the best path for them. Now that doesn't mean they're not going to be difficult. That doesn't mean that there is going to be a substantial disagreement on the sequencing of when you dismantle and when you rejoin the nonproliferation talks. [Bill Richardson] I do believe another positive sign; they reversed themselves on economic and UN assistance to a lot of nongovernmental groups, to the World Food Program. They had basically said we're throwing these people out. And I came in and pushed them hard and said this is ludicrous. You are hurting yourselves. And they reversed themselves and it now looks like the humanitarian groups that were about to be expelled can now stay perhaps in a reduced number. Flexibility in negotiations MARGARET WARNER: You've mentioned two issues that have been the old stumbling blocks: One is their insistence in having a light water reactor, civilian reactor with international help, and the other is what you called sequencing which is sort of who goes first. Did you hear anything new on that, anything that you could convey to the -- US negotiators going into the next round of talks? [Bill Richardson] GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: Well, first on the light water reactor, I did notice some flexibility and secondly that this I don't think is a deal breaker issue for them. Specifically, the North Koreans said that they would be prepared to allow the United States to either co-manage the reactor or to participate in the fuel cycle on the front end and back end, basically controlling the reactor, or having the five-party or six-party countries participate in the management. They seem quite flexible. Now on the sequencing, this is the big issue and I believe that it may take more than the next session to get this achieved. I do believe you have to be very strong in laying out benchmarks on how quickly and when the North Koreans dismantle or -- the Yongbyon reactor, when they rejoin the nonproliferation treaty and invite inspectors back, like Mohammed ElBaradei, for high level inspections. And then we have to figure out a verification effort that is new, that is very strong, that is very foolproof because in the past, they have cheated. And it's important that they recognize that this agreement has to be totally foolproof if it's going to work. MARGARET WARNER: But do you think that the Bush administration on the US part has to be willing to give more or give more sooner than they have indicated at this point that they are? Well, I have been encouraged by Secretary Rice and her new team. They have been, I believe, realistic at pursuing negotiations like Colin Powell did based on diplomacy, based on the statement of principles, which I believe the fact that the North Koreans agreed to it, which denuclearizes the peninsula which dismantles their weapons is an excellent place to start. This last session they had made more progress than many other times before. You now have to be flexible. I believe we now have to show to the North Koreans that the sequencing is something that we can work with, that the light water reactor, which I don't think is a deal breaker for them, something that can be managed in a way that there are guarantees that the North Koreans under no circumstances can use that facility for other than civilian totally peaceful purposes. [Margaret Warner] MARGARET WARNER: Finally very, very briefly, why do you think they invited you? GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: They know me, in the past in the last two years I passed on messages back and forth to Secretary Powell. They trust me. I don't know if that is something I want to advertise or brag about. But I think with the North Koreans, they're different. They negotiate differently. You have to show a degree of understanding and respect for their position while totally disagreeing with them on the way they behave internationally, the way they treat their citizens. And I believe it's a matter of trusting each other. And that is what we did. MARGARET WARNER: Gov. Richardson, thanks so much for being with us. GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: Thank you. Copyright ©2005 MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights ***************************************************************** 14 CNIC: Oppose South Korean Nuclear Waste Dump (Citizens' Nuclear Information Center) CNIC received the request below from friends in South Korea. The South Korean government is pressing ahead with its plan to hold an undemocratic vote regarding a low level radioactive waste dump site. We urge you to read the information below and to support this campaign. The citizens' vote is scheduled for November 2nd, so there is not much time left. Please send the protest letter to the President of South Korea as soon as possible. Urgent message from South Korean Activists against Nuclear Waste Dump Site Please send Korean environmental and democracy activists international support for our campaign to stop an illegal nuclear waste vote scheduled to take place November 2nd! Background South Korea, the world's sixth-largest nuclear power-producing nation, now operates 20 nuclear power plants, which provide roughly 40 percent of its total electricity needs. However, since 1978, the Korean government has built only nuclear power plants - it has not built any nuclear waste dump sites. The reason is simple: we are a small, densely populated country, and local communities and environmental groups have successfully campaigned to stop construction at every site that has been proposed. Most of our nation's citizens recognize that a nuclear dump site will never be a "good neighbor", and they have quickly joined our protests. What's Happening Now But in 2004, the Korean government got smarter. Realizing that public opposition to high-level dumps is difficult to overcome, government announced that it would build a low and mid-level radioactive waste dump site - but would not attempt to store high-level waste at this site. Further, the government is offering a huge financial windfall to the site selected: US$300 million to any community that would accept a low and mid-level radioactive waste dump. An additional US$5-10 million will go to the site annually. Finally, the headquarters office of Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Corporation will be relocated to the host area, providing jobs and more economic incentives. The government has actively promoted the dump site with a campaign of lies, telling communities that the radioactive waste dump will not contaminate the surrounding environment, poses no health risks to those living near the site, and will encourage economic development in the area. [ height=] LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE NOT OPPOSING THE DUMP SITE! Instead, they are competing for it! The reaction of many local governments to the central government's proposal has typically changed from ``NIMBY'' (not-in-my-backyard) to ``PIMFY'' (please-in-my-front yard), because of the supposed economic benefits. Many local governments (small cities and rural areas) find these incentives attractive because they foresee both development and economic prosperity from government's funding of the dump site. The candidate cities and counties are Pohang, Yeongdeok, and Gyeongju along the eastern coast and Gusan in the western coast. Based on the results of regional voting scheduled to take place on November 2, 2005, the site with the highest popular vote will become the national dumpsite, given that at least one-third of that region's residents cast a vote. Serious Problems This process is fraught with many serious problems. First, the candidate sites have not been screened for geological stability and environmental impact. One of candidate sites, for example, is expected to be under water during heavy rains, is near a national park and protective zone for cultural properties, and is on an active earthquake fault-line. Another site is located near the source of the region's water supply. Second, democracy in an election process has disappeared. Local governments which want to be selected for the nuclear waste dump site have mobilized their own public servants to campaign illegally. They have given money to people to buy "yes" votes and manipulated the application of absentee ballots. Because of these blatant abuses of government authority and financial corruption, we strongly insist that the Korean government immediately stop the election. You Can Help Us! We are asking for the help of the international community to shine a light on these abuses and help us stop the voting and the dump. We ask our friends-YOU- to spread this message of our concern and hope as much as you can and to send letters to South Korean President Rho Moo-Hyun. Write President Roh today, please! Here is a sample letter to President Roh. Please modify or add your own comments if you with. His e-mail address is as follows: [ height=] So that we can see how many people in the international community are supporting us, please also send a CC to the following address: [ height=] . We appreciate your help and cooperation a lot - lives are at stake, and the government should not be allowed to "buy" a dump site location that may be dangerous to our citizens and future generations. All the best, Ma Yong-Un International Campaigner Movement-Friends of the Earth Korea(KFEM-FoE Korea) * A sample of letter for the message is below. Phase Out Nuclear Energy. Promote Renewable Energy. Respect Democracy! Dear Honorable President Roh Moo-Hyun, I am writing you to express my surprise and concern about the illegal, anti-democratic, and unsafe process your government is undertaking to build a mid- and low-radioactive waste dump site in South Korea. The South Korean government should know that no nation has been able to create a technology to isolate these harmful and fatal materials for the full period of nuclear waste toxicity. Radioactive waste remains deadly for up to hundreds of millions of years. In order to protect ourselves and our future generations, we will have to spend enormous amounts of money to monitor and safe-keep the waste. Nuclear power and its wastes are not clean and sustainable, but costly and dangerous. Instead of bribing communities to accept deadly waste and spending large sums to construct burial sites for the waste, the Korean government should instead spend its resources on phasing out nuclear power plants and developing and promoting safe, clean, and sustainable renewable energy sources. We urge you to stop the undemocratic voting process to choose a site for nuclear waste disposal and respect democracy and your own people, so that the world will respect South Korea's example of wise leadership. I will look forward to seeing your wise decision soon. Yours sincerely, Your name Your organization Citizens' Nuclear Information Center TEL.03-5330-9520 FAX.03-5330-9530 http://cnic.jp/english/ Email ***************************************************************** 15 [NYTr] Bush Duped the Entire World, Says Blix Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 18:48:25 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com Bush Duped the Entire World, Says UN Official Washington, 25 Oct (Prensa Latina) Former UN Arms Inspector Hans Blix accused the US Administration of deceiving the world by using alleged weapons of mass destruction as an excuse against the former Iraqi government. Blix told the Boston Globe daily that President George W. Bush lied to everyone about Baghdad's WMD arsenal, and that he believes Washington invaded to secure Middle East oil supplies and always planned to put in a friendly government there. The former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency led the UN inspectors sent to verify whether there were illegal WMD in Iraq, the justification used by the White House for the war. The US-led coalition toppled the government of Saddam Hussein in a war begun in March 2003. So far, 2,000 US soldiers have died and some 14,300 have been wounded. Anti-war civilian groups, such as the American Friends Service Committee and Action for Peace, convoked a national protest Tuesday to mark the death of the 2,000 US citizens killed in Iraq. The number of Iraqi dead is believed to exceed 100,000. A recent poll by CBS shows an increasing number of US citizens (55 percent) believe the Bush Administration was wrong to launch this war and 59 percent want the troops to return home; a dramatic decline of support for military operations. hr/ccs/emw/jvj * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 16 ABQJOURNAL: Nuclear Bunker-Buster Project Dead Tuesday, October 25, 2005 Albuquerque Journal--> By John Fleck/ Journal Staff Writer Efforts to develop a nuclear bunker-buster for the U.S. nuclear arsenal appear to be dead, according to Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M. Domenici's office issued a statement late this afternoon saying funding has been cut during final budget negotiations with House leadership over the Fiscal Year 2006 budget for the U.S. nuclear weapons program. Domenici's statement said the money was dropped at the request of the National Nuclear Security Administration, the federal agency responsible for the nuclear weapons program. Funding for the project was modest — just $4 million a year in a nuclear weapons budget worth more than $6 billion. But the issue had become a flash point, with arms control activists lobbying actively to kill the program. Steve@abqjournal.com ***************************************************************** 17 AFP: White House defends Cheney - Tue Oct 25,11:42 AM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The White House defended Vice President Dick Cheney after a news report appeared to deepen links between him and the criminal investigation into who unmasked a CIA agent in 2003. "The vice president is doing a great job as a member of this administration, and the president appreciates all that he's doing," said Scott McClellan, chief spokesman for US President George W. Bush. Asked whether the report cast doubt on Cheney's public truthfulness on the CIA scandal, McClellan replied: "You're prejudging things and speculating and we're not going to prejudge or speculate." A special prosecutor has been looking into allegations that senior Bush administration officials blew the cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame, perhaps to avenge claims by her husband, former diplomat Joseph Wilson, that Bush aides "twisted" intelligence to justify war in Iraq. With the criminal probe seemingly drawing to a close, Washington has been abuzz with talk of possible indictments reaching as high as Bush's chief political strategist, Karl Rove, and Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis Libby. The New York Times reported Monday, citing lawyers close to the case, that Libby's notes show he learned of Plame's status from Cheney on June 12, 2003, weeks before her identity was revealed by a newspaper columnist. Libby's notes show Cheney got the information from then-CIA director George Tenet in response to questions from the vice president about Wilson, the Times reported. Libby has reportedly told Fitzgerald that he learned from reporters that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. And Cheney said in a nationally televised interview in September 2003 that he had no idea who Joseph Wilson was or who put him in charge of investigating claims that Iraq sought uranium from Niger. Asked whether Cheney knew who Wilson was, McClellan replied: "This is a question relating to an ongoing investigation and we're not having any further comment on the investigation while it's ongoing." Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 UPI: Security &Terrorism - Libby, Rove await indictment decisions United Press International - 10/25/2005 7:49:00 PM -0400 By MARTIN SIEFF UPI Senior News Analyst WASHINGTON, Oct. 25 (UPI) -- Washington seethed with rumors and speculation Tuesday night on the eve of the expected announcement of possible indictments in the Valerie Plame CIA leak probe. There was widespread expectation that I. Lewis Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney would be indicted in Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's probe and the very real possibility that Karl Rove, the deputy White House chief of staff and long-time top political strategist and advisor to President George W. Bush would be indicted as well. Congressional sources told United Press International that National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and former White House press spokesman Ari Fleischer could be indicted as well. Other sources told UPI that between one to five indictments would be issued and that the subjects of the indictments had already received notification of them Tuesday. If Libby is indicted, pressure could rapidly mount on Cheney, the most powerful vice president in American history and a key driving force behind the Iraq war, to step down. Speculation swirled in Washington Tuesday that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., President Bush's chief rival for the 2000 Republican presidential nomination, would be the frontrunner to succeed him as vice president. The New York Times reported Tuesday that Libby had first learned the identity of Plame, the CIA officer at the heart of the leak investigation, in a conversation with the vice president, his longtime boss, only weeks before her identity became public in 2003. The paper cited lawyers involved with the case as their source. The previously undisclosed conversation took place on June 12, 2003 and it appeared to differ significantly from Libby's previous testimony to a federal grand jury that he initially learned about Plame from journalists, the New York Times said. Plame's identity as a CIA agent was made public by syndicated columnist Robert Novak in a column he wrote that appeared on July 14, 2003. The New York Times said that Libby's own notes indicated that Cheney himself had received his information about Plame from then-Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet in response to questions that Cheney had asked. The paper also noted that any effort by Libby try to avoid discussing his conversations with the vice president could be considered by Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald as an illegal effort to impede his inquiry. Fitzgerald has until Friday to announce who, if anyone, will face prosecution after 22 months of grand jury hearings and private interviews. Plame's identity was leaked soon after her diplomat husband publicly criticized the Bush administration's claim the war in Iraq was necessary because Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. The conversation between Libby and Cheney apparently took place on the day The Washington Post published a front-page story by Walter Pincus about an unnamed diplomat, later publicly identified as Plame Wilson's husband Joseph Wilson, and his mission to Niger. "A key component of President Bush's claim in his State of the Union address last January that Iraq had an active nuclear weapons program -- its alleged attempt to buy uranium in Niger -- was disputed by a CIA-directed mission to the central African nation in early 2002, according to senior administration officials and a former government official," Pincus wrote. The New York Times story for the first time placed Cheney in the heart of the investigation. That has thrown the White House and the vice president's office into turmoil. MSNBC reporter David Shuster said Tuesday morning that the New York Times report could have devastating implications for Libby. "For Scooter Libby, it suggests that his legal exposure may be even greater than expected... This also raises questions about Vice President Cheney. What did the vice president tell investigators? Did the vice president also tell them that he learned about Valerie Plame a month before her identity was revealed by reporters? "Why was Scooter Libby trying to protect the vice president in some fashion? Did the vice president know that Scooter Libby was trying to protect him in some fashion? And were there any steps that were taken to further that effort?" White House sources have told UPI that any senior figure that is indicted would resign their position. If Rove were indicted and forced to resign, the White House would effectively be decapitated and the president would be deprived of the figure that has been his effective alter ego through five years in power and two successful presidential campaigns. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 19 UPI: NewsTrack - Physicists oppose U.S. nuclear policy United Press International - 10/25/2005 4:15:00 PM -0400 Newstrack: College students from New Orleans are SAN DIEGO, Oct. 25 (UPI) -- More than 470 physicists have signed a petition opposing a U.S. proposal allowing the use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. The petition was started by Kim Griest and Jorge Hirsch, physics professors at the University of California-San Diego. They said they felt an obligation to speak out because their profession brought nuclear weapons into the world 60 years ago. Prominent physicists, including seven Nobel laureates, believe the policy blurs the line between nuclear weapons and conventional, chemical and biological weapons. The petition is to be delivered to members of Congress, as well as scientific professional societies. "Humanity has gone more than half a century without using nuclear weapons, in large part because of the success of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty," said Griest. "The U.S. use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states will destroy the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and give strong incentive for other countries to develop and use nuclear weapons, thus making nuclear war more likely." They hope to gain additional supporters before a Nov. 18 meeting of the executive board of the American Physical Society and a Nov. 24 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 20 [NYTr] Tony Blair's Trident Missiles Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:39:25 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit New Communist Party of Britain http://www.newworker.org New Worker News - Oct 21, 2005 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/New-Worker-News Editorial Trident missiles While the Blair government continues to run down the National Health Service billions are being earmarked for another criminal folly - the development of a new generation of nuclear weapons to replace Britain's ageing Trident submarine fleet. Some =A310 billion will be needed to pay for Trident's replacement, money that could be spent on hospitals, schools and pensions. Instead it will be squandered in another vain attempt by British imperialism to retain Great Power status through the possession of a nuclear arsenal which is ultimately controlled by the Americans. Though the submarines and warheads are made in Britain the inter-continental ballistic missiles are American and Washington has had the final say in their use from day one. Trident is part of the British nuclear "deterrent" built during the Cold War to counter the supposed threat from the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is no more and talk about needing nuclear bombs to combat "terror" is plain nonsense. At election time in June Blair claimed he was only "considering" the new project and he also said he would "listen" to the views of his MPs before making a decision. What that consultation exercise apparently means in an invitation for a chat with the Defence Secretary in groups of six at a time. Some Labour MPs are already working on plans to try and stop this nuclear madness in Parliament. The labour and peace movement that has mobilised millions against the war in Iraq must ensure that the campaign is taken to the streets of every town in Britain. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 21 Moscow Times: Nukes Giving Old Rivals a Rough Ride Wednesday, October 26, 2005. Issue 3282. Page 13. By Stephen Boykewich Staff Writer The border guards at Perm airport had their orders, even if it meant detaining the high-ranking visitors from the United States against their will. The American delegation led by Richard Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was locked into an airport lounge while border guards demanded to search the visitors' DC-9 military jet. After a three-hour stand-off and little in the way of explanation, the guests were finally allowed to leave. The incident was reminiscent of Cold War tensions, but took place just two months ago, as Lugar and Senator Barack Obama were wrapping up a visit under the U.S.-Russian Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, the bilateral framework agreement for securing Russia's nuclear weapons. After meeting Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov in Moscow, the senators inspected a nuclear warhead storage site in Saratov and visited a missile disposal site in Perm. All went according to plan -- until the unexpected delay at the airport. The episode illustrates the state of U.S.-Russian relations in a telling way: a lofty partnership between old rivals still often hits snags on the ground. Despite talk of Moscow's vast resources feeding the United States' hunger for energy, Russia supplies less than 2 percent of U.S. oil imports today. The volume of bilateral trade is modest on a global scale, with U.S. investors investing as much into Russia as they do into Costa Rica. It is Moscow's inheritance from its superpower days -- nuclear know-how and the attendant permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council -- that still largely determines the agenda of bilateral relations. Nuclear security -- at least in theory -- is a key shared priority between Russia and the United States. Presidents Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush pledged to expand cooperation on the issue at their Bratislava summit in February. But nonproliferation experts on both sides of the Atlantic say that in reality, that partnership is far from ideal. The arrest of Moscow's former nuclear power minister Yevgeny Adamov in Switzerland in May set off a six-month extradition tug of war. A Swiss court's decision earlier this month to extradite Adamov to the United States -- and not to Russia -- outraged Moscow's political elite, who said Washington would seek to squeeze nuclear secrets out of him. Washington has also been at pains to convince Russia that its development of Iran's nuclear program could one day backfire in the form of an atomic bomb. Despite intense diplomatic pressure, Moscow has held up U.S. efforts to refer Tehran to the UN Security Council for its nuclear program. At the core of recent disputes is a difference in the way Moscow and Washington view the role and threat of nuclear weapons, said Celeste Wallander, a nonproliferation expert at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. Reuters Missile silos such as this one in Saratov have been opened for inspection. In a forthcoming report, Wallander argues that despite bilateral agreements such as the Cooperative Threat Reduction Initiative and the Group of Eight's $20 billion program to recover weapons-usable material in the former Soviet Union, "the United States and Russia have not been able to cooperate meaningfully on terrorism, nonproliferation, and the intersection of the two threats." While Washington is focused on keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists and countries it deems state sponsors of terrorism, Wallander says, Moscow sees U.S. nonproliferation efforts "as likely to be based on containing and weakening Russia as on genuine security vulnerabilities." In the case of Iran, many Westerners have interpreted Russia's opposition to Security Council referral as being motivated by commercial interests. State-owned Rosatomstroi has $1 billion in contracts to build Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant, and Iran is a major buyer of conventional arms and other technologies from Russia. Wallander, however, contends that Russia sees nuclear arms in terms of geopolitical balance rather than as an immediate security threat, making Iran's potential nuclear ambitions far less alarming to Moscow than to Washington. "Many in Moscow believe Iran has less interest in developing nuclear weapons than it did 15 or 18 years ago," said Vladimir Orlov, director of the Moscow-based Center for Policy Studies in Russia. Iran's nuclear ambitions date back to the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, Orlov said, when Iran endured chemical weapons attacks and lacked support from either superpower. Now, he said, Iran is primarily interested in "the Japan option" -- demonstrating to the world it has the ability to produce nuclear weapons if it wants to. Orlov also said that Washington's failure to put public pressure on nuclear-armed Pakistan on security issues weakens the Bush administration's credibility over Iran. But Alexander Pikayev, a defense analyst at the Kremlin-funded Institute of World Economics and International Relations, said that Moscow's comfort level on Iran should not be overstated. Russia insists on Iran's right to develop a peaceful nuclear program, but "no one wants to see a nuclear-armed Iran," Pikayev said. The Bush administration's diplomatic campaign to bring Tehran to account before the UN shows the extent of U.S. anxiety over that possibility. In recent weeks, both U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley have traveled to Moscow to pressure the Kremlin to lift its opposition -- to no avail. Averting the threat of nuclear terrorism would seem, on the face of it, a less divisive issue. But a recent report from Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs details how "many thousands of bombs' worth of Russian bomb uranium" remains unsecured. One reason for that, the report says, is the lack of "genuine Russian commitment -- a sense in Russia that cooperation on nuclear security is not just a favor to the Americans but essential for Russia's own security." "In general, the United States sees Russia as putting too low a priority on action to prevent nuclear terrorism," said report co-author Matthew Bunn. "Russia is putting remarkably little of its own money into maintaining and upgrading the nuclear security systems" at sensitive sites, he said. Within the framework of the G8's Global Partnership program, the U.S. has pledged $10 billion over 10 years to secure weapons of mass destruction, as opposed to Russia's pledge of $2 billion. In terms of percentage of GDP, however, the Russian pledge is significantly higher. "Only U.S. people who engage in 'nuclear tourism' think that we haven't made dramatic progress in securing nuclear materials" in recent years, Orlov said. The furor over the Adamov case has revealed just how sensitive such funding issues can be. The U.S. District Attorney's Office has indicted the former nuclear power minister on charges of embezzling $9 million of U.S. funds meant to improve Russian nuclear security during his 1998-2001 tenure. State Duma deputies in turn have accused the United States of wanting to steal Russian nuclear secrets through him. Further complicating the case, Adamov was involved in early planning for the Bushehr power plant. The Swiss Supreme Court is expected to rule in early November on Adamov's appeal of the extradition decision. Orlov doubted that Adamov's extradition would put big secrets at risk, or that intelligence-gathering was even the main goal of the U.S. case. "The United States wants him not for secrets, but for a big showcase," he said. "It's a clear message to all those involved in using U.S. assistance for nuclear security." Despite recent disagreement over nuclear issues, however, the context of bilateral relations has changed radically since the Cold War. "People in the U.S. who think of and worry about Russia's nuclear weapons are a fraction of what they were during the Cold War," said Jon Wolfsthal, a nonproliferation fellow at CSIS. "That interest or anxiety is simply not something that drives U.S. policy any more." © Copyright 2005 The Moscow Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 Bellona: Nuclear Official: ‘Everything Should be Transparent’ Grigory Pasko interviews Sergei Antipov, deputy head of Rosatom, Russia's federal nuclear-power agency, about the decommissioning of nuclear submarines and the role of civil society in the process.--> Interview Deputy Rosatom Director Sergei Antipov. Grigory Pasko/Bellona Grigory Pasko, 2005-10-25 08:54 Translated by Peter Morley At a recent international conference held in St. Petersburg entitled “Nuclear safety: the Economy of Safety and Working with Radiation Sources,” Rosatom Deputy Director Sergei Antipov said that his agency is gearing up to receive approximately 3.5 billion roubles ($116 million) from various international funding sources toward the decommissioning of nuclear submarines. According to Antipov, the money will come from Germany, the U.K., Norway, Sweden, France, Canada, Japan, Australia, and the European Union. Talks are currently underway to involve South Korea in the programme. Antipov also spoke about plans to allocate some 2 billion roubles from next year's Russian budget for the decommissioning of nuclear subs. One hundred and ninety six nuclear submarines have been taken out of service with the Russian Navy since the 1980s, of which 115 have been decommissioned. “The government has set a target of decommissioning all nuclear submarines by 2010. Eighteen nuclear subs will be decommissioned in 2005, and next year we plan to decommission a further 15 vessels,” Antipov said. Antipov discussed problems involved in decommissioning nuclear submarines and dealing with radioactive waste, and about the role of civil society in this process with Bellona Web. Expert: “We need a Strategic Master Plan for the Far East” Grigory Pasko interviews Ashot Sarkisov, head of the scientific group developing the Strategic Master Plan for decommissioning nuclear submarines in Northwest Russia. Grigory Pasko: Sergei Antipov, the Strategic Master Plan for decommissioning nuclear submarines and other nuclear-powered vessels in Northwest Russia was adopted in 2004. The SMP defined priority tasks formed a list of urgent measures, and the first concrete contracts have already been signed. What is the role of the first-phase works in the context of the overall programme? Has everything been done that was planned? Sergei Antipov: Anyone who has been following events could point to a massive amount of information on this topic. The first stage, the first phase of implementing the Master Plan has been discussed on the Internet, at public hearings, and in reports of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Basically we can say that the first stage of the SMP was important because we achieved—and this is the main thing—an understanding with the whole community, including the international community, and all the bodies involved that such a Strategic Master Plan was necessary. No one had any objections to developing it. Transparency and clarity about the direction in which we should move are the most important items—we can't go any further without them. We showed the problems that lie ahead of us. Solving these problems is the task of the second stage [of the Strategic Master Plan]. There are concrete results as well. Now, we are at the end of negotiations with the EBRD on inking a contract to develop the second stage of the Master Plan. If during the first [stage] we defined the basic areas of focus, particular places and pressing projects, then in the second stage we will carry out more detailed developmental work on the problems, and flesh them out into concrete projects. It is possible that after this we will be left not with about 40 projects, as was the case during the first stage, but several hundred—we want to have a much more detailed picture and will try to define the links between them. We can say, conditionally, that we cannot take a reactor block and turn it into radioactive waste before we have a storage facility prepared for that waste. These links between projects are very important. Foreign donors need to see this in order precisely to define deadlines and the amount of financing needed to implement the project. Antipov says Global Partnership coming up short for Pacific Fleet Antipov said that $4 billion in order to fully dismantle all of the Russian Navy’s 80 submarines. So far, donor nations have pledged only $2.5 billion and almost all these funds are earmarked for subs in Northwest Russia, “The most important goal of our delegation at the seminar [held Summer 2005 in Tokyo] was to draw the attention of all the countries in the Global Partnership to the fact that the problems in the Far East are no less serious than in the west, and that [the east] receives far more modest funding,” Antipov said. He said that the number of nuclear submarines awaiting dismantlement in the Far East and in the Northwest are the practically the same—approximately 40 submarines on each coast. However, the single donor nation in the global partnership that has pledged any money toward liquidating decommissioned submarines in Russia’s Pacific Fleet is Japan. Tokyo has promised to earmarked $100m toward this goal. Therefore during the whole time between when the Global Partnership was formed and now, it has eliminated only one submarine. Antipov says negotiations are underway with Japan to eliminate five more submarines. “But until we have concluded the negotiations, we cannot speak of contracts—so far its all words,” said Antipov. During the conference, the Russian side said it will take on the task of motivating Japan and other countries to eliminate subs in the Far East. —ITAR TASS G.P.: Obviously, the Master Plan for the Northwest will not be the first and last plan of the overall process of decommissioning nuclear subs and radioactive waste across the country. Are other plans for the Far East also being developed? S.A.: The existing Strategic Master Plan deals only with the Northwest—historically, the region has the most pressing problems. The Northern Fleet had much more technical equipment than does the Pacific Fleet. Secondly, we must take into account that donors and countries sponsoring this process have a definite interest in the Northwest. For them, this region is much more important. Of course, we do need the same sort of master plan for the Far East. We have been drawing up the first outlines of it for some years now. We have a general idea about the problems we face there. But to develop the plan to the same level of detail as the SMP for the North-West, we need financing. It is quite expensive work. Many organisations are being engaged, and accounting work is being carried out. Funds from the Russian budget are very limited. We have to choose our priority areas. For example, if there is a leak of radioactive waste, then the money must go first of all toward dealing with the consequences of this leak. We are hopeful of favourable conditions to speed up the development process for this master plan. And we're not just waiting, but are making great efforts towards this. In the Far East, Japan is a genuine potential partner. And not just Japan. For example, there is Australia, which has said that it wants to allocate money, but only if Japan transfers it. Seven million is enough not only to develop the master plan: The first stage of the SMP for the North-West, for example, cost about half a million dollars. G.P.: In your opinion, what are the reasons for Japan, shall we say, not being over-zealous in approving Russian suggestions in this area? Is it the lack of a peace treaty, or territorial problems? S.A.: Yes, of course, from the Japanese side we have unfortunately not seen any really significant steps towards solving the question of drawing up a Strategic Master Plan for the Far East. The reasons? It's hard for technical specialists like us to make political assessments and conclusions. The peace treaty, territorial problems—we have not mentioned these problems. For example, we have heard arguments like these from our partners: You know, the Japanese public is not entirely happy about helping Russia in this sphere. Russia's economy is growing, while Japan's is in a slump. Russia's Stabilisation Fund is growing, while Japan doesn't have enough resources for everything. Of course, these arguments are not uncontestable. It would be incorrect to compare budgets in absolute terms. The same goes for the scale of the problems facing the two countries. But we must recognise that the Japanese public and Japanese politicians are ambivalent about the necessity of helping us. On the other hand, the Japanese do have concerns about the ecological state of their neighbours—that is, our country. They have radioactively-dangerous facilities right next door. They have to take this factor into account. So attitudes to the problem vary. Either we upset the balance, or they do. Some politician speaks out of turn and the process grinds to a halt. Occasionally we see attempts by our eastern neighbours to prepare a noteworthy gift for a certain date. They are trying—I can feel this personally—to, for example, sign a joint agreement during President Vladimir Putin's visit to Japan in November of this year. G.P.: There are probably other reasons for this mutual misunderstanding. I have had occasion to hear arguments from the Japanese side that their financial help could be used ineffectively or for the wrong purpose. S.A.: Of course, this area of co-operation is limited. This is linked with the Navy. They are concerned that the money could be used to strengthen the military capability of our Navy. For example, people involved in this know about the problem of the section of a railway from the Zvezda factory to the mainline station. Because of the unsatisfactory state of this section we cannot safely transport spent nuclear fuel. We have to take it the long way round, by sea, a different route that is longer and more complicated. It would seem that, if Japan was interested in our getting the SNF out of the region more quickly, it would help us to restore this section of [railroad] track. The track totals 28 km in length, of which 7 km needs work. Rosatom cannot do this, even formally, as the track is on the balance sheet of Russian Railways. By law we cannot spend budgetary funds on the property of others. But repairing the track is not viable for Russian Railways, which is looking to invest money and get a return. So there is a conflict. Potential partners are also wary of whether we will use that section of track to transport materials meant for the Navy. There are no separate routes for military cargoes and separate routes for civilian cargoes. We will be carrying both. And this gets in the way of solving the main problem, namely decommissioning nuclear subs and nuclear waste. We don't want to get our priorities mixed up. G.P.: What do you think about the idea of writing a special report on the condition of radioactivly-dangerous installations in the Pacific Fleet and the Far East? S.A.: Everything depends on the level of detail and the degree to which the report is developed. We do make such reports. And at a summer seminar in Tokyo we produced a detailed report on the most pressing problems in the Far East. We can prepare a similar report for a conference that will possibly be held this year. Or we could just prepare one anyway. We're doing this work. And variations on the master-plan for the Far East are also being developed, at our expense. When we have some results, we'll publish them. G.P.: In your speech in Tokyo you mentioned the lack of a regional monitoring system among the list of problems in the Far East. How fundamental is this problem? S.A.: Monitoring is not only important for the Far East, but for any region. If any nuclear incident occurs, the relevant bodies will have to take quick and effective decisions. People's lives, not to mention the environment, could depend on the accuracy and speed of the decision-making. Therefore, a monitoring system is necessary and important. But it isn't cheap. We have a local system, both at factories and at DalRAO facilities. But we need something at a higher level: We need to unite everything into a single network, with a single set of parameters, with a structured apparatus, in a single place where the management can react in an emergency. Incidentally, Japan has reacted positively and with understanding to this problem. G.P.: You also noted that participants in the Global Partnership have not given enough attention to the Far East. What are you and your agency doing to attract this attention? S.A.: Last year, I spoke about the problems of the Far East at the IAEA, and then at the NDEP Steering Group, and this year at the seminar in Tokyo. Incidentally, the seminar itself was held with the aim of drawing attention to the current state of affairs in the region. And in every interview and in all my speeches I never tire of saying that if we safeguard the Northwest and don't solve the problems of the Far East then the overall situation with regards to decommissioning of nuclear subs and nuclear waste will get no better. You can't through the rubbish out of your own yard and ignore the rubbish in your neighbour's. Terrorists, cross-border transfers. Anything could happen. This has to be recognised. Today, by the way, there are no resounding noes when we talk about the problems of the Far East, as was the case a couple of years ago. Today they say maybe. The Canadians say it, the Americans—who are working in the Far East on strategic nuclear subs ... To get a result, we have to apply ourselves and move further. G.P.: Could you mention a donor country, a partner, who is always reliable? S.A.: That's hard to do. If you forget someone, they'll be offended. There's a mutual jealousy. Last week at a conference on nuclear technologies in St. Petersburg I praised our neighbours in the Northwest region, and a representative of one of the countries I didn't mention asked, ‘Why didn't you name us?’ We can talk about different levels of participation. Traditionally, Germany, the U.K., and Norway have been good partners; France can now be added to that list; Italy is close to some real works; Canada is active. Some partners pick one area and focus heavily on it. Others do a little, but for the good of the cause, which is useful. Relations with the European Union are difficult, but we are signing several contracts with them. The conference in October will look at the productivity of the joint Rosatom-TACIS programme. A lot has already been done on nuclear power-station safety. But now we have to get the project on radiation safety going. With international help we have developed a grant to draft a Law on Working With Radioactive Waste. A contract is being concluded on combined engineering and ecological research at Gremikha, and to deliver personal-safety equipment. This is a living process. Like a large ship, it can't be stopped and change direction easily. G.P.: How do you assess the participation of social organisations in these processes? S.A.: Several social bodies and organisations are trying to take an active part. Over time we have felt the popularisation of opinions on several problems, and in this connection we divide social organisations into good ones and wild ones. In fact, any social movement has the word “social” in its name. Therefore, they should act in the interests of society. For their part, state bodies should take into account public opinion. We can disagree on some positions, but we should exchange opinions and knowledge. Then you can see that our opponents change their point of view, as do we. Therefore this is necessary. A good example: In May of this year the latest conference of the IAEA working group [on decommissioning of nuclear submarines] was held in Murmansk. The group is a formal body, with its own participants. The Norwegian ecological organisation Bellona requested to make a report, set out its position, and open it up for discussion. We granted them this opportunity. And the report was very constructive. We clarified that we have no radical conflicts or reasons to oppose each other. The meeting was about the problem of the Lepse technical support vessel. And it helped to move forward the solution of the long-suffering Lepse project: Contracts are being signed with our project organisations. This social organisation's [Bellona's] help made it possible to get money out of the bodies financing the project. I think it is necessary to work with social organisations. But we shouldn't be afraid of differences of opinion. Of course, there are differences in our positions. Not long ago I received a document from an organisation in the Northwest proposing that it take part “in decision making”. This is not the correct way of putting it. In working out decisions—yes, of course. But not in taking them. Because whoever takes a decision has to bear responsibility for it. And what responsibility can a social organisation take? G.P.: But, you know, decisions are often taken without accounting for public opinion, of different opinions generally, such is departmental voluntarism. S.A.: If I know your opinion and it is worth considering, I will take it into account. But that doesn't mean that I have to act as you think I should. For example, as a Naval officer, you know how decisions are taken there: The commander listens to everyone's opinion, and then says: ‘Thank you all; now I will take a decision.’ And from the moment the decision is taken the commander bears full responsibility for it. And everyone has to act in accordance with the decision taken. A state body does not have to follow the opinions of social organisations, but it does have to listen to them. G.P.: At the start of our conversation you spoke about the necessity to make the international co-operation process regarding decommissioning of nuclear submarines and nuclear waste transparent. How successful have you been with this transparency? S.A.: You probably understand that we are working on the boundary between the admissible and the inadmissible. State secrets should also be taken into account. I understand what you will say that often state secrets are invoked to cover up incompetence, failures. G.P.: Of course I'd say that. S.A.: ... and to cover up ecological information. Well, that does happen. G.P.: Is the weight of the past preventing Russia from moving towards solving problems of decommissioning nuclear submarines and nuclear waste? S.A.: The legacy of the past is both a help and a hindrance in problem-solving. It depends on the legacy. We have to understand and correct things where things are being done wrong. But one flourish of the pen, one order, will not do anything. We need time, long and patient attrition, to understand everything and live in harmony with each other. G.P.: Thank you. I hope that we can continue our discussion about the problems of the Far East when another occasion arises. S.A.: Thank you. 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 ***************************************************************** 23 BBC: Five charged over nuclear protest Last Updated: Tuesday, 25 October 2005 [Protest at Rolls-Royce Derby/ Raynesway] The protest lasted about six hours Five people have been charged in connection with an anti-nuclear protest outside a Rolls-Royce plant in Derby. Three men and a woman have been charged with obstructing the highway and one woman has been charged with failing to stop the vehicle she was driving. Derbyshire Police made 10 arrests during a demonstration on Monday. About 40 people took part in the protest opposing the production of engine parts for Britain's Trident nuclear submarine programme. The five were bailed to appear before magistrates in November. Two other women were cautioned for wilful obstruction, while a man and two women arrested on suspicion of possessing an article with intent to damage property were released without charge. Police and council officials used public order laws to restrict the demonstration. ***************************************************************** 24 Daily Times: Pakistan has dismantled AQ Khan network: FO October 26, 2005 Daily Times Monitor LAHORE: Foreign Office spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said on Tuesday that Pakistan had fully cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), conducted a thorough investigation and taken forceful action to dismantle Dr Qadeer Khan’s illegal nuclear network, the Pakistan Television (PTV) reported. The spokeswoman was responding to comments by Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran that the IAEA should investigate Dr Khan’s involvement in nuclear proliferation. She said that the nuclear proliferation network no longer exists in Pakistan, the PTV quoted her as saying. She said that the IAEA had already acknowledged Pakistan’s cooperation and its commitment to nuclear non-proliferation, adding that the country had enforced comprehensive export controls. The spokesperson said that Pakistan was not to blame for nuclear proliferation in South Asia, adding that India had exploited its civilian programme in diverting technology for military purposes and testing a nuclear device in 1974, PTV reported. Aslam said that India had been the aggressor in 1998 when it conducted nuclear tests, and Pakistan was compelled to respond to the regional developments in South Asia. Daily Times - All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 25 AFP: EDF workers protest part-privatisation Tuesday October 25, 01:17 PM PARIS (AFP) - Unions (NASDAQ: VRTS- news) and workers at France's EDF electricity utility were preparing a campaign of protests against government plans to sell off part of the huge company in one of Europe's biggest stock market flotations. Rallies were organised to take place Tuesday in front of Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin's office and in front of government buildings across the country. A petition was to be given to Villepin with 100,000 signatures opposing his announcement Monday that up to 15 percent of the state-owned Electricity de France (EDF) would be sold off next month to raise around seven billion euros (8.4 billion dollars). The powerful CGT and FO unions also declared their EDF members would begin hardline action from November 8 which would include strikes and targeted electricity cuts. A big Paris demonstration is additionally scheduled for November 19. The unions were behind hundreds of blackouts that hit France last year in protest at the privatisation of EDF's smaller sister company, Gaz de France (Paris: FR0010208488- news) . They accuse the conservative government of forcing through privatisation over the concerns of workers, who fear job losses and a decline in the public service role of the big enterprises. "Job-cuts will likely happen. The reassurances of the government and the management on this subject are only there to help us swallow the medicine," one EDF technician, Hubert Hamon, told Le Parisien newspaper. Villepin sought to attentuate some of the fears by having his government sign a contract with EDF which he said would ensure moderate and universal electricity rates would stay, and poorer families would not find themselves suddenly cut off if unable to pay their energy bills. The company chief executive, Pierre Gadonneix, also said EDF would invest 40 billion euros (48 billion dollars) over five years to boost electricity production, mainly in France, and to pay for more acquisitions abroad. The launch of the EDF share offer is to take place Friday, with trading to begin by November 21, Economy Minister Thierry Breton said. The operation would value EDF at around 50 billion euros, with the shares expected to be set at 24.40 euros each at least. Workers at the utility have been allocated 15 percent of the issue, while institutional investors will get 50 percent and private investors 35 percent. EDF is Europe's biggest utility and the largest supplier of civilian nuclear energy in the world. It generates nearly three-quarters of its output from nuclear power plants, of which 19 dot France, and supplies 22 percent of the European Union's energy needs. The state-owned company has aggressively expanded internationally in recent years, racking up nearly 20 billion euros in debt. But its partial privatisation has been on the cards since 2000, when EU energy market liberalisation rules came into effect. By next year, households in France will for the first time be able to choose their electricity supplier with the introduction of consumer-level competition. Companies have already been able to do so for a year. Copyright © 2005 AFP AFP. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 26 Indian Express: A new nuclear realism October 26, 2005 The non-proliferation principles Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran articulated on Monday mark an important milestone in the evolution of India’s nuclear diplomacy. Gone is the old feckless rhetoric on global nuclear disarmament. Instead, Saran has articulated a new nuclear realism that calls on India to address the current non-proliferation challenges in a practical manner. Although there has been a steady adaptation of India’s nuclear diplomacy since the nuclear tests of May 1998 — from the support to missile defence in May 2001 to voting against Iran at the IAEA in September — this is the first time any senior functionary of the government has spelt out India’s non-proliferation approach with such clarity. Three elements of the doctrine stand out. First is emphasis on national interest as opposed to some ideology that many presume guides India’s nuclear policy. The vote on Iran or the decision to separate India’s civilian and military programmes under the Indo-US nuclear pact are steps based on a cold national security calculus, according to Saran. Second, India is prepared to help construct a new set of global nuclear rules that go beyond even the NPT. To those who missed the underlying logic, the government is reminding them that New Delhi has always complied with the obligations of a nuclear weapon state under the NPT. Third, and most important, is the assertion that as a rising global power India can no longer “sit out” such controversial debates as the current one on Iran. Saran made it clear there are unresolved issues in relation to Iran’s clandestine nuclear programme and that India will not avoid them merely because Iran is a member of the non-aligned movement and is friendly to India. If Delhi cannot condone Iran’s nuclear transgression it can no longer keep quiet on the nuclear black market operated by Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan. In underlining its responsible record on non-proliferation and offering unstinted support to new global efforts on non-proliferation, Saran has answered those in the world who ask why India should be treated as a nuclear exception. He has also signaled that the Iran vote last month was part of a larger policy and not a one-off decision under US pressure. © 2005: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 27 [NukeNet] TVA New Reactor Study Released Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:33:33 -0700 X-Temp-Whitephrase: YES nuclear X-Spamprobe: ham-super * 0.0000450 OK Tennessee Valley Authority Releases its Cost and Schedule Estimate for a Twin Unit General Electric Advanced Boiling Water Reactor at its Bellefonte Site in Alabama http://www.nuclear.gov/NucPwr2010/NP2010TVABellefonte.html The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has received a final report from the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) on the cost and schedule estimate to build a twin unit General Electric Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) at its Bellefonte site in Alabama. TVA, along with team members Toshiba, Bechtel, General Electric, Global Nuclear Fuels-America and the United States Enrichment Corporation, completed the 13 month study to determine and present in detail, the engineering, procurement and construction schedule, (EPC) and economics for building the twin unit ABWR. The overall conclusion of this cost and schedule study is that two ABWR nuclear units can be constructed at the Bellefonte site on a 40 month schedule for each reactor. This time frame is the duration from installation of the first reactor structural concrete to fuel load. The engineering, procurement and construction cost for the two units is $1611/KW for the 1371MWe certified ABWR plant design that incorporates some technology advancements developed during the Japanese and Lungmen ABWR construction. A higher power ABWR incorporating other power increase design features identified in this report would increase the output to 1465MWe reducing the EPC cost to $1535/KW. These EPC costs would be the basis for a firm fixed price offering to TVA. The results of this study provide the nuclear power industry with a very detailed estimate for construction time and cost, based on 2004 dollars, of building a new ABWR nuclear plant. This estimate should establish an upper bound for the cost of a new nuclear power plant since the newer passive reactor designs are expected to be simplified and more economical to build. The completion of this report will also assist TVA in determining its path forward in installing new nuclear capability at the Bellefonte site in Alabama. This study was funded under an interagency agreement by the Nuclear Power 2010 program (NP 2010) in August 2004. The NP 2010 program is a Presidential initiative for government/industry cost-shared efforts to expand the use of nuclear energy in the United States and implemented by the Department's Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology. Final Report: http://np2010.ne.doe.gov/reports/Main%20Report%20All5.pdf _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 28 Nukes put big O in Ontario: Straightgoods.com Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:53:49 -0500 (CDT) from: http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewFeature5.cfm?REF=489 Energy policy puts the big Owe back into Ontario Nuclear choice, high hydro prices in North mean trouble for consumers and taxpayers. Dateline: Monday, October 24, 2005 by Ish Theilheimer The Ontario Liberals have made it official. With recent policy announcements and the extremely generous terms offered to the private company that has taken over the Bruce nuclear reactors, the future is so clear it glows. The party that gave us Darlington, its $14 billion cost overrun and the debt retirement charges on our power bills, is once again setting the province on a nuclear track. Home and business owners should brace for the next set of rate increases that will be required to pay for the nuclear panacea the Liberals seek. Regardless of one's opinions on matters nuclear, it is clearly a high-cost option once long-term costs are calculated. 36b227c.jpgConservation remains the most affordable option. It is much cheaper to take steps that will lead to less power use than it is to build new generation of any kind. High-efficiency appliances, better insulation everywhere, increased use of cogeneration and district heating and cooling these are the cheapest ways to increase our electrical capacity. They do not require quantam technological leaps, and they can definitely help protect Ontario power consumers from surprises down the road. Conservation will not replace the aging generation stations on which we depend, but they will lessen our need for greater capacity. Replacement is another issue and not an easy one. No option is perfectly clean. Dams, wind, biomass, ethanol, solar all have their downsides (environmental destruction, climate change potential, air pollution, inefficiency of production, and climate change potential, respectively). What is required at this point, and has been for some time, is for the government to dedicate serious research and development funding for energy alternatives and assessment of the best way to combine those alternatives for sustained use. The quick fix the McGuinty government seeks from nuclear will inevitably result in regret at leisure and pain at the bank.... whole article at: http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewFeature5.cfm?REF=489 Penney Kome, author and journalist http://penneykome.ca Editor, Straight Goods, http://straightgoods.com [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/octet-stream which had a name of 36b227c.jpg] ***************************************************************** 29 TMI shuts down for refueling Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:33:53 -0700 More From The Patriot-News | Subscribe To The Patriot-News LONDONDERRY TWP. TMI shuts down for refueling Company touts safety record Tuesday, October 25, 2005 BY GARRY LENTON Of The Patriot-News The Three Mile Island nuclear power station shut down for refueling yesterday and is expected to remain off line for at least two weeks. The plant's 870-megawatt reactor was shut down around 12:30 a.m. yesterday, ending a world record 689 days of continuous operation. AmerGen Energy, a subsidiary of Chicago-based Exelon Nuclear, topped its own 680-day record set in 2003. Nuclear plants shut down every two years for maintenance and refueling. Most outages are planned for fall or spring, when demand for electricity ebbs. Unit 1 generates enough electricity to heat about 300,000 homes daily. Advertisement Company officials touted Unit 1's operating record, calling it a tribute to the company's dedication to safety. "Three Mile Island's achievement underscores the company's dedication to the safe and reliable operation of our plants," said Rich Lopriore, a senior vice president for plant owner Exelon Nuclear, in a statement. The operating milestone comes on the heels of some humbling events for the company. Last December, the National Nuclear Accrediting Board placed the company on probation because of problems with its training program for control room operators. AmerGen responded by making more than 450 changes to its programs and was re-accredited in June. Last year, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission cited similar problems with operator training, noting 25 percent of the operating crews failed a test of their ability to safely shut down the reactor. All crews were re-tested this summer and passed. AmerGen has announced plans to ask the NRC for a 20-year extension of its operating license, which is set to expire in 2014. If granted, TMI Unit 1 would remain in operation through 2034. Eric Epstein, chairman of Three Mile Island Alert, the Harrisburg-based nuclear watchdog group, said TMI was able to break its record because the NRC only requires plants to shut down once every 24 months. The two-year period is too long for nuclear plants like TMI, he said. "The nuclear plant is like a human body. It requires frequent inspections and proactive maintenance," Epstein said. During the outages, AmerGen will replace 177 fuel assemblies, about a third of its fuel. The spent fuel, which is highly radioactive, will be stored at the site. Workers, including more than 1,200 hired just for the outage, will also inspect more than 30,000 steam tubes in two steam generators, said Ralph DeSantis, a spokesman for AmerGen. The tubes carry superheated water from the reactor and are used to make the steam that turns the plant's turbines. The tubes will be electronically checked for cracks and pitting. Damaged tubes will be capped and taken out of service, DeSantis said. GARRY LENTON: 255-8264 or glenton@patriot-news.com ***************************************************************** 30 Guardian Unlimited: The chief scientific adviser has become a government spin doctor The man who told the truth about climate change is now selling nuclear power for his political masters George Monbiot Tuesday October 25, 2005 The Guardian I report this with sadness: Sir David King has lost his bottle. Until a few weeks ago, the chief scientific adviser looked to me like one of the few brave souls in the British government. In an article in Science at the beginning of last year, he argued that "climate change is the most severe problem that we are facing today - more serious even than the threat of terrorism" and criticised the Bush administration for "failing to take up the challenge". In response, he was viciously attacked by the Exxon-sponsored climate change denier Myron Ebell. Being viciously attacked by Ebell is something to which all self-respecting scientists should aspire. Article continues Last month he was attacked again, and this time he deserved it. At a meeting of climate change specialists, King announced that a "reasonable" target for stabilising carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 550 parts of the gas per million parts of air. It would be "politically unrealistic", he said, to demand anything lower. Simon Retallack, from the Institute for Public Policy Research, reminded King what his job was. As chief scientist, his duty is not to represent political reality - there are plenty of advisers schooled in that art - but to represent scientific reality. Retallack's own work, based on the latest science, shows that at 550 parts per million the chances of preventing more than two degrees of global warming are just 10%-20%. To raise them to 80%, carbon concentrations will have to be stabilised at 400 parts. Two degrees is the point beyond which most climate scientists predict catastrophe: several key ecosystems are likely to flip into runaway feedback; the biosphere becomes a net source of carbon; global food production is clobbered, and 2 billion people face the risk of drought. All very reasonable, I'm sure. King replied that if he recommended a lower limit, he would lose credibility with the government. As far as I was concerned, his credibility had just disappeared without trace. By shielding his masters from uncomfortable realities, he is failing in his duties as both scientist and adviser. Anyone who has studied the BSE crisis knows how dangerous the cowardice of scientific counsellors can be. As if to prove that his nerve has gone, on Friday King made his clearest statement yet that he sees nuclear power as the answer to climate change. With the right carbon taxes, he said, nuclear power would become cheaper than coal. "It's important we do take the public with us on the environmental debate," he said. "That is why I'm trying to sell it." He may have political reasons for "trying to sell" new nuclear power stations - at the Labour party conference Tony Blair said he wants to re-examine the nuclear option - but King would, I suspect, have as much trouble identifying a scientific case as he had at the meeting last month. The figures leave him stranded. Let us forget, for the moment, that nuclear power spreads radioactive pollution, presents a target for terrorists and leaves us with waste that no government wants to handle. Like King, I believe that while all these problems are grave, they are not as grave as climate change. Let us concentrate on value for money. It seems clear that new nuclear power stations will not be built unless the government supports them. A recent review by the economics consultancy Oxera shows that even if you exclude the cost of insurance and include the benefits of emissions trading (which attaches a price to carbon dioxide), "a programme of public assistance ... would be needed to boost predicted [rates of return] to a level that is acceptable to private investors". The consultants suggested that £1.6bn of grants might be enough to tip the balance in favour of a new nuclear programme. The first "even if" is a big one. Private insurers will not cover the risk. Three international conventions limit investors' liability and oblige governments to pick up the bill on their behalf. According to a report commissioned by the European parliament, the costs of a large-scale nuclear accident range from 83bn to 5.5 trillion. They would have to be met by us. But let us also forget the costs of insurance. If the public sector (or for that matter, given that funds are limited, the private sector) invests in nuclear power, is this the best use to which the money can be put? This is the question addressed in a new paper by the physicist Amory Lovins. He begins by examining the terms of reference used by people like King, who compare nuclear power "only with a central power plant burning coal or natural gas". If the costs of construction come down, and if the government offers big enough subsidies and makes carbon emissions sufficiently expensive, Lovins says, nuclear power might be able to compete with coal. "But those central thermal power plants are the wrong competitors. None of them can compete with windpower ... let alone with two far cheaper resources: cogeneration of heat and power, and efficient use of electricity." Ten cents of investment, he shows, will buy either 1 kilowatt-hour of nuclear electricity; 1.2-1.7 of windpower; 2.2-6.5 of small-scale cogeneration; or up to 10 of energy efficiency. "Its higher cost than competitors, per unit of net CO2 displaced, means that every dollar invested in nuclear expansion will worsen climate change by buying less solution per dollar." And, because nuclear power stations take so long to build, it would be spent later. "Expanding nuclear power would both reduce and retard the desired decrease in CO2 emissions." Already, the market is voting with its wallet. "In 2004 alone," Lovins notes, "Spain and Germany each added as much wind capacity - 2bn watts - as nuclear power is adding worldwide in each year of this decade." Though the nuclear industry in the US has guzzled 33 times as much government money as wind and has "enjoyed a regulatory system of its own design for a quarter-century", it hasn't fulfilled a single new order from the electricity companies since 1973. And, unlike nuclear power stations, wind, cogeneration and energy efficiency will all become much cheaper. It's certainly a good idea, as people like King recommend, to have a "diversified energy portfolio". But, as Lovins points out, "this does not mean ... that every option merits a place in the portfolio purely for the sake of diversity, any more than a financial portfolio should include bad investments just because they're on the market". Building new nuclear power stations in Britain would be a political decision, not a scientific one. So what has happened to the man who once bravely did battle with the new Inquisition? A memo sent by Blair's private secretary, Ivan Rogers, a month after King's article was published in Science, instructed him to stop criticising the Bush administration on the grounds that it "does not help us achieve our wider policy aims". Mock interviews King conducted with his political minders, which were found by a journalist on a disk dropped by his press secretary, show him learning to recite the government's line. Could he have had his arm twisted over the nuclear issue too? I hope not, and I hope he can produce some robust figures to support his contentions. But I fear that the government's chief scientist is mutating into its chief spin doctor. www.monbiot.com Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 31 London Times: Nuclear option is at least 20 years away - Angela Jameson Utilities, Utility news, Times Online In the meantime, household fuel bills and industry’s energy costs are likely to continue to rise steeply unless the Government acts to speed up the planning process. Tony Blair has said that the Government will make a final decision on the nuclear issue next year and ministers appear to be softening their stance on the need for nuclear. Companies that want to get involved in the expected multibillion-pound business are suggesting that the Government should follow America’s lead and introduce legislation to prevent new power stations being delayed during planning. The United States has changed its planning process to speed up construction of nuclear power stations and expects to cut the time from 15 years to seven. People in the nuclear industry have told ministers that they should consider following next year’s energy White Paper with a Bill to shorten the inquiry process. “The real issue is not the actual build — you can build a station in five years — it is the planning and consent process that is likely to hold things up. The public inquiry process can be very costly and drawn out, as we know from Terminal Five, which took ten to twelve years,” an industry insider said. Sir Peter Mason, chief executive of Amec, the engineering group, which wants to build new generators, said: “While due democratic process must, of course, be respected, and everyone is entitled to have a say, we need to achieve this without totally derailing the progress of important projects and imposing substantial and potentially unrecoverable sunk costs on private-sector investors.” Ian Fells, a leading adviser for the Government on energy issues, will tell a conference organised by a United Nations research institute in Italy next month that Britain risks falling behing on nuclear power. “If we do not decide soon to go down the nuclear route, we will be so far behind the new build queue that it will be 25 years before we begin to see any benefit,” Professor Fells will tell the conference. Professor Fells is also concerned that Britain no longer has the skills to build new nuclear power stations, because its nuclear programme has been in abeyance for so long. “Being at the back of the queue is an issue. France, the US, China are all moving forward. We are urging Government to get a move on,” Philip Dewhurst, chairman of the Nuclear Industry Association, said. thetimes.co.uk The Times and The Sunday Times. Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 32 Arizona Republic: Outages at Palo Verde cost APS $40 mill since April [azcentral.com] Associated Press Oct. 25, 2005 04:16 PM Outages since April at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station have cost Arizona Public Service Co., which runs the plant, an estimated $40 million to purchase replacement power. In a Monday letter to the Arizona Corporation Commission, APS said it will try to recover those funds through upcoming rate adjustments, meaning potentially higher bills for ratepayers. Jim McDonald, a spokesman for APS, said the utility will likely seek to recover the $40 million - which would translate to less than a 1 percent rate hike for APS customers if approved - during the next review for rate adjustments in April, subject to approval from the commission. Since April, the plant has experienced several outages. The most recent started on Oct. 11 and lasted nearly 10 days. In that case, the plant was shut down after Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors raised questions about the emergency reactor cooling system. Plant engineers then ran an analysis that showed parts of the system may not work properly. APS recalculated how the emergency cooling system would work, eventually coming to the conclusion that the system would work properly. That outage alone cost APS an estimated $14 million to purchase replacement power, excluding the cost of any repairs. "Every generating plant ever built has had unplanned outages," wrote Steven Wheeler, the executive vice president for APS customer service and regulation. "It is the expectation of such outages that necessitates the maintenance of adequate reserves by all utilities." In March, the Corporation Commission, which regulates utilities in the state, approved a 4.34 percent rate hike that increased the typical residential monthly bill to $107.92. Then in July, APS filed a fuel "adjuster" request that would increase the typical residential electricity bill 2.1 percent, to $110.66. That request is still awaiting approval from the commission. Palo Verde is the nation's largest nuclear plant, with three reactors producing nearly 4,000 megawatts of electricity. APS owns 29.5 percent of the plant and operates it for a consortium of utility companies in four states. The plant supplies electricity to about 4 million customers in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California. Copyright © 2005, azcentral.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 33 NRC: NRC Seeks Public Comment on Implementation of Reactor Oversight Process 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. 05-144 October 25, 2005 members of the public on the implementation of the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP), which the agency created six years ago to revamp and improve its inspection and enforcement programs for commercial nuclear power plants. Each year the NRC seeks feedback to help the agency continue to improve its regulatory approach. In particular, the NRC would appreciate the publics answers to a list of 19 questions relating to the ROP, including the following: -- Is the information in the inspection reports useful to you? -- Is the ROP understandable, and are the processes, procedures and products clear and written in plain English? -- Has the public had enough opportunity to participate in the ROP and provide input and comments? All 19 questions are contained in the Federal Register notice of the request for comment, which was published Oct. 21. The notice is available from the NRCs Web site at this address: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/rop2005survey.pdf [PDF Icon] . The comment period runs until Dec. 1. Comments may be e-mailed to nrcrep@nrc.govor mailed to Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001. Comments can also be delivered to Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md., between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Last revised Tuesday, October 25, 2005 ***************************************************************** 34 Washington Times: Chernobyl exposed - Editorials/Op-Ed - By Joshua Gilder October 25, 2005 It turns out that scaring people to death may be more than a figure of speech. That's the overriding message of a recently released U.N. report on the health effects of the 1986 explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the then-Soviet Ukraine. The result of an exhaustive investigation by eight U.N. agencies, the report concludes that a "paralyzing fatalism" among the residents of the effected areas and problems such as suicide, alcoholism and clinical depression -- resulting in part from people's perceived sense of hopelessness -- "pose a far greater threat to local communities than does radiation exposure." The Chernobyl explosion and resulting fire spewed 200 times as much radioactivity into the environment as the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atom bombs combined, directly affecting an area currently inhabited by some 5 million people. (Built with standard Soviet disregard for public safety, the unstable reactor had no containment structure.) At the time of the disaster, all Europe was thrown into panic, with estimates of as many as a half-million people dying as a result of the contamination. Yet, according to the report, there have been fewer than 60 fatalities so far, about 50 of them on-site staff and emergency workers exposed to massive radiation poisoning at the time of the blast and its immediate aftermath. It is believed that nine children have also died of thyroid cancer as a result of the accident, though these deaths may have been preventable. The U.N. scientists were deeply divided over the report's prediction that an extra 4,000 may eventually die from cancer, a statistical conjecture based on what many believe to be faulty science. All agreed, however, that the more urgent task is for governments in the region to get accurate information to their frightened populations, as the decline in mental health brought on by undue fear is by far "the largest public health problem created by the accident." Getting the American people accurate information on radiation and its dangers (what's real, what's only imagined) might be something the U.S. government should consider as well. For decades, anti-nuclear activists have hyped fears about nuclear safety in order to halt the construction of nuclear power plants in the United States. They have been bolstered in this effort by official government regulatory policy, which is based on something called the linear no-threshold theory (LNT). More a result of politics than sound science, LNT holds that any amount of radiation is bad for you (that there is no threshold under which the effect is benign), and that the damage is cumulative, building up consistently over time. Thus one can extrapolate from the effects of massive radiation poisoning in a straight line back to zero, predicting a certain number of cancers even at levels of exposure far below the normal variations in natural background radiation. The Chernobyl report's prediction of another 4,000 deaths was such an LNT extrapolation. One problem with this theory is that it is contradicted by massive epidemiological evidence. While the average level of natural background radiation in the Rocky Mountains is over three times greater than the Gulf Coast, cancer incidence in the Rockies is actually lower. The residents in Kerala, India, are exposed to as much as eight times more radiation than in other parts of India; and households in Ramsar, Iran, are dosed with 13,000 millirem annually, compared to the U.S. average of 300 millirem -- all without observable adverse health effects. In a recent unanimous report, the French Academies of Science and Medicine also took issue with LNT, pointing out that no carcinogenic effect from low doses of radiation has been shown in animal tests. More devastating, the academy declares that LNT is based on old science and that its underlying assumptions are "not consistent with current radiobiological knowledge" concerning self-repairing mechanisms within cells. Why does this matter? Because many people today forgo low-level medical radiation treatments and X-rays due to inflated fears about their cancer-causing potential. Our country endlessly debates whether to build desert storage for spent nuclear fuel that might leak inconsequential amounts of radiation in a million years. And anti-nuclear activists use LNT to try to block the construction of new nuclear power plants, the only possible source of the abundant clean energy we'll need to wean ourselves off foreign oil -- and stop pumping petro-dollars into the hands of terrorists. If the United States is ever going to overcome its own "paralyzing fatalism" on nuclear energy and its uses, it's going to have to discard the flawed science of LNT theory. One hopes this happens sooner rather than later: Our personal health and economic well-being -- not to mention our national security -- may well depend on it. Joshua Gilder is a visiting fellow at the Lexington Institute. ***************************************************************** 35 allAfrica.com: Angola: International Atomic Energy Agency Approves Projects Angola Press Agency (Luanda) October 25, 2005 Luanda Ten projects that include the use of nuclear techniques in the country were approved by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), under the existing technical co-operation with Angola. The projects include those on malaria, assessment of marine pollution due to offshore oil exploration, non-destructive tests, application of techniques of nuclear medicine and ionising radiation in the production of foodstuffs through production of mutations. These projects will benefit the National Oncology Centre, with three projects, the National Technological Centre (2) and the Faculty of Agrarian Sciences of Huambo, also with two. The Fisheries Investigation Institute (1) and the Veterinary Institute (2) will also benefit from the projects that will be implemented in the 2007-2008 biennial. Under the existing technical co-operation between Angola and the IAEA, that began in 1999, six projects are being carried out and two have already been implemented. They are the Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and the project for the Updating of Capacities in the Use of Nuclear Techniques for the Diagnostic of Animal Diseases. The AIEA was set up in 1957 within the United Nations organisations family, with the aim of promoting the safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear technologies. Make allAfrica.com your home page | RSS Feed Copyright © 2005 Angola Press Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 36 (China Daily): US to transfer nuclear reactor tech to China By Fu Jing Updated: 2005-10-26 05:44 A senior US official yesterday expressed repeated commitment to transferring nuclear reactor technologies to China. China has drafted ambitious plans to use nuclear power to alleviate growing energy shortages. Administrator of the US National Nuclear Security Administration, Linton Brooks, told China Daily: "There is no reason why the (reactor) technology should not be transferred to a country like China." Industry insiders said the commitment from Brooks, who is also undersecretary of the US Department of Energy, is expected to boost US nuclear power company Westinghouse's attempts to win a US$8-billion contract to build four nuclear reactors at Sanmen in Zhejiang Province and Guangdong Province's Yangjiang. So far, the Chinese Government has been busy reviewing bid application from the US company, France's Areva and Russia's AtomStroyExport. Several high-level US officials have expressed interest in loosening controls over exports of nuclear reactor technologies to China. The controls have rendered Westinghouse unable to participate in China's nuclear reactor construction, despite the company having had a presence here for years. An earlier report said that Westinghouse plans to sell its new AP1000 reactor, which is to be approved by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the end of the year. China is considering picking one strong partner to help it build dozens of new nuclear plants over the coming years, as part of the plan to raise the country's nuclear power generating capacity fourfold by 2020 to 36,000 megawatts. Brooks said the US will forge a partnership with China to enhance nuclear security capacity. He said a week-long demonstration has been organized by his department and the China Atomic Energy Authority (CAEA) in Beijing, to prevent nuclear material theft, diversion and sabotage. "The demonstration, which ends on Friday, is the first one we have held in China, and in fact the first one we have held outside the US," said Brooks. CAEA Chairman Sun Qin said the demonstration is to promote the adoption of modern security practices and technologies at civilian nuclear facilities in China. Brooks also said that the US does not conduct nuclear security co-operation with China at military level, despite "the great potential." (China Daily 10/26/2005 page2) ***************************************************************** 37 NRC: Hurricane Update - Wilma Emergency Preparedness and Response > How We Respond to an Emergency > Response to Hurricanes > Hurricane Update - Wilma Hurricane Update - Wilma as of 2:00 p.m., E.D.T., 10/24 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has deactivated its headquarters and regional response centers that were monitoring Hurricane Wilma. The storm has moved past two nuclear power plants and storm damage to the sites is minimal. Further onsite and offsite inspections by NRC staff and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will determine the plants' abilities to restart in the near future. Earlier, the St. Lucie plant, near Ft. Pierce, and the Turkey Point plant, 25 miles south of Miami, were shut down before the storm. All safety systems at both plants are working normally and both plants continue to receive power from the region's electrical grid. The NRC continues to maintain contact with plant personnel and NRC inspection staff on site. Backup communication methods are available at both sites if normal communications are lost. Communication links are also established and maintained with state emergency response officials and other federal response agencies. The most current status of Hurricane Wilma can be found at the National Hurricane Center's Web site[exit icon] . Last revised Tuesday, October 25, 2005 ***************************************************************** 38 NRC: Amergen Energy Company, LLC; Clinton Power Station, Unit 1; FR Doc E5-5874 [Federal Register: October 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 205)] [Notices] [Page 61651-61654] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25oc05-90] Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-62 issued to AmerGen Energy Company, LLC (AmerGen or the licensee), for operation of Clinton Power Station, Unit 1 (CPS), located in DeWitt County, Illinois. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would revise Technical Specification 4.3, ``Fuel Assemblies,'' for CPS to reflect the increased fuel storage capacity in the spent fuel pool (SFP) and the addition of fuel storage capacity in the fuel cask storage pool. The proposed expansion will increase the total storage capacity from 2,512 to 4,159 fuel assemblies. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated August 18, 2004, as supplemented on May 13 and 25, June 14, and August 17, 2005. The Need for the Proposed Action The loss of full core discharge capability at CPS is projected to occur during the February 2006 refueling outage, based on current projections. To maintain spent fuel storage capability, AmerGen would like to expand SFP storage capacity. The proposed action would result in the increased fuel storage capacity in the SFP and the addition of fuel storage capacity in the fuel cask storage pool. The proposed expansion will increase the total storage capacity from 2,512 to 4,159 fuel assemblies. The additional capacity is expected to allow operation without loss of full-core discharge capability until the year 2016. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action Radioactive Waste Treatment CPS uses waste treatment systems designed to collect and process gaseous, liquid, and solid waste that might contain radioactive material. These radioactive waste treatment systems were evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) for CPS, Unit 1, dated May 1982. The proposed changes to the SFP will not involve any change in the waste treatment systems described in the FES. Gaseous Radioactive Wastes The increase in the number of spent fuel assemblies stored in the SFP will potentially result in an increase in the radioactive gasses evolving from the pool. However, the level of gaseous radioactivity in the pool water is dominated by the most recent reactor core offload to the pool, not the fuel already stored in the pool. Therefore, the storage of additional aged spent fuel assemblies in the pool will have a minimal contribution to radioactivity in the pool. The overall release of radioactive gases from CPS will remain within the limits of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 20.1301. Solid Radioactive Wastes Spent resins are generated by the processing of SFP water through the pools' purification system. These spent resins are disposed of as solid radioactive waste. Resin replacement is determined primarily by the requirement for water clarity and is normally done approximately once per year. No significant increase in the volume of solid radioactive waste is expected with the expanded storage capacity. During pool re-racking operations, small amounts of additional waste resin may be generated by the [[Page 61652]] pools' cleanup systems on a one-time basis. Additional solid radioactive waste will consist of the existing contaminated fuel storage racks. The old existing fuel storage racks will be washed down prior to being removed from the pool to remove as much contamination as possible. Then the racks will be shipped to a volume reduction facility for processing and subsequent disposal at a burial site. Shipping containers and procedures will conform to Federal regulations as specified in 10 CFR Part 71, ``Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material,'' and to the requirements of any state through which the shipment may pass, as set forth by the state department of transportation. Liquid Radioactive Wastes The release of radioactive liquids will not be affected directly as a result of the SFP modifications. The SFP ion exchanger resins remove soluble radioactive materials from the pool water. When the resins are replaced, the small amount of resin sluice water that is released is processed by the radwaste systems. As previously stated, the frequency of resin replacement may increase slightly during the installation of the new racks. However, the increase in the amount of radioactive liquid released to the environment as a result of the proposed SFP expansion is expected to be negligible. Occupational Dose Consideration All operations involved in the fuel rack installations will follow detailed procedures prepared in accordance with as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principles. Personnel performing the re-racking operation will be given pre-job briefings to ensure awareness of job responsibilities and necessary precautions. Radiation protection personnel at CPS will monitor and control work, personnel traffic, and equipment movement in the SFP area to minimize contamination and assure that exposures are maintained ALARA. Personnel monitoring equipment (including thermoluminescence dosimeter (TLDs)), protective clothing, and respiratory protective equipment will be issued as required. Alarming dosimeters will be used as needed to confirm exposure and dose rates to workers. The licensee plans to use divers in the pool to remove underwater interferences and assist in fuel storage rack removal. Procedures for controlling diving operations will comply with the guidance in Regulatory Guide 8.38, ``Control of Access to High and Very High Radiation Areas in Nuclear Power Plants.'' During the diving operations, the licensee estimates that dose rates will average from 20 to 40 mrem/hr. Special precautions such as physical barriers or tethers will be used to prevent a diver from coming in close proximity to highly radioactive materials in the pool. The diver will be confined to a safe diving area within the pool, which will be clearly delineated in the pre-job brief as well as physically marked in the pool. The diver will be visually monitored, either directly or remotely, at all times during the dive. In addition, the diver will be monitored by a remote dose telemetry system. This system enables the radiation protection personnel supervising the dive to obtain the dose being delivered to the diver's body. The diver will have a hand-held probe to complete radiological surveys when entering the water. Divers exiting the pool will be monitored for radiation and contamination, as will all items removed from the pool. Appropriate measures will be taken to minimize the spread of contamination. The existing fuel racks that are removed from the pool will be rinsed and surveyed as they break the water's surface, allowed to ``drip dry,'' and then placed in plastic shipping bags to contain any contamination until they are placed in shipping containers to be taken offsite for disposal. The increased storage capacity will not affect dose rates in areas adjacent to the SFP and transfer canal. The concrete side walls of the SFP provide sufficient shielding that the maximum dose rate in adjacent areas from fuel in the SFP is calculated to be 2 mrem/hr, if the pool is completely filled with freshly offloaded fuel. The walls of the fuel cask storage pool are not as thick, and the licensee's shielding calculations indicate that filling the racks that are proposed to be installed in the fuel cask storage pool with freshly offloaded fuel could result in dose rates of up to 26 mrem/hr in adjacent areas. This could be mitigated by filling the outer (peripheral) three rows of the storage cells with older (more decayed) fuel, thus reducing the maximum dose rate in the adjacent areas to 4.4 mrem/hr. The licensee will implement administrative controls to ensure that fuel stored in the peripheral storage cells will have been stored outside of the reactor for a minimum of 10 years, allowing sufficient decay time. On the basis of its review of the licensee's proposal, the NRC staff concludes that the CPS SFP re-racking operations can be performed in a manner that will ensure that doses to workers will be maintained ALARA and that the generation of additional solid radioactive waste will be minimized. The staff concludes that the projected dose for the project of 7 to 14 person-rem is in the range of doses for similar modifications at other nuclear plants. Accident Considerations The licensee evaluated the impact of newly installed higher density storage racks in the SFP and fuel storage in the fuel cask storage pool on the current design basis accident (DBA) dose analyses, as discussed in the CPS Updated Safety Analysis Report. The DBAs that are potentially affected by the proposed change to the SFP storage capacity are the fuel handling accident (FHA) and the cask drop accident. By Amendment No. 147, dated April 3, 2002, the CPS licensing basis for the FHA was changed by a selective implementation of an alternative source term, per the provisions of 10 CFR 50.67. In support of that amendment request, AmerGen demonstrated that the radiological consequences of an FHA, either in the containment or in the fuel building, are within the offsite and control room dose acceptance criteria specified in NUREG- 0800, ``Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants,'' and General Design Criterion 19 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, and well within the dose criteria given in 10 CFR 50.67. The NRC staff performed a review of the licensee's analysis of the proposed action on DBA dose analyses. Adding additional spent fuel storage does not increase the amount of fuel assumed to be damaged in an FHA, and the proposed action does not significantly change the source term in the DBA; therefore, the staff finds that the current licensing basis FHA dose analysis remains applicable after the expansion of the spent fuel storage capacity. The licensee plans to install spent fuel storage racks in the fuel cask storage pool. The licensee will implement administrative controls to ensure that fuel will be removed from the racks in the fuel cask storage pool prior to any fuel cask being moved in the area. Therefore, there would be no damage to spent fuel or radiological consequences as a result of a cask drop on the empty fuel storage racks in the fuel cask storage area. Based on its review, the staff finds that the current licensing basis analysis of the cask drop accident remains bounding with respect to radiological consequences. During removal and installation of fuel storage racks in the SFP and fuel cask storage pool, AmerGen will ensure that all work will be controlled and performed in strict accordance with specific written guidance. Any [[Page 61653]] movement of fuel assemblies required to support removal and installation of racks will be performed as during normal refueling operations, and no shipping cask movement will be performed during this time frame. The licensee will determine and follow safe load paths and written procedures to ensure that no racks are carried over any portions of the existing fuel storage racks containing fuel assemblies. Based on its review, the staff concludes that the current DBA dose analyses remain bounding for the installation of expanded spent fuel storage capacity in the SFP and fuel cask storage pool. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Alternatives to the Proposed Action Shipping Fuel to a Permanent Federal Fuel Storage/Disposal Facility Shipment of spent fuel to a high-level radioactive storage facility is an alternative to increasing the onsite spent fuel storage capacity. However, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) proposed high-level radioactive waste repository is not expected to begin receiving spent fuel in the near future. Therefore, shipping the spent fuel to the DOE repository is not considered an alternative to increased onsite fuel storage capacity at this time. Shipping Fuel to a Reprocessing Facility Reprocessing of spent fuel from CPS is not a viable alternative since there are no operating commercial reprocessing facilities in the United States. Therefore, spent fuel would have to be shipped to an overseas facility for reprocessing. However, this approach has never been used and it would require approval by the Department of State as well as other entities. Additionally, the cost of spent fuel reprocessing is not offset by the salvage value of the residual uranium; reprocessing represents an added cost. Shipping the Fuel Offsite to Another Utility or another Exelon/AmerGen Site The shipment of fuel to another utility or transferring fuel to another of the licensee's facilities would provide short-term relief from the shortage of SFP storage at CPS. However, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Subtitle B, Section 131(a)(1) clearly places the responsibility for the interim storage of spent fuel with each owner or operator of a nuclear plant. The SFPs at the other reactor sites were designed with capacity to accommodate spent fuel from those particular sites. Therefore, transferring spent fuel from CPS to other sites would create storage capacity problems at those locations. The shipment of spent fuel to another site or transferring it to another Exelon/AmerGen site is not an acceptable alternative because of increased fuel handling risks and additional occupational radiation exposure, as well as the fact that no additional storage capacity would be created. Alternatives Creating Additional Storage Capacity Alternative technologies that would create additional storage capacity include rod consolidation, dry cask storage, modular vault dry storage, and constructing a new pool. Rod consolidation involves disassembling the spent fuel assemblies and storing the fuel rods from two or more assemblies into a stainless steel canister that can be stored in the spent fuel racks. Industry experience with rod consolidation is currently limited, primarily due to concerns for potential gap activity release due to rod breakage, the potential for increased fuel cladding corrosion due to some of the protective oxide layer being scraped off, and because the time-consuming consolidation activity could interfere with ongoing plant operations. Dry cask storage is a method of transferring spent fuel, after storage in the pool for several years, to high capacity casks with passive heat dissipation features. After loading, the casks are stored outdoors on a seismically qualified concrete pad. Concerns for dry cask storage include the need for special security provisions and high cost. Vault storage consists of storing spent fuel in shielded stainless steel cylinders in a horizontal configuration in a reinforced concrete vault. The concrete vault provides missile and earthquake protection and radiation shielding. Concerns for vault dry storage include security, land consumption, eventual decommissioning of the new vault, the potential for fuel or clad rupture due to high temperatures, and high cost. The alternative of constructing and licensing new SFPs is not practical for CPS because such an effort would require about 10 years to complete and would be an expensive alternative. The alternative technologies that could create additional storage capacity involve additional fuel handling with an attendant opportunity for an FHA, involve higher cumulative dose to workers affecting the fuel transfers, require additional security measures that are significantly more expensive, and would not result in a significant reduction in environmental impacts compared to the proposed re-racking modifications. Reduction of Spent Fuel Generation Generally, improved usage of the fuel and/or operation at a reduced power level would be an alternative that would decrease the amount of fuel being stored in the SFPs and, thus, increase the amount of time before the maximum storage capacities of the SFPs are reached. However, operating the plant at a reduced power level would not make effective use of available resources, and would cause unnecessary economic hardship on the licensee and its customers. Therefore, reducing the amount of spent fuel generated by reducing power is not considered a practical alternative. Impact on SFP Storage From Increasing Length of Fuel Cycle By letter dated May 20, 2004, as supplemented May 23 and September 30, 2005, the licensee requested changes to the Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement frequencies to support 24-month fuel cycles at CPS in accordance with the guidance of Generic Letter 91-04, ``Changes in Technical Specification Surveillance Intervals to Accommodate a 24- Month Fuel Cycle.'' Currently, this request is under review by the NRC staff. If this request is approved, CPS will experience a loss of full core discharge capability sooner. Therefore, this is not a practical alternative to the proposed action. The No-Action Alternative The NRC staff also considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The [[Page 61654]] environmental impacts of the proposed action and this alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the FES for CPS, Unit 1, dated May 1982. Agencies and Persons Contacted In accordance with its stated policy, on September 27, 2005, the NRC staff consulted with Illinois State Official, Frank Niziolek of the Illinois Emergency Management Agency, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The state official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated August 18, 2004, as supplemented by letters dated May 13 and 25, June 14, and August 17, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800- 397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of October, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Kahtan N. Jabbour, Sr. Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate III, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-5874 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 39 Hudson Valley News: NRC chairman gives Senator Clinton commitment to stronger oversight of Indian Point Tuesday, October 25, 2005 Senator Hillary Clinton met today with U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Nils Diaz to discuss recent leaks found near the spent fuel pools at the Indian Point power plant, as well as continued problems associated with the plants emergency notification system. During the meeting, the Senator called on the NRC to produce a comprehensive plan and timeline for dealing with these serious issues facing the facility. People living around the plant have a right to know about how this leak happened and what action is being taken, not only to identify the source of the problem, but to determine what the impact might be, Clinton said. During the meeting, Diaz informed Clinton that he would soon announce enhanced oversight of Indian Point with respect to both the leaks and the emergency notification system. Diaz also committed that the NRC would be implementing the provision the senator inserted in the energy bill by issuing detailed orders to Entergy in January to require them to back up their emergency notification system. Clinton said she is concerned about a lack of a comprehensive plan to deal with the problems the facility is facing and she call on the NRC to produce a multi-agency timeline as soon as possible. "We (Entergy) are aggressively taking actions to ensure the safety of the Indian Point 2 spent-fuel pool and the reliability of a functioning siren system, including plans to replace the current one, and we welcome additional reviews of those activities by the NRC, said Entergy spokesman James Streets. We're all on the same side on these issues." HEAR today's news on MidHudsonRadio.com, the Hudson Valley's only Internet radio news report. ***************************************************************** 40 Daily Free Press: MIT nuclear reactor scrutinized Cambridge mayor refutes ABC report about lax MIT nuke safety By Carlene Olsen Published: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 An ABC News investigation that tested the safety of 25 campus nuclear research reactors throughout the country cited security concerns at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, but city and MIT officials say the nuclear reactor is well-guarded and poses no threat to the surrounding community. ABC News conducted the study to determine if campus nuclear reactor sites, including the one at MIT that has operated safely for 47 years, pose public safety concerns because the explosive chemicals contained within the reactors that could be possible terrorist targets. "The synopsis by which [ABC News] claimed [the nuclear reactor] could be targeted is not likely because of the amount of protection before you get to the core," Cambridge Mayor Michael Sullivan told The Daily Free Press. In the ABC News study, a news producer parked a truck near the reactor to investigate how accessible the site is to the public. ABC reported that MIT officials did not question their placement of the vehicle. The study also found detailed plans of the reactor site were attainable on the internet, citing this as a security concern. In a letter to the senior producer of ABC News, Denise Brehm, spokeswoman for MIT, defended the institution and stressed that precautions were taken to guard the reactor. "MIT has initiated several security studies of the research reactor and is confident that the reactor's containment facility and security guidelines protect the MIT and Cambridge communities from the possibility of harm from the reactor itself," Brehm wrote. Sullivan also defended MIT, noting the many protective barriers in place around the reactor core. "The nuclear reactor is protected by several barriers -- including a five-foot concrete wall -- making it difficult to penetrate from the outside," he said. Regarding the proximity of the ABC News truck to the reactor site, Sullivan said that even if that vehicle had contained explosives, the reactor core would have remained impenetrable. According to an MIT news report released Oct. 13, the truck "did not actually enter the secure perimeter around the reactor." The report also said that MIT has conducted tests in the past to confirm that the reactor is safe. The MIT news report also said that the plans for the reactor site, available online, were outdated and did not contain security-sensitive information. All information regarding the nuclear reactor, which posed possible security concerns, was removed from the MIT website after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Security remains high at the MIT nuclear research reactor site -- background checks are performed on people who request a tour of the facility, and two armed guards are also on site. "MIT believes that the nation benefits from the existence of the research reactor and that it poses no safety or security threat to the community," Brehm wrote in her letter to ABC. Sullivan said minimal security concerns have been reported from area residents, but he plans to hold a public meeting to address the safety of the MIT reactor site. "We want to offer a community meeting with MIT officials and our own city officials to address any safety concerns," Sullivan said. Community organizations, such as the Porter Square Neighbors Association, did not express concern about the reactor. "It's a very, very small reactor surrounded by a lot of concrete," said David Reed, president of the Porter Square Neighbors Association. "It poses a threat to no one." The Daily Free Press ***************************************************************** 41 Newsday: NRC chair pledges greater oversight of nuclear plant New York City - AP New York Newsday.com October 25, 2005, 1:09 PM EDT WASHINGTON -- The head of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has pledged to boost oversight of the Indian Point nuclear plants after the apparent leak of a radioactive isotope, aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday. Clinton, D-N.Y., met with NRC chairman Nils Diaz, who told her he would announce in coming days "enhanced oversight ... with respect to both the leaks and the emergency notification system," said the senator's spokesman, Philippe Reines. Diaz didn't spell out exactly what the enhancements would be, but they could include additional reporting requirements and closer monitoring of the site. "They already have sent additional inspectors to Indian Point to check our work," said Jim Steets, a spokesman for Indian Point's owner Entergy Nuclear Northeast. "They're more than welcome to send more people, we're all on the same side of this issue," he said. Entergy and the NRC said last week that low levels of tritium, a radioactive isotope, have been found in water at the bottom of six sampling wells on the Indian Point property in Buchanan, N.Y. The tritium may be the result of a leak from Indian Point 2's spent fuel pool, first detected in August. In one of the wells, the amount of tritium found was slightly above the federal standard permitted for drinking water. However, none of the wells, which are 20 to 30 feet deep, are used for drinking water or for anything other than sampling groundwater. The water is believed to have leaked from a 40-foot-deep pool, which holds the highly radioactive fuel assemblies that have been used in the nuclear reactor. Experts are not sure if there is a new leak or if the contaminated water could have come from a previous, already-repaired leak and just remained for years in the ground. Tritium, which is used in a range of products from watch faces to nuclear bombs, is present in nature in tiny amounts and is also a byproduct of the reactors. The company is also wrestling with the failure of emergency sirens meant to warn surrounding communities. Last week, a majority of the sirens in Orange County did not work during a test, and a similar test last month in Rockland County also failed. The sirens have been a near-constant headache for Entergy, which has pledged to replace the entire system within the next two years. Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 42 asahi.com: EDITORIAL/ Nuclear energy policy 10/25/2005 The government has cobbled together an Outline of Nuclear-energy Policy for the next decade on the nation's problem-plagued nuclear energy program. The government decided to work out the outline because it thought its duty was to present a broad policy orientation rather than a traditional long-term program this time around. The focus of attention in the outline was whether the government would press ahead with its traditional policy of nuclear fuel recycling or change tack. The Atomic Energy Commission of Japan discussed alternative policies, giving hope that the government might actually shift its stance. But the talks were half-baked, and the commission approved the continuation of the existing policy. Japan plans to carry out a nuclear fuel cycle program in which plutonium is used as fuel after all spent nuclear fuel is reprocessed. Such a method is very expensive, and many foreign countries have given up on the idea. Even in Japan, an increasing number of experts have urged the government to reconsider this policy. In discussing the nation's future nuclear energy policy, the Atomic Energy Commission presented three alternatives in response to such critical views. Talks at the commission showed that reprocessing spent nuclear fuel would be 1.5 to 1.8 times as costly as a disposal method for the spent fuel. But the commission decided to maintain the current policy, mainly because the government has not yet studied a direct disposal method of spent fuel and that a change in policy would waste all the money that has been invested in the nuclear fuel recycling program. The commission also said a change in policy would invite resentment of local governments. The commission's arguments do not make sense. Japan has not inquired about a direct disposal method because it was assumed that such a study would be unnecessary. The commission itself is partly responsible for failing to look into this alternative. If the government hesitates to change its policy by citing various obstacles that may arise, then it will never be able to switch policies. It is inevitable even if the commission is criticized that it is not really ready for a change. At any rate, the outline gives a stamp of approval to start operations of the Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Plant in the village of Rokkasho in Aomori Prefecture. The plant will soon start testing high-level radioactive spent fuel, thus embarking on the road to nuclear fuel recycling. Discussions on this nuclear fuel cycle have not been completed. Further and deeper talks must be held over the reprocessing plant. But the outline does propose multifaceted inquiries into nuclear energy in preparation for possible future change in Japan's nuclear policy. This is only natural. Even if the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant starts operating, the plutonium-thermal program, which uses plutonium produced by the reprocessing plant, is not yet under way. Nor is there any plan for another reactor that will take over from the Monju prototype fast-breeder reactor. Japan's nuclear fuel recycling program requires overcoming many difficult problems. Nuclear reactors themselves are also fraught with problems. The government plans to operate the reactors for 60 years, but there is no guarantee they will be safe enough to run after such a long time. Power companies might also become reluctant to use such unwieldy nuclear reactors when demand for electricity declines. Uncertainties surround nuclear power. The government should not stick to a single set of policies. It should study many other technologies to prepare for a possible policy shift if the situation changes. What is needed is a flexible approach. --The Asahi Shimbun, Oct. 24(IHT/Asahi: October 25,2005) + The Asahi Shimbun Company [Copyright Asahi Shimbun. All rights reserved. No reproduction ***************************************************************** 43 UPI: Security & Terrorism - Clinton pressures NRC over nuke fuel leaks United Press International - 10/25/2005 5:27:00 PM -0400 Newstrack: College students from New Orleans are WASHINGTON, Oct. 25 (UPI) -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is probing recent nuclear fuel leaks at the Indian Point power plant. Clinton, D-N.Y., met Tuesday with Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Nils Diaz to discuss recent leaks found near the spent fuel pools at the power plant in New York state, as well as continued problems associated with the plant's emergency notification system. During the meeting, Clinton called on the NRC to produce a comprehensive plan and timeline for dealing with these serious issues facing the facility. "I had a good meeting with the chairman today, and expressed my serious concerns over the recent leak of radioactive water and the continued failure of the plant's emergency notification systems," Clinton said. "People living around the plant have a right to know about how this leak happened and what action is being taken, not only to identify the source of the problem, but to determine what the impact might be." During the meeting, Diaz informed Cliinton that he would soon announce enhanced oversight of Indian Point with respect to both the leaks and the emergency notification system. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights ***************************************************************** 44 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting FR Doc 05-21337 [Federal Register: October 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 205)] [Notices] [Page 61654-61655] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25oc05-91] agency holding the meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. date: Weeks of October 24, 31, November 7, 14, 21, 28, 2005. place: Commissioner's Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. status: Public and closed. matters to be considered: Week of October 24, 2005 Wednesday, October 26, 2005 1:20 p.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. U.S. Army (Jefferson Proving Ground Site) (Materials License Amendment) (tentative). b. Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3), Docket Nos. 50-336-LR & 50-423-LR, LBP-05-16 (July 20, 2005) (tentative). c. Amergen Energy Co. (Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1), Docket No. 50-289-LT-2 (tenative). d. Exelon Generation Company, LLC & PSEG Nuclear, LLC (Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Docket Nos. 50-277-LT & 50-278-LT (tentative). 1:30 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1). Thursday, October 27, 2005 10 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1). Week of October 31, 2005--Tentative Tuesday, November 1, 2005 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Implementation of Davis-Besse Lessons Learned Task Force (DBLLTF) Recommendations (Public Meeting). (Contact: Brendan Moroney, (301) 415-3974). This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . Week of November 7, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of November 7, 2005. Week of November 14, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of November 14, 2005. Week of November 21, 2005--Tentative Monday, November 21, 2005 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Status of New Reactor Issues, Part 1 (Public Meeting). (Contact: Laura Dudes, (301) 415-0146). 1:30 p.m. Briefing on Status of New Reactor Issues, Part 2 (Public Meeting). (Contact: Laura Dudes, (301) 415-0146). This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . Week of November 28, 2005--Tentative Wednesday, November 30, 2005 9:30 a.m. Briefing on EEO Program (Public Meeting). (Contact: Corenthis Kelley, (301) 415-7380). This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more information. Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662. Additional Information By a vote of 5-0 on October 18, 2005, the Commission determined pursuant to U.S.C. 552b(e) and Sec. 9.107(a) of the Commission's rules that ``Affirmation of a. Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (National Enrichment Facility), Intervenors' Petition for Review of LBP-05-13 (Decision on Environmental Contentions); b. Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (National Enrichment Facility), Licensing Board's Referral of Memorandum and Order Rejecting Amended and Supplemental Contentions; and c. Private Fuel Storage (Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations) Docket No. 72-22-ISFSI; Review of Board's September 15, 2005 order regarding safeguards redactions'' be held October 19, 2005, and on less than one week's notice to the public. The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html. The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, August Spector, at (301) 415-7080, TDD: (301) 415- 2100, or by e-mail at aks@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. [[Page 61655]] This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301) 415-1969. In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: October 20, 2005. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 05-21337 Filed 10-21-05; 9:54 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M ***************************************************************** 45 RIA Novosti: European Commission to grant Armenia food and nuclear security aid 25/ 10/ 2005 YEREVAN, October 25 (RIA Novosti, Gamlet Matevosyan) - The European Commission will donate $20 million to Armenia for the 2005-2006 Food Security Program, a senior European official said Tuesday. Torben Holtze, the head of the European Commission delegation to the Caucasus republics of Armenia and Georgia, said the funds would be spent on agriculture, welfare, and statistical services. He said the commission had stopped funding Armenia's land reform because the five-year program to map the republic's arable lands had been completed. Armenia has been receiving European grants under the Food Security Program, which covers four spheres - agriculture, land reform, welfare, and statistics - since 1996. Another 5-7 million euros will be granted to Armenia in 2006-2007 to ensure the security of its nuclear power plant, Holtze said. Commissioned in 1980, the plant was shut down for political reasons in 1989 but reopened in 1995 during an acute energy crisis in Armenia. Holtze said the commission was not insisting on closing the plant but rather enhancing its security, which has been the commission's policy toward all first-generation plants in other emerging democracies. Outfitted with a Russian-made first-generation reactor, the plant's second unit generates up to 40% of Armenia's overall power output and can remain operational until 2016, experts estimate. Since 1993, the republic has received a total of $80 million to improve security at the plant. Since September 2003, the plant has been run by an affiliate of Unified Energy Systems and Rosenergoatom, Russia's major electricity producers and its trust managers for a five-year period. The EU has said the plant should be shut down temporarily and it would be willing to provide 100 million euros in funding. Armenian experts, however, said building alternative power facilities would require nearly a billion euros. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 46 UPI: Intl. Intelligence - U.S. works with China on nuke security United Press International - By EDWARD LANFRANCO BEIJING, Oct. 25 (UPI) -- Linton Brooks, administrator of the Department of Energy's nuclear security watchdog told reporters Tuesday about a groundbreaking project in Sino-U.S. cooperation. Ambassador Brooks heads DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration, also serves as undersecretary of energy for nuclear security. His responsibilities include the design, safety and security of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. He is also in charge of bilateral and multilateral foreign cooperation arrangements pursuant to non-proliferation and nuclear safety and protection. The Bush administration's efforts to increase global security against the threat of nuclear materials being stolen, sabotaged or diverted includes an initiative to form a partnership with the People's Republic of China to modernize its security practices and technologies deployed at civilian nuclear facilities. There is no military to military nuclear relationship between the U.S. and China at this time. The U.S.-China 2005 Integrated Nuclear Material Management Technology Demonstration running Monday to Friday this week includes joint technical work on hardware, software, system design and installation for a storage facility at the China Institute for Atomic Energy as well as workshops on vulnerability assessment and nondestructive assay, plus personnel, training and site visit exchanges. Brooks told reporters "to the best of my knowledge, not only is it the first demonstration of this kind in China, its first demonstration of this kind that we've done with anyone." On site demonstrations in Beijing include physical protection, nuclear material control and accounting, and safeguard technologies. The NNSA is leaving behind nearly $6 million worth of nuclear security system technology and is transfer its use as a demonstration model for the Chinese to emulate, but not necessarily purchase from the United States. Brooks said some hardware was returning to the United States at the end of the event. The NNSA administrator noted the situation was quite different in discussions with China compared with Russia, "in that much of our efforts with Russia over the past 10 years have been in the form of assistance, wherein in China we're looking at more of a cooperative partnership." This has resulted in improvements to some facilities but more importantly an opportunity to train our Chinese colleagues in some of the techniques that technology makes available. Technical work was done by American National Laboratories working with the Chinese Atomic Energy Institute. We see this as important in itself, but also a springboard to greater cooperation with China on the technical aspects of non-proliferation: material protection, export control and other areas. Foreign ministry spokesman Kong Quan, commenting on the state of non-proliferation cooperation with the United States replied: "Non-proliferation has been a priority area for cooperation between the two countries with leaders maintaining contact and exchanges of views on this issue." He described bilateral cooperation as "fruitful" saying China "looks forward to further collaboration and joint efforts with the United States in enhancing non-proliferation cooperation. Asked about American criticism of export controls and accusations of proliferation of nuclear technology in the past and what were the proper channels to address U.S. concerns Kong stated: "concerns or accusations about the efforts of China on non-proliferation are not based on the facts." "These remarks are irresponsible; everybody knows that China has formulated a series of very strict regulations and laws on non-proliferation and export control. These regulations are in line with international standards. We have always followed laws and every violation will be punished." Kong promised. On non-proliferation we will continue to make our effort on export control. We also would hope that we can work with the international community on an equal footing in non-proliferation. Regarding concerns in the United States about export items by Chinese firms, Kong said his government opposed punitive measures taken by the U.S. because it "does not follow international practice in punishing Chinese enterprises. Kong said the U.S. should refrain from actions "so as to develop China-U.S. relations on the basis of mutual benefit and equal footing." If the U.S. finds firms violating export regulations on non-proliferation, China wants the evidence turned over so that "justice will be served and their actions punished according to the relevant (Chinese) regulations and laws." Analysts believe the approach of the Bush administration embodied in the NNSA's ongoing mission will succeed so long as eyes stay on the prize of beefing up a partnership on Chinese civilian nuclear facility security. From the Chinese perspective, other non-proliferation goals such as tightening export controls are better handled through back channels rather than going public with a first time offending individual or export business unit, however China should be prepared to lose face when repeat offenders are caught. International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 47 [du-list]Nuclear Regulatory Commission Deals Blow to Depleted Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:33:46 -0700 ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:00:36 -0500 To: ieer@ieer.org From: Lisa Ledwidge/IEER Subject: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Deals Blow to Depleted Uranium Disposal Plans, IEER press release INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH PRESS RELEASE For further information: Dr. Arjun Makhijani (301) 270-5500; cell (301) 509-6843 For immediate release Monday, October 24, 2005 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Deals Blow to Depleted Uranium (DU) Disposal Plans Shallow Burial in Low-Level Waste Dumps Would Far Exceed Radiation Dose Limits, Independent Research Shows DU Poses Long-Term Risks Comparable to Plutonium-Contaminated Wastes Takoma Park, Maryland: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has handed a stinging reversal to advocates of a New Mexico uranium enrichment facility by requiring licensers to hear testimony from Dr. Arjun Makhijani, an independent expert, on the environmental impacts of disposing of depleted uranium (DU), a waste material that will be generated by the plant. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), the NRC staff, and LES, the corporate consortium that is seeking the plant license, had sought to exclude Dr. Makhijani's testimony. Last week the NRC ruled that the ASLB had improperly excluded the testimony and that it should be considered in license hearings scheduled to begin at the NRC headquarters near Washington D.C. today, Monday, October 24. "The NRC ruling that environmental impacts need to be explicitly taken into account in the licensing process completely undermines the premise on which the NRC staff prepared its Environmental Impact Statement for the LES plant," Dr. Makhijani explained. "The staff's position and that of LES had been that an environmental impact calculation was unnecessary since DU was Class A waste, the least radioactive and risky low-level category, which could be disposed of in shallow burial facilities, such as the one run by Envirocare near Clive, Utah." Dr. Makhijani is principal author of two reports on DU prepared for interveners in the NRC license hearings and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER), in Takoma Park, Maryland. The interveners are the Nuclear Information and Resource Service and Public Citizen. The NRC ruled that its staff and ASLB had been wrong in concluding that the present low-level waste regulations allowed DU to be classified as Class A low-level waste without an explicit environmental impact analysis. An IEER analysis showed that peak radiation doses from burying LES wastes in shallow trenches would produce peak radiation doses at least a hundred times higher than the legal limit of 25 millirem per year. IEER also concluded that proposed DU disposal sites Utah and in Andrews County, Texas are unsuitable and should not be used for wastes the LES plant would generate. "Land near Clive, Utah, and near the other proposed waste disposal facility in Andrews County, Texas, has been used for grazing in the past," added Dr. Brice Smith, Senior Scientist at IEER and co-author of the DU reports. "Use of the either site for food crops or ranching in the future could result in radiation doses that are thousands of times larger than the allowable limits." The NRC also ordered its staff to examine whether existing low-level waste classification regulations need to be amended in order to take into account the impact of disposing of large amounts of depleted uranium as a generic matter separate from any particular licensing process. "This NRC decision not only throws the LES plant into question, it also raises the same issue about wastes from a plant proposed by the U.S. Enrichment Corporation for Ohio," Dr. Makhijani said. "It creates a large new uncertainty about DU disposal methods and costs. The industry will have to go back to the drawing board on costs and methods of DU disposal." IEER's analysis shows that DU waste disposal would very likely not comply with radiation protection rules at any shallow land burial facility. It also found that Waste Control Specialists, the company seeking a license for low-level waste disposal in Texas, is not qualified to receive or handle uranium waste because its application shows no understanding of some of the basic radiological characteristics of uranium. Putting DU in a proper chemical form, uranium dioxide, treating and encapsulating it for durability, and disposing it of in deep geologic repository would cost $2.5 billion or more for the DU projected to be generated by the proposed LES plant. IEER's reports on depleted uranium disposal risks and costs are available on its web site at http://www.ieer.org/reports/du/LESrptfeb05.pdf and http://www.ieer.org/reports/du/LESrptupdate.pdf - - 3 0 - - This press release is also available at IEER's web site http://www.ieer.org Apologies if you have received this message more than once. To unsubscribe from receiving email messages from IEER, reply to this email with Remove in the subject line. Lisa Ledwidge Outreach Director, United States, and Editor of Science for Democratic Action Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) PO Box 6674 | Minneapolis, MN 55406 USA tel. 1-612-722-9700 | fax: please call first | ieer@ieer.org | http://www.ieer.org IEER's main office: 6935 Laurel Ave. Suite 201 | Takoma Park, MD 20912 USA | tel. 1-301-270-5500 | fax 1-301-270-3029 ------- End of forwarded message ------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- stichting Laka Laka foundation documentatie en onderzoeks- documentation and research centrum kernenergie centre on nuclear energy Ketelhuisplein 43 Ketelhuisplein 43 1054 RD Amsterdam NL-1054 RD Amsterdam tel: 020-6168294 Netherlands fax: 020-6892179 tel: +31-20-6168294 fax: +31-20-6892179 www.laka.org laka@antenna.nl ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 48 Deseret News: Downwinder clinic's funding renewed [deseretnews.com] Tuesday, October 25, 2005 Dixie facility screens potential victims for variety of cancers By Nancy Perkins Deseret Morning News ST. GEORGE — Federal funding for Dixie Regional Medical Center's downwinder cancer clinic has been renewed, and that is good news for thousands of people who worry about the deadly disease. "We are glad to have had such a great response and want to hammer home the point that when dealing with cancer, early detection is the key," said Becky Barlow, oncology nurse and director of the hospital's Radiation Exposure Screening and Education Program (RESEP). Downwinders are defined as the estimated 40,000 people who were exposed to radiation from above-ground nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site during the 1950s and 1960s. And thousands of southern Utah downwinders are seeking medical care and compensation from the federal Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), which provides $100,000 or more to qualified cancer patients or their survivors. "Downwinder patients are at higher risk for certain cancers," Barlow said. "The government has identified 20 cancers that they compensate for. They (downwinders) can't change their exposure risk, but they can be proactive about screening and early detection. This does save lives." The clinic literally could help several hundred more people now that an important time requirement has been revised, Barlow noted. Under the new guideline, those people who lived in a radiation exposure area between 1951 and 1958 for one year, and not the previously required two years, are now eligible. "Patients who fit the downwinder criteria should come in for yearly cancer screening exams either at the RESEP or with their own physician," she said. "In fact, we are required to do periodic follow-up with these patients in the clinic." DRMC's three RESEP clinic locations in St. George, Cedar City and Hildale have screened more than 10,000 people for various cancers since opening in March 2004. "Among the early diagnoses we have made are two women with breast cancers so small that they couldn't be felt by physical exam," said Barlow. "These women have a much better chance of beating the disease because it was caught so early." Funding for the clinic is awarded on a yearly basis by the Department of Health and Human Services. HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt, Utah's former governor, announced earlier this month that funding for the nation's seven RESEP clinics, all based in the Southwest, would be renewed. DRMC's clinic received $322,000 while the Utah Navajo Health System in Montezuma Creek was awarded $224,750 in RESEP funds. "In the early years of the Cold War, many Americans were exposed to high levels of radiation while mining, transporting and processing uranium and participating in above-ground nuclear weapons tests," Leavitt said in a news release. "These funds will help people who face an increased risk of cancer and other diseases as a result of that exposure." Clinic patients are sent a letter with the results of their exam and recommendations for follow-up care, and Barlow said staff members routinely call patients to make sure they take that second step. The most commonly discovered cancers diagnosed at the RESEP clinic are breast, prostate, skin and precancerous polyps in the colon, according to Barlow. The awards mark the third year RESEP clinics have been funded through the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 2000. For more information about the RESEP clinic at DRMC, call 435-688-5990. © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 49 SU: Radiologist contributed to landmark study showing even low levels of radiation are unsafe Stanford University Stanford Report, October 25, 2005 BY SHARAN L. DANIEL Exposure to X-rays and gamma rays, even at low-dose levels, increases risk of cancer. That is the bottom line of a comprehensive five-year study by a National Research Council (NRC) committee that included Stanford's Herbert L. Abrams, a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences. "There appears to be no threshold below which exposure can be viewed as harmless," said Abrams, professor emeritus of radiology at Stanford and Harvard universities and a member in residence at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Abrams was one of two physicians and the only member from Stanford on the committee of 16 international experts in fields including epidemiology, radiation biology, genetics, cancer biology, radiology and physics. As a radiologist, Abrams said he "was able to serve as a bridge between the epidemiologists and the biologists on the committee, whose approaches to risk were based on completely different data sets." The landmark 700-page advisory report to the U.S. government, titled "Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII," was completed in July, near the eve of the 60-year anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. It is the seventh report in a series since the 1945 atomic bombings to investigate the effects of low-level radiation exposure. The reports provide U.S. policymakers and health agencies with authoritative risk estimates. Beginning with the first BEIR study, published in 1956, the reports have used data from the Life Span Study by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation in Japan, which continues to track developments among a cohort of 120,000 people who were in Hiroshima or Nagasaki at the time of the bombings, as well as other radiation-exposure studies. The NRC convenes BEIR committees periodically, at the request of U.S. government agencies, to decide whether sufficient new information is available to merit an updated study, and if so, to conduct it. This process has yielded BEIR reports I, III-V and VII, which assess low-level radiation risks in general, and BEIR II and VI, which focus on radon gas effects. BEIR VII, sponsored by the U.S. departments of Defense, Energy and Homeland Security and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "provides the most up-to-date, comprehensive estimates for risk for cancer and other harmful health effects from low-dose radiation," according to the NRC. The committee reviewed not only new data on A-bomb survivors and their offspring but also 1,300 other studies on radiation exposure at the cell, animal and human levels, Abrams said. Since the 1990 publication of BEIR V, "substantial epidemiologic and experimental research has yielded a wealth of new information on radiation-induced cancer, as well as other adverse health impacts," he added. The new report confirms that even very low doses of radiation can produce cellular injury. The committee defined "low-dose" as a range from near zero up to about 100 milliSievertsabout 10 times that from a CT scan, 1,000 times greater than a mammogram and 30 to 40 times the annual background exposure a person encounters. Background radiation from the natural environmentincluding outer space, the ground, and basic activities such as eating, drinking and breathingaccounts for about 82 percent of human exposure, while man-made radiation from sources including medical X-rays and consumer products accounts for the remaining 18 percent. Progressive exposure to such radiation causes DNA damage, Abrams said, which correlates with an increased risk of developing a variety of cancers. While the report examined a range of potential health risks, it focused on causal relationships to solid cancers in humans. The report is among the first of its kind to include detailed estimates for radiation-induced cancer incidence and morbidity, Abrams said. The report enhances prior risk estimates for solid cancer and leukemia, using risk models based on a gender and age distribution similar to that of the entire U.S. population. The committee estimated the excess lifetime risks for 12 categories of cancer. Major findings For boys, radiation exposure in the first year of life produces three to four times the lifetime cancer risk as exposure to the same dose between the ages of 20 and 50. Female infants have almost double the risk as male infants. For women, the risks of developing cancer after exposure to radiation were 37.5 percent higher than for men. The risks for all solid tumors, such as lung and breast tumors, when added together, were almost 50 percent greater for women than for men. But for a few specific cancers, such as leukemia, the radiation-induced risk estimates were higher for men. Examining data on children of A-bomb survivors, the committee did not find genetic effects in children whose parents had been exposed to radiation from the bombs, but exposure of the fetus during pregnancy was associated with significant damage to the brain, including mental retardation. Studies of mice and other organisms have produced extensive data showing that radiation-induced cell mutation in sperm and eggs can be passed to offspring, the committee reported. Such mutations might also be passed on to human offspring, but their detection might require a survivor population larger than that of the children of A-bomb survivors. What's next? The report identified key areas for further research: + Determining various molecular markers of radiation-caused DNA damage. + Examining adverse genetic impacts, with particular emphasis on the hereditary effects. + Elucidating the specific role of radiation in the development and growth of tumors. + Clarifying the genetic factors that influence radiation response and cancer risk, as well as the correlation between radiation and other diseases such as heart disease and stroke. + Exploring the health effects of radiation exposure to patients in the practice of diagnostic radiologysuch as repeated screening CT scansand in high-risk occupations such as nuclear industry workers and uranium miners. + Conducting epidemiologic studies of workers in these high-risk jobs as well as persons exposed in key regions of the former Soviet Union and remaining atomic bomb survivors. Studies in these areas could inform the next BEIR report, when enough new data accumulate to warrant an update. For Abrams, completion of BEIR VII adds to an already distinguished career. The director of diagnostic radiology at Stanford in the 1960s, Abrams was the Philip H. Cook Professor and Chairman of Radiology at Harvard Medical School for 18 years before returning Stanford in 1985 to join the Radiology Department and CISAC. He was a founder of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, which received the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize. Sharan L. Daniel is media and public relations manager for the Center for International Security and Cooperation. Abrams' faculty profile Center for International Security and Cooperation ***************************************************************** 50 DVA: Veterans' Advisory Committee on Environmental Hazards; Notice of Meeting FR Doc 05-21313 [Federal Register: October 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 205)] [Notices] [Page 61696] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25oc05-115] DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that a meeting of the Veterans' Advisory Committee on Environmental Hazards will be held on Wednesday, November 30 and Thursday, December 1, 2005, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day. The meeting will be held at the Hilton Tampa Airport Westshore, 2225 N. Lois Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33607. The meeting is open to the public. The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on adverse health effects that may be associated with exposure to ionizing radiation and to make recommendations on proposed standards and guidelines regarding VA benefit claims based upon exposure to ionizing radiation. The major items on the agenda for both days will be discussions and analyses of medical and scientific papers concerning the health effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. On the basis of its analyses and discussions, the Committee may make recommendations to the Secretary concerning the relationship of certain diseases with exposure to ionizing radiation. On November 30, there will be a presentation by VA's Public Health and Environmental Hazards Office. The December 1 session will include planning future Committee activities and assignment of tasks among the members. Those who wish to attend should contact Ms. Bernice Green of the Department of Veterans Affairs, Compensation and Pension Service, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, by phone at (202) 273-7210, or by fax at (202) 275-1728. Members of the public may submit written questions or prepared statements in advance for the Committees review. Statements should be sent to Ms. Green's attention at least 5 days prior to the meeting at the address show above. Those who submit material may be asked to clarify it prior to its consideration by the Committee. An open forum for verbal statements from the public will also be available for 20 minutes during the morning and 20 minutes in the afternoon each day. Each person who wishes to make a verbal statement before the Committee will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis and will be provided three (3) minutes to present a statement. Dated: October 19, 2005. By Direction of the Secretary. E. Philip Riggin, Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 05-21313 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-M ***************************************************************** 51 AU SMH: Nuclear waste 'can be stored safely' - [www.smh.com.au] October 25, 2005 The first chief of research at Australia's nuclear science body says it has the means to safely store nuclear waste - the only issue is where to put it. The federal government is undertaking a process which would lead to a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory for material from around Australia. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation's (ANSTO) newly-appointed chief of research, Dr George Collins, believes the organisation's Synroc process will provide a suitable form of storage for medium-level nuclear waste. Synroc combines radioactive elements into mineral structures, making a material that is stable and secure. "You can only use Synroc for intermediate level waste or higher," Dr Collins said. "For the low-level waste, then things like properly designed concrete are quite adequate for that purpose," he said. "Australia's issue at the moment is where to put it rather than the manner of dealing with it." Dr Collins also says researchers at ANSTO are eagerly awaiting the new OPAL nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights in Sydney, due to be commissioned next year. "When the new reactor comes online, our teams of researchers are preparing the instruments," he said. "They're going to be sitting there, ready to use the neutrons to study the materials and various things that people will bring. "We'll put on the reactor to understand the structure of materials and how to make them better. "We will really lift the game, in a sense, when we have a world-class facility with world-class instruments, and people will come and use it." © 2005 AAP Copyright © 2005. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 52 Deseret News: Envirocare expansion is not done deal, state official says [deseretnews.com] Tuesday, October 25, 2005 By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News An information summary by the nuclear Regulatory Commission gives the impression that Envirocare of Utah's proposed doubling of its disposal area is a foregone conclusion. But a state official says that is not the case. The summary is part of an NRC document posted on the Internet, "Items of Interest (for the) Week Ending Sept. 30, 2005." It discusses activities of the NRC's Office of nuclear Material Safety and Standards. Office staff members participated in a meeting of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum, held in Las Vegas on Sept. 22-23, according to the document. Among other items summarized was the following reference to Envirocare, the low-level radioactive waste disposal facility operating in Tooele County: "Utah summarized its pending decision that will double the Envirocare licensed land area. The state could approve that proposal in early 2006." By law, before any expansion is permitted, the state's Radiation Control Board, Legislature and governor must approve. The phrase in the meeting notes, "will double," makes it seem as if the decision already has been made. That prospect concerns Jason Groenewold, director of the Health Environment Alliance of Utah, a group fighting against the expansion. "It's alarming that the state of Utah is poised to fast-track a decision that could lock Utah into another half century or more of being the nation's nuclear waste dump," Groenewold said. Bill Sinclair, deputy director of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality and the state's representative to the forum, said the expansion is not a foregone conclusion. He was the official who briefed the forum on the Envirocare matter. "What I represented to the forum was just a statement of facts of where we were in the process," Sinclair said. He noted that the briefing happened after the initial decision by the board to approve the expansion, and before HEAL won a right to challenge the board. Sinclair said he let it be known that besides regulatory approval, the expansion still needed authorization by the governor and Legislature. "Everybody in the forum knows that," he said. Most likely, NRC representatives attending the meeting thought that if no hearing was requested, the governor and Legislature could consider the expansion during the next legislative general session — thus the January 2006 date mentioned in the summary. Is the expansion still up in the air? "It is," Sinclair said. "The board will schedule the hearing and then they'll hear the merits of the appeal." Sinclair said the Radiation Control Board will decide on Nov. 4 the schedule for the hearing at which HEAL will detail its objections to the expansion. © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 53 Deseret News: Mum's the word as USS Salt Lake sails to junk yard [deseretnews.com] Tuesday, October 25, 2005 By Doug Robinson Deseret Morning News You probably don't know this, but there's a submarine named the USS Salt Lake City. The United States Navy wants you to know this. Which is why Tracy Howard, commander of the submarine, visits Salt Lake City occasionally, as he did recently. He meets with government leaders, schools, media and members of the 716 Club, which promotes the sub (named after the sub's hull number). "It's important to take the opportunity to educate the people," Capt. Howard said over breakfast. There are two problems with this promotional effort: He can't talk about what the sub actually does. Well, he could, but then he'd have to kill you. The other problem: The Navy is decommissioning the USS Salt Lake City, which is a polite way of saying they're sending it to the junk yard. So maybe we're having this conversation too late. They're going to take the submarine from its home port of San Diego to Portsmouth, Maine, where the nuclear fuel will be removed, and then it will be towed to a submarine graveyard in Bremerton, Wash. I asked Howard when the ship will leave for Portsmouth. "I can't say," he said. "It's classified." See what I mean? The Navy loves publicity for its subs — to garner public support and funding — but they can't tell you much about them. They're not known as the "Silent Service" for nothing. "We're trying to break that silence as much as we can," Howard said. Which isn't much. Ever notice that you never hear about subs in the news, while you hear plenty about aircraft carriers and ships? They don't even put hull numbers or names on the sides of subs, as they do on surface ships. Ask Howard what the USS Salt Lake City has been up to during the past 20 years, and you don't get far. You might as well ask Kyle Whittingham what his game plan is the night before a game. "I can't get into specifics," Howard said. "It's done normal sub duty. Things you see in the news." If there was a conflict, the SLC was somewhere in the area. It carries torpedoes and missiles and performs surveillance and reconnaissance work. "We (subs) have the advantage of stealth," Howard said. "No one knows we're there." Hence the silence. "They promote the fact that there is a naval ship named after the city," says 716 Club president Kerry Casaday. "But beyond that, they don't tell you the specifics of what it does, except to say it does lots of gee-whizzy stuff." Capt. Howard, 41, has commanded the SLC for more than two years. He has spent several months in a tube that is a little longer than a football field and only 33 feet wide, staying underwater for as long as 66 days at a time. The sub makes its own potable water and oxygen from seawater. The only reason it ever surfaces is for food. It has never even had to refuel. It has cruised some 85,000 miles on one tank of gas. Now it is time to change the nuclear fuel, but the Navy has decided to junk the sub instead. Which seems a little odd, since the SLC is still fully functioning and has just returned recently from another deployment. By the end of the year, Salt Lake City will no longer have a namesake on the high seas. The USS Salt Lake City is the second ship named after the city — the first was a World War II cruiser. So it's possible there will be a third. The SLC has had a good run. It has received several commendations from the Navy for outstanding service. Apparently, it has been doing good things at sea. We'll take their word for it. drob@desnews.com. Doug Robinson columns © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 54 SignOnSanDiego.com: DOE changes approach to transporting waste to Yucca Mountain By Erica Werner ASSOCIATED PRESS 2:27 p.m. October 25, 2005 WASHINGTON  Nuclear waste bound for Yucca Mountain would be sealed in canisters that could be put directly into the ground, eliminating the need to repackage the radioactive material at the dump site in Nevada, the Energy Department said Tuesday. The department's announcement marked a shift. Earlier plans called for large handling facilities at the desert site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas where spent nuclear reactor fuel would be transferred from transportation canisters into different containers for underground storage. Under the new plan the spent fuel would be packaged at reactor sites and would not be exposed to the atmosphere again, potentially removing risks for workers and the public. The change, announced by Paul Golan, acting director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, comes amid project delays and calls by some in Congress for the administration to supplement the dump with interim waste storage or to reprocess spent fuel. "What we're trying to focus on is, no matter what happens, we still need a Yucca Mountain," Golan told reporters in a conference call. "And what we're tasked to do is make this the simplest, most straightforward, safest operation possible." Golan couldn't say if the change would affect the timeline for the project, designed to hold 77,000 tons of highly radioactive used reactor fuel from commercial nuclear power plants and military installations. The opening date already has slipped from 2010 to 2012 at earliest. Golan said it wasn't clear when the department would apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to operate the dump. He also said it wasn't clear if the price tag of the $58 billion project would change. While costly onsite handling facilities would be eliminated, it would cost money to design, develop and license the new canisters. The new plan follows a review Golan started after taking over the project in May. It also includes initiatives designed to improve project management and scientific controls, including directing a national laboratory to coordinate science on the project. Yucca Mountain has suffered a series of budget shortages and delays. The government was forced to rewrite its radiation safety standards after a federal court threw out the first version, and the Energy Department is redoing some scientific models after e-mails surfaced last spring indicating government workers on the project might have falsified data. Industry officials welcomed Tuesday's announcement as a sign of the Energy Department's commitment to the dump. "It shows they're taking steps to make the program as efficient as possible, including enhancing safety," said Steve Kerekes, spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute. "This has the potential as well to send a positive message to Congress about the necessity to move forward with the program, including full funding." Opponents said the new proposal is no improvement. "Something like what DOE proposed today would mean a major reassessment of the proposed project," Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., said in a joint statement. "We certainly appreciate the likely decades-long delay this announcement means. But this proposal is just words and a made-up scenario with no substance or fact." On the Net: Yucca Mountain project: www.ymp.gov Asked Questions| UTads.com© Copyright 2005 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 55 WNYC: Radioactive Material in Groundwater at Indian Point by Fred Mogul NEW YORK, NY, October 25, 2005 Federal inspectors will be taking a closer look at the Indian Point nuclear power plants, after trace amounts of radioactive material were found in groundwater. WNYC's Fred Mogul has more. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has already had Indian Point under a "special inspection" for the last month, following the discovery of cracks in the pool where spent nuclear fuel rods are stored. The NRC and Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns the plants, said last week that low levels of tritium, a radioactive isotope, were found in six sampling wells on the plant's property. Today, the agency head pledged additional specialized inspections to determine the source of the leak. The normal complement of 4 inspectors has been increased to 10, and the plant will dig more sampling wells to determine how widespread the problem is. Inspectors will also be looking into failures in the emergency sirens meant to warn surrounding communities in the Hudson Valley. ***************************************************************** 56 Gilroy Dispatch: Fish Bones, Manure Help Rid Groundwater of Perchlorate Tuesday, October 25, 2005 By Matt King Gilroy - Toss some fish bones on a pile of potato peels, manure, lemon juice and mushroom compost and you’ve got one very effective perchlorate-cleaning mess. Researchers at New Mexico Sate University’s College of Engineering have announced that fish bones have shown a knack for cleaning everything from heavy metals, like lead and uranium, to organic materials, like perchlorate, from groundwater. “They’re really excellent for contaminated water,” said James Conca, director of the Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring and Research Center. “You just get a bunch of bones, 100 tons of bones, dig a ditch in the ground in front of the oncoming groundwater, the water will leach through them [and remove the perchlorate].” White fish works best. In theory, homeowners could use the remnants of a Friday night cod dinner on their private wells, but there is a catch. Water cleaned by fish bones tends to smell - and taste - like fish. “You really want to do it on a larger scale,” Conca said. “It’s not something you want to drink right afterwards.” Perchlorate, which has been shown to inhibit thyroid function, has contaminated the groundwater in Morgan Hill and San Martin, as well as numerous sites across the country. Fish bones clean perchlorate by stimulating growth of bacterial microbes that feast on the sodium that was used by the Olin Corp. to make road flares in Morgan Hill. Tom Mohr, a geologist with the Santa Clara Valley Water District, said the fish bone research is just one component of the quickly evolving science surrounding perchlorate contamination, a national problem caused in large measure by companies producing military equipment for the U.S. Dept. of Defense. He said that companies cleaning contaminated sites across the country also have used molasses, road salt and steer manure. “All have worked remarkably well,” Mohr said. Rick McClure oversees the South County cleanup effort for Olin Corp. He said the company believes installing ion-exchange systems on wells is the best way to ensure safe water and clean the groundwater basin, but won’t rule out other methods. At the site of its former factory, for example, Olin has used citric acid from lemons. “It’s very important as we continue to address the drinking water supply that remediation systems be mature in technology,” McClure said. “Ion-exchange leads the way, but that doesn’t mean we won’t evaluate fish bones.” Ion-exchange systems work by cleaning water as its pumped out of the well. It’s the technology the city of Morgan Hill uses on its municipal wells and Olin has installed seven similar systems on private wells in South County. The California Department of Health Services has approved the systems for large-scale municipal use and is in the process of approving smaller-sized contraptions for home use. Matt King covers Santa Clara County for The Dispatch. He can be reached at 847-7240 or mking@gilroydispatch.com. ***************************************************************** 57 NRC: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact FR Doc E5-5878 [Federal Register: October 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 205)] [Notices] [Page 61649-61651] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25oc05-89] for Department of the Air Force's Request for 10 CFR 20.2002 Authorization, for Disposal of Four Tanks Containing Depleted Uranium to a Subtitle C RCRA Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of availability. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel S. Browder, M.S., Health Physicist, Nuclear Materials Licensing Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011; Telephone: (817) 276-6552; fax number: (817) 860-8122; e-mail: . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering approval of a request dated June 23, 2004, by the U.S. Department of the Air Force (Air Force), for disposal of four M-47 tanks containing depleted uranium (DU) from the 98th Range Wing at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, to a Subtitle C RCRA hazardous waste disposal facility. The request for approval is submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2002, ``Method of Obtaining Approval of Proposed Disposal Procedures.'' NRC staff evaluated the licensee's analyses of disposal to a Subtitle C RCRA hazardous waste disposal facility, to demonstrate compliance with 10 CFR 20.2002. The staff used the general guidance for dose modeling as documented in NUREG-1727, SRP 5.2, and supplemented by the decommissioning-specific guidance of the license termination rule. The dose assessment for the disposal of the subject material would result in doses less than 0.01 millisievert (1 millirem) per year. This action will revise the Air Force Master Materials License No. 42-23539-01AF, to authorize the specific disposal of four M-47 tanks containing DU material to a Subtitle C RCRA hazardous waste disposal facility, pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2002, for procedures not otherwise authorized in the regulations of this chapter. This proposed action would also exempt the low-contaminated material authorized for burial from further Atomic Energy Act (AEA) and NRC licensing requirements. The NRC staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this action in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. The NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate for the proposed action. II. Environmental Assessment Background The Air Force used four U.S. Army M-47 tanks as target practice at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. The M-47 tanks were contaminated with DU, as a result of A-10 aircraft target penetrator rounds. Each tank contains less than forty GAU-8 30mm DU rounds; each round contains 300 grams of DU. As a result of the kinetic energy released when a tank is hit by a DU round, some of the DU from the round will bond with the metal surrounding the entry point and the interior of the chamber. The DU is a metal form with a minor contribution as an oxide. The mass of the DU per tank is approximately 12 kg, and when averaged over the mass of the tank (60 tons), the source material is less than one-twentieth of 1 percent (0.05 percent) of the mixture. The Air Force demonstrated by calculation that the potential dose consequence is less than 1 mrem per year, based on the proposed burial of the M-47 tanks in a RCRA facility. Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action is approval of the disposal of four (4) M-47 tanks from Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, to U.S. Ecology facility in Grand View, Idaho, which is a Subtitle C RCRA hazardous waste disposal facility. The Air Force has conservatively assumed the inventory of DU in each of the four M-47 tanks and calculated the potential dose as being less than 1 mrem per year, if all four tanks were to be disposed of, [[Page 61650]] in such a facility. This proposed action would also exempt the low- contaminated material authorized for burial from further Atomic Energy Act (AEA) and NRC licensing requirements. The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action is needed to dispose of four M-47 tanks at a RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste disposal facility. The Air Force maintains the clean-up of the range at Nellis Air Force Base by implementing an on-going process to dispose of objects that require disposition or decontamination in lieu of postponing clean-up efforts until there are extensive objects which require disposition. Therefore, the disposal of the four M-47 tanks are part of the Air Force on-going maintenance efforts on the range. Alternatives to the Proposed Action The alternatives to the proposed action include: (1) No action alternative, (2) decontamination of the M-47 tanks, or (3) handling the M-47 tanks as low-level radioactive waste and shipping the tanks to a licensed low-level waste facility. The Air Force performed an evaluation to determine if the costs to decontaminate the M-47 tanks would be comparable to or less than the costs for burial in a Subtitle C RCRA hazardous waste disposal facility. For the respective four M-47 tanks, the Air Force determined the costs for burial would be less than the cost to decontaminate the tanks. Disposal of the four M-47 tanks in the manner proposed is protective of the health and safety, is consistent with as low as reasonably achievable, and is the most cost- effective alternative. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The four M-47 tanks were used as target practice in Range 63, Target Area 10, at Nellis Air Force Base. Nellis Air Force Base is located approximately 8 miles northeast of Las Vegas, Nevada. The base itself covers more than 14,000 acres, while the total land area occupied by Nellis and its restricted ranges is about 5,000 square miles. The 98th Range Wing is responsible for the 2.9 million acre Nevada Test and Training Range, located just north of Las Vegas. The distance between Las Vegas and US Ecology, Idaho, is approximately 800 miles. The driving time would be approximately 16 hours (assuming average speed of 50 miles per hour). The Air Force's dose analysis conservatively assumed the same driver transported all four tanks in four separate shipments. The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the disposal of four M-47 tanks to US Ecology, Idaho, which is a Subtitle C RCRA hazardous waste disposal facility. The Air Force's analyses conservatively assumed the inventory of DU in each of the four M-47 tanks was the maximum number of penetrators (i.e., 40 rounds) which potentially hit each tank. The Air Force analyzed the dose to a transport driver, loader, burial worker, and long-term impacts to a residence. While the Air Force did not analyze the groundwater impacts from the disposal, the NRC staff reviewed previous analyses in support of NUREG-1640, ``Radiological Assessment for Clearance of Materials from Nuclear Facilities,'' which indicated that the groundwater pathway is not a controlling factor for DU. Each of the analyses conservatively estimated the exposure to less than 1 mrem total dose per year. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not involve any historic sites nor does it affect non- radiological plant effluents. There may be a slight increase in air quality and noise impacts during the loading and transportation of each tank. However, there are no expected adverse impacts to air quality as a result of the loading and transportation of the four M-47 tanks. These activities will be short in duration and minimal as compared to other activities at the base. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. The NRC has evaluated whether cumulative environmental impacts could result from an incremental impact of the proposed action when added to other foreseeable actions in the area. The proposed NRC approval of the 10 CFR 20.2002 alternative disposal procedure, when combined with known effects on resource areas of the site, are not anticipated to result in any cumulative impacts at the site. The proposed action and attendant exemption of the material from further AEA and NRC licensing requirements will not significantly increase the probability or consequence of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Accordingly, the NRC concludes there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). The implications from the no-action alternative is that the tanks would remain on the range until disposition sometime in the future. The impacts would therefore be limited to the site, and there would be no transportation impacts and no disposal considerations or impacts until sometime in the future. Another alternative to the proposed action, is that the Air Force may consider decontamination of the four M-47 tanks. The environmental impacts would increase as a result of this alternative from the air quality, noise and water usage during the decontamination process. Additionally, there would be an increase in occupational exposure as a result of the decontamination process. Disposing of the four M-47 tanks in a low-level waste disposal facility is another alternative to the proposed action. This alternative has similar environmental impacts as the proposed action. Conclusion Based on its review, the NRC staff finds that the environmental impact of the proposed action are either similar to, or less impactive than, the alternatives to the proposed action. If the proposed action is denied, the licensee may be required to ship the material to an off- site low level radioactive waste disposal facility. The costs associated with off-site disposal at a low-level waste facility greatly exceeds the cost of burial under the proposed action, with no significant benefit to the environment. Since the proposed action will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment, and the proposed action complies with the criteria in 10 CFR 20.2002 for alternate disposal procedure, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action is the preferred alternative. Agencies and Persons Consulted The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is not a major decommissioning activity and will not affect listed or proposed endangered species, nor critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Likewise, NRC staff determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties, as the M-47 tanks are [[Page 61651]] currently residing in Range 63, Target Area 10, at Nellis Air Force Base. Therefore, no consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. On September 23, 2004, the staff consulted with two Nevada State officials, Mr. Stan Marshall of the Radiological Health Section of the Nevada State Health Division, Bureau of Health Protection Services and Ms. Jolene Johnson of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. Neither State Official had any comments regarding the draft EA. Additionally, the staff consulted with the Idaho State official, Mr. Doug Walker of the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. On November 2, 2004, the State of Idaho, Department of Environmental Quality, provided comments regarding the draft EA, and those comments have been incorporated in the final EA. III. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the license amendment request and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at . From this site, you may access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice are: U.S. NRC Radioactive Materials License: Department of the Air Force, Docket Number 030- 28641, License Number 42-23539-01AF; Request letter dated June 23, 2004, U.S. Department of the Air Force (ML041810555); NRC Technical Review of Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 20.2002 request by U.S. Department of the Air Force (ML042120512); Safety Evaluation Report, August 5, 2005 (ML052170209); Environmental Assessment and FONSI. August 5, 2005 (ML052170216); Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, 20.2002, ``Method of Obtaining Approval of Proposed Disposal Procedures''; and Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions.'' If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems with accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at (800) 397-4203, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to . These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located the NRC's PDR, O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. The PDR is open from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays. Dated at Arlington, Texas, this 12th day of October 2005 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jack E. Whitten, Chief, Nuclear Materials Licensing Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV. [FR Doc. E5-5878 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 58 Cibola County Beacon: Poisoned water leaves bad taste , October 25, 2005 GRANTS - County residents from north of Milan expressed both concern and anger at a community meeting set up by state, federal and business officials in Grants on Thursday. The meeting was held at the Cibola County Centers convention room to discuss the ground water cleanup that is ongoing at the former Homestake mine and mill site. Representatives from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NCR), New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Homestake Mining Company were on hand to inform the citizens of Broadview Acres, Murray Acres, Pleasant Valley, San Mateo and Felise Acres of the condition of their well water and to discuss a change in contaminant levels requested by Homestake. Mining operations began in the area north of Milan in 1958 and ceased in the mid 1980s. Four mills were built in the area known as the Grants mineral belt, along with numerous mines over a 200-square-mile area. Homestake Mining Company used to be located 5.5 miles north of Milan on NM 605. All that remains now are two tailing piles, which are leaking poison into the local water supply, including uranium, selenium, molybdenum, sulfate, nitrate, chloride and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Homestake Mining Company has been attempting to clean up the water, which it polluted between the years of 1958 and 1990. Four aquifers in the area have been polluted with these contaminants, including the Alluvial Aquifer and the Chinle Aquifer, which has three separate levels - the upper Chinle, the middle Chinle and the lower Chinle. These aquifers range in depth from 50 feet to 500 feet. Below the Chinle Aquifer lies the San Andreas Aquifer which supplies water for both Grants and Milan. Currently, federal law requires.03 milligrams per liter as an acceptable level of Uranium in ground water. Homestake has applied for a higher level per liter based on past background water samples drawn from a number of well sites up gradient (uphill) of the Homestake mill site, but down gradient (downhill) from the other mill sites in the area. Over a 10-year span of testing, the NCR, NMED and Homestake Mining developed a background water sample for Homestake to go by. That background level exceeds the federal limit of .03 per liter for uranium and is more than twice the limit for selenium. State and federal officials used phrases like, We are the authority over, We are overseeing, and We are in charge of, mixed with phrase such as, It wasnt brought to our attention and we didnt know. Community reaction Community members present at the meeting said they could not understand why the water samples were being taken in area where pollutants already existed. One person asked why the samples were not taken up gradient form the furthest mine in the mineral belt. NCR spokesman William von Till said the background levels would not reflect a true measure that far away from the Homestake mill site. Although admitting the NRC used polluted water to gain its background water levels, von Till added, We cannot make Homestake Mining Company clean up any pollutants it didnt cause; i.e. the other mill sites and mines up gradient from Homestake. Audience members said they felt Homestake used that philosophy to find a loophole in which to file its request for a higher level of uranium in their water. There is a back door in every building, a local man commented. NMED spokesman Jake Ingram said that his agency tested about 30 private wells out of 100-plus wells in the area. We are still waiting for the results to come back from the lab, said Ingram. Some community members said they used their well water for their daily living and noted that they were never told not to use the water. One woman noted that she and her family have been using the water for years, adding that she and her four children all have cancer. Von Till replied, There are many things that can cause cancer, but then told the NMED people to contact the woman following the meeting to get more information. Another man said he and his family moved into the area six months ago and they have been using the water. He also said no one told them not to use the water. As discussions began to heat up and after one community member asked if Homestake is asking for the contaminant level to save money, the meeting arbitrator called the meeting to an end, without answering the question. In the EPSs latest report, dated August 2005 concerning Homestake clean-up efforts, the EPS reported EPA and NMED recently surveyed the communities around the site to identify private wells and ensure all affected homeowners have access to safe drinking water from the city of Milan. According to some community members, however, Milan will not supply water to these residents. And according to testimony given during the meeting, some families have their private wells as a water source. Anyone interested in learning more about the Homestake contamination and cleanup can to the NMSU-Grants site repository on 1500 N. Third Street in Grants or phone the local NMED office at 287-8845. Finally, information is available at www.nmenv.state.nm.us on the Internet. By Scott Ford Copyright © 2005Cibola County Beacon. ***************************************************************** 59 DUF6 cylinders stored at Portsmouth, Paducah, OakRidge Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:34:08 -0700 In 1978 at Piketon,Ohio a cylinder drop and lost over 21,000.00 Lbs of DUF6 to the air and the local creeks. In 1992 a valve was broken off a cylinder and workers were told to stay inside the buildings for around four hours. During both of these release there was never any warning to the community nor did they sound off the alarms to warn the community. More information call 740-357-8916.. http://www.courier-journal. from today's Louisville Courier Journal PADUCAH, Ky. -- Cylinders storing depleted uranium at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant may be corroding because of toxic gas mistakenly left in them, according to a federal memo obtained by The Courier-Journal. About 1,825 cylinders at the plant previously had been used to store phosgene, a chemical warfare gas, according to the memo from the Department of Energy Inspector General's Office to nuclear facilities in Paducah; Oak Ridge, Tenn.; and Portsmouth, Ohio. The issues regarding the cylinders are: does enough phosgene remain to endanger workers or the public, will the gas corrode the tanks and cause a leak, and could the gas cause a dangerous reaction during a proposed conversion process? Experts have said a cylinder breached by corrosion could release hydrogen fluoride, a ground-hugging toxic gas. But Laura Schachter, an Energy Department spokeswoman, said in an interview that existing safeguards would protect Paducah's 1,200 workers and people living near the plant, which is about 10 miles west of Paducah. "We are looking at project records and documents to determine what records are in place to definitely state these cylinders have been washed (and cleaned)," she said. Any trace elements such as phosgene "probably have been dissipated," she said. But she said the issue remains under investigation. "Obviously the department is taking it seriously," she added. The Energy Department is building factories at the Paducah and Portsmouth plants to recycle and stabilize the depleted uranium in hopes of selling the fluorine that is mixed with it. 'Catastrophic' possibility The "unexpected introduction" of phosgene into the fluorine recycling plant under construction at Paducah and at an Ohio plant could have "catastrophic safety consequences," according to the memo. "We believe the findings may warrant immediate attention," said the memo's author, Alfred K. Walter, DOE assistant inspector general for Inspections and Special Inquiries. Schachter said some cylinder shipments have been placed on hold during a review but the department "has not found any verification" of an immediate danger. The Energy Department has known since October 2000 that the former Army cylinders may contain residual phosgene, according to the memo. Schachter said she could not comment on the memo's reference to October 2000 because the department could not immediately find the report. Walter's office referred questions to a spokeswoman, Denise Smith. Smith, in a telephone interview, said the Sept. 30 memo was "not a public document" and referred questions to the Energy Department. Al Puckett, a former worker who lives about a mile from the Paducah plant and who has been a vocal critic of its contamination, said he is concerned by the disclosure about phosgene. "I sure would not want those tanks busting," Puckett said. "I guess they would blow the sirens, but would you have time to get away? Phosgene? I have never even heard of phosgene at that plant." The Paducah plant has about 35,200 cylinders of depleted uranium and 37,000 cylinders overall, the Energy Department says. The discovery will not have an impact on production of commercial nuclear-reactor fuel at the plant, said Elizabeth Stuckle, a spokeswoman for U.S. Enrichment, which leases the Paducah and Portsmouth plants from the federal government. Bill Cossler, president of United Steelworkers' Local 5-550, which represents hourly workers at the plant, said he first heard of the phosgene issue about two weeks ago from U.S. Enrichment officials. "I have a lot of concern but I am reserving any worry until we know more about it," said Cossler, who has worked at the plant for 12 years. Since 2000, the government has made numerous disclosures about historical operations at the plant that have exposed workers to hazardous and highly radioactive substances. 2,500 cylinders hold gas? The phosgene gas, according to the memo's preliminary findings, could be present in about 2,500 cylinders the government acquired during the Cold War from the Army's Chemical Warfare Service in the 1940s and '50s. Investigators said there are "as many as" 309 cylinders in storage at Oak Ridge, 406 at Portsmouth and 1,825 at Paducah. At the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, U.S. Enrichment officials have ordered an immediate hold on movement, processing or transportation of 141 of the steel tanks under their control until studies are completed. The company said it controlled only one of the tanks at the Paducah plant and the balance were owned by the Energy Department. Stuckle said the measures taken to protect workers from uranium hexafluoride are sufficient to safeguard them from phosgene. At the Paducah plant, uranium that has been mixed with fluorine to form uranium hexafluoride is heated and forced through filters to separate uranium isotopes. The leftover waste product is pumped into storage cylinders and crystallizes as it cools. A plant is being built on site to treat the waste uranium byproduct and extract the fluorine. Phosgene is a corrosive, toxic gas the Germans used briefly during World War I. Exposure to skin can cause lesions and burns and inhalation causes a victim's lungs to fill with mucus and fluid. ***************************************************************** 60 Rocky Mountain News: Memo spurred FBI's Flats probe in 1989 By Karen Abbott, Rocky Mountain News October 25, 2005 The FBI agent who led a 1989 raid at the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant launched his investigation after reading an internal government memo that expressed worries about "just how really bad this site is." Jon Lipsky testified in federal court Monday that he received the crucial memo in June 1987 during a meeting at the Federal Center in Lakewood with Bill Smith, an official of the Environmental Protection Agency. Lipsky's testimony came as a $500 million class action trial entered its third week before Colorado U.S. District Judge John Kane. Thousands of neighbors and former neighbors of the now-defunct nuclear weapons plant have sued former operators Rockwell and Dow Chemical Co., contending they trespassed on the plaintiffs' properties by contaminating it with plutonium and interfered with the plaintiffs' right to use and enjoy what they owned, reducing their property values. Known as "the Walker memo," the key document set two federal agencies investigating a third and eventually led to Rocky Flats operator Rockwell International Corp. pleading guilty to 10 environmental crimes and paying an $18.5 million fine. Lawyers for Rockwell and Dow had asked Kane not to let the plaintiffs introduce the Walker memo as evidence during the trial, but Kane admitted it as an exhibit. The defendants' lawyers also tried unsuccessfully to stop Lipsky's testimony. They did persuade Kane not to let Wes McKinley testify. He was the foreman of a federal grand jury that reviewed the FBI evidence against Rockwell and wanted to indict individual officials at the plant. McKinley, later elected to the Colorado legislature, is prohibited by grand jury secrecy rules from discussing what he learned about Rocky Flats as a grand juror, but would have testified about his unsuccessful bill to post signs at the plant site warning that it isn't safe. The Walker memo had been written a year before Lipsky's meeting at the Federal Center as a draft briefing for Mary Walker, a Department of Energy assistant secretary, who was about to meet with her DOE bosses. The Walker memo said Rocky Flats lacked wells to monitor possible pollution of ground water, was handling dangerous wastes in possibly illegal ways, had poor data to show what really was happening to dangerous waste at the plant, and had numerous problems involving the required state and federal permits. Signed in the same month that Rocky Flats made a deal with federal and Colorado agencies about who would monitor its handling of dangerous wastes, the memo said, "Much of the good press that we have gotten from the agreement . . . has taken attention away from just how really bad this site is." The memo came into the possession of a congressional committee in 1987, had been passed along to top EPA officials, and, finally, handed to Lipsky. He said he got permission from federal prosecutors to begin a preliminary inquiry into what was going on at Rocky Flats. That meant he could review public documents but couldn't start interviewing people, Lipsky testified. Among the documents he reviewed were Rocky Flats' applications for permits required for the handling of dangerous wastes. Those permits had become necessary under a 1976 federal law, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, intended to follow dangerous solid wastes from their creation to their eventual disposal - "cradle to grave," Lipsky said. He said the Colorado Department of Health found Rocky Flats' permit applications so inadequate that, in 1988, it denied the facility a permit to handle dangerous solid wastes. Lipsky said the applications omitted information about some of the dangerous wastes at Rocky Flats and how they were being handled. That same year, the FBI investigation of Rocky Flats moved from a preliminary inquiry to a full field investigation, Lipsky said. The Rocky Flats plant is 16 miles northwest of downtown Denver in Jefferson County. It opened in 1952 and made plutonium-based nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. Now closed, it has undergone environmental cleansing and is destined to become a wildlife refuge. abbottk@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5188 2005 © Rocky Mountain News ***************************************************************** 61 AP Wire Report: Toxic gas may be in cylinders with depleted uranium | 10/25/2005 | Associated Press PADUCAH, Ky. - A toxic gas may be corroding cylinders with depleted uranium at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, according to a federal memo. Phosgene, a chemical warfare gas, may have been left in 1,825 cylinders at the Paducah plant, said the memo the Department of Energy's Inspector General's Office. The memo, reported by the Louisville Courier-Journal, was sent to nuclear facilities in Paducah, Oak Ridge, Tenn., and Portsmouth, Ohio. The memo outlines several issues with the gas, including whether enough phosgene remains to endanger workers or the public, whether the gas will corrode the tanks and cause a leak and could there be a harmful reaction during a proposed conversion proces. Energy Department spokeswoman Laura Schachter said that existing safeguards would protect Paducah's 1,200 workers and people living near the plant, which is about 10 miles west of Paducah. Any trace elements such as phosgene "probably have been dissipated," she said. Schacter said the issue remains under investigation. "Obviously the department is taking it seriously," she said. The Energy Department is building factories at the Paducah and Portsmouth plants to recycle and stabilize the depleted uranium in hopes of selling the fluorine that is mixed with it. Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., told reporters that plans for a depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion plant will help with the clean up. "We know all about those cannisters. That's why we're doing the (conversion plant), and we want to get that underway and those cannisters disposed of ASAP," Bunning said. The memo states that the "unexpected introduction" of phosgene into the fluorine recycling plant under construction at Paducah and at an Ohio plant could have "catastrophic safety consequences." "We believe the findings may warrant immediate attention," said the memo's author, Alfred K. Walter, DOE assistant inspector general for Inspections and Special Inquiries. Schachter said some cylinder shipments have been placed on hold during a review but the department "has not found any verification" of an immediate danger. Phosgene is a corrosive, toxic gas the Germans used briefly during World War I. Exposure to skin can cause lesions and burns and inhalation causes a victim's lungs to fill with mucous and fluid. The Energy Department has known since October 2000 that the former Army cylinders may contain residual phosgene, according to the memo. Schachter said she could not comment on the memo's reference to October 2000 because the department could not immediately find the report. Al Puckett, a former worker who lives about a mile from the Paducah plant and who has been a vocal critic of its pollution and contamination, said he is concerned by the disclosure about phosgene. "I sure would not want those tanks busting," Puckett said. "I guess they would blow the sirens, but would you have time to get away? Phosgene? I have never even heard of phosgene at that plant." The Paducah plant has roughly 35,200 cylinders of depleted uranium and 37,000 cylinders overall, the Energy Department says. The discovery will not have an impact production of commercial nuclear-reactor fuel at the plant, said Elizabeth Stuckle, a spokeswoman for U.S. Enrichment, which leases the Paducah and Portsmouth plants from the federal government. The phosgene gas, according to the memo's preliminary findings, could be present in about 2,500 cylinders the government acquired during the Cold War from the Army's Chemical Warfare Service in the 1940s and '50s. Investigators said there are "as many as" 309 cylinders in storage at Oak Ridge, 406 at Portsmouth and 1,825 at Paducah. Information from: The Courier-Journal, http://www.courier-journal.com ***************************************************************** 62 Courier-Journal: Uranium-filled cylinders at plants may be corroding courier-journal.com > Local News > Tuesday, October 25, 2005 Memo: Toxic gas in containers at Paducah, two other sites By James Malone PADUCAH, Ky. -- Cylinders storing depleted uranium at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant may be corroding because of toxic gas mistakenly left in them, according to a federal memo obtained by The Courier-Journal. About 1,825 cylinders at the plant previously had been used to store phosgene, a chemical warfare gas, according to the memo from the Department of Energy Inspector General's Office to nuclear facilities in Paducah; Oak Ridge, Tenn.; and Portsmouth, Ohio. The issues regarding the cylinders are: does enough phosgene remain to endanger workers or the public, will the gas corrode the tanks and cause a leak, and could the gas cause a dangerous reaction during a proposed conversion process? Experts have said a cylinder breached by corrosion could release hydrogen fluoride, a ground-hugging toxic gas. But Laura Schachter, an Energy Department spokeswoman, said in an interview that existing safeguards would protect Paducah's 1,200 workers and people living near the plant, which is about 10 miles west of Paducah. "We are looking at project records and documents to determine what records are in place to definitely state these cylinders have been washed (and cleaned)," she said. Any trace elements such as phosgene "probably have been dissipated," she said. But she said the issue remains under investigation. "Obviously the department is taking it seriously," she added. The Energy Department is building factories at the Paducah and Portsmouth plants to recycle and stabilize the depleted uranium in hopes of selling the fluorine that is mixed with it. 'Catastrophic' possibility The "unexpected introduction" of phosgene into the fluorine recycling plant under construction at Paducah and at an Ohio plant could have "catastrophic safety consequences," according to the memo. "We believe the findings may warrant immediate attention," said the memo's author, Alfred K. Walter, DOE assistant inspector general for Inspections and Special Inquiries. Schachter said some cylinder shipments have been placed on hold during a review but the department "has not found any verification" of an immediate danger. The Energy Department has known since October 2000 that the former Army cylinders may contain residual phosgene, according to the memo. Schachter said she could not comment on the memo's reference to October 2000 because the department could not immediately find the report. Walter's office referred questions to a spokeswoman, Denise Smith. Smith, in a telephone interview, said the Sept. 30 memo was "not a public document" and referred questions to the Energy Department. Al Puckett, a former worker who lives about a mile from the Paducah plant and who has been a vocal critic of its contamination, said he is concerned by the disclosure about phosgene. "I sure would not want those tanks busting," Puckett said. "I guess they would blow the sirens, but would you have time to get away? Phosgene? I have never even heard of phosgene at that plant." The Paducah plant has about 35,200 cylinders of depleted uranium and 37,000 cylinders overall, the Energy Department says. The discovery will not have an impact on production of commercial nuclear-reactor fuel at the plant, said Elizabeth Stuckle, a spokeswoman for U.S. Enrichment, which leases the Paducah and Portsmouth plants from the federal government. Bill Cossler, president of United Steelworkers' Local 5-550, which represents hourly workers at the plant, said he first heard of the phosgene issue about two weeks ago from U.S. Enrichment officials. "I have a lot of concern but I am reserving any worry until we know more about it," said Cossler, who has worked at the plant for 12 years. Since 2000, the government has made numerous disclosures about historical operations at the plant that have exposed workers to hazardous and highly radioactive substances. 2,500 cylinders hold gas? The phosgene gas, according to the memo's preliminary findings, could be present in about 2,500 cylinders the government acquired during the Cold War from the Army's Chemical Warfare Service in the 1940s and '50s. Investigators said there are "as many as" 309 cylinders in storage at Oak Ridge, 406 at Portsmouth and 1,825 at Paducah. At the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, U.S. Enrichment officials have ordered an immediate hold on movement, processing or transportation of 141 of the steel tanks under their control until studies are completed. The company said it controlled only one of the tanks at the Paducah plant and the balance were owned by the Energy Department. Stuckle said the measures taken to protect workers from uranium hexafluoride are sufficient to safeguard them from phosgene. At the Paducah plant, uranium that has been mixed with fluorine to form uranium hexafluoride is heated and forced through filters to separate uranium isotopes. The leftover waste product is pumped into storage cylinders and crystallizes as it cools. A plant is being built on site to treat the waste uranium byproduct and extract the fluorine. Phosgene is a corrosive, toxic gas the Germans used briefly during World War I. Exposure to skin can cause lesions and burns and inhalation causes a victim's lungs to fill with mucus and fluid. Copyright 2005 The Courier-Journal. ***************************************************************** 63 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Fernald FR Doc 05-21288 [Federal Register: October 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 205)] [Notices] [Page 61609-61610] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25oc05-41] AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Fernald. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Saturday, November 5, 2005, 8:30 a.m.-12 p.m. ADDRESSES: Crosby Township Senior Center, 8910 Willey Road, Harrison, Ohio 45030. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Sarno, The Perspectives Group, Inc., 1055 North Fairfax Street, Suite 204, Alexandria, VA 22314, at (703) 837-1197, or e-mail: djsarno@theperspectivesgroup.com. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Agenda: 8:30 a.m.--Call to Order. 8:35 a.m.--Updates and Announcements. 8:45 a.m.--Legacy Management and Institutional Controls Plan. 10:15 a.m.--Break. 10:30 a.m.--Local Stakeholder Organization (LSO) Update. [[Page 61610]] 10:45 a.m.--History/Education Roundtable Results and Next Steps. 11:05 a.m.--Fernald Citizens' Advisory Board History Update and Next Steps. 11:25 a.m.--Friends of Fernald Group. 11:50 a.m.--Public Comment. 12 p.m.--Adjourn. Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board chair either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact the Board chair at the address or telephone number listed below. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provisions will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. This notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available by writing to the Fernald Citizens' Advisory Board, Phoenix Environmental Corporation, MS-76, Post Office Box 538704, Cincinnati, OH 43253-8704, or by calling the Advisory Board at (513) 648-6478. Issued at Washington, DC on October 19, 2005. Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 05-21288 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 64 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho FR Doc 05-21289 [Federal Register: October 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 205)] [Notices] [Page 61610] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25oc05-42] National Laboratory AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Idaho National Laboratory. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 8 a.m.-6 p.m. Wednesday, November 16, 2005, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Opportunities for public participation will be held Tuesday, November 15, from 12:15 to 12:30 p.m. and 4:45 to 5 p.m.; and Wednesday, November 16, from 11:45 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 4 to 4:15 p.m. Additional time may be made available for public comment during the presentations. These times are subject to change as the meeting progresses, depending on the extent of comment offered. Please check with the meeting facilitator to confirm these times. ADDRESSES: Eagle Rock Art Museum, 300 South Capital, Idaho Falls, ID 83402. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon A. Brennan, Federal Coordinator, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 Fremont Avenue, MS-1216, Idaho Falls, ID 83401. Phone (208) 526-3993; Fax (208) 526-1926 or e-mail: Shannon.Brennan@nuclear.energy.gov or visit the Board's Internet home page at: http://www.ida.net/users/cab. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the meeting; please contact Shannon A. Brennan for the most current agenda): Idaho Cleanup Project Lifecycle Baseline. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act--Five-Year Review. Tribal concerns along waste corridors. Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Shannon A. Brennan at the address or telephone number listed above. The request must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available by writing to Shannon A. Brennan, Federal Coordinator, at the address and phone number listed above. Issued at Washington, DC on October 19, 2005. Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 05-21289 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 65 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge FR Doc 05-21290 [Federal Register: October 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 205)] [Notices] [Page 61610-61611] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25oc05-43] Reservation AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Oak Ridge Reservation. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Wednesday, November 9, 2005, 6 p.m. ADDRESSES: DOE Information Center, 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pat Halsey, Federal Coordinator, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, P.O. Box 2001, EM-90, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865) 576-4025; Fax (865) 576-5333 or e- mail: halseypj@oro.doe.gov or check the Web site at http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ssab. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Agenda: Haul Road Update. Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the agenda item should contact Pat Halsey at the address or telephone number listed above. [[Page 61611]] Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. This notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues. Minutes: Minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying at the Department of Energy's Information Center at 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, TN between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, or by writing to Pat Halsey, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, P.O. Box 2001, EM-90, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, or by calling her at (865) 576-4025. Issued at Washington, DC on October 19, 2005. Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 05-21290 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************