*****************************************************************
01/20/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.17
*****************************************************************
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 Annan Encourages Iran To Foster Environment Conducive To Talks
2 [NYTr] US, EU Have Little Leverage over Iran
3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Pulling Foreign Reserves From Europe
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's energy needs will not be met by oil alone
5 Interfax: Moscow supports discussion of Iranian nuclear issue within
6 AFP: IAEA chief holding off Iran report until March - diplomats -
7 AFP: Israelis would back attack on Iran nuclear sites - poll -
8 AFP: US says Iran facing growing isolation
9 Guardian Unlimited: Russia: Iran Ready to Discuss Proposal
10 US: [NYTr] Chomsky warns against 'Armageddon of our own making'
11 Asian Tribune: The illusive US arms bazaar
12 IPS-English FRANCE: Chirac's Nuclear Threat Dismissed
13 [NYTr] Chirac Rattles Nuclear Sabers at "State Terrorists"
14 Guardian Unlimited: Chirac prepared to use nuclear strike against
15 Times of India: Glitches dog Indo-US nuclear deal
16 Bellona: UK sticks to its guns in AMEC quarrel
17 TheStar.com: Missile defence: It's still a bad idea
18 Mos News: Russian Colonel Who Averted Nuclear War Receives World Cit
NUCLEAR REACTORS
19 US: Arizona Republic: Nuclear power to stay low
20 Guardian Unlimited: Next generation of nuclear reactors may be fast
21 US: Beacon Journal: Nuclear facility workers indicted
22 US: Beacon Journal: Davis-Besse investigation
23 US: Beacon Journal: FirstEnergy agrees to $28 million fine, saying w
24 US: NRC: NRC Statement on Justice Department Davis-Besse Action
25 RIA Novosti: Russian nuclear agency's operations unprofitable in 200
26 RIA Novosti: Russian nuclear power official to talk cooperation with
27 US: NRC: Diaz Names Jeanne Lopatto Federal/International Assistant
28 US: AP: Nuke plant contractor, ex-workers indicted
29 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
30 US: NRC: Final Regulatory Guide; Issuance, Availability
31 US: NRC: Nuclear Information and Resource Service All Nuclear Power
32 AFP: US still sees problems in civilian nuclear deal with India -
33 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria's Court Drops Greenpeace Nuclear Plant
34 Guardian Unlimited: Three Indicted in Ohio Nuclear Plant Case
35 US: Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Plant Owner to Pay $28M Fine
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
36 US: kgw.com: Judge denies new trial for Hanford downwinder
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
37 US: Sydney Morning Herald: China uranium export talks to continue -
38 The Hindu: Safeguards for breeder reactors, key obstacle
39 Las Vegas SUN: Bechtel opposes Yucca lawsuits
40 reviewjournal.com : Miss Nevada supports nuclear waste facility
41 RGJ.com: Miss Nevada sounds off on Yucca Mountain
42 US: Star-Gazette.COM - Letters: Landfill pollutants hang around for
43 US: UPI: Uranium interest worries Utah residents
44 US: LA Daily News: Regulators back neighbors in Boeing case
45 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Lawyers call for ethics probe
46 Pahrump Valley Times: Commission slates a pair for next week (Yucca)
47 QandO Blog: Congressional Entitlement (Yucca)
48 Pahrump Valley Times: Sandia: Lead federal lab for Yucca Mountain jo
49 KVBC: Response to Miss Nevada's Yucca Mountain comments
50 US: Watertown TAB & Press: State takes a pass on toxic park
51 Pahrump Valley Times: Consultant's report on Yucca project 'vacuous,
52 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE takes new steps to reorganize Yucca
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
53 ContraCostaTimes.com: Los Alamos rolls out team roster
54 CC Times: Pension change angers lab workers
55 DOE: DOE Announces Three Projects to Help the Gulf Coast Recover
56 Hanford News: Work progressing at vitrification plant; Budget cuts s
57 Hanford News: Feds eye changes in Hanford claim rules
58 Hanford News: CH2M Hill Hanford makes relief donation
59 Hanford News: Fluor agrees to pay DOE $206,000 fine
60 DOE: Emergency Order To Resume Limited Operation at the Potomac Rive
61 Rocky Mountain News: Rocky Flats case getting closer to end
62 Pahrump Valley Times: Hanford leads the way in nuke cleanup
63 lamonitor.com: LANL power source off to Pluto
64 Paducah Sun: DOE urged to save workers’ pensions
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Annan Encourages Iran To Foster Environment Conducive To Talks
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:00:50 -0500
New York, Jan 19 2006 7:00PM
United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan today urged the Tehran
Government to foster an environment conducive to talks on Iran’s
nuclear ambitions.
<"http://www.un.org/apps/sg/offthecuff.asp?nid=822">Responding to
press questions in New York, Mr. Annan recalled yesterday’s announcement
by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that its
Board of Government will hold a special meeting on Iran early next
month.
“My own advice to the Iranians is to create an environment that will
allow the negotiations to go forward,” he said.
Last week, Iran broke the IAEA seals on equipment used to produce
enriched uranium, ending its suspension of those activities. Iran
contends that it is only conducting research and development for
peaceful purposes, but the Agency says it is unable to verify this
claim.
The Secretary-General said the country’s authorities should not resume
their nuclear fuel research. “We need time to build confidence
and trust so that these negotiations will take place in an atmosphere
which is appropriate,” he stressed.
He also voiced hope that the Iranians would return to the negotiating
table “in a genuine spirit of searching for a solution, because
if indeed their intention is peaceful nuclear capability, the
international community in the discussions have given an assurance
that they will make sure that they do have the fuel necessary.”
At the same time, he noted that as a last resort the matter would
revert to the UN Security Council. “If all else fails and the process
is exhausted and the issue were to come here, then the Council
will have to deal with it,” he said.
Looking at the broader need to tackle nuclear arms proliferation,
the Secretary-General noted that when national leaders gathered
for last September’s World Summit at the UN, they were unable to
endorse common language addressing the issue. “We all knew the dangers
of (failing to address) non-proliferation and disarmament,
but we couldn’t get a paragraph agreed, which I said was a real disappointment
and a real disgrace.”
He cautioned that a concerted response is needed. “If leadership
is not shown and we are not sending around the message that we mean
business when we talk of nuclear non-proliferation, we mean business
when we talk of disarmament, we are going to be confronted
with these problems, so I would hope that all is not lost and that
the Member States will still find some way, some energy and creativity
in reverting to this issue of nuclear non-proliferation
and disarmament, even during the course of this General Assembly
session,” he said.
“It is not too late.”
2006-01-19 00:00:00.000
________________
For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml
*****************************************************************
2 [NYTr] US, EU Have Little Leverage over Iran
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:20:10 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
excerpted from Abunimah News
The New York Times - 20 January 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/politics/20sanctions.html
U.S. Aims to Avoid Angering Iran's Public
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
WASHINGTON, Jan. 19 - As Western governments debate how to punish Iran for
its nuclear activities, Bush administration and European officials said
Thursday that they wanted to avoid causing hardship or more anti-Western
resentment in the Iranian public.
The officials said that sanctions were not in the offing anytime soon, and
they had ruled out any early steps toward an oil embargo or other sorts of
sweeping economic punishments that would not only be opposed in Europe but
would also cause internal suffering in Iran.
Iran's leverage over the West because of its oil exports and trade
agreements are a fact of life that American and European officials said made
sanctions in that area impractical. But these officials also argue the
importance of not alienating Iranians who might support the West, causing
them to rally around their leaders.
"A heavy-handed sanctions approach is going to hurt an awful lot of Iranians
that we don't want to alienate," said a State Department official who is
working on the issue. "We're going to have to be more surgical."
President Bush and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany discussed the need
for "smart sanctions" in a meeting last week, according to a German
diplomatic official, with Mrs. Merkel in particular pushing for care in not
angering the Iranian public.
Various Western diplomats said Thursday that one way of punishing Iranian
leaders would be to impose travel bans or freeze the assets of government
officials in crucial ministries or business leaders close to the theocracy.
Another step might involve acting against any businesses connected to Iran's
suspected nuclear weapons program. Iran has denied having any such program.
Bush administration officials cited as an example the Treasury Department's
move on Wednesday to freeze assets of the director of Syrian military
intelligence over that country's involvement in the assassination of
Lebanese political figures.
The issue of penalties has become more pressing as a Feb. 2 emergency
meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency approaches. Western
officials are planning to refer Iran for action at that meeting, and
proposals will then be considered in the United Nations Security Council and
referred back to the atomic agency.
Even as the notion of sweeping sanctions was being discounted, however, the
administration also came under pressure on Thursday to move quickly toward
such penalties. Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, a leading Democrat, announced
that he would shortly introduce a resolution calling for just such a step.
"We have wasted valuable time, diverted resources and ignored this problem
at our peril," Mr. Bayh said, noting that he supports a ban on gasoline
sales to Iran and other economic punishments. "No one wants to forestall the
need to use military force more than I do, but if we are to do so, we must
act now."
As a practical matter, a resolution like the one Mr. Bayh put forward might
be popular among senators but would also be unlikely to be voted on quickly,
especially if the administration wants to hold off on punishments while it
is in the final throes of negotiating with Europeans on what to do about
Iran.
Andy Fisher, a spokesman for Senator Richard G. Lugar, an Indiana Republican
who heads the Foreign Relations Committee, also said the committee generally
favored waiting for the last stages of diplomacy to be played out before
sanctions on Iran are considered.
Even then, Mr. Fisher said, sanctions should be imposed in a way that did
not replicate what happened in Iraq in the 1990's, when a ban on oil exports
caused huge suffering among Iraqis but also led to profits among Saddam
Hussein and his clique as they evaded the sanctions through the black
market.
In their discussions last week, Mrs. Merkel gave Mr. Bush a personal example
of how such sanctions affected her fellow East Germans during the Communist
years, the German diplomatic official said Thursday. She recalled that she
and other Germans sympathetic to the West had no problem with Western
actions that punished Communist leaders but that "if we ran out of oranges
or bananas, then we didn't like it."
Even attempts to put pressure on the Soviet Union by banning their
participation in the 1980 Olympics were unpopular among sympathetic Germans,
Mrs. Merkel was said to have told Mr. Bush.
The president's reaction was not known, but an administration official said
a ban on World Cup participation was not being considered. Indeed,
administration officials have maintained that permitting Iranian athletes or
musicians to travel to the West should be encouraged, to help open Iran to
outside influences, encourage defections and lead eventually to internal
demands for change. "The focus on smart sanctions makes sense because they
work the best," said Patrick Clawson, deputy director of the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy. "Big economic sanctions would not only be
difficult to get, but Iran has vast foreign reserves from its oil revenues,
so they can ride out what gets thrown at them."
Mr. Clawson, who has written extensively about Iran, said Iranian leaders
were acutely sensitive to being diplomatically isolated so that travel bans
and asset freezes "offer some pretty good prospects." A side benefit of such
smaller sanctions, he said, is that "what might be easier to achieve would
also be more effective."
American and European experts on Iran say corruption is a major problem and
many Iranian leaders have foreign bank accounts, though they are in Europe
and not the United States. Eventually, if negotiations fail to stop Iran
from enriching uranium or taking other steps opposed by the West, European
countries might act against those accounts, various diplomats said.
***
Syrian Backs Iran Nuclear Aims
By The New York Times
CAIRO, Jan. 19 - President Bashar al-Assad of Syria greeted the Iranian
president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in Damascus on Thursday and said he
supported Iran's drive for a peaceful nuclear program.
"Syria supports the right of Iran and any country in the world to acquire
nuclear technology for peaceful purposes," Mr. Assad said during a joint
news conference with Mr. Ahmadinejad. "Those countries which object to this
issue did not offer convincing reasons as to whether this is legitimate or
not."
During the news conference, Mr. Assad also repeated his long-standing demand
that Israel give up nuclear weapons, and he insisted that any
counterproliferation effort in the Middle East should begin with pressure on
Israel.
Thursday was the first day of Mr. Ahmadinejad's two-day visit to Syria, his
first there since becoming president in August.
The trip comes two weeks before an emergency meeting of the International
Atomic Energy Agency's board to discuss Iran's nuclear program.
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Pulling Foreign Reserves From Europe
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Saturday January 21, 2006 2:17 AM
AP Photo DAM105
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - A defiant Iran announced Friday it has begun
pulling its foreign currency accounts out of European banks to
protect its assets from possible U.N. sanctions over its nuclear
program.
As analysts estimated the amount of those funds at up to $50
billion, Iran also called for a reduction in OPEC oil production
- raising the possibility that the country would use oil in its
standoff with the West. Iran pumps about 4 million barrels of
oil a day, making it the second largest producer in OPEC after
Saudi Arabia.
Underlining his challenging stance, Iran's hard-line president,
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, held a meeting in Damascus, Syria, on
Friday with leaders from the Palestinian militant groups Hamas
and Islamic Jihad.
The two governments expressed support for Iran's right to the
peaceful exploitation of nuclear power and criticized what they
called the ``selective and double-standard policy practiced by
some international powers in this regard.'' The remark was a
reference to U.S. and European opposition to Iran's enrichment
of uranium, a process that can produce material for atomic
bombs.
The meeting came a day after an Islamic Jihad suicide bomber
blew himself up in a Tel Aviv restaurant, wounding 20 people.
Israel accused Iran and Syria of being behind the attack, a
charge both countries denied.
The currency withdrawal signaled that Iran was willing to
weather U.N. punishment rather than abandon its nuclear
ambitions, which the United States and some in Europe say are to
develop atomic weapons. Tehran insists its program is for
peaceful purposes only.
Friday's move also deprives Europe of an important lever to
influence Iran and could weaken its resolve to push Iran to give
up key parts of its nuclear program, analysts said.
Crude oil prices rose above $67 Friday amid concern over the
Iranian nuclear dispute, unrest in Nigeria and al-Qaida's threat
of terrorist attacks in the United States.
Analysts fear that oil prices could surge much higher - even
beyond $100 a barrel - if the U.N. Security Council imposes
trade sanctions on Iran over its nuclear activities.
Iran's Oil Ministry confirmed Friday that the country is pushing
for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to cut its
overall production.
Ministry spokeswoman Souzan Shakourzadeh told The Associated
Press the move was connected to the expected fall in demand for
oil in the second quarter of 2006 and not to the nuclear
dispute. She could not say how large a cut Iran is seeking.
The announcement of the withdrawal of Iran's foreign currency
accounts from Europe came from the country's Central Bank
governor, Ebrahim Sheibani.
``We transfer the foreign exchange reserves to wherever we deem
fit,'' Sheibani was quoted as saying by the semiofficial Iranian
Students News Agency. He would not say how much money was
involved or where Iran would move it.
It was not immediately clear whether Iran's investments and
property in Europe would also be affected.
Iran's assets in the United States were frozen shortly after the
1979 revolution that toppled the pro-Western Shah Mohammad Reza
Pahlavi and installed a clerical regime.
Economists said the impact on the global economy would be muted
since the amount is not large in comparison to other countries'
reserves and since there was no sign the money would be shifted
from dollars and euros to other currencies.
Analysts put the amount of Iran's funds in Europe at between $40
billion and $50 billion - far below the holdings of countries
such as China, which had $819 billion at the end of December.
Swiss officials were tightlipped over whether Iran's move might
include Switzerland, which is not part of the European Union, or
if it meant more Iranian money might be on the way.
Peter Westin, chief economist for Moscow investment bank MDM
Bank, said that Iran's good relations with Moscow made it a
possible destination for Iran's foreign currency reserves. ``In
that sense Russia is a good option,'' he said.
Spokesmen for the Russian Central bank were not available Friday
evening.
Traders pushed the price of light sweet crude for February
delivery up $1.32 to $68.15 in New York trading. On the ICE
Futures exchange in London, March Brent rose $1.01 to $66.24 a
barrel.
Stuart Eizenstat, who helped negotiate sanctions against Iran
after the 1979 hostage crisis, said the Iranian currency action
could weaken European resolve to ensure that Iran does not
acquire nuclear weapons.
``It's one less instrument of leverage,'' Eizenstat told AP.
European powers have drafted a resolution that calls for
referring Iran to the council but stops short of asking for
imposition of punitive measures against Iran. The International
Atomic Energy, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, will meet Feb. 2 to
discuss the draft.
Momentum gathered Friday for Europe to take steps against Iran
with two senior officials speaking out against the country's
nuclear activities.
Italian Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini told the AP that Iran's
nuclear program was testing the world's resolve. ``The
international community must have a defined, very precise, very
united strategy,'' Fini said in an interview.
The head of France's armed forces, Gen. Henri Bentegeat, accused
Iran of trying to obtain nuclear weapons. Iran ``presents a
major worry because it is a country that has shown extremely
bellicose intentions,'' he told RTL radio.
Iran removed some U.N. seals from its main uranium enrichment
facility in Natanz, central Iran, on Jan. 10 and resumed
research on nuclear fuel - including small-scale enrichment -
after a 2-year freeze.
---
AP Business Writers Matt Moore in Frankfurt, Jane Wardell in
London, Alex Nicholson in Moscow, Victor L. Simpson in Rome and
Laurence Frost in Paris contributed to this report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's energy needs will not be met by oil alone
The international pressure over our nuclear plants is
unfair and unjustified, says Hamid Babaei
Friday January 20, 2006
The Guardian
The news reporting on Iran has been to a large extent misleading
because it portrays the country as a menace that must be urgently
dealt with. The basis of much of these claims is Iran's peaceful
nuclear program. It seems this issue will dominate the media
coverage in weeks to come - with the strategy apparently being to
deprive a nation proud of its great scientific achievements from
research-based activities. What are the real motives behind this
orchestrated move to demonise the Islamic Republic?
The move by Iran is crystal clear: under the non proliferation
treaty (NPT) it is allowed to exercise its rights. As the
Guardian leader article suggested: "Diplomacy is the right way to
respond" (Tangling with Tehran, January 12, The Guardian). We
also believe that diplomatic action has not completely been put
to the test.
Instead of resorting to exaggeration about the issue and relying
on unfounded stories to name one party as guilty, it would be
much more useful to review impartially the existing facts and
figures. Unlike exonerated parties who pose a real threat to the
world's stability by bluntly ignoring article 6 of the NPT
obliging them to phase out their nuclear arsenals, Iran has
signed the treaty and has time and again renounced the pursuit
of any nuclear weapons programme.
We have even signed the additional protocol which provides the
International Atomic Energy Authority inspectors with the
authority to carry out on-the-spot and intrusive inspections.
Moreover, the IAEA cameras haven't hesitated to monitor any
movement, whether animate or inanimate, in Iranian nuclear
sites. In addition there are the 1,400 person-hours of
inspection of the sites by the authority, which is another
indication of Tehran's transparency in its nuclear activities.
This evidence rules out any baseless accusations about Iran's
"intentions". But what else is needed and what can be added to
this menu so that the west's double-standards approach comes to
an end?
After two and a half years of voluntary suspension and
confidence-building measures, our plans are now just nuclear
research and have nothing to do with enrichment, the details of
which are to be discussed with Russia in Moscow on February 17.
It has been said that Iran, as a major oil-producing country,
should not change its energy mix in favour of clean and
renewable sources, as recommended by the Kyoto protocol. But we
will definitely need nuclear power plants to meet our future
energy needs. Our domestic oil consumption stands at just under
1.7m barrels a day. Based on our annual growth rate, it is
predicted that our energy consumption will increase by 7-12%
each year for the next 10 years. So this precious source of
energy will be exhausted in the foreseeable future.
It is not right, by any civilised norms, to impose
imperial-style ideas on a sovereign state - and especially on a
country which has historically been a stabilising and civilising
force in the highly sensitive Persian Gulf region.
· Hamid Babaei is first secretary at the embassy of the Islamic
Republic of Iran, in London
h_babaei@iran-embassy.org.uk
The Response column offers those who have been written about in
the Guardian an opportunity to reply. If you wish to respond, at
greater length than in a letter, to an article in which you have
featured either directly or indirectly, please email
response@guardian.co.ukor write to Response, The Guardian, 119
Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3ER. We cannot guarantee to publish
all responses, and we reserve the right to edit pieces for both
length and content
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
5 Interfax: Moscow supports discussion of Iranian nuclear issue within IAEA
Jan 20 2006 3:48PM
VIENNA. Jan 20 (Interfax) - Russia still supports the
continuation of discussions surrounding the Iranian nuclear
problem within the framework of the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), a source from the permanent Russian mission to
international organizations in Vienna told Interfax on Friday.
"As of now our position is that these issues should be dealt
with within diplomatic and IAEA frameworks," the source said.
© 1991-2006 Interfax
All rights reserved
News and other data on this web site are provided for
information purposes only, and are not intended for
republication or redistribution. Republication or redistribution
of Interfax content, including by framing or similar means, is
expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of
Interfax.
*****************************************************************
6 AFP: IAEA chief holding off Iran report until March - diplomats -
VIENNA (AFP) - UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei wants
to give Iran until March to comply with international
inspections, despite an emergency meeting set for February that
could bring Tehran before the UN Security Council for possible
sanctions, diplomats told AFP.
"He doesn't want to move the date up all of a sudden. He
wouldn't have the information he needs sooner and also he wants
to give the Iranians due process," as he had told the Iranians
they would have until March, when ADVERTISEMENT
[ src=] he
would file a report, to comply, a Western diplomat said.
ElBaradei's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) holds its
next regularly scheduled meeting on March 6 but an emergency
session of the IAEA's board of governors has been called for
February 2, after Iran moved to begin previously suspended work
on nuclear fuel that can be used for nuclear energy but can also
be bomb material.
The head of the IAEA is preparing a "detailed" report on Iran's
compliance in answering crucial questions about its nuclear
program that the nuclear watchdog has been investigating for
three years.
Iran triggered the crisis when on January 10 it removed the
seals on sensitive equipment used to enrich uranium, amid
Western fears it is secretly developing nuclear weapons.
The European Union's three main powers -- Britain, France and
Germany -- called next month's emergency meeting to refer Iran
to the UN Security Council, which could impose sanctions to
force Iranian compliance.
The trio has asked ElBaradei to issue his full report for the
February meeting but he has refused, saying this would not give
Iran enough time, diplomats said.
In Washington, US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said
the United States thinks "it would be appropriate and helpful
for the board members to hear (in February) from Director
General ElBaradei concerning the IAEA's efforts to obtain
information from the Iranian government regarding the unanswered
questions that Iran has left on the table."
ElBaradei said however that Iran should be given "until March,"
a diplomat said, although the IAEA chief is open to giving a
shorter report in February.
McCormack said ElBaradei should report "in some fashion," in any
case.
The diplomat said ElBaradei has been talking tough with Iran and
told them that if they did not comply by March "he could not go
any further and the international community could not go any
further" in tolerating their nuclear program.
Iran says its nuclear program is a peaceful effort to generate
electricity but the United States alleges it is hiding covert
work on atomic weapons.
While the US and the EU want to take Iran to the Security
Council, Russia and China, which have strong trade ties with
Iran, want to give Tehran more time.
A diplomat close to the IAEA said Russia wanted to split the
action into two parts, "with a nominal referral in February but
giving Iran one month to deliver on demands to suspend nuclear
fuel work and to cooperate with the IAEA."
But a Western diplomat said the US and European states "rejected
this idea outright."
Another Western diplomat said ElBaradei will "very possibly
provide an update to the February board and could provide some
general information on other issues, but the detailed report
will only be for March 6."
"ElBaradei has told the Iranians he's going to provide a
detailed report on the main outstanding issues and if Iran has
not complied by then, he is going to report that he is not
making progress," the diplomat said.
The outstanding issues concern two offers Iran received in 1987
and in the mid-1990's from a nuclear black market for nuclear
technology, along with IAEA demands to visit military sites
Lavizan and Parchin and IAEA requests for information on
dual-use equipmen that could be used for weapons purposes.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
7 AFP: Israelis would back attack on Iran nuclear sites - poll -
Fri Jan 20, 7:43 AM ET
JERUSALEM (AFP) - More Israelis than not believe their government
should risk a military attack on Iranian nuclear sites if
diplomatic efforts fail on Tehran's atomic programme, a poll
revealed.
Asked if diplomatic efforts fail Israel" /> Israelshould take
military action against Iran" /> Iran, despite the risk of
retaliation, 49 percent responded yes in a survey published in
the Maariv newspaper.
Around 40 percent said no and 11 percent expressed no opinion
either way, said the poll conducted by an independent research
institute.
Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert warned Iran on Tuesday that
Israel would not let anyone who threatened its existence obtain
weapons of mass destruction.
Iran faces the threat of being referred to the UN Security
Council for resuming nuclear fuel research work that Israel and
the Western powers fear would give the regime the know-how to
build a bomb.
Although Israel is believed to be the only nuclear power in the
Middle East, it has never admitted to having a non-conventional
arsenal.
The Jewish state views the Islamic republic as its number one
enemy and its fears were heightened when President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad in October called for the Jewish state to be "wiped
off the map."
Friday's opinion poll was carried out on the basis of a
representative sample of 552 people and carried a margin of
error of 4.2 percent.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
8 AFP: US says Iran facing growing isolation
Fri Jan 20, 5:46 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States said that Iran" /> Iran's
move to transfer currency deposits away from Europe is a sign of
growing isolation amid heightening tensions over its nuclear
programme.
US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Iran's market
manoeuvres would not deter moves to refer its nuclear activities
to the UN Security Council.
The chief of Iran's Central Bank indicated that Tehran has
started shifting foreign currency deposits to southeast Asia
amid the threat of sanctions, Iranian media reported Friday.
"I think it is an indication that Iran is further isolating
itself from the rest of the world," McCormack told a press
briefing. "I don't know what it is that they hope to accomplish
by doing this."
McCormack described the decision making process of the Iranian
leadership as "opaque" to the rest of the world.
The spokesman reaffirmed that the United States believes it has
enough votes at the International Atomic Energy Agency" />
International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) to refer Iran to the UN
Security Council for action. The IAEA's board of governors is to
meet in Vienna on February 2.
"We'll see if the added weight of finding themselves before the
Security Council provides an incentive for the Iranian regime to
engage with the international community in a serious manner on
this topic," said McCormack.
A US envoy, undersecretary of state for arms control and
international security, Robert Joseph, is on an international
tour seeking support for action against Iran.
He was in Tokyo on Friday and will go on to Beijing, having
already visited Moscow this week.
Russia and China have so far proved reluctant to take the matter
to the Security Council. Both have large business interests in
Iran, which has denied that it is seeking to build a nuclear
bomb.
"We believe it's important that the world send a unified message
to the Iranian government that their behaviour is unacceptable,
that they cannot violate with impunity their international
obligations," said the spokesman.
The United States is calling for a vote for UN Security Council
referral, but McCormack said: "Ultimately that decision is going
to be up to those individual governments what course of action
they decide to take."
The spokesman said that IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei
should make a statement on the UN watchdog agency's "efforts to
obtain information from the Iranian government regarding the
unanswered questions that Iran has left on the table."
McCormack also noted Friday was the 25th anniversary of the end
of the hostage seige at the US embassy in the Iranian capital.
He said it had been "an outrageous violation of international
law."
Fifty-two diplomats and embassy staff were held hostage in the
mission for 444 days from 1979 to 1981.
*****************************************************************
9 Guardian Unlimited: Russia: Iran Ready to Discuss Proposal
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 20, 2006 1:02 PM
AP Photo DAM101
By JIM HEINTZ
Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW (AP) - The head of Russia's atomic energy agency said
Friday that Iran is ready for detailed discussions on the
proposal to conduct Iran's uranium enrichment in Russia.
The proposal, under which uranium would be enriched in Russia
for use in Iranian reactors, is aimed at eliminating concerns
that Iran could enrich its own uranium to higher levels for use
in nuclear weapons.
The United States and the European Union have backed the Russian
proposal as a way out of the deadlock over Iran's nuclear
program. International pressure on Iran has mounted sharply over
the past two weeks since Iran removed United Nations seals on
its uranium-enrichment facility in Natanz.
Western countries are pushing for Iran to be referred to the
U.N. Security Council, a move that could bring sanctions. Russia
and China have held back from supporting the referral, although
the Kremlin has said it is concerned over Iran's defiance of the
international community.
Iran ``considers our proposal extremely interesting and is
prepared for detailed discussions,'' Sergei Kiriyenko, the head
of the Russian atomic energy agency, told President Vladimir
Putin in televised remarks.
``Our Iranian partners should come here in the near future and
talks will take place constantly,'' Kiriyenko said.
He did not give a specific date for the visit, but officials
have said an Iranian delegation is expected to travel to Russia
for talks on the initiative around Feb. 16.
Moscow appears to be seeking to slow the pace of action against
Iran and avert a Security Council vote on sanctions.
Although Russia has close ties with Tehran and is building the
country's first nuclear power reactor, it has been moving closer
to the Western position on Iran's nuclear program and has been
reluctant to let the issue cause a major rift in relations with
the United States and Europe.
On Wednesday, EU diplomat Javier Solana said Russia had proposed
a delay in confronting Iran at the Security Council, suggesting
the council hold less formal discussions before considering
referral by the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency.
The head of Russia's lower house of parliament warned Friday
that putting too much pressure on Iran could prompt it to follow
North Korea's path of withdrawing from the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty and ending cooperation with the IAEA.
``Such a possibility exists, and should it become a reality, the
world would undoubtedly lose,'' Kostantin Kosachyov was quoted
as saying by the Interfax news agency. He blamed ``excessive
pressure from the United States'' for the North Korea scenario.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
10 [NYTr] Chomsky warns against 'Armageddon of our own making'
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:17:41 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
The Irish Times - Jan 20, 2006
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/0120/3427285884HM11CHOMZ.html
Chomsky warns against 'Armageddon of our own making'
by Joe Humphreys
America's unilateral policy on nuclear defence is increasing the
likelihood of "an Armageddon of our own making", the controversial US
academic Dr Noam Chomsky told a Dublin audience last night.
Speaking at a lecture in UCD hosted by the Literary and Historical
Society, Dr Chomsky warned that the Bush administration was ignoring not
only the wishes of the American people but the advice of US military
analysts pursuing a "space wars" programme.
If a planned "first-strike weapon" showed any sign of success China
would almost certainly increase its warhead capacity, he said.
Dr Chomsky, who was speaking on the theme of "The Question of Survival",
also accused the US of shooting down a recent proposal, supported almost
unanimously at the UN, to control the spread of nuclear materials. As a
result, its recent posturing over Iran was regarded by the rest of the
world as a cynical attempt to convert the Non-Proliferation Treaty into
"a convenient implement of US foreign policy".
Meanwhile, in an RTI [TV] Prime Time interview broadcast last night, Dr
Chomsky suggested Ireland would be foolish to accept American assurances
that no prisoners were being transported through Shannon by the CIA.
"Governments lie all the time," he said. "It really doesn't matter
whether there are prisoners or not [in Shannon]. Suppose the planes are
refuelled at Shannon and then carry prisoners for what's called
rendition - rendition is just a fancy word for torture - well then, the
Irish people have to ask themselves: 'do we want to participate in
torture?'."
Elaborating on comments he made at a speech in Dublin on Wednesday he
said it was "an open question" as to whether the Government had
committed "a war crime" by allowing troops to stop at Shannon en route
to Iraq but it had certainly committed "a major crime".
In the question and answer session after last night's speech, Dr Chomsky
urged that wealthy people had greater responsibilities beyond the poor.
"The West has become more civilised," he added, pointing out that the
Iraq war was the first "colonial war" which was preceded by massive
protests. While such protests did not stop the invasion they represented
a huge step forward.
) The Irish Times
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
11 Asian Tribune: The illusive US arms bazaar
Date : 21/01/2006 , Sat A Newspaper Published by World
Institute for Asian Studies. Vol. 5 No. 271
By Atul Cowshish - Syndicate Features
Two roadblocks await the forward move in the Indo-US bilateral
relations early in 2006. First, the issue of nuclear cooperation
with India may look more uncertain than before with the
non-proliferation Ayatollahs in the US and its Congress becoming
increasingly hostile to the idea of extending that cooperation
with India. An equally big irritant may surface when Washington
sits on judgement on what items from its inventory of
sophisticated offensive arms to sell to the two major rivals in
South Asia—India and Pakistan.
The arms sales do appear to be on, if for no other reason than
the fact that the US arms industry is in desperate need of
buyers. One thing that can be said with some certainty, going by
past experience, is that the US will ‘balance’ the arms sales in
the sub-continent. This is something that will please the client
state of Pakistan and disappoint those in India who swears by a
transformed US that is said to be sincere in befriending us.
'‘Balance' in US sales of arms to India and Pakistan has always
meant a tilt in favour of Islamabad. The US now claims that it
is cultivating a new post-cold war relationship with India
outside its bilateral ties with Pakistan. But that will not
prevent the old US theory of ‘balance’ being put into practice.
Only the cover will change: voices are being heard in Washington
that by selling arms to India, Washington will be fuelling an
arms race in an area where both the rivals are armed with
nuclear arms. And as the self-appointed monitor in the
sub-continent, the US should not sell any 'offensive' weapons to
India, says a powerful lobby, which has a clear anti-India bias.
With plenty of cash flowing from abroad and pledges totally
nearly $6 billion after the devastating October 2005 earthquake,
Pakistan will certainly be encouraged to buy latest arms from
the US which in any case has pledged a $3 billion economic and
military package as a trade off for 'cooperation' in the
so-called war against terror.
It may be recalled that in 2003, the US had offered Pakistan a
$9 billion arms package. Washington also rewarded it in March
2004 by elevating it to the status of non-Nato ally by virtue of
which Pakistan becomes eligible for soft loans for leasing the
latest American weapons and equipment for research and
development purposes. It can expect speedy clearance for import
of US arms.
Quake or no quake, Pakistan is almost sure to go on a big arms
shopping spree worth billions of dollars in 2006 in the name of
‘matching’ the strength of India’s conventional arms. Earlier it
appeared as though Pakistan might defer some of its arms
purchase plans, particularly the F-16 fighters in view of the
more pressing financial needs in the earthquake hit areas. But
cash is no longer a problem with Islamabad. It already has
negotiated a $4 billion deal for buying Chinese JF-17 jet
fighters and naval boats.
As always, Pakistan has a long shopping list for arms that it is
seeking from abroad. US vice president, Dick Cheney, and defence
secretary Donald Rumsfeld, had made 'unannounced' visits to
Pakistan in quick succession to assure the military rulers that
they continue to enjoy American affections and their roguish
activities will continue to be overlooked. The Americans are not
going to raise the question of priority for quake relief should
Pakistan announce its plans to buy huge quantity of arms and
equipment from the US in 2006.
What is more, nearly every item that Pakistan wants may be made
available to it. The US had lifted the arms sanctions on
Pakistan soon after 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington by
Islamist terrorists (who had a Pakistani connection too). At
that time the main item that Pakistan wanted to buy from the US
was a fleet of 16 F-16 jet fighters that, in fact, had already
been contracted for. Since then Pakistan has considerably
expanded its shopping list and included nearly all the items
that India too is keen to buy from the US. These include P3C
Orion maritime surveillance aircraft, PAC-3 anti-missiles and
electronic warfare systems.
In May 2005, the Pentagon had informed the US Congress that it
would let Pakistan buy 300 ‘Sidewinder’ heat-seeking air-to-air
missiles and 60 Harpoon missiles. Their total value exceeds $225
million. Pakistan has also expressed a desire to buy 75 new
models of F-16s. Under the excuse of fighting Al Qaeda
fugitives, Pakistan has already received many sophisticated
surveillance and military equipment from the US free of charge.
India too has shown interest in buying a large American variety
of new arms and equipment. But the Bush administration is yet to
take a decision on what it is willing to sell to India. The US
decision is not entirely driven by commercial considerations
when it relates to sale of certain arms and equipment to India
that Pakistan alleges will disturb the ‘balance’ in the
sub-continent. That India’s defence and security needs cannot be
judged with the Pakistani prism does not matter to the decision
makers in Washington.
A 2003 agreement between India and the US that goes by the
grandiose name of 'next step in strategic partnership' is meant
to enhance bilateral ties in various fields, including military.
To be sure, the US has 'offered' cooperation in many strategic
areas, including the sale of some sophisticated arms.
Nothing big seems to be in the pipeline even after almost three
years of this new relationship. The US allows the veto right to
Islamabad in the sale of any 'offensive' weapon of US make or
design to India, even if that equipment is manufactured in a
third country.
India's interest in US weapons is part of the process of
diversifying the sources. India is no longer keen to put all its
eggs in the Russian basket after it was found that spares for
many vital Russian equipment were not available easily or in
time. But India continues to be more interested in purchasing
defence equipment from suppliers who are willing to transfer
technology. This is another no-go area as far as the Americans
are concerned, if it means transferring cutting-edge technology
to India.
In the name of civilian nuclear cooperation with India it
appears the US is going to transfer—the Congress permitting--
nothing but dated or untested and untried technology. India can
hardly expect America to be generous in selling its latest
'offensive' armed equipment unless it can sell the same to its
MFN ally in the region.
- Syndicate Features -
*****************************************************************
12 IPS-English FRANCE: Chirac's Nuclear Threat Dismissed
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:05:44 -0800
ROMAIPS EU IP=20
FRANCE: Chirac's Nuclear Threat Dismissed
By Julio Godoy
PARIS, Jan 20 (IPS) - French President Jacques Chirac's threat that Franc=
e could use nuclear weapons to retaliate against terrorist attacks has pr=
ovoked strong opposition.
Members of the opposition Socialist party condemned Chirac's threats. Jac=
k Lang, nominee for Socialist candidature for the 2007 presidential elect=
ions told reporters that =94a parliamentary and national debate should be=
organised to discuss the legitimacy of the French nuclear armament, and =
its enormous costs.=94
The French nuclear weapons programme costs up to four billion dollars a y=
ear. The annual state deficit is 56 billion dollars and the total debt 1.=
1 trillion dollars (a trillion is a thousand billion).
=94Many of our compatriots question the need to keep spending to maintain=
a nuclear weapons programme, which, by definition, should never be used,=
=94 Communist leader Helene Luc told IPS.
Analyst Laurent Zecchini wrote in Le Monde that =94the necessity of maint=
aining the 'force de frappe' is less and less evident after the end of th=
e cold war.=94 The 'force de frappe' is the name given to the French nucl=
ear weapons programme.
=94Russia, the former enemy, is now a French diplomatic partner, and even=
NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) is searching for a role,=94 Ze=
cchini said. Under these circumstances, =94why should France maintain its=
nuclear weapons programme?=94
In a speech Thursday at the marine military base Ile Longue on the north-=
western Atlantic coast, Chirac announced that France would use nuclear we=
apons to =94guarantee our strategic supplies and to defend our allies.=94
Chirac also said France would use nuclear weapons against =94state leader=
s who would take recourse to terrorist methods against us, and all others=
who would consider attacking France with weapons of mass destruction.=94
Chirac did not spell out what represents =94strategic supplies=94 and whi=
ch forces he thought could consider attacking France with weapons of mass=
destruction, but most people believe he was talking about oil, the Arab =
states and Iran.
The European Union, represented by France, Germany, and Britain, is curre=
ntly leading negotiations with Iran to prevent authorities in Teheran fro=
m resuming a nuclear programme.
Under the old French nuclear policy, its weapons would be a deterrent, an=
d it would never strike first. That policy seems now to have changed.
=94To think that France would use nuclear weapons against a country only =
because one of its leaders would consider attacking France is a geopoliti=
cal aberration,=94 Green party leader Noel Mamerre told IPS. =94That woul=
d mean that we would be ready to let a whole population pay for the murde=
rous folly of a handful of leaders.=94
Mamerre said Chirac's remarks call for a review of military policy. =94We=
cannot leave the responsibility for the use of nuclear weapons to one si=
ngle man,=94 he said. =94The best way to fight terrorism is to reinforce =
our own democratic values, and not believe in the chimera of impossible n=
uclear strikes.=94
Luc said Chirac's new nuclear weapons policy would =94bring us back to th=
e Cold War and to a new form of colonialism, now under the disguise of th=
e defence of our strategic supplies.=94
France should instead announce =94strong new measures to encourage the la=
rgest possible number of countries to sign the non-proliferation treaty.=94=
This treaty has been signed by 61 countries.
Only five countries officially possess nuclear weapons -- France, Britain=
, China, Russia, and the United States. Four other countries -- India, Is=
rael, Pakistan, and North Korea - are also thought to have nuclear weapon=
s.
Chirac's speech has caused concern abroad. In Germany leader of the right=
-wing Liberal Democratic Party Guido Westerwelle urged Chancellor Angela =
Merkel to =94encourage Chirac to hold back=94 from nuclear weapons.=20
Leftist foreign policy analyst Norman Peach told IPS that =94Germany and =
other European countries should stop France's risky nuclear weapons polic=
y.=94
France is believed to possess up to 300 nuclear heads, and this arsenal h=
as been modernised to allow pre-emptive strikes, military experts say. (E=
ND/IPS/EU/IP/JG/SS/06)
=20
=20
=3D 01201818 ORP012
NNNN
*****************************************************************
13 [NYTr] Chirac Rattles Nuclear Sabers at "State Terrorists"
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:20:06 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
The New York Times - 20 January 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/international/europe/20france.html
Chirac Hints at Nuclear Reply to State-Supported Terrorism
By ARIANE BERNARD
PARIS, Jan. 19 - President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that he would
consider a nuclear response to a large, state-backed terrorist strike
against France.
"The leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, as well as
those who would consider using in one way or another weapons of mass
destruction, must understand that they would lay themselves open to a firm
and adapted response on our part," Mr. Chirac said in a speech at a nuclear
submarine base in Brittany.
He named no countries.
"This response could be a conventional one," he said. "It could also be of a
different kind."
Elysee Palace said Mr. Chirac's speech reflected changes adopted as part of
a routine review of nuclear doctrine, which is done every five years.
But this was the first time that a French president had publicly spelled out
the possibility of nuclear retaliation for state-backed terrorism. In the
past, France has said nuclear weapons could be used if its "vital interests"
were at risk, while deliberately refraining from identifying those
interests.
"In French doctrine, nuclear weapons are meant to deter attacks against
'vital interests,' to create uncertainty among potential attackers about
what these interests could be," said Francois Heisbourg, special adviser at
the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris. "But here, things get
defined. That's a change."
Even though the speech did not name any countries, it was delivered amid
heightened concern about Iran, which the State Department frequently calls
"the most active state sponsor of terrorism." Iran recently resumed nuclear
activities, breaking off a November 2004 agreement suspending most of its
nuclear program. Iran maintains that it wants to develop a civilian nuclear
program and has no intention of building nuclear weapons.
Mr. Chirac couched his directive within other longstanding precedents,
saying that France does not plan to use nuclear weapons in a military
conflict and that its "nuclear deterrence is not intended to deter fanatical
terrorists" who operate around the globe, independent of established
governments.
France's Communist opposition and disarmament groups sharply criticized Mr.
Chirac's comments, calling them irresponsible, Reuters reported.
"Far from ridding France of nuclear weapons, the president is, on the
contrary, considering the actual use of nuclear bombs," the Sortir du
Nucleaire, an antinuclear group, said.
A Communist deputy, Jacques Brunhes, said Mr. Chirac's position could,
perversely, lead nonnuclear nations to seek nuclear arms. "It can only
encourage states which have signed the Nonproliferation Treaty to opt for
military uses of nuclear technology."
Specialists say they believe the French arsenal comprises about 300
warheads.
Since the cold war, critics have questioned the need for France to maintain
a nuclear deterrent, which absorbs about 10 percent of the military budget.
Mr. Chirac's government is under pressure to cut spending as it struggles to
bring its budget deficit below the European Union's limit of 3 percent of
gross domestic product. But in his speech, Mr. Chirac said, "Our country's
security and its independence have their price."
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
14 Guardian Unlimited: Chirac prepared to use nuclear strike against
terror states
Jon Henley in Paris
Friday January 20, 2006
The Guardian
Jacques Chirac said yesterday that France was prepared to use
nuclear weapons against any country that carried out a
state-sponsored terrorist attack against it.
In a speech aimed at defending France's 3bn-a-year (£2bn) nuclear
arms programme, the president said the country's nuclear strike
force was "not aimed at dissuading fanatical terrorists", but
states who used "terrorist means" or "weapons of mass
destruction" against France.
Some commentators suspected that Mr Chirac was indulging in some
international sabre-rattling during his visit to a naval base
near the port of Brest, in the north-west, to bolster his
tarnished image at home. "This response could be conventional. It
could also be of another nature," Mr Chirac told the crew of one
of the four nuclear submarines that carry 85% of France's nuclear
warheads.
But he said the country had changed its nuclear strategy,
configuring its strike force to react "flexibly" to any new
threat, particularly from regional powers. "The flexibility and
reactivity of our strategic forces would enable us to exercise
our response directly against its centres of power and its
capacity to act."
[UP]
Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
15 Times of India: Glitches dog Indo-US nuclear deal
Indrani Bagchi
[ Friday, January 20, 2006 12:13:09 amTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
NEW DELHI: The India-US efforts to work out an agreement on a
separation plan for India’s civil and military nuclear
facilities hit a roadblock on Friday, raising serious doubts
whether the two sides would be able to wrap up the landmark
nuclear deal before President Bush’s visit in March.
The differences were significant, with both foreign secretary
Shyam Saran and US undersecretary of state Nicholas Burns forced
to publicly acknowledge after two days of "intensive
discussions" that there were "difficulties."
While sources maintained that these were not insurmountable and
the determination to achieve an agreement was pretty evident,
the government here acknowledged that it may require political
intervention at the highest levels to expedite the pact.
The differences, according to sources, concern not just how to
craft a separation plan, but the safeguards agreement and the
additional protocol (which will be unique to India). According
to sources, the US made several demands from India that Saran
shot down.
The divergence remained even after a last-minute confabulation
between Saran and Burns, who on Thursday had held a quiet
meeting with national security adviser M K Narayanan.
It is only after these creases have been ironed out that India
and the US can sign the bilateral civil nuclear agreement.
While Burns described the talks as "difficult and unique", Saran
- looking unusually sombre - said many more meetings were needed
on this issue.
Thrashing out a separation plan which could be described as
"credible and defensible" is crucial for Bush administration's
attempt to get the US Congress to relax decades-old nuclear curbs
on India. On India's part, the same plan would be the basis for
it to secure a safeguards agreement with the IAEA, which in turn
would enable the Nuclear Suppliers' Group to consider allowing
nuclear trade with New Delhi.
Copyright © 2006Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 Bellona: UK sticks to its guns in AMEC quarrel
This is the second in a series of articles about the future of
AMEC
Despite recent flare ups over the future of the Arctic Military
Environmental Co-operation (AMEC) Program, which have largely
been caused by a paper presented on the organisation’s progress
by the UK, the UK remains optimistic that the involved nations
can come to some sort of consensus, AMEC officials there said.
Charles Digges, 2006-01-20 08:03
They were also clear, however, that if any of the involved
nations wished to declare their tasks within the AMEC framework
finished, then the UK would take up those projects left behind
by other countries and complete them themselves. UK officials
also emphasised that they would welcome cooperation from other
countries under the AMEC umbrella and said countries like Canada
and Sweden, had expressed interest in working with the UK.
Many observers of the programme, however, feel that the UK is
forcing the hands of its constituent nations in the four way
partnershipNorway, Russia, the United States, and the UKto do
things the UK way or leave, with a particular accent on Norway
and the United States.
Dieter Rudolph, AMEC United States Co-Chairman noted that when
AMEC first started the three original AMEC partners, Norway,
Russia and the United States agreed to common procedures for
project implementation. These procedures led to the successful
completion of initial projects. When the UK joined AMEC in 2003
they proposed new procedures. The original partners agreed to
use them on a trial basis.
Dieter Rudolph, co-chair of AMEC United States.
Charles Digges/Bellona
When the US and Norway proposed changes, they found that they
were locked into a rigid process with no flexibility, said
Rudolph in an email interview with Bellona Web..
UK officials, however, have said they are not demanding anything
extraordinary, and presented what they called a “series of
recommendations” known as the UK paper at an AMEC principles’
meeting held in November in Plymouth. The paper, entitled “AMEC
Napoleonic Bureaucracy or Effective Collaborative Delivery
Programme?” called Norway and the United States onto the carpet
for programme hold-ups, inefficiency, and safety issues.
The papera copy of which was obtained by Bellona Webwas a
surprising assessment in the eyes of Norwegian and US observers
who noted that the successful track record of completed projects
by the original partners speaks for itself. They also asked why
the UK was not willing to use the “tried and true” proven
approach, in the opinion of the US and Norway and why the UK
insisted on change right from the start of its AMEC tenure.
But UK officials nonetheless maintain that they did not wish to
strong-arm anyone out of the programme or wrest control of AMEC
from the three other countries that are involved.
DTI Chief Alan Heyes (front, right) speaking to the IAEA’s
Contact Expert Group in Moscow in 2004.
Nils Bøhmer/Bellona
Alan Heyes, chief of the UK’s Department of Trade and Industry
(DTI), which oversees the UK’s nuclear work in Russia, said the
UK paper was a set of recommendations rather than a lambasting
of it’s AMEC partners.
“We are the new guys here and we noted several places where
AMEC’s operation could be improved. There is always room for
improvement,” he said in a recent telephone interview with
Bellona Web.
Derelict submarines, many with their nuclear fuel still on
board, at mooring at the Kola Pennisula Gremikha base, from
which AMEC’s next dismantlement may come.
KSF/Bellona
What AMEC does
AMEC was originally founded as a three country consortium
created by the respective defence agencies of the United States,
Russia and Norway in order to address military-related
environmental problems, primarily submarine dismantlement, in
the fragile Arctic ecosystem of Russia’s northwest. The UK
joined AMEC in 2003.
AMEC’s underlying philosophy is that it should be easier to
discuss military environmental problems through a military
co-operative effort than through civilian channels. The
programme also emphasises the need to leave behind an
infrastructure for Russia to use after US led Co-operative
Threat Reduction (CTR) and Norwegian programmes have come to an
end.
The UK Paper
The UK Paper opens by stating: “In the opinion of many
observers, AMEC has become dysfunctional. Bureaucratic,
inefficient, slow, it has proved itself incapable of rising to
the challenge presented by multilateral procurement of high risk
nuclear legacy projects.”
This opinion seems to be restricted to a small number of
individuals, noted Rudolph. He cited a September 2004 study by
the Centre for Non-proliferation Studies commissioned by the
Nuclear Threat Reduction Initiative (NTI) on “Co-ordinating
Submarine Dismantlement Assistance in Russia” The Centre noted
AMEC’s unique role with the Russian military and recommended
that AMEC‘s expansion to Russia’s Far East be encouraged.
“Bringing AMEC’s expertise and experience to that region would
make the successful execution of projects there more likely, and
help ensure that synergies between the two regions be
discovered” the study read.
Norwegian participation in AMEC could be dissolved
In a surprise development, the Arctic Military Environmental
Co-operation (AMEC) group—long seen as the environmental
conscience of US, Norwegian and Russian nuclear dismantlement
efforts in Russia, providing safe temporary storage of spent
naval nuclear fuel—may no longer include Norway, AMEC
representatives from that country said.
The UK paper continued that: ”Despite the overall positive
context of collaboration on nuclear security, safety and other
environmental issues, donor confidence and willingness to commit
to AMEC activity has never been lower. Support remains for the
collaborative intent set out in the AMEC Declaration, but AMEC
needs to change if it is to survive.”
In its paper, the UK deflected “conflict of interest criticisms”
that have been levels against the commercial RWE NUKEM as UK’s
lead contractor for future AMEC projects.
“RWE NUKEM has continued to attract conflict of interest
criticism and unsubstantiated charges of operating to their
commercial advantage. The UK will continue to employ a
contractor for project management (for all its Global
Partnership related work), and has full confidence in RWE NUKEM
performance to date,” read the UK paper.
Rudolph noted that the idea of having a contractor as the
Project Officer, a position occupied by a government
representative in Norway, Russia and the US and also as
contracting agent as well as technical expert is foreign to US
AMEC. Repeated requests for increased UK Government oversight
have not been successful. Another AMEC observer noted that if
the UK believes that NUKEM does not act in a manner to support
the company bottom line and profit margin, they are fooling
noone but themselves.
The UK further criticised the US and Norwegian effort for AMEC’s
safety and risk management.
The UK acknowledged that “It is clear that UK requirements for
project management within AMEC have caused difficulty with our
donor partners. Feedback from Norwegian and American colleagues
has indicated that the project management methodology and
procurement strategies required by the British government and
implemented by our project contract managers on our instructions
are seen as laborious and inefficient.”
The paper continued that: “UK insistence on Treasury approved
project management techniques, especially competitive
procurement, formal risk and safety management,
[…] and environmental impact assessment, has caused significant
difficulty for our partners. The UK has no room to manoeuvre on
these principles, and an alternative collaborative framework
must be found if UK donorship is to continue. It should be
emphasised that the UK approach on project management is nearly
identical to most other countries supporting projects under the
Global Partnership.”
Why is the UK in AMEC?
Interviews with UK officials were softer in tone than the UK
paper, but nonetheless indicated that they were firm in their
policies. Given its candid assessment of the work of its partner
nations in its paper, many AMEC observers have asked why the UK
joined the partnership in the first place. Heyes said it was to
bolster the UK’s military contact with Russia via what he called
“an excellent programme.”
“We joined partly because of our [G-8] Global Partnership
commitments and partly because of the military to military
contact benefits,” said Heyes.
“We think it is a good agreement and provides good contacts with
Russia and we wish to continue.”
Maj. Garris Baker, who heads the UK Ministry of Defence’s
Russia, desk agreed with Heyes and told Bellona Web. “We would
not have joined AMEC if we did not think it was a good
organisation.”
“It supplies us with valuable Military to Military contact AMEC,
but that the UK did not have prior to joining,” he said. “AMEC
allows us to achieve what we wish, which would not be possible
without the what the AMEC umbrella of provides in terms of a
legal framework and liability.”
Other countries joining and leaving
But he also emphasised that the programme needs “common lines of
practice” and that all projects must adhere to AMEC’s project
management and best practice policies. He reinforced this point,
saying: “If Norway and the United States withdraw, that is a
national decision. But the same is not true of [the UK]we seek
a bilateral solution . The UK still sees value in the AMEC
process.”
The withdrawal of any of AMEC’s constituent nations would weaken
the whole programme’s financial base to tackle the most pressing
issues in Russia.
He added, though, that other countries are invited to take part
in AMEC, and said that Canada and Sweden had expressed interest
in supporting UK efforts.
Russian AMEC officials told Bellona Web that they were satisfied
with any changes in the structure of AMEC so long as the funding
continued to arrive.
K-60 Norway’s swan song in AMEC?
Norwegian officials have indicated that the moving and
dismantlement of the derelict K-60 submarineby all accounts one
of the most un-seaworthy vessels in Russia’s Northern Fleetwill
be the country’s last AMEC project. Norway has the lead on the
$8.5 billion transportation and dismantlement project, but the
UK is apparently fitting half the bill.
The Norwegian project will employ a heavy lift vessel to convey
the sub from the semi-operational Naval base of Gremikha to a
dismantling point. The heavy lift vessel has been secured by
Norway for use from the Dutch firm Dockwise.
The heavy transport vessel has the ability to submerge its
specially fitted deck beneath the K-60 and then blow its ballast
tanks and rise again to the surface with the K-60 secured in
special above-water cradles for its fragile hull. The transport
vessel will then continue from Gremikha to Polyarny near
Murmansk were it will be de-fueled and dismantled.
All that remains is a final detailed environmental impact study
so that the western contractors and Russia can put the plan of
the vessel’s removal together. Time is therefore of the essence
as the Norwegian Ministry of Defence petitions the country’s
Ministry of Foreign Affairs for funding the project.
There are also rumours among AMEC observers that the UK may pull
its funding on the project, though these could not be
independently confirmed.
Norwegian and US Positions
In her response to the UK paper, Ingjerd Kroken, co-chairperson
of AMEC Norway, sounded more capitulatory than defensive of
Norway’s role in AMEC.
“The UK has proposed that the participant countries work
bilaterally with Russia under the AMEC umbrella,” she said.
Kroken met with Russian delegations during early December and
put a positive spin on the possible dissolution of AMEC. “We
will all continue to help solve the issue” of radioactive waste
storage in Russia.
“Because so many other donor nations [to Russian nuclear
remediation] are now involved, AMEC may not be as necessary as
it once was,” she said.
US AMEC observers, however, have taken a stronger stance, and
say that the UK’s position threatens to drive a wedge among AMEC
countries that will ultimately leave far too many militarily
projects unfinished.
Following interviews with the principal government’s involved
with AMEC, the Bellona Foundation thinks the slow progress on UK
led projects can be attributed to their lack of ability to build
technical consensus on technical issues. Their new proposal is a
step in the wrong direction.
A former US Project Officer noted that UK Project management is
bureaucratic and process driven with “reams and reams” of paper.
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
*****************************************************************
17 TheStar.com: Missile defence: It's still a bad idea
Fri. Jan. 20, 2006. | Updated at 08:09 AM
This article was signed by 10 concerned Canadians, including
former external affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy, vice-chancellor,
University of Winnipeg; Dale Dewar, president, Physicians for
Global Survival; Mel Hurtig, founder of the Council of Canadians;
Peggy Mason, Canada's former U.N. ambassador for disarmament;
John Polanyi, Nobel laureate and professor, University of
Toronto; and Steven Staples, of the Polaris Institute.
The federal election has unexpectedly reopened the debate on
Canada's participation in the U.S.'s Ballistic Missile Defence
(BMD) system. The Canadian government, after a lengthy public
debate, decided not to participate in the U.S. missile shield in
February 2005. It was a popular decision because the majority of
Canadians opposed participation and numerous events of the last
year have borne out that it was the correct decision.
Conservative party leader Stephen Harper feels otherwise. He has
promised that, if elected, his government will revisit the
previous government's decision not to join the U.S. missile
defence system.
In the past Parliament, all the political parties supported the
government's decision not to participate in BMD with the
exception of the Conservatives, who reserved judgment on the
issue. Is it the Conservatives' assessment now that negotiating
entry into the BMD program could be in Canada's best interests?
News and analysis from the United States shows Canada to be
vindicated, as it appears that confidence in the viability of
the ground-based, mid-course system is faltering.
A U.S. Senate defence subcommittee, led by missile defence
advocate Republican Ted Stevens, recently warned supporters that
the Missile Defence Agency had decided that the first generation
of interceptor missiles in Alaska and California will also be
the last.
The missiles are behind schedule, badly over budget and have yet
to be fully tested or declared operational. In other words, as
many prominent scientists and military experts have testified,
the Pentagon is admitting BMD may never meet the challenge of
achieving any acceptable reliability.
The Congressional Budget Office has also issued its own warning,
predicting that the projected annual costs of the missile
defence system could spiral upwards to $19 billion per year,
more than twice its annual budget today.
In fact, after examining the key technologies and their
likelihood of success, the budget office proposed halting
missile defence deployment entirely. Had Ottawa joined and made
a financial commitment, Canadians could have seen their expected
contribution likewise skyrocket for a system that has little
chance of functioning.
In any renewed discussion of Canada's participation in the
ballistic missile defence program, the potential for the
weaponization of space looms large. Like all other parties, the
Conservative party shares an opposition to the weaponization of
space, a chief international concern about the missile defence
program.
But in the last year, President George W. Bush has shown no
indication that he has renounced the Pentagon's and Air Force's
declared and widely publicized plans to "dominate space" and to
"deny others the use of space" through the use of space weapons.
On the contrary, doctrines for space warfare continue to be
espoused in Washington.
Alarmingly, last fall the U.S. voted "no" for the first time on
the annual United Nations resolution to prevent an arms race in
outer space. Observers agree this is a clear indication that the
decision to deploy space weapons may be imminent. Had Canada
joined the ballistic missile defence program, we would have been
unable to avoid responsibility for contributing to a new arms
race in space.
The Canadian government approved detailed BMD talks with the
Americans in May 2003 and rejected the idea in February 2005.
Canadian questions about our potential participation apparently
could not be answered satisfactorily. Would there eventually be
U.S. weapons in space? Would Canada be stuck with a mounting tab
as costs rapidly increased? Bush adamantly refused to give Prime
Minister Paul Martin an undertaking that missile defence was not
tied to the future weaponization of space.
What is more, the White House and proponents of BMD within the
Canadian government were unable to convince Canadians that
participating in the program is vital to their security.
Following the decision not to join, a Decima poll found that 57
per cent supported the decision, and 26 per cent opposed it.
Virtually every constituency was opposed to BMD participation
from teenagers to senior citizens, men and women, urban and
rural dwellers, and a majority in every single province. Simply
put, strong links to the Bush administration make BMD an
unpopular cause among many Canadians, who are clearly wary of
Bush's aggressive military and foreign policy.
Canada was correct not to join missile defence in 2005, and
nothing new has occurred that warrants reopening the debate.
Our country has long been a staunch advocate of diplomatic
efforts to abolish nuclear weapons, and it has a strong interest
in keeping Earth's orbit a demilitarized zone.
We believe that joining the "Star Wars" system being pushed by
the Bush administration would undermine Canada's reputation as a
peacekeeper and advocate for disarmament, and endanger the
entire world.
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
18 Mos News: Russian Colonel Who Averted Nuclear War Receives World Citizen Award -
NEWS - MOSNEWS.COM
Created: 20.01.2006 13:18 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 13:18 MSK
Retired Russian colonel Stanislav Petrov received a special
World Citizen Award at a UN meeting in New York on Thursday.
Petrov was honored as the “Man Who Averted Nuclear War”.
In a meeting held at the UN’s Dag Hammarskjold Auditorium on
Jan. 19, the Association of World Citizens (AWC) presented the
retired officer with his award.
The inscription on the award, which has a granite base with a
solid glass hand holding the earth, read: “The single hand that
holds the earth symbolizes your heroic deed on September 26,
1983 that earned you the title: The Man Who Averted Nuclear
War.” The back of the award read: “May the hand now symbolize
humanity united to save our world by eliminating nuclear weapons
from the face of the earth.”
Back in 1983 Petrov made a decision that prevented a war that
could have destroyed the planet. He was the duty officer at
Russia’s main nuclear command center in September 1983 when the
system indicated a nuclear missile attack was launched by the
U.S. on Russia.
It was just after midnight, Sept. 26, and 120 staff were working
the graveyard shift in Serpukhov-15, the secret USSR command
bunker hidden in a forest 30 miles northeast of Moscow,
WorldNetDaily reported.
In the commander’s chair was Lt. Col. Stanislav Petrov, 44,
looking down from his mezzanine desk to the gymnasium-sized main
floor filled with military officers and technicians charged with
monitoring any U.S. missiles and retaliating instantly.
Petrov was highly aware that Cold War tensions were acute, as
USSR fighters had shot down a Korean airliner on Sept. 1. But he
was completely shocked when the warning siren began to wail and
two lights on his desk console began flashing MISSILE ATTACK and
START. “Start” was the instruction to launch, irreversibly, all
5,000 or so Soviet missiles and obliterate America.
A new, unproven Soviet satellite system had picked up a flash in
Montana near a Minuteman II silo. Then another — five, all told.
Petrov recalls his legs were “like cotton,” as they say in
Russian. He stared at the huge electronic wall map of the United
States in terror and disbelief. As his staff gawked upward at
him from the floor, he had the thought, “Who would order an
attack with only five missiles? That big an idiot has not been
born yet, not even in the U.S.”
The Soviet procedure manual was inflexible, and it demanded he
notify his superiors of the attack immediately. But relying on
his intuition, Petrov disobeyed. For almost five minutes, he
stalled, holding his hotline phone in one hand and his intercom
in the other, barking orders to his personnel to get back to
their desks.
Then he made the decision that saved the world. Summoning up his
firmest voice, he called his Kremlin liaison and said it was a
false alarm. But today he admits, “I wasn’t 100 percent sure.
Not even close to 100 percent.”
Months later, it was determined that sunlight reflecting off
clouds in Montana had caused a faulty satellite computer
assembly to report a missile launch flash. But by that time,
Petrov’s excellent military career had been sidetracked. He
wasn’t fired, but he was transferred — and never got any medals
or recognition. When his wife was found to have a brain tumor in
1993, he retired to take care of her. When she died, he borrowed
money to give her a funeral.
Today, Petrov, 67, lives in Moscow on a monthly pension of less
than $200.
Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM
*****************************************************************
19 Arizona Republic: Nuclear power to stay low
[azcentral.com]
Nuclear power to stay low 1 Palo Verde reactor to run at reduced
level to fix pipe
Ken Alltucker
Jan. 21, 2006 12:00 AM
One of three reactors at the Palo Verde nuclear power plant
could operate at significantly reduced power levels for weeks as
Arizona Public Service Co. explores ways to fix a vibrating
emergency pipe.
Palo Verde Unit 1 restarted Friday although crews failed to find
a quick fix for an "acoustical impact" that causes a shutdown
cooling line to vibrate too much.
APS officials say the plant can operate safely at reduced power
levels until the problem is fixed.
"We will go up as far as our administrative levels allow us to
go," said Jim McDonald, APS spokesman. "Before, it was at 32
percent power. It might be higher or lower."
The other two reactors at the nation's largest nuclear power
plant, about 50 miles west of downtown Phoenix, remain at full
power.
APS has known about the vibrations since 2001, but the problem
became more pronounced after the utility installed new steam
generators this fall during the reactor's scheduled refueling.
APS detected the increased rattle and hum after restarting the
reactor before Christmas. It has not been run beyond 32 percent
of its capacity since then because of the vibrations. The
utility took the reactor out of service Tuesday and attempted to
weigh down the pipe, a fix that proved unsuccessful.
Now, the utility has identified other potential short-term
remedies, including installation of hydraulic shock absorbers, a
dampener or clamps and springs that would offset the vibrations.
A permanent fix could include relocating a part on the shutdown
cooling line. Such a fix would not be attempted until the
reactor receives its next refueling in about 18 months.
The loss of power in Unit 1 should not immediately affect the
utility's ability to send electricity to Valley homes and
businesses. Electricity use is at its lowest this time of year.
"The thing we need to be concerned about is the possibility of
these problems extending into the summer months when we
absolutely need that power to meet Arizona's electricity needs,"
said Kris Mayes, an Arizona Corporation commissioner.
The bigger immediate question could be the financial impact on
Arizona ratepayers.
APS already estimates that the reactor's reduced output has cost
the utility $7 million to $10 million. That's because the
utility has had to buy more expensive electricity sources such
as coal and natural gas to replace the cheaper nuclear-generated
electricity.
The utility reported that a higher-than-normal frequency of
outages at Palo Verde last year cost more than $40 million in
replacement power costs.
APS wants customers to pick up the tab and is trying to recover
more than $500 million by raising electricity bills. Most of the
proposed rate increase is tied to high fuel costs.
APS warns that its mounting fuel costs have created a great
financial strain. One Wall Street ratings agency, Standard &
Poor's, has signaled that it may put the utility's corporate
rating in junk status unless the utility moves quickly to ease
the financial jam.
APS has asked the Corporation Commission for an emergency rate
increase that would raise electricity bills by 14 percent as
soon as April.
El Paso Electric, which owns a 15.8 percent stake of Palo Verde,
alerted its shareholders that Unit 1's problem will cost it $2
million to $3 million each month the reactor operates at reduced
power levels.
Reach the reporter at ken .alltucker@arizonarepublic.com.
Copyright © 2006, azcentral.com. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
20 Guardian Unlimited: Next generation of nuclear reactors may be fast tracked
David Adam, environment correspondent
Saturday January 21, 2006
The nuclear industry is pushing ministers to approve sweeping
changes to the way atomic power stations are approved in an
attempt to fast-track a new generation of reactors.
Documents obtained under freedom of information laws show that
British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) wants to restrict the scope of local
planning inquiries. Instead it proposes effectively discussing
issues such as safety, security and environmental impact behind
closed doors.
The move comes as the government is to launch a review of its
energy policies on Monday, which is widely expected to recommend
restarting Britain's controversial civil nuclear programme.
In the documents, BNFL warns that the only way to guarantee new
power stations open on schedule is to fast-track the planning
process by pre-licensing reactors before sites are selected. It
says: "Investment in this phase has immense leverage over
subsequent phases. For example, it should enable a public inquiry
to be assured that all safety and environmental issues have been
satisfactorily addressed, enabling it to focus on local issues."
Existing regulations require these issues to be discussed at
local public inquiries set up into the siting of individual
nuclear power stations. BNFL is worried this will cause severe
delays; the public inquiry into Sizewell B in Suffolk lasted six
years. The document says: "Inadequate preparation could extend
the programme from 10 years to up to 16 years."
Nuclear power has risen towards the top of the political agenda
as ministers and officials scramble to address an impending
energy crisis. Britain's existing nuclear power stations supply
about 20% of UK electricity and all but one are scheduled to
close by 2023.
Prominent figures such as Sir David King, the government's chief
scientific adviser, have said replacing them is the only
realistic way to satisfy growing energy demand while meeting
demanding greenhouse gas targets. Uncertainties about the
security of future gas supplies, especially after this month's
crisis in Ukraine, have also helped to convince Tony Blair and
senior figures at the Department for Trade and Industry that new
nuclear power stations are needed.
Anti-nuclear campaigners claimed BNFL's proposed changes to the
planning and consent process would allow the nuclear industry to
steamroller local opposition. Jean McSorley of Greenpeace, which
obtained the documents, said: "The process would be closed to
public input, which means issues that local authorities and the
public would expect to be examined at a public inquiry would be
dealt with behind closed doors."
Hugh Richards, head of the Welsh Anti Nuclear Alliance, said:
"Pre-licensing is a trojan horse. It sounds innocent but the
objective is clear. It would shield consideration of nuclear
safety from public scrutiny and that is extremely worrying."
BNFL said: "We are committed to an open and transparent process.
The pre-licensing process ensures that national issues are
discussed at a national level and local issues discussed at a
local level."
A poll carried out by the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change
Research and Mori showed 54% of people would accept the building
of nuclear stations if it helped to tackle climate change. But
72% said this should only be considered as a last resort.
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
21 Beacon Journal: Nuclear facility workers indicted
01/20/2006 |
2 former FirstEnergy employees, contractor accused of covering
up details of damage at Davis-Besse
By Dave Scott Beacon Journal business writer
Two former FirstEnergy employees and a contractor allegedly used
``tricks, schemes and devices'' to cover up details about damage
at the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant, according to a
five-count federal indictment issued Thursday.
Using false statements, video and letters in late 2001, the
indictment said, the three misled the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission during what is now called the fourth-worst nuclear
power incident in U.S. history.
A grand jury in Cleveland indicted David Geisen and Andrew
Siemaszko, former FirstEnergy employees, and Rodney Cook, a
contractor the utility hired, late Thursday.
The men are accused of concealing acid leaks that nearly ate
through the 6-inch steel top of Davis-Besse's reactor head.
The NRC estimated the reactor lining would have failed in two to
22 months if the hole had not been discovered in March 2002.
Davis-Besse is on the Lake Erie shore in Oak Harbor.
FirstEnergy Corp. spokesman Todd Schneider said the Akron
utility had little comment regarding the indictments.
Geisen and Siemaszko left the company in the fall of 2003. Cook,
the consultant, was never a FirstEnergy employee, he said.
None of the three could be located for comment.
In August 2001, the NRC warned FirstEnergy that plants similar
to Davis-Besse were experiencing problems with acid leaks and
asked the Akron utility to report on the condition of its
nuclear power plant by the end of the year.
In oral and written reports, the men falsely assured the NRC
that Davis-Besse had been thoroughly inspected and had no
problems, according to the indictment.
At the same time, they asked to delay further inspection until a
scheduled refueling in 2002.
The three men failed to report problems gaining access to parts
of the reactor head where the damage was later found, the
indictment said. They allegedly omitted a portion of a video of
the reactor that showed large boric acid deposits.
They also are accused of lying when reporting that in 1996 ``the
entire reactor pressure vessel head was inspected.''
The indictment said, ``In fact, at least twenty-four nozzles
were blocked from view because of boric acid.''
The NRC said it would not have allowed the plant to continue to
restart after a 2000 inspection if it had known the full measure
of the damage at the plant and that the inspections were
incomplete.
``Had the NRC known that the plant was being operated with
leakage through the reactor vessel head, the agency would have
taken immediate action to shut down the plant,'' James Caldwell,
NRC regional administrator, said in a release earlier this
month.
Siemaszko has said he was wrongly fired and that he had told
supervisors the reactor needed to be cleaned. He said managers
rejected his requests.
Both Siemaszko and Geisen were barred by the NRC from working in
the nuclear industry for five years.
The plant was safely shut down in 2002.
In September 2002, company officials told the NRC that it is
making safety, not profit, the plant's top priority.
FirstEnergy's self-analysis of what went wrong at Davis-Besse
reported that previous plant management had emphasized
production over safety.
FirstEnergy paid a $5.45 million fine in April for its part in
the incident. The corporation was not named in the indictment.
The nuclear plant was restarted in March 2004 after a two-year
shutdown.
FirstEnergy spent more than $600 million in repairs and to buy
replacement electricity while the plant was shut down.
The indictments represent the last of the investigations into
the incident.
The case was assigned to U.S. District Court Judge David A. Katz
in Toledo.
Dave Scott can be reached at 330-996-3577 or
davescott@thebeaconjournal.com. The Associated Press contributed
*****************************************************************
22 Beacon Journal: Davis-Besse investigation
01/20/2006 |
key dates:
Aug. 3, 2001: Nuclear Regulatory Agency issues a bulletin
regarding problems with nozzles in nuclear reactors such as
Davis-Besse. Facilities are asked to inspect the nozzles by Dec.
31 or justify a delay.
Sept. 4-Nov. 1, 2001: Two of the defendants allegedly sign
misleading letters regarding Davis-Besse's condition and submit
them to the NRC. In one instance, all three sign a letter.
Dec. 4: NRC agrees to allow Davis-Besse to continue operating
until Feb. 16, 2002.
Feb. 16, 2002: Davis-Besse shuts down for refueling and
inspection.
March 8: Inspectors discover significant damage to reactor
vessel head and a cracked nozzle.
*****************************************************************
23 Beacon Journal: FirstEnergy agrees to $28 million fine, saying workers hid damage
01/20/2006 |
From staff and wire reports
FirstEnergy Corp. agreed to pay $28 million in fines,
restitution and community service projects because the company
says employees hid serious damage at the Davis-Besse plant, the
U.S. Justice Department announced Friday.
Inspectors found an acid leak in 2002 that nearly ate through a
6-inch steel cap on the reactor vessel at the plant in Oak
Harbor on the Lake Erie shore. Officials said it was the most
extensive corrosion ever seen at a U.S. nuclear reactor.
Company and Nuclear Regulatory Commission investigations
concluded that the rust hole had been growing for at least four
years and that Davis-Besse's managers had ignored the evidence
because they were focused on profits rather than safety at the
plant, which sits along the Lake Erie shore about 30 miles east
of Toledo.
As part of the agreement, FirstEnergy acknowledged that the
government can prove that nuclear plant employees ``knowingly
made false representations to the NRC in the course of
attempting to persuade the NRC that Davis-Besse was safe to
operate beyond Dec. 31, 2001,'' a Justice Department statement
obtained by the Associated Press said.
U.S. Attorney Greg White began a criminal investigation of the
plant in November 2003. Late Thursday, a federal grand jury
indicted two former Davis-Besse employees and a contractor,
charging them with hiding damage from federal regulators.
Last year, the NRC levied a record $5.45 million fine against
FirstEnergy for failing to stop the leak.
The agreement frees FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. from
further prosecution.
``FENOC regrets the significant performance deficiencies that
led to the reactor head issue and accepts full responsibility
for the failure to accurately communicate with the NRC. We have
learned much from this experience, and FENOC is a better and
stronger company today than in 2001 when this occurred,'' said
FENOC President and Chief Nuclear Officer Gary R. Leidich.
Of the $28 million fine, $4.35 million will be directed to
community service projects with the agreement of FENOC and the
Department of Justice. Recipients will include the Ottawa
National Wildlife Refuge, Ottawa County Emergency Management
Agency, University of Toledo Foundation for the College of
Engineering, Cuyahoga Valley National Park and Habitat for
Humanity International.
*****************************************************************
24 NRC: NRC Statement on Justice Department Davis-Besse Action
News Release - Region III - 2006-00
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region III
No. III-06-003 January 20, 2006
CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663
Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov
issue which culminated today with the actions announced by the
Justice Department. Central to this matter was a failure by the
licensee to ensure that information provided to the NRC was
complete so it can effectively regulate nuclear power plant
safety.
The NRC took tough, aggressive action against FirstEnergy,
levying the largest fine in NRC history ($5.45 million) for
violations associated with the damage to the reactor vessel head
at Davis-Besse and for deliberately providing inaccurate and
incomplete information to the NRC on reactor conditions. Action
also has been initiated against five individuals.
The Davis-Besse actions by the NRC, and DOJ and its
Environmental Crimes Section, send a strong message to the
industry, emphasizing that appropriate safety margins must be
maintained and that the NRC will not tolerate the failure of
licensees and individuals to provide it with accurate and
complete information.
The failure to comply with NRC regulations and provide accurate
information led to a two-year shutdown of the Davis-Besse plant
for extensive repairs, major management changes, and
improvements to the safety culture of the plant staff. Only
after extensive inspections and oversight did the agency permit
the plant to restart in March 2004. Since that time, the plant
has operated safely and successfully.
The NRC also instituted a lessons learned task force following
the event to evaluate the agencys regulatory processes on
reactor vessel head integrity and recommend improvements for
both the NRC and industry. All of the nearly 50 task force
recommendations have been implemented.
Last revised Friday, January 20, 2006
*****************************************************************
25 RIA Novosti: Russian nuclear agency's operations unprofitable in 2002-2004
20/ 01/ 2006
MOSCOW, January 20 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's financial watchdog
said Friday that the Federal Agency for Nuclear Power had failed
to break even in 2002-2004.
The Russian Audit Chamber released the results of an inspection
into the agency's economic operations in 2002-2004 and found
that the agency had made a net loss in 2004 of 1.3 billion
rubles ($45.95 million). The debt of the federal wholesale
electric energy market to the agency at the beginning of 2005
accounted for 7 billion rubles ($247.4 million) and increased to
over 10 billion rubles ($353.5 million) in the first nine months
of the year.
Auditors said an unbalanced tariff policy was to blame for the
situation.
The Chamber said the Russian energy strategy until 2020 put
nuclear power as one of the main guarantors of the country's
energy security as plants would increasingly replace stations
burning fossil fuels.
In 2004, nuclear plants produced 15.6% of the electricity in
Russia. The Nuclear Power Energy Agency received about 74.6
billion rubles ($2.64 billion) for energy supplies.
© 2005 "RIA Novosti"
*****************************************************************
26 RIA Novosti: Russian nuclear power official to talk cooperation with Ukraine
20/ 01/ 2006
MOSCOW, January 20 (RIA Novosti) - Head of the Russian Federal
Agency for Nuclear Power Sergei Kiriyenko plans to discuss
bilateral cooperation with the Ukrainian fuel and energy
minister during his visit to Ukraine January 21, the agency's
press service said Friday.
Ukrainian Minister Ivan Plachkov said earlier that an expert
group would be formed in Kiev during Kiriyenko's visit "to
tackle the joint projects in which Russia and Ukraine are
interested".
Kiriyenko said last week during his visit to Kazakhstan that
Russia was interested in becoming a partner in a Ukrainian
turbine plant.
"We are ready to agree to any option advantageous to us and our
partners," he said.
According to Kiriyenko, Russia intends to rebuild the nuclear
power industry network that existed during the Soviet period and
is initiating talks with Ukraine and Kazakhstan on the subject.
Kiriyenko will also meet with Emergencies Minister Viktor Boloha
during his visit to Ukraine.
© 2005 "RIA Novosti"
*****************************************************************
27 NRC: Diaz Names Jeanne Lopatto Federal/International Assistant
News Release - 2006-00
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200
Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
No. 06-007 January 19, 2006
government, to the newly created position of special assistant
for Federal and International Programs.
Ms. Lopatto, whose most recent government service was as
Director of Public Affairs for the U.S. Department of Energy,
will report directly to Diaz.
Im pleased to have someone with Ms. Lopattos breadth of
experience on my office staff. Her background will enable the
NRC to have a more cohesive federal and international liaison
effort, Diaz said in announcing her appointment to his personal
staff.
In her position at the Energy Department, Ms. Lopatto served as
the spokesperson for then Secretary Spencer Abraham, as well as
other department officials, and managed DOEs media and public
relations programs. She was a member of official delegations to
a variety of international conferences on topics including oil
and gas development, oil supply issues, nuclear power, climate
change, nuclear non-proliferation programs and technology
development. She organized a number of media events at meetings
of the International Atomic Energy Agency, international energy
forums, the International Energy Agency, meetings of the G-8
energy ministers and U.S.-Russia Commercial Energy Summits.
As Director of Public Affairs at DOE, she worked closely with
other government agencies, including the Departments of State,
Commerce and Homeland Security, the Environmental Protection
Agency and the National Security Council.
Prior to that Ms. Lopatto had a long career on Capitol Hill,
including her service as the press secretary for the U.S. Senate
Judiciary Committee under Chairman Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah. She
also worked in media positions on Sen. Hatchs personal staff as
well as the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee.
She holds a B.A. in American Studies from Dickinson College in
Carlisle, Pa.
Last revised Friday, January 20, 2006
*****************************************************************
28 AP: Nuke plant contractor, ex-workers indicted
Friday, January 20, 2006
Charged with hiding Ohio reactor damage
By Connie Mabin
The Associated Press
[Zoom] Associated Press/FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors found an acid leak
that nearly ate through a cap on the reactor vessel at the
Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station near Port Clinton.
CLEVELAND - A federal grand jury charged two former Davis-Besse
nuclear plant employees and a contractor Thursday with hiding
information from regulators about serious damage to the facility
Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors found an acid leak in
2002 that nearly ate through a 6-inch steel cap on the reactor
vessel at the plant, which sits along the Lake Erie shore about
30 miles east of Toledo. It's not clear how close the plant was
to an accident when the leak was discovered, but it was the most
extensive corrosion ever seen at a U.S. nuclear reactor.
The plant was closed for two years but returned to full power in
2004. Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp., which owns Davis-Besse,
spent $600 million making repairs and buying replacement power
because of the shutdown.
Company and NRC investigations concluded that the rust hole had
been growing for at least four years and that Davis-Besse's
managers had ignored the evidence because they were focused on
profits rather than safety.
The indictment accuses the trio of misleading regulators in the
fall of 2001 into believing that the plant was safe so
inspectors would delay visits until the spring of 2002, during a
scheduled shutdown for refueling.
Indicted were former engineering design manager David Geisen,
former engineer Andrew Siemaszko and Rodney Cook, a consultant
who was working for Davis-Besse.
There were no Ohio telephone listings for Siemaszko and Geisen.
Messages were left at numbers listed under Rodney Cook.
Siemaszko was responsible for making sure the reactor vessel
head was cleaned and inspected. The NRC has said he deliberately
provided false information about the plant's conditions.
Siemaszko has said he was wrongly fired and that he had told
supervisors the reactor needed to be cleaned. He said managers
rejected his requests.
Both Siemaszko and Geisen were barred by the NRC from working in
the nuclear industry for five years.
All three signed off on reports from the company to the NRC in
2001 that concealed information about problems with the reactor
vessel head, where inspectors eventually found the cracks and
leak, the indictment states.
The indictment also accuses the employees of omitting important
facts about previous company inspections, including the fact
that employees had trouble accessing the equipment that needed
inspecting because of leaks.
The three also are accused of omitting parts of a videotape that
was sent to the NRC that was to show inspections of the reactor
vessel head but parts showing "substantial deposits of boric
acid" were edited out, according to the indictment.
FirstEnergy also agreed to pay a record $5.45 million fine for
failing to stop the acid leak.
Davis-Besse spokesman Richard Wilkins said Thursday that he was
not aware of the indictments. "Those are former employees, so I
couldn't comment on it anyway," he said.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, Davis-Besse provides
70,160 megawatt hours of energy annually.
FirstEnergy, the nation's fourth-largest investor-owned utility,
has 16 power plants and 4.4 million customers in New Jersey,
Ohio and Pennsylvania.
The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge David A. Katz in
Toledo.
[Cincinnati.Com]
*****************************************************************
29 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
FR Doc E6-613
[Federal Register: January 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 13)]
[Notices] [Page 3342-3344] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20ja06-93]
of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for Framatome ANP,
Inc., Lynchburg, VA AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Billy Gleaves, Project Manager,
Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and
Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Rockville, MD, 20555-0001.
Telephone: (301) 415- 5848; fax number: (301) 415-5955; e-mail:
bcg@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) staff has received a license amendment request
from Framatome ANP, Inc., Lynchburg, VA (FANP Lynchburg) dated
September 1, 2005 (Ref. 1, 2), to amend Special Nuclear Material
License (SNM)-1168 (Ref. 3) to use the International Commission
on Radiation Protection (ICRP) Publication 68 for Derived Air
Concentration (DAC) and the Annual Limit on Intake (ALI)
determinations (Ref. 4). In accordance with the requirements of
10 CFR part 51, an Environmental Assessment (EA) was performed by
the NRC staff in support of its review of FANP Lynchburg's
license amendment request. The conclusion of the EA is a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the proposed licensing
action. The amendment will be issued following the publication of
this notice.
II. Environmental Assessment Background The FANP Lynchburg
facility is authorized, under Materials License SNM-1168, to
possess nuclear materials for the fabrication and assembly of
nuclear power fuel components. Principal activities in the
fabrication facility include the processing of low-enriched
uranium (2 pellets. Uranium pellets are received and then
transported to a pellet vault after the receipt inspection
process is completed. The fuel pellets are then inserted into
rods, which are then assembled into fuel bundles. Finished fuel
bundles are then packaged and loaded onto truck transport for
delivery
[[Page 3343]] to the receiving utility. Other activities
conducted in conjunction with nuclear fuel fabrication include:
Fabrication of poison rods; download of finished fuel bundles and
rods; repair of returned fuel assemblies; laboratory operations;
and waste disposal operations.
Inhalation of dust in radiologically controlled areas poses an
internal radiation hazard, and the NRC regulations in 10 CFR part
20 require licensees to implement certain protective measures to
minimize that hazard. These measures include taking a variety of
air samples, using respirators in certain work areas, posting
airborne radioactivity warning signs outside the work areas, and
putting the potentially exposed workers on a routine bioassay
program to assess their intakes and verify the effectiveness of
the protection program. Many of these protective measures are
triggered when the air concentrations in the workplace reach
specified fractions of the air concentrations tabulated in 10 CFR
part 20, Appendix B.
FANP Lynchburg has requested to amend its license to permit the
use of values other than those tabulated in 10 CFR part 20 as the
basis for triggering protective measures, and for assessing the
internal dose to its workers. The basis for the amendment request
is the recommendations in ICRP 68. In the amendment application,
FANP Lynchburg maintains that the assessment of the radiological
hazard based on 10 CFR part 20, Appendix B, requires it to
implement monitoring and protection programs at levels that are
out of proportion with the true level of hazard, and do not
significantly add to worker protection. FANP Lynchburg believes
that granting the exemption would enable it to reduce the size of
its internal exposure program while, at the same time, providing
a level of protection proportional to the actual hazard. FANP
Lynchburg references an NRC staff requirements memorandum
(SECY-99-077) (Ref. 5), which directs the staff to grant
exemptions to 10 CFR part 20 on this modeling issue on a
case-by-case basis.
Review Scope In accordance with 10 CFR part 51, this EA serves
to: (1) Present information and analysis for determining whether
to issue a FONSI or to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS); (2) fulfill the NRC's compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act when no EIS is necessary; and (3)
facilitate preparation of an EIS when one is necessary. Should
the NRC issue a FONSI, no EIS would be prepared and the license
amendment would be granted.
The EA serves to evaluate and document the impacts of the
proposed amendment. Activities beyond the proposed changes have
previously been evaluated and documented in the 2003 EA as part
of the FANP Lynchburg license renewal (Ref. 6). The 2003 document
remains the most current EA for activities outside the scope of
the proposed amendment.
Proposed Action The proposed action is to amend the NRC Materials
License SNM-1168 to authorize the use of DAC and ALI values based
on ICRP 68, entitled Dose Coefficients for Intake of
Radionuclides by Worker (Ref. 4). Affected Environment The
affected environment for the proposed activity is the FANP
Lynchburg site. A full description of the site and its
characteristics are given in the 2003 EA for the renewal of the
NRC license for FANP Lynchburg (Ref. 6). Effluent Releases and
Monitoring A full description of the effluent monitoring program
at the site is provided in the 2003 EA for the renewal of the NRC
license for FANP Lynchburg (Ref. 6). Monitoring programs at the
FANP Lynchburg facility comprise effluent monitoring of air and
water and environmental monitoring of various media (air, soil,
vegetation, and groundwater). This program provides a basis for
evaluation of public health and safety impacts, for establishing
compliance with environmental regulations, and for development of
mitigation measures if necessary. The monitoring program is not
expected to change as a result of the proposed action. In the
2003 renewal, the NRC reviewed the location of the environmental
monitoring program sampling points, the frequency of sample
collection, and the trends in the sampling program results. The
data, taken in conjunction with the environmental pathway and
exposure analysis, leads the NRC to conclude that the monitoring
program provides adequate protection of public health and safety.
Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action Radiological Impacts The
basic limits on radiation exposures, as well as the minimum
radiation protection practices required of any NRC licensee, are
specified in 10 CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against
Radiation'' (Ref. 7). The models used in 10 CFR part 20 to
regulate internal doses are those described in the ICRP
Publications 26 and 30, adopted by the ICRP in 1977 and 1978,
respectively (Ref. 8, 9). Much of the basic structure of these
models were developed in 1966.
However, some of its components and parameters were altered
somewhat between 1966 and their formal adoption by the ICRP in
1978. In the same year that the Commission approved the final 10
CFR part 20 rule (1991), the ICRP published a major revision of
its radiation protection recommendations, ICRP 60 (Ref. 10).
During the several years following this revision, the ICRP
published a series of reports in which it described the
components of an extensively updated and revised internal
dosimetry model. Due to the restrictions in 10 CFR part 20, the
NRC licensees are not permitted to use the revised and updated
internal dosimetry models without receiving an exemption to the
regulations.
Although the dose per unit intake calculated, using the new
models, does not differ by more than a factor of about two from
the values in 10 CFR part 20 for most radionuclides, the
differences are substantial for some, particularly for the
isotopes of thorium, uranium, and some of the transuranic
radionuclides. For example, for inhalation of insoluble
thorium-232 (232Th), the dose per unit intake calculated using
the revised ICRP lung model, is a factor of about 15 times lower
than that in 10 CFR part 20. Because protective measures are
based on the hazard, and since the hazard is proportional to
dose, 10 CFR part 20 requires significantly more protective
measures when using 232Th than would be warranted based on the
revised models.
Using the updated ICRP 68 standard would enable FANP Lynchburg to
reduce the size of its internal exposure program while, at the
same time, providing a level of protection proportional to the
actual hazard. This is FANP Lynchburg's primary concern, and it
has requested to be allowed to use DAC and ALI values based on
the dose coefficients listed in ICRP 68. The NRC staff concluded
that FANP Lynchburg has historically maintained worker doses as
low as reasonably achievable and is qualified to utilize the ICRP
68 in a manner equivalent to 10 CFR 20.1201(d), (i.e. doses at a
level lower than the NRC's regulatory limit of 5 rem, in its
Radiation Safety Program). Therefore, FANP Lynchburg's request
for an exemption under 10 CFR 20.2301 is acceptable, because it
gives its workers equivalent radiological protection as required
by 10 CFR part
[[Page 3344]] 20. Thus, the exemption is authorized by law and
will not result in an undue hazard to life or property.
Nonradiological Impacts The NRC determined that there are no
non-radiological impacts associated with the proposed action.
Cumulative Impacts The NRC determined that there are no
cumulative impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action The NRC considered one
alternative to the proposed action, which was to deny the
amendment request. This alternative was rejected because the
impacts of the proposed action on the health and safety of the
workers, the public, and the environment were determined to be
insignificant. In addition, the licensee will be able to save
time and resources using the updated ICRP 68 models. The new
models will maintain doses within the regulatory limit, while
allowing the licensee to remove unwarranted protective measures
required by the old models.
Agencies and Persons Contacted The NRC contacted the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) concerning this
request. There were no comments, concerns or objections from
VDEQ.
Because the proposed action is entirely within existing
facilities, and does not involve new or increased effluents or
accident scenarios, the NRC has concluded that there is no
potential to affect endangered species or historic resources, and
therefore consultation with the State Historic Preservation
Society and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was not performed.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact Based on the EA, the staff
concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant
effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the
staff has determined that preparation of an EIS is not warranted.
IV. Further Information The following documents are related to
the proposed action: 1. C.F. Holman, Framatome ANP, Inc., letter
to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Amendment Request to
Use of ICRP 68 for ALI and DAC Values,'' September 1, 2005
(ML052550120).
2. The NRC administrative review, documented in a letter to
Framatome ANP, Inc. dated September 23, 2005 (ML052640365). 3.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Special Nuclear Material
License SNM-1168 Amendment 7, October 3, 2005 (ML052840071).
4. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ``Dose
Coefficients for Intake of Radionuclides by Worker,'' Publication
68, Elsevier Science, 1995.
5. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``SRM-SECY-99-0077--To
Request Commission Approval to Grant Exemptions from Portions of
10 CFR Part 20,'' April 21, 1999 (ML042750086).
6. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental
Assessment for the Renewal Framatome ANP, Inc., Lynchburg,
Virginia,'' April 2, 2003 (ML030940720).
7. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, ``Standards for Protection
Against Radiation,'' Part 20, Chapter 1, Title 10, Energy.
8. International Commission on Radiological Protection,
``Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological
Protection,'' Publication 26, Elsevier Science, 1977.
9. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ``Limits
for the Intake of Radionuclides by Workers,'' Publication 30,
Elsevier Science, 1978.
10. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ``1990
Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological
Protection,'' Publication 60, Elsevier Science, 1991.
The NRC documents related to this action, including the
application for amendment and supporting documentation, are
available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can
access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System
(ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public
documents. The accession numbers for documents contained in ADAMS
are provided with the reference. If you do not have access to
ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located
in ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) Reference
staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or via e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov. The documents in ADAMS may also be viewed
electronically on the public computers located at 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.
Dated at Rockville, MD this 13th day of January, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William C. Gleaves, Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities
Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of
Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-613 Filed 1-19-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
30 NRC: Final Regulatory Guide; Issuance, Availability
FR Doc E6-619
[Federal Register: January 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 13)]
[Notices] [Page 3345-3346] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20ja06-95]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a
revision to an existing guide in the agency's Regulatory Guide
Series.
This series has been developed to describe and make available to
the public such information as methods that are acceptable to the
NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the NRC's
regulations, techniques that the staff uses in evaluating
specific problems or postulated accidents, and data that the
staff needs in its review of applications for permits and
licenses.
Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.152, entitled ``Criteria for Use
of Computers in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants,''
describes a method that the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) deems acceptable for complying with the
Commission's regulations for promoting high functional
reliability, design quality, and cyber- security for the use of
digital computers in safety systems of nuclear power plants. In
this context, the term ``computer'' identifies a system that
includes computer hardware, software, firmware, and interfaces.
The guidance provided in Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.152 is
consistent with General Design Criterion (GDC) 21, ``Protection
System Reliability and Testability,'' of Appendix A, ``General
Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,'' to title 10, part 50,
``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,''
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR part 50). Among other
things, GDC 21 requires that protection systems (or safety
systems) must be designed for high functional reliability,
commensurate with the safety functions to be performed. In
addition, Criterion III, ``Design Control,'' of Appendix B,
``Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel
Reprocessing Plants,'' to 10 CFR part 50 requires, among other
things, that quality standards must be specified, and design
control measures must be provided, for verifying or checking the
adequacy of design.
Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.152 also contains the staff's
regulatory
[[Page 3346]] position on IEEE Std 7-4.3.2-2003, ``Standard
Criteria for Digital Computers in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power
Generating Stations,'' which was prepared by Working Group SC
6.4, ``Application of Programmable Digital Computers to Safety
Systems,'' of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE) Nuclear Power Engineering Committee. This
standard evolved from IEEE Std 7-4.3.2-1993 and reflects advances
in digital technology. It also represents a continued effort by
IEEE to support the specification, design, and implementation of
computers in safety systems of nuclear power plants. In addition,
IEEE Std 7-4.3.2-2003 specifies computer-specific requirements to
supplement the criteria and requirements of IEEE Std 603-1998,
``Standard Criteria for Safety Systems for Nuclear Power
Generating Stations.'' In Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.152,
the staff endorses IEEE Std 7-4.3.2-2003, with certain
exceptions, as an acceptable method for satisfying the NRC's
regulations with respect to (1) high functional reliability and
design requirements for computers used in safety systems of
nuclear power plants, and (2) independence between safety
software and nonsafety software residing on the same computer.
The NRC previously solicited public comments on this revised
guide by publishing a Federal Register notice (69 FR 75359)
concerning Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1130 on December 16, 2004.
Following the closure of the public comment period on March 14,
2005, the staff considered all stakeholder comments in the course
of preparing Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.152. The NRC staff
encourages and welcomes comments and suggestions in connection
with improvements to published regulatory guides, as well as
items for inclusion in regulatory guides that are currently being
developed. You may submit comments by any of the following
methods.
Mail comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001.
Hand-deliver comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.
Fax comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301)
415-5144.
Requests for technical information about Revision 2 of Regulatory
Guide 1.152 may be directed to NRC Senior Program Manager, Satish
Aggarwal, at (301) 415-6005 or .
Regulatory guides are available for inspection or downloading
through the NRC's public Web site in the Regulatory Guides
document collection of the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at .
Electronic copies of Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.152 are
also available in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) at http: // , under Accession
ML053070150.
In addition, regulatory guides are available for inspection at
the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), which is located at 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; the PDR's mailing address is
USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The PDR can also be reached
by telephone at (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4205, by fax at (301)
415-3548, and by e- mail to . Requests for single copies of draft
or final guides (which may be reproduced) or for placement on an
automatic distribution list for single copies of future draft
guides in specific divisions should be made in writing to the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,
Attention: Reproduction and Distribution Services Section; by
e-mail to ; or by fax to (301) 415-2289. Telephone requests
cannot be accommodated. Regulatory guides are not copyrighted,
and Commission approval is not required to reproduce them.
(5 U.S.C. 552(a)) Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of
December, 2005.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, James T. Wiggins,
Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
[FR Doc. E6-619 Filed 1-19-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
31 NRC: Nuclear Information and Resource Service All Nuclear Power
FR Doc E6-625
[Federal Register: January 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 13)]
[Notices] [Page 3344-3345] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20ja06-94]
Plants That Use Hemyc/MT Fire Barriers Notice of Issuance of
Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 Notice is hereby given
that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has
issued a Director's Decision with regard to a petition dated May
12, 2005, filed by Paul Gunter on behalf of the Nuclear
Information and Resource Service, Citizens Awareness Network,
Indian Point Safe Coalition, North Carolina Waste Awareness and
Reduction Network, Alliance for Affordable Energy, and Blue Ridge
Environmental Defense League, hereinafter referred to as the
``petitioners.'' The petition was supplemented on June 1, 2005.
The petition concerns the operation of all nuclear power plants
that use Hemyc/MT fire barriers.
The petition requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) engage in enforcement actions to modify and/or
suspend operating licenses for Shearon Harris Nuclear Power
Station Unit 1, H. B. Robinson Unit 2, McGuire Units 1 and 2,
Catawba Units 1 and 2, Ginna, James A. Fitzpatrick, Indian Point
Units 2 and 3, Vermont Yankee, Waterford Unit 3, and Arkansas
Nuclear One Units 1 and 2.
As the basis for the requests, the petitioners cited a meeting on
April 29, 2005, held by NRC with all stakeholders to discuss the
performance of 1-hour (Hemyc) and 3-hour (MT) fire barriers for
Electrical Raceways during full scale fire testing. In that
meeting the NRC staff informed all stakeholders that the Hemyc/MT
electrical raceway fire barrier system (ERFBS) failed to protect
electrical cables for 1 hour/3 hours in fire tests that were
performed to the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Standard E119. The petitioners' request was also based on the
following conclusions made by the petitioners: (1) The same
Hemyc/MT fire barrier wrap systems as installed in the above
nuclear plants fail to assure the protection of the control room
operations for achieving safe shutdown
[[Page 3345]] of the reactor in the event of a significant fire,
(2) NRC has not quantified the full extent of the amount of
Hemyc/MT fire barrier material in terms of linear and/or square
footage deployed per fire protection regulation, and NRC has not
determined the safety significance of this deployment for safe
shutdown systems that are not currently protected by these fire
barriers, and (3) the petitioners believe that the above listed
nuclear power stations are operating in violation of NRC fire
protection requirements and in an unanalyzed condition resulting
in a degradation of defense-in-depth fire protection and safe
shut down in the event of a significant fire.
The petitioners requested that the NRC take the following
actions: (1) Collect information through generic communications
with nuclear industry and specifically with the named reactor
sites to determine the extent of condition of the inoperable fire
barriers; including the requirement that the licensees conduct a
full inventory of the type Hemyc/MT to include the amount in
linear and square footage, its specific applications, and the
identification of safe shutdown systems, which are currently
unprotected by the noncompliance and an assessment of the safety
significance of each application; (2) The communication should
require, at minimum that the above- named sites provide
justification for operation in noncompliance with all applicable
fire protection regulations; and (3) With the determination that
any and/or all of the above- mentioned sites are operating in
unanalyzed condition and/or that assurance of public health and
safety is degraded, promptly order a suspension of the license or
a power reduction of the affected reactors until such time as it
can be demonstrated that the licensees are operating in
conformance with all other applicable fire protection
regulations.
In a letter dated June 27, 2005, the NRC informed the petitioners
that the issues in the petition were accepted for review under
Section 2.206 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) and had
been referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for
appropriate action. A copy of the acknowledgment letter is
publicly available in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML051740562. A copy
of the petition is publicly available in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML051440209. The petitioners' representatives held a
teleconference with the Petition Review Board to discuss the
petition on June 1, 2005.
The teleconference transcript was treated as a supplement to the
petition and is publicly available in ADAMS under Accession No.
ML051640452.
The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director's Decision to the
petitioners for comment on October 20, 2005 (Accession No.
ML052630411). The NRC staff did not receive any comments on the
proposed Director's Decision.
The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has
determined that, with regard to Request Nos. 1 and 2, the NRC
staff has granted the petitioners' request through the generic
communication process. Specifically, the NRC staff is planning to
issue a Generic Letter (GL) to all licensees asking them to
provide detailed information about the use of Hemyc/MT in their
nuclear power plants. In response to Request No. 3, the NRC staff
is planning to review all affected plants in detail and will take
appropriate actions to resolve the issues with the use of
Hemyc/MT material commensurate with the safety significance of
the protected systems. The GL will be issued after the NRC's
internal review process to consider comments received on the
proposed GL is completed.
The reasons for these decisions are explained in the Director's
Decision pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 (DD-06-01), the complete text
of which is available in ADAMS, and is available for inspection
at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and from the ADAMS Public
Library component on the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic
Reading Room). 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 by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. A copy of the
Director's Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the
Commission for the Commission's review in accordance with 10 CFR
2.206 of the Commission's regulations. As provided for by this
regulation, the Director's Decision will constitute the final
action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision,
unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of
the Director's Decision in that time.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of January 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
J.E. Dyer, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-625 Filed 1-19-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
32 AFP: US still sees problems in civilian nuclear deal with India -
Fri Jan 20, 7:58 AM ET
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India and the United States still face
difficulties before a landmark nuclear deal can be sealed giving
the south Asian giant access to previously forbidden technology,
a senior US official said.
"There is no question that we've made some progress over the
last six months but that much further progress has to be made
and that there are some difficulties ahead of us," US
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said on Friday.
"But I've spent 25 years in diplomacy thinking that with
goodwill and dedication countries can reach agreement and I have
the same feeling about this agreement," Burns told reporters
after two days of talks in New Delhi.
He met Indian foreign secretary Shyam Saran following an
agreement signed between the two countries last July during a
visit by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Washington.
Under the terms of the accord, India must separate civilian and
military nuclear programs in exchange for advanced civilian
nuclear technology. It would place its civilian nuclear reactors
under International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International
Atomic Energy Agencyinspection.
Washington would ask the US Congress to amend laws to allow
India access to technology normally reserved for nations that
have signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The deal also commits Washington to persuade countries in the
44-member Nuclear Suppliers Group to lift restrictions on India
in the civilian nuclear technology trade.
Saran last month gave Washington a plan to separate India's
civilian and military nuclear facilities, an Indian official
said.
Some US lawmakers have questioned the wisdom of providing atomic
fuel and technology to a nuclear weapons power like India that
has refused to sign the NPT.
They also see India's response to Iran" /> Iran's suspected
efforts to build nuclear weapons as key to the closure of the
deal.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
33 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria's Court Drops Greenpeace Nuclear Plant Claim
21 January 2006
Business: 20 January 2006, Friday.
Bulgaria's Supreme Administrative Court has dropped the claim by
eco activists against the Belene plant, Bulgaria's to-be second
nuclear power producer.
Greenpeace and local environmental organization Ecoglasnost say
that Bulgarian authorities did not make a waste evaluation
before okaying the decision about Belene.
This decision assigned concrete obligations to the Energy
Minister and other organs, in relations to the completion of the
project. The court's decision can be challenged by a private
appeal before a five-member jury in seven days after it has been
announced.
The Greenpeace move began the past summer, when the eco
campaigners declared a crusade against Bulgarian energetics.
Greenpeace demanded for a halt on future investment in nuclear
projects, as well as for writing off Belene.
Bulgaria should name the chief contractor by May 2006 to build
the plant.
Agency - www.sofianewsagency.com) and Sofia Morning News
*****************************************************************
34 Guardian Unlimited: Three Indicted in Ohio Nuclear Plant Case
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 20, 2006 3:47 AM
AP Photo CD302
By CONNIE MABIN
Associated Press Writer
CLEVELAND (AP) - A federal grand jury indicted two former
nuclear power plant employees and a contractor Thursday on
charges of hiding information about serious damage to a reactor
from regulators.
The indictment accuses the trio of misleading regulators in the
fall of 2001 into believing that the Davis-Besse plant was safe
so federal inspectors would delay visits until the spring of
2002, during a scheduled shutdown for refueling.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors found an acid leak in
2002 that nearly ate through a 6-inch steel cap on the reactor
vessel at the plant, which sits along the Lake Erie shore about
30 miles east of Toledo.
Officials said it was the most extensive corrosion ever seen at
a U.S. nuclear reactor.
The plant was closed for two years but returned to full power in
2004. Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp., which owns the plant, spent
$600 million making repairs and buying replacement power because
of the shutdown.
Company and NRC investigations concluded that the rust hole had
been growing for at least four years and that Davis-Besse's
managers had ignored the evidence because they were focused on
profits rather than safety.
Indicted were former engineering design manager David Geisen,
former engineer Andrew Siemaszko and Rodney Cook, a consultant
who was working for Davis-Besse.
There were no Ohio telephone listings for Siemaszko and Geisen.
Messages were left at numbers listed under Rodney Cook.
Davis-Besse spokesman Richard Wilkins said Thursday that he was
not aware of the indictments.
``Those are former employees so I couldn't comment on it
anyway,'' he said.
^---
Associated Press writers M.R. Kropko in Cleveland and John
Seewer in Toledo contributed to this report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
35 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear Plant Owner to Pay $28M Fine
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 20, 2006 4:17 PM
CLEVELAND (AP) - Acknowledging that its employees covered up
serious damage at a nuclear power plant, the facility's owner
has agreed to pay $28 million in fines, restitution and
community service projects, the U.S. Justice Department
announced Friday.
Inspectors found an acid leak in 2002 that nearly ate through a
6-inch steel cap on the reactor vessel at the Davis-Besse plant
owned by FirstEnergy Corp. Officials said it was the most
extensive corrosion ever seen at a U.S. nuclear reactor.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
36 kgw.com: Judge denies new trial for Hanford downwinder
News for Oregon and SW Washington | AP Wire
01/21/2006
Associated Press
A U.S. District Court judge Friday denied a motion for a new
trial for an Idaho woman who claims Cold War emissions from the
Hanford nuclear reservation caused her thyroid cancer.
A federal jury in November denied claims by Shannon Rhodes of
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, that Hanford releases caused her thyroid
cancer. The verdict followed a mistrial in May, when jurors
deadlocked over whether her health problems were caused by the
releases.
Rhodes' attorneys filed a motion for a new trial last month,
alleging jury misconduct. They argued that during deliberations
last fall, two jurors brought up evidence not introduced during
the trial namely, that the trial was Rhodes' second and that
she had lost the first trial.
U.S. District Judge William F. Nielsen denied the motion Friday.
References to the first trial, though stricken in part, were
made to the jury during the second trial, and the information
was not an extraneous influence on the jury process, Nielsen
wrote.
Richard Eymann, Rhodes' lawyer, said he was disappointed with
the ruling and would appeal.
Rhodes was one of six so-called "bellwether" plaintiffs, who
were considered representative of thousands of people who
contend their health was damaged by releases from the
south-central Washington Hanford site.
The plaintiffs are known as Hanford "downwinders" because many
lived in areas downwind from radioactive and chemical releases
from the nuclear site. Downwinders didn't learn about the
radiation releases until the government declassified the
information in 1986.
Since 1990, lawsuits have been filed against the private
companies General Electric Co., E.I. du Pont de Nemours Co.
and UNC Nuclear Inc. _that ran Hanford's plutonium factories
during World War II and the early days of the Cold War.
In February, two of the bellwether plaintiffs were awarded a
combined total of about $500,000 after the jury decided their
thyroid cancers were "more likely than not" caused by Hanford
radiation.
Jurors rejected the claims of three others with autoimmune
thyroid disease, saying their illnesses likely were not caused
by Hanford's emissions of radioactive iodine-131, a byproduct of
plutonium production.
Those rulings remain under appeal.
This text is invisible on the page, but this text is affected by
the invisible item's flow. This text is invisible on the page,
but this text is affected by the invisible item's flow.
copy; 2006, KGW-TV
*****************************************************************
37 Sydney Morning Herald: China uranium export talks to continue -
www.smh.com.au
January 20, 2006 - 2:35PM
Negotiations over the sale of Australian uranium to China will
continue after initial talks wound up on Thursday.
The two days of talks between Chinese officials and Australian
government representatives in Canberra resulted in "good and
substantial progress", a Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman
said.
Australia - which has about 40 per cent of the world's known
uranium reserves - indicated it was likely to lift its
moratorium on uranium exports to the highly lucrative Chinese
market last August.
The talks were established to ensure safeguards were in place
and the uranium was not used to build nuclear weapons.
"Good and substantial progress was made and close consultation
will continue and the details of negotiations are confidential
to those parties," the spokesman said.
"We will not compromise requirements for strict safeguards
applied to Australian uranium exported and to ensure it is used
solely for peaceful purposes."
The spokesman said it was not known when the next round of talks
would begin.
© 2006 AAP
Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
38 The Hindu: Safeguards for breeder reactors, key obstacle
Saturday, Jan 21, 2006
U.S. unwilling to accept Indian stand
New Delhi : As India and the United States concluded their third
round of technical talks on the planned separation and
safeguarding of Indian civilian nuclear facilities this week,
the status of the country's fast breeder programme is emerging
as a key obstacle to the conclusion of an agreement acceptable
to both sides, The Hindu has learnt.
According to sources familiar with the ideas exchanged by both
delegations, the U.S. team, headed by Under-Secretary of State
for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns, is unwilling to accept
India's position that the fast breeder, as an R programme, will
not be put on the list of civilian facilities that are offered
up for safeguards and inspections by the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA).
The American delegation is understood to have argued that there
was nothing unique or distinctive about fast breeder technology,
which warranted an exception being made for it. They argued that
if Japan could agree to subject its Joyo experimental breeder
reactor and Monju prototype breeder reactor to IAEA safeguards,
there was no reason India could not.
Both reactors have been under safeguards since their inception
and today are subject to full-time advanced verification systems
such as `neutron coincidence counters', radiation monitoring
systems and fuel flow monitors, in addition to video
surveillance. If India does not accept safeguards on its
breeders, the U.S. argues, it will be very hard to get the
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to sign off on a rule change
enabling nuclear commerce with India.
Thursday's meeting here was apparently the first time the Indian
side formally got to learn of America's insistence on
safeguarding the 20-year old Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR)
and Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) at Kalpakkam, near
Chennai. Even as recently as December last, following the
conclusion of the second round of talks, well-placed Indian
officials told The Hindu that the breeder issue had never been
raised by the American side.
At Thursday's discussions, however, the Japanese analogy for
safeguards cut no ice. The Indian side pointed out that there
was no basis to compare India with Japan when the July 18, 2005
agreement spoke of India assuming "the same responsibilities and
practices and (acquiring) the same benefits and advantages as
other leading countries with advanced nuclear technology, such
as the United States." Japan was a non-nuclear weapon state
under the NPT and the status of its safeguards agreement with
the IAEA had no bearing on what India should do.
India also believes that the breeder technology plays a much
less important part in Japan's overall nuclear energy mix than
it does in Indian plans. Unlike the Japan Atomic Energy Agency,
which has the freedom to source components and technology from
any part of the world, India's Department of Atomic Energy has
had to rely on its own resources and technologies. Despite this,
it has achieved great success particularly in the development
and use of carbide fuel. At the same time, much work still needs
to be done, particularly on commercial viability of breeder
reactors.
Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of
*****************************************************************
39 Las Vegas SUN: Bechtel opposes Yucca lawsuits
Today: January 20, 2006 at 9:2:37 PST
WASHINGTON -- Yucca Mountain workers who claim that exposure to
toxic materials made them sick are not eligible for a class
action lawsuit, Yucca contractor Bechtel National Inc. argued in
court documents this week.
The workers' lawyer plans to continue pressing for class action
status.
Nine workers are named in a 2004 lawsuit seeking unspecified
damages from Bechtel and five other contractors working on the
proposed nuclear waste repository. The lawsuit alleges that as
many as 1,200 to 1,500 employees who worked in an exploratory
research tunnel have been exposed to toxic substances, including
silica dust. Exposure can reduce lung capacity and can even be
fatal.
Bechtel lawyers said the cases should not be lumped together as
a class action because they involve "individual questions of
exposure, injury, medical causation and damages."
"Liability to individual employees present at different times,
doing different jobs, in different locations in the seven miles
of tunnel, alcoves and niches cannot be determined on a
classwide basis," the company said.
The workers will challenge the Bechtel assertions, their
lawyer, Joseph Egan, said. He plans to argue that the court has
considered far more complex cases as class actions, including
asbestos lawsuits. "We think this is an easy call for class
certification," Egan said.
Benjamin Grove can be reached at (202) 662-7436 or at grove@
lasvegassun.com.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
40 reviewjournal.com : Miss Nevada supports nuclear waste facility
Jan. 20, 2006
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Crystal Wosik
Miss Nevada says "we just have to take one for the team" and
take nation's nuclear waste
Hoping for world peace is one thing. Supporting the construction
of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste facility in Southern Nevada
is quite another, especially if you're a Nevadan.
Miss Nevada Crystal Wosik apparently tried to put to rest any
concerns about the safety of the proposed nuclear repository
during Thursday's preparation for Saturday night's Miss America
pageant in Las Vegas.
The matter came up during her interview with the judges,
according to Nancy Ames, Nevada's state pageant director.
"They asked her what she thought about Yucca Mountain and she
told them that it has to go someplace, and that (Yucca Mountain)
was the best-built facility in the country," Ames told the Reno
Gazette-Journal in a story posted on the newspaper's Web site
Thursday afternoon.
"Then they said something like, 'But what if people could die?'
And she answered that, 'We just have to take one for the team.'
That's just Crystal. She's pretty outspoken," Ames said.
The Energy Department plans to use Yucca Mountain as a geologic
repository to entomb 77,000 tons of nuclear waste about 100
miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Gov. Kenny Guinn and Nevada's congressional delegation have been
united in trying to derail the plan in Congress and the state
has filed several lawsuits in an attempt to block construction.
Wosik, 23, of Las Vegas, will compete Saturday night at the
first Miss America pageant to be held outside of Atlantic City
in about 85 years of the event.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
41 RGJ.com: Miss Nevada sounds off on Yucca Mountain
January 20, 2006
Miss America Pageant judges asked Crystal Wosik, Miss Nevada
2005, about the nuclear waste repository proposed by the Bush
administration for Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas.
"During her interview with the judges, they asked her what she
thought about Yucca Mountain and she told them that it has to go
someplace, and that (Yucca Mountain) was the best-built facility
in the country," said the state's pageant director, Nancy Ames,
after the interview portion of the Miss America pageant in Las
Vegas on Thursday morning.
"Then they said something like, 'But what if people could die?'
and she answered that 'We just have to take one for the team.'
"That's just Crystal. She's pretty outspoken."
Wosik, a Las Vegas resident, could not be reached for further
comment.
The Energy Department plans to use Yucca Mountain as a geologic
repository to entomb 77,000 tons of nuclear waste. Gov. Kenny
Guinn and Nevada's congressional delegation has been united in
trying to derail the plan in Congress and the state has filed
several lawsuits in an attempt to block construction.
-- By Sandi Hoover
The Reno Gazette-Journal
*****************************************************************
42 Star-Gazette.COM - Letters: Landfill pollutants hang around for centuries
Friday January 20, 2006
Elmira/Corning, N.Y.
There are few things in this world that can survive for
thousands of years. The Pyramids, the Parthenon and diamonds are
some of the wonders of the world that have endured for millennia.
There are some enduring monuments and substances, however, which
are not so appealing. Along with nuclear waste, dumps pollute
the environment for thousands of years. The dumps of the Roman
Empire, more than 2,000 years old, still produce leachate today.
Unfortunately, Chemung County has not been farsighted enough to
understand the future it is setting out for residents living
around the county landfill in Lowman. All man-made monuments
must crumble with time, and the manmade plastic landfill liners
supposedly protecting drinking water supplies from toxic garbage
juice (leachate) are no different. Landfill liners are
guaranteed to fail; the only uncertainty is when. So-called
"sanitary" landfills are nothing more than ticking time bombs
that will threaten public health for generations.
Residents in Chemung County are forced to bear this toxic
burden. It is utterly unacceptable to subject unwilling
residents to these dangers without a thorough environmental
assessment that takes the future, as well as the present, into
account. The pathetic excuse for a state- mandated environmental
review submitted by the county is a serious insult to all county
residents, their children, their grandchildren and all the
generations to follow.
MARY KNAPP
Lowman
Copyright © 2006 Star-Gazette. Use of this site signifies your
agreement to the Terms of Serviceand Privacy Policy(updated
6/7/2005). Send questions or comments to Webmaster.
*****************************************************************
43 UPI: Uranium interest worries Utah residents
United Press International - NewsTrack -
1/20/2006 12:12:00 PM -0500
MOAB, Utah, Jan. 20 (UPI) -- Residents of Utah are once again
worried over renewed interest to mine uranium to meet growing
global demand to fuel nuclear plants.
The Cold War of yesteryears had similarly targeted the state for
making atomic bombs but now the effort has turned to peaceful
uses.
Prospectors have staked thousands of claims in the state's
uranium-rich southwest, causing concerns among residents about
environmental damage, health risks and disruption of the
bustling tourist economy that took over after the uranium mines
closed in the 1980s, reports USA Today.
"We are very concerned. Our economy's changed now," a civic
leader in Moab told USA Today. The town, noted for fat-tire
bikes and Jeep safaris, now derives 80 percent of its revenues
from sales taxes paid largely by 1.5 million tourists.
But one prospector told the newspaper the mountain bikers and
the uranium ore trucks have to learn to get along. Another says
mining will take off when the price for uranium increases
enough, which he predicts will happen within five years.
© Copyright 2006 United Press , Inc. All Rights Reserved Want to
*****************************************************************
44 LA Daily News: Regulators back neighbors in Boeing case
Article Launched: 01/20/2006 12:00:00 AM
Company's request to ease water-pollution rules rejected
By Kerry Cavanaugh, Staff Writer
SIMI VALLEY - Los Angeles regulators Thursday rejected the
Boeing Co.'s request to relax water-pollution limits at the
Santa Susana Field Lab and said they plan to punish the company
for nearly 50 water-quality violations at the site last year.
The decision by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control
Board overruled a request by Boeing and the U.S. Air Force to
weaken pollution limits on storm water flowing off the hilltop
lab for four years.
Rather, the appointed board sided with environmentalists and lab
neighbors who complained that Boeing has repeatedly violated its
water-quality permit with impunity.
"The public has borne these costs and now it's time for the
polluter to bear these costs," said board member Francine
Diamond.
Water officials could not say what penalties Boeing might face
for its past violations, but said they are working on an
enforcement plan. Their decision also added new, more stringent
pollution limits on water leaving the site and included a
recommendation that Boeing hire an independent monitor to
reassure community members that the test results are legitimate.
The field lab is a 2,800-acre property at the top of the Simi
Hills, on the Ventura-Los Angeles county line. Starting in the
late 1940s, scientists conducted nuclear research and tested
rocket engines on behalf of the departments of Energy and
Defense, leaving extensive radiological and toxic contamination
on the property.
The site's water permit regulates storm water and industrial
water flowing from the property into creeks that eventually hit
the Los Angeles River and Arroyo Simi.
Between July 2004 and April 2005, Boeing received 48 permit
violations citing higher-than-allowed levels of mercury, dioxins
and other contaminants.
In response, Boeing argued that the new pollution limits were
too stringent. The company had asked for four years to study
where the contamination is coming from and to develop a plan to
prevent pollutants from moving off-site - without fear of
penalties.
In addition, the company pushed for lenience after the Topanga
Fire in September that burned 70 percent of the lab and created
a serious erosion problem.
"Boeing has done everything within its power to meet these
limits," Boeing attorney Sharon Rubalcava told officials, and
she argued that the board's lack of flexibility "set us up for
failure."
But neighbors argued that water officials have been too lenient
with Boeing.
"This company has been violating over and over and they're
asking for a free pass," said Marie Mason, a Simi Valley
resident. "We're real humans with children and grandchildren
living below this area."
Frustrated with slow enforcement, the Committee to Bridge the
Gap in December sent Boeing a 60-day notice that the group
intended to sue the company for violating the Clean Water Act.
In a separate action, a federal grand jury is investigating the
field lab's water-quality violations and demanded documents
relating to the storm water and wastewater.
Kerry Cavanaugh, (818) 713-3746
kerry.cavanaugh@dailynews.com
Los Angeles Newspaper Group
*****************************************************************
45 Salt Lake Tribune: Lawyers call for ethics probe
Article Last Updated: 01/20/2006 12:46:12 AM
Stephenson: They suspect a link between the Republican senator
and Envirocare
By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune
A lawyers group wants an ethics check on state Sen. Howard
Stephenson.
Members of Trial-lawyers Representing Utah's Environment
(TRUE) said Thursday they will ask the Senate Ethics Committee
to look into a possible conflict of interest involving
Stephenson, whose SB70 would change current law to give
lawmakers override power when a governor rejects a hazardous or
radioactive waste-site proposal.
The Draper Republican is president of and a registered
lobbyist for the Utah Taxpayers Association. If passed, his bill
would eliminate an obstacle for a member of the association,
Envirocare of Utah, a company that had hoped to get approval for
expanding its low-level radioactive waste landfill before Gov.
Jon Huntsman announced his objections in November.
Envirocare cannot go through with the expansion without
approval of the Legislature and the governor.
Attorney Jim McConkie, representing TRUE, said the Senate
Ethics Committee should find out how much money Envirocare
contributes to the Taxpayers Association.
Given the scandal now gripping disgraced lobbyist Jack
Abramoff in Washington, the public is wary of too-cozy relations
- and too much money - between lawmakers and lobbyists, he said.
"We're concerned it is spilling down into the
state," McConkie said.
Stephenson said neither his trade group nor Envirocare,
which is one of 2,000 association members, requested SB70. He
added that the company contributes 0.5 percent of the
association's budget.
The senator restated that the bill is intended to correct an
"inappropriate" and "dangerous" power imbalance that could set
an unconstitutional precedent.
"The Legislature has a constitutional prerogative to
override vetoes of the governor," he said.
The lawyers group does not have the power to initiate an
ethics investigation on its own. It will need three senators to
write letters requesting the inquiry.
fahys@sltrib.com
© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
46 Pahrump Valley Times: Commission slates a pair for next week (Yucca)
January 20, 2006
SPECIAL MEETINGS
PVT
The Board of Nye County Commissioners is holding special
meetings - at 1:30 p.m. on Monday and Tuesday.
Both will be by teleconference at 101 Radar Rd. in Tonopah and
at the commissioners' conference room at 1510 E. Basin Ave. in
Pahrump.
The Monday meeting is to set the county's legislative
priorities in the U.S. Congress for the coming year.
Consultant and lobbyist Akerman Senterfitt and Russ Reid
Company are expected to provide an update on federal legislative
issues affecting Nye County.
Akerman Senterfitt is Nye County's lobbyist for Department of
Energy matters related to the proposed Yucca Mountain
Repository. Russ Reid Company is the county's lobbyist for other
issues of interest to the county.
On Tuesday, the commission is scheduled to appoint a strategic
planning steering committee and project leader for the purpose
of reaching the county's SMART goals, which the commissioners
will discuss and establish.
The SMART goals relate to the mission, the financial and the
communication groups of the steering committee.
Other matters scheduled pertain to the Tri-county Cooperative
Weed Management Agency and the reclassification of a vacant
engineering position.
As always, general public comment will be allowed.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
47 QandO Blog: Congressional Entitlement (Yucca)
http://www.qando.net/ - Congressional Entitlement
Posted by: Jon Henke on Friday, January 20, 2006
The entitlement attitude of career Beltway politicians ...Some
lawmakers said they thought Congress was overreacting to the
lobbying scandal with an excess of new rules and requirements.
"Now we're going to say you can't have a meal for more than 20
bucks," said Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi.
"Where are you going, to McDonald's?" Apparently, it's just too
much to expect Senator Lott, et al, to buy their own food with
their meager ~ salary, and it's way out of line to expect a
United States Senator to subsist on sub-$20 lunches.
UPDATE: McQ informs me that quelle surprise! the New York
Times Reporter has quoted Senator Lott out of context. In a
recent , a bit more context is given...
[Show/Hide] Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said a proposal to lower
the gift limit from $50 to $20 was "outrageous" in a town where
lunch isn't cheap. "Where are you going to go? McDonald's?" he
asked. He said he'd rather see a ban on meals. Besides, "any
senator who's been around here more than six years does not want
another free meal," Lott said.
To his credit, Lott says he would rather see a complete ban on
meals than a $20 limit. That makes some sense. In any event...
This isn't about corruption. Senators are probably not bought
and sold over $30 lunches at Red Lobster. It's about the sense
of entitlement that Congressmen have in every aspect of
Washington life. If there's a bennie to be had, they take it.
And they do it because they can; not becuse they have
substantially different moral codes than you or I, but because
the incentives are geared towards producing that kind of
behaviour. And, Congressmen being human, they react to
incentives.
Consider what Radley Balko tells us about ...For example, in
2002 Rep. Richard Burr, R-N.C., was "educated" at the expensive
Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas with first-class airplane tickets,
an open bar for poolside drinks and other "educational" expenses
paid for by the National Association of Broadcasters, according
The Washington Post. The trip's purpose: a public policy
conference. Burr later wanted to learn about the nuclear site in
Nevada's Yucca Mountain. Not content to simply visit the Nevada
desert, Burr and Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, arranged for a
lobbyist to "educate" them and their spouses in Barcelona and
Seville.Because Barcelona and Seville are, of course, the most
obvious places to learn about nuclear waste in Nevada. They went
to Nevada's Yucca Mountain because it was their job; they went
to Barcelona and Seville because they could.
*****************************************************************
48 Pahrump Valley Times: Sandia: Lead federal lab for Yucca Mountain job
January 20, 2006
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MAKES ANNOUNCEMENT
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
ALBUQUERQUE - Sandia National Laboratories has been chosen as
the lead federal lab to coordinate science work on the $58
billion Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada, the
U.S. Department of Energy said Wednesday.
Sandia has done work on the planned repository for 20 years, lab
spokesman Michael Padilla said. The DOE's Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management, OCRWM, made the selection
announcement.
Project contractor Bechtel SAIC Co. currently oversees the work.
Bechtel will continue to be responsible for above-ground design
efforts, the agency said in a news release.
Designating Sandia will give the federal agency a strong,
central leader for the science program and will increase the
project's credibility both with the scientific community and
with federal regulators, the DOE said.
``The independent expert review that the scientists at Sandia
will perform will help ensure that the technical and scientific
basis for the Yucca Mountain repository is without question,''
said OCRWM's acting director, Paul Golan.
The contract is in effect, although some final details are being
worked out with the DOE's National Nuclear Security
Administration, according to Craig Stevens, a DOE spokesman in
Washington, D.C.
``We really see Sandia's involvement as a positive step in
making sure the work done at Yucca is based on sound science,''
Stevens said.
Shifting lab responsibilities and so-called post-closure work to
Sandia will affect contract talks with Yucca Mountain project
contractor Bechtel SAIC Co., said Jason Bohne, a Bechtel
spokesman in Las Vegas.
Bohne on Wednesday denied the Energy Department decision showed
it plans to sever ties with Bechtel, which has some 1,300
contract employees on the Yucca project under a $3.2 billion
five-year contract that expires March 31.
There are another 350 laboratory workers on the project in
Nevada, Bohne said.
Sandia did much of the site work that led to the opening of the
DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Project near Carlsbad, N.M. The
nuclear waste dump, which opened in March 1999, buries
plutonium-contaminated waste from the nation's defense work in
ancient underground salt beds.
Earlier this month, the DOE announced a reorganization of
federal offices overseeing the Yucca Mountain project, which
would bury the nation's most radioactive waste. The
reorganization, ordered by Golan, came after design changes and
investigations into critics' claims that the project is based on
flawed science.
The Energy Department plans to use Yucca Mountain as a geologic
repository to entomb 77,000 tons of nuclear waste now stored at
more than 100 commercial, industrial and military sites in 39
states. Congress and President Bush picked the site in 2002.
The project has suffered such setbacks as missing its license
application deadline, congressional funding cuts and revelations
that geologists may have falsified data. The government also is
rewriting radiation safety rules after a federal court threw out
the first ones.
Last year, officials pushed back the target date for Yucca
Mountain's opening from 2010 to 2012 or later. The federal
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's review of the application is
expected to take several years.
OCRWM said Sandia will provide the technical support for the
NRC's review, including assigning work to other national
laboratories, subcontractors, federal agencies, universities and
expert panels.
Sens. Jeff Bingaman and Pete Domenici praised the selection of
Sandia.
Bingaman, D-N.M., said it ``speaks very highly of the work the
lab has already done on the Nevada site and all of the work it
did to certify WIPP.''
Domenici, R-N.M., said work on nuclear waste issue is key to the
future of the nation's nuclear power development.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
49 KVBC: Response to Miss Nevada's Yucca Mountain comments
January 21, 2006
Miss Nevada is stirring up some controversy over her comments
about Yucca Mountain. It happened Thursday when 23 year old
Crystal Wosik was interviewed by judges.
According to the pageant director, the judges asked Wosik what
she thought of Yucca Mountain. She told them "it has to go
someplace and that Yucca Mountain was the best built facility in
the country." Then a judge said what would happen if people
could die? She, according to the pageant director, answered "we
just have to take one for the team."
That drew a pretty direct response from Peggy Maze Johnson of
Citizen Alert. Johnson is an outspoken critic of the nuclear
waste repository planned about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Johnson said, "Before she gets up there and starts representing
the state of Nevada, she needs to find out more about what the
issues are. Instead, she's shooting from the hip with a
ridiculous statement that feeds into many people's idea that
Miss America contestants are bimbos".
News 3 contacted the Miss Nevada organization to try and get a
direct response from Crystal Wosik. Wosik will be competing in
the Miss America Pageant this Saturday night at the Aladdin here
in Las Vegas.
.gif"> All content © Copyright 2000 - 2006 WorldNow and KVBC.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
50 Watertown TAB & Press: State takes a pass on toxic park
TownOnline.com -
By Christopher Loh/ Staff Writer
Friday, January 20, 2006
A piece of lead-contaminated Watertown land on Greenough
Boulevard near Arsenal Street and Memorial Drive has sparked
another fiery controversy in town.
The state has put a halt on the acceptance of the parcel
from the federal government until further cleanup is performed.
The site was once a dumping ground for the Army and its
depleted uranium scraps when it was a part of the formal
Watertown Arsenal.
The parcel was discussed at a Restoration Advisory Board
meeting Tuesday evening with representatives from the state
Department of Conservation and Recreation and the federal
governments General Services Administration in attendance.
State Sen. Steve Tolman, D-Boston, and a representative
from Congressman Edward Markeys office were also in attendance.
According to member Susan Falkoff, RAB and Watertown
Citizens for Environmental Safety, plans for the site were going
straight but "hit a right turn" at the meeting when a letter by
DCR Commissioner Stephen Burrington was read declaring the
department would accept nothing less but a full cleanup of the
site.
Jay Peters, senior scientist for MACTEC Engineering and
Consulting, a firm contracted by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to assess the risk of contamination at the site, gave
a presentation at the meeting concerning the risk factors.
Peters told the RAB three possible uses for the site were
determined before any risk assessment was performed.
Those sites were determined to be a Metropolitan District
Commission recreational facility consisting of athletic fields
for organized sporting events and an indoor ice skating rink; a
greenway that may be used for passive recreational activities;
or a community vegetable garden.
Risk assessments performed by MACTAC yielded information
that there appears to be no significant risk for use of the site
as an MDC complex or a greenway, but would pose a significant
problem as a garden.
MACTEC engineers focused on the risk assessment and the
different risks associated with using the site as a greenway or
playground. [continue]
MACTEC determined, according to Peters, that the site, if
frequently used as a playground by children between the ages of 1
and 5, would require further cleanup.
The site, however, is approved for frequent use as athletic
fields by persons older than 6 years old.
Peters speculated children between 1 and 6 years of age
would be there at two-thirds the frequency of older children and
adults.
"Without playground equipment, athletic fields are not
attractive to young children for frequent play," the presentation
read. "Young children generally only present at athletic fields
as spectators during organized events; no other reason to
frequently go to the athletic fields."
Residents in the area raised many concerns over this
speculation of infrequent use by children under 6, especially
those who live near the site.
RAB members said the distinction between frequent and
infrequent needed to be defined further, although it seems by
Burrington's letter the DCR will require complete cleanup of the
lead at the site before it accepts the land from the GSA.
Falkoff said the letter was a complete surprise to everyone
at the meeting, as the DCR previously made no demands regarding
the cleanup of the site.
"They have to regroup," Falkoff said of the two departments
after the "right turn" was taken.
Falkoff said she appreciated the letter by Burrington
though, and was also happy to hear government officials at both
the state and federal levels will be more involved in the
process.
Tolman said he was surprised the GSA thought the state would
accept the land.
"This is a no-brainer for me," Tolman, a parent of two
children who both suffered neurological disorders from unknown
causes, said of the demand for further cleanup. "I would never
wish this on anyone."
Tolman said he would begin communications with the proper
officials concerning the site.
The RAB will next meet to discuss the issue at 7 p.m. on
March 15. A place has not yet been designated.
Christopher Loh can be reached at cloh@cnc.com
1.800.982.4023
© Copyright of CNC and Herald Interactive Advertising Systems,
Inc.
No portion of townonline.com or its content may be reproduced
*****************************************************************
51 Pahrump Valley Times: Consultant's report on Yucca project 'vacuous,' says Devlin
January 20, 2006
WILLIAMS' PACT DISCUSSED BY COMMISSIONERS
By PHILLIP GOMEZ PVT
Denver, Colo.-based consultant James Williams' contract came up
again at Tuesday's meeting of the Board of Nye County
Commissioners.
Previously, the commissioners denied the consultant's short-term
contract for $50,000. But this time they approved an earlier
funded contract to finalize a draft study of development
opportunities for Yucca Mountain Repository-related facilities
near Lathrop Wells, just outside the main entrance to the
proposed nuclear waste facility at the U.S. Route 95 junction
with the county road to Amargosa Valley.
The study is due next December, but aspects of it will be
presented to the Amargosa Valley Town Board on Feb. 23.
"I have read the report and it is absolutely vacuous," said
Pahrump resident Sally Devlin, who never fails to be on hand to
denounce Yucca Mountain developments. "Any high school kid could
have written these reports. They don't say anything. ... There
are no meat and potatoes. ... The man is completely incapable of
doing anything."
David Swanson, interim director of the county's nuclear waste
repository project office, had a contrary opinion of a recent
report Williams has written.
"The Department of Energy called the report 'inspired,'" Swanson
said. He also had a different spin on the Yucca Mountain
situation in light of recent revelations of a DOE order to stop
work at the site, due to continued problems with obtaining
reliable safety design data.
"Regardless of what you hear," Swanson said, "the (Yucca
Mountain) project is not dead. The Department of Energy is
actively involved in planning (its next steps in obtaining
Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing, now said to be two
years off in the future).
"We need to stay engaged with that process," Swanson said,
citing a recent meeting on rights-of-way concerns that a project
office contractor had attended. Swanson also reported that DOE
was considering moving a water sampling office off the Nevada
Test Site where Yucca Mountain is located.
That would place it in the environs of Lathrop Wells, where Nye
County has developed infrastructure in support of office
buildings and other facilities that might be constructed for
future contractors.
Swanson added that the guard station at the main entrance to
Yucca Mountain is going to be reconstructed and would likely
entail collateral support buildings, possibly in the Lathrop
Wells area off the federal reservation.
"Williams' team is exactly the team we need to engage those
issues," Swanson said. Beatty and Amargosa Valley were closely
involved and interested in the study results, he said.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
52 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE takes new steps to reorganize Yucca
January 20, 2006
MEET THE NEW OLD BOSS
SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES DESIGNATED AS THE 'LEAD AGENCY' FOR
EMBATTLED REPOSITORY
By STEVE TETREAULT SPECIAL TO THE PVT
WASHINGTON - The Department of Energy on Wednesday expanded the
role of government science laboratories at Yucca Mountain,
continuing its reorganization of the embattled nuclear waste
repository project.
DOE designated Sandia National Laboratories as the lead agency
to coordinate science and technical work for the Nevada
repository, where the government wants to bury 77,000 tons of
high level spent nuclear fuel.
Sandia has been involved in the Yucca Mountain program since
its inception in the early 1980s, with cadres of scientists that
have contributed to performance assessments, field and
laboratory testing and quality assurance, according to the
laboratories' Web site.
The new designation greatly expands the role of the
Albuquerque-based institute, one of 14 government science
facilities that support Energy Department activities nationwide.
Paul Golan, acting Yucca Mountain director, maintained that
increasing Sandia's role would improve the credibility of the
Yucca project with scientists and federal regulators.
Golan said Sandia performed a similar role in coordinating
research at the Waste Isolation Pilot Project in Carlsbad, N.M.,
a repository that began receiving transuranic nuclear waste for
disposal in 1999.
"The independent, expert review that the scientists at Sandia
will perform will help ensure that the technical and scientific
basis for the Yucca Mountain repository is without question,"
Golan said.
It was not immediately clear how the change might affect Yucca
personnel, most of whom are based in Las Vegas, though dozens
reside in Pahrump. The program employs about 100 federal workers
in Nevada and about 2,000 others who work for contractors and
national laboratories. One source within the program said Sandia
has been recruiting from among contractors who are facing
potential layoffs.
Sandia National Laboratories employs about 60 people on the
Yucca project. Andrew Orrell, who has worked on the project for
eight years and is based in Las Vegas, is senior manager.
The Energy Department has announced several management and
technical changes to the nuclear waste project over the past
four months. The Yucca effort has missed self-imposed deadlines,
and been confronted with budget and legal challenges and fresh
questioning by critics and outside reviewers.
A Nevada official who coordinates the state's official
opposition to Yucca Mountain said he doubted Sandia's new role
would spark the project.
"It's difficult to call Sandia independent since they have had
a major role to play in the program all along," said Bob Loux,
director of the state Agency for Nuclear Projects. "In this
case, the new boss is the same as the old boss, they've been
part of the problem."
Sandia will take over project segments that focus on the
emplacement of waste canisters within Yucca Mountain, the
anticipated water flows through rock and the long term
environmental conditions that will gradually corrode the metal
containers, officials said.
That work will be assumed from Bechtel SAIC, the project's
management and operations contractor. Bechtel will now focus on
developing aboveground facilities where nuclear waste will be
transferred from trucks or rail cars and positioned for burial.
Bechtel's initial five-year contract to manage the Yucca project
expires in March. DOE and corporate officials are negotiating a
new deal that will likely reflect the scaled back work scope,
officials said.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., chairman of the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, applauded DOE's move.
Sandia features some of the best scientists in the country and
will be able to provide the Yucca Mountain project with strong,
centralized leadership," said Domenici, who is an active
supporter of nuclear laboratories in New Mexico.
In another move reflecting greater reliance on the national
labs, DOE said that a building on the campus of the Idaho
National Laboratory will be transferred to the Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, which runs the Yucca
Mountain project.
The TAN-607 building will be used to train nuclear fuel
handlers for Yucca Mountain, the department said. The 153,000
square foot facility includes the nation's largest "hot shop," a
shielded fuel-handling room where radioactive materials can be
manipulated by radio-controlled cranes.
The announcement is the latest element in DOE's reorganization
of Yucca Mountain. In the fall, officials announced they will
redesign nuclear waste canisters and the aboveground complex at
the site to simplify fuel handling.
Last week, the department said Yucca Mountain management offices
in Las Vegas and Washington were being reorganized.
Yucca Mountain is situated in Nye County 20 miles north of
Amargosa Valley and an equal distance east of Beatty. The ridge,
which is located on a fault line, is 50 miles northwest of
Pahrump.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
53 ContraCostaTimes.com: Los Alamos rolls out team roster
01/20/2006 |
By Betsy Mason CONTRA COSTA TIMES
The new manager of Los Alamos National Laboratory announced an
all-star management team and board of governors Thursday that
will officially take the helm of the New Mexico nuclear weapons
lab on June 1.
The lab is currently in a six-month management transition period
between the University of California, which has run the
Department of Energy lab for more than 60 years, and Los Alamos
National Security, LLC, which was selected by the DOE last month
for a new seven-year contract.
The new group is made up of UC and a trio of industrial partners
led by Bechtel National.
Michael Anastasio, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory's current
director, will become director of Los Alamos Lab under the new
management. Anastasio met with lab employees Thursday to discuss
the transition and announce the new lineup of key personnel.
"We're very committed to make this transition as smooth as
possible," Anastasio said. "We're right on track and we're
making good progress."
Anastasio emphasized integration among organizations at the lab
as well as across the DOE's entire nuclear weapons complex, a
task made easier in that at least one of the four parent
institutions that make up Los Alamos National Security has a
presence at six of the eight other DOE nuclear sites.
Of the 21 members of the new management team, only four were
retained from the previous managing group.
The board of governors will be chaired by UC regents' chairman
Gerald Parsky, with Bechtel's president, Tom Hash, as vice
chairman. Other board members include UC San Diego chancellor
Marye Anne Fox and UC senior vice president for business and
finance Joseph Mullinix.
An impressive list of outside governors includes physicist
Sydney Drell, former director of the Stanford Linear Accelerator
Center; recently retired Pricewaterhouse Coopers chairman Nick
Moore; former U.S. Secretary of Defense William Perry; and
retired U.S. Navy Adm. Richard Mies.
"We have experts in scientific research, technology, business
management, nuclear operations, national security, finance,
accounting and government," Parsky said in a statement.
Anastasio is still the director of Livermore Lab, but has been
spending most of his time working on the LANS contract bid and
on the management transition.
Deputy director Wayne Shotts, who has been acting director in
Anastasio's absence, announced Wednesday his plans to retire at
the end of February. Deputy director for science and technology
Cherry Murray will step in as acting director.
Anastasio said he will resign from Livermore Lab when UC is
ready to appoint an interim director to head the lab during the
search for a new permanent director.
Betsy Mason covers science and the national laboratories. Reach
her at 925-847-2158 or bmason@cctimes.com
*****************************************************************
54 CC Times: Pension change angers lab workers
Friday, Jan 20, 2006 Today in the Times
By Heather Clark ASSOCIATED PRESS
ALBUQUERQUE - Los Alamos National Laboratory employees and
retirees say they are outraged that the University of California
Board of Regents has approved the creation of a separate pension
fund for the lab.
The regents ratified a committee recommendation without
discussion during a meeting Thursday in San Diego. The pension
fund for the lab -- called the UCRP-LANL Plan -- will be removed
from the overall UC pension fund.
UC President Robert Dynes recommended the regents approve
creating a "cloned" plan that would provide the same monthly
benefit formulas as the regular UC retirement plan. It would
cover active, inactive and retired members, according to a
report from Dynes' office.
But lab employees and retirees said Thursday they feel betrayed
by the regents.
"Once this word gets out, people are going to be even more
incensed," Charles Mansfield, president of the Laboratory
Retiree Group, Inc., said after hearing about Thursday's
decision. He had described employees and retirees as "livid" the
day before the vote.
Mansfield said the move is a breach of trust between the
university and lab employees and retirees.
Since 2003, when the Department of Energy announced the lab's
management contract would be put out for bid, Mansfield said UC
told employees they would remain with the UC retirement plan.
Los Alamos National Security, a team led by UC and Bechtel
Corp., was picked to manage the lab last month. Its contract
starts June 1.
Mansfield said the retirees fear that management of the pension
fund would be subcontracted to another firm that would raid the
fund, which had a market value of $4.3 billion last June. UC's
total pension fund was worth $41.8 billion.
Brad Holian, a semiretired physicist, is concerned the smaller
lab fund would be riskier in the long run than the larger UC
fund.
"It is terribly unfair to suddenly force people who have worked
for over two decades at the lab under the UCRP system into an
entirely new and unknown entity," Holian wrote in a letter to
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M. "Retirement is all about planning,
and we have been given no opportunity to plan for such a
catastrophic turn of events."
UC officials have described the lab's pension fund as "extremely
healthy."
On Wednesday, Regents' Chairman Gerald Parsky said the
university would stand by its commitment to lab employees and
retirees to provide "substantially equivalent" pension benefits.
Asked about the regents' vote Thursday, designated lab director
Michael Anastasio said LANS was still committed to a smooth
transition. He said LANS will submit its benefits proposals,
including pensions, to the Department of Energy for approval
next week.
LANS hopes to make formal offers to employees by March 15, he
said.
Dynes has recommended that the new fund become effective no
later than March 31.
Associated Press Writer Michelle Locke in San Diego contributed
to this report.
Contra Costa Times
*****************************************************************
55 DOE: DOE Announces Three Projects to Help the Gulf Coast Recover
and Rebuild
January 20, 2006
ROBINSONVILLE, MS Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman today
announced three Department of Energy (DOE) initiatives to help
the people in the Gulf coast region recover from the hurricanes
in 2005, as well as prevent loss of life and damage in the
future. During his speech to the Energy Leadership Forum, the
secretary announced that DOE will donate 400,000 hours of
supercomputing time at its National Energy Research Scientific
Computing Center (NRESC) to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
assist with the rebuilding of levees. DOE is also offering
hurricane-affected residents free rebuilding workshops providing
expert advice on the latest energy-efficient products and
techniques, in addition to donating approximately 200 pieces of
used furniture to a Louisiana school.
The Department of Energy is so much more than gasoline and coal,
were Americans who saw our neighbors devastated by the
hurricanes - and were finding ways to help, Secretary Bodman
said.
In addition to strengthening our nations energy infrastructure
and improving our departments response to natural disasters, our
goal is to help those affected in every way that we can. The
DOE Office of Science has allocated 400,000 processor hours of
supercomputing time at NERSC at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
in Berkeley, California, to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
This will allow the Corps to run hurricane simulations to help
model hurricane-induced storm surge elevations so coastal levees
can be strengthened and offer more protection to low-lying areas.
Were proud to lend our resources to help strengthen the levees
that will protect the people of the Gulf region, Director of
DOEs Office of Science Dr. Ray Orbach said.
Secretary Bodman has directed us to do whatever we can to help,
and we are committed to doing just that.
Running the 400,000 supercomputer hours of simulations on a
single-processor personal computer would take about 46 years. But
by tapping NERSCs supercomputers, which include a
6,080-processor IBM supercomputer, an 888-processor IBM cluster
computer and a 640-processor Linux Networx cluster, the
simulations are expected to be completed within a month.
Also, Secretary Bodman announced that DOE, in partnership with
Entergy New Orleans, The Home Depot, and the Partnership for
Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH), is offering free home
repair workshops in Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi, as
residents begin to repair and rebuild. Specifically, workshop
attendees will receive hands-on instruction on how to improve
home energy efficiency and durability when repairing
storm-damaged roofs, ceilings, walls and floors, and when
installing windows, doors and hurricane shutters.
In effort to help homeowners make use of their training right
away, The Home Depot is donating discount coupons worth ten
percent off customers purchases and will give away gift cards
valued at up to $1000 to workshop participants. For more
details, please visit http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/.
In addition, Secretary Bodman announced that, in accordance with
a Department of Education initiative to help re-supply schools
affected by the hurricanes, DOE will donate 200 pieces of
furniture to Belle Chasse High School in Belle Chasse, LA.
This includes desks, bookcases, credenzas and filing cabinets.
Each piece of furniture has been approved for donation by the
General Services Administration (GSA) and the Department of
Education. The school is about ten miles from downtown New
Orleans and only three blocks from the Mississippi River.
Secretary Bodman made these announcements while giving the
keynote address at the Energy Leadership Forum in Robinsonville,
MS. The Forum brought together local energy utility
representatives, government officials, and other key players in
the hurricane recovery effort. During the two-day forum,
participants discussed disaster response, lessons learned from
the hurricanes of 2005, and how best to strengthen Americas
energy infrastructure.
Media contact(s):
Craig Stevens, 202/586-4940 [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585
1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 |
*****************************************************************
56 Hanford News: Work progressing at vitrification plant; Budget cuts slow work,
but DOE committed to completing project
This story was published Thursday, January 19th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Hanford's vitrification plant is quieter these days.
Last spring, the site was crawling with about 1,100 craft
workers, their yellow hard hats and orange safety vests in sharp
contrast to the gray concrete walls of the plant's buildings.
By Wednesday, about 300 were at work, wading through inch-deep
water in rain-soaked buildings constructed with watertight
floors and waiting for 200-foot-tall cranes to deliver materials
through thick fog.
Federal budget cuts have slowed construction work, but not
stopped it.
"We had to rethink, restrategize," said John Eschenberg, DOE's
project manager at the plant.
At the two largest buildings on the 65-acre site, skeleton crews
are busy finishing up work needed to secure the buildings before
construction is suspended for much of the year.
Although little work likely will be done at the Pretreatment
Facility and the High Level Waste Facility for much of the year,
"we are still focused very, very aggressively on finishing
engineering," Eschenberg said.
Once previously announced layoffs are completed in February,
about 1,725 workers will continue on the project, including
construction and nonconstruction workers.
The pause in construction work will keep DOE within a budget cut
from $690 million last fiscal year to $526 million this year.
It also will allow work to be completed on the seismic design of
the two buildings and the verification of seismic design already
completed. A study in 2004 raised questions whether the previous
seismic standard was robust enough for the buildings to
withstand a severe earthquake. Both will handle substantial
amounts of high-level radioactive waste once operations begin.
In the meantime, contractor Bechtel National is shifting
construction crews to other buildings for most of this year.
The plan is to focus work at the Analytical Laboratory and the
Low Activity Waste Facility, plus about 20 support buildings.
"Toward the end of the calendar year, we'll slow construction
there and ramp up construction on Pretreatment and High-Level
Waste," Eschenberg said.
Since major construction began in 2002, about $3 billion has
been spent at the vitrification plant. It's expected to treat a
substantial portion of the 53 million gallons of radioactive
waste now held in underground tanks, including the most
radioactive material.
The waste began accumulating in World War II as Hanford made the
plutonium used for the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki, Japan.
The volume of waste grew during the decades of the Cold War.
At the vitrification plant, radioactive material will be
concentrated by evaporation, then separated in the huge
Pretreatment Facility into waste to be sent to the High Level
Waste Facility or the Low Activity Waste Facility. Waste
containers at the High Level Waste Facility will have radiation
levels of about 5,000 rems. Touch it, and the radiation dose
would be lethal within minutes, said Jim Henschel, Becthel
National's project director.
At the two treatment facilities, the waste will be mixed with
silica and other materials and heated to 2,100 degrees to form
glass logs that immobilize the radioactive waste for permanent
disposal.
Construction is about 32 percent complete on the entire
vitrification plant and design is about 60 percent complete. But
work is further along on some buildings than others.
Just 20 percent of the construction has been finished at the
High Level Waste Facility, which will stand six stories high and
be the size of two football fields. The Pretreatment Facility
will be even larger, with its footprint as large as four
football fields and standing about 12 stories high. Construction
on it is 24 percent complete, and it already is 56-feet high.
Construction is further along on the other buildings, including
the Low Activity Waste Building where much of the work is
concentrated now. It will stand about seven stories high and be
the size of 1 1/2 football fields.
Construction workers topped it off last year, and the
ventilation, sprinkler system and lighting have been installed.
In its lower level, tracks are in place that will move empty
containers to turntables that will lift them in elevators to
fill with molten glass from melters on the floor above. Each
container will hold about 6.6 tons of glass.
Most of the space in the building will be devoted to an
intricate cleaning system that consists of a dozen different
steps to treat off-gases and cleanse the air.
Winter weather is causing some construction problems at the
building. A fire-protective coating to keep structural steel
sound in high heats bubbled and pulled away from the steel in
some places during December's rain and snow storms.
Tests still are being done, but patching damaged areas may solve
the problem.
The Low Activity Waste Facility is largely open on the sides,
but DOE's goal is to have it and the other buildings where work
is continuing boxed in this year.
Estimates vary on when the vitrification plant will be ready to
begin treating waste. DOE has acknowledged that it will not be
ready by a legal deadline of 2011. Other estimates put the start
of operations anytime from 2015 to 2018.
Despite the slowdown in construction, top DOE officials have
emphasized that they remain committed to finishing the plant and
treating the radioactive waste to protect the Columbia River.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
57 Hanford News: Feds eye changes in Hanford claim rules
This story was published Friday, January 20th, 2006
By the Herald staff
The federal government is considering new rules that may make it
easier for former Hanford workers with lymphoma cancers or their
survivors to receive benefits that include a $150,000 payment.
If the rules are adopted, previously decided claims could be
reconsidered. The proposed change was published Thursday in the
Federal Register. Public comment will be accepted for two weeks.
Comments may be mailed to Larry Elliott, director, Office of
Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, C-46,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45226.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
58 Hanford News: CH2M Hill Hanford makes relief donation
This story was published Friday, January 20th, 2006
By the Herald staff
CH2M Hill Hanford Group employees have donated $5,650 to the
American Red Cross for hurricane relief by cashing in 130
personal vacation hours.
The contribution is part of an Internal Revenue Service program
that lets employees donate personal leave time in exchange for
cash payments to organizations assisting people impacted by the
Gulf Coast hurricanes. The donation brings the amount CH2M Hill
employees have raised for relief to more than $11,000.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
59 Hanford News: Fluor agrees to pay DOE $206,000 fine
This story was published Friday, January 20th, 2006
By the Herald staff
Fluor Hanford agreed to pay a Department of Energy fine of
$206,250, rather than appeal it, for problems primarily at the
Hanford nuclear reservation's Plutonium Finishing Plant.
More than half the fine was for problems in the criticality
prevention program at PFP. Some of the criticality safety issues
were representative of safety deficiencies that date back to
1996, according to DOE.
In addition, DOE cited other safety requirements that had not
been met at PFP and an incident at the K West Basin in 2004 in
which several workers received low-level radiological exposure.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
60 DOE: Emergency Order To Resume Limited Operation at the Potomac River
FR Doc 06-570
[Federal Register: January 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 13)]
[Notices] [Page 3279-3281] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20ja06-36]
Generating Station, Alexandria, VA, in Response to Electricity
Reliability Concerns in Washington, DC AGENCY: Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of emergency action.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.343, the U.S. Department of
Energy is issuing this Notice to document emergency actions that
it has taken, and to set forth the steps it intends to take in
the future, to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) in the matter described in this Notice.
On August 24, 2005, Mirant Corporation, and its wholly owned
subsidiary, Mirant Potomac River, LLC (collectively referred to
herein as Mirant), ceased operations at its Potomac River
Generating Station (the ``Plant'') in Alexandria, Virginia, after
modeling that it conducted indicated that the Plant's operations
were causing exceedances of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) of the Clean Air Act. On the same day, the
District of Columbia Public Service Commission (DCPSC) filed with
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or ``Department''), a petition
for an emergency order pursuant to section 202(c) of the Federal
Power Act (FPA), asserting that the Plant's closure reduced the
reliability of the electrical supply to much of the central
business district of the District of Columbia, many federal
institutions, the Georgetown area in DC, as well as other
portions of Northwest DC, and the District of Columbia Water and
Sewer Authority's Blue Plains Advanced Water Treatment Plant
(collectively referred to herein as the ``Central DC area''),
placing these electrical customers in risk of a blackout.
After an exhaustive review of the facts, and consultation with
Federal and state officials responsible for environmental
compliance and the private entities responsible for electricity
transmission, the Secretary of the Department of Energy on
December 20, 2005, issued an emergency order (the ``Order'')
directing the Plant's owner, Mirant, to generate electricity at
the coal-fired Plant under certain, limited circumstances. The
section below on ``Further Information'' includes information on
how to obtain paper and electronic copies of the Order.
In emergency situations such as this one, the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations Implementing the
Procedural Requirements of NEPA at 40 CFR 1506.11 provide that a
federal agency may take an action with significant environmental
impacts without observing the provisions of the NEPA regulations
associated with preparing an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS). Instead, the agency should consult with CEQ to determine
what alternative arrangements the agency will take in lieu of
preparing a normal NEPA EIS. DOE has consulted with CEQ about
alternative arrangements it will take in this matter and is
publishing this notice to inform the public of those arrangements
pursuant to DOE's NEPA regulations at 10 CFR 1021.343. Consistent
with its consultation with CEQ, DOE will implement the following
alternative arrangements: (1) Prepare a Special Environmental
Analysis (SEA) that will examine the potential impacts from
issuance of the order, and identify potential mitigation
measures; (2) provide opportunities for public involvement by
disseminating information related to the environmental effects of
Mirant's operations and by accepting public comment on this
notice, the compliance plan Mirant submitted to DOE, and the SEA;
(3) continue consultations with appropriate agencies with regard
to relevant environmental issues; and (4) identify in the SEA any
steps that DOE believes can be taken to mitigate the impacts from
its Order.
DATES: Comments on this notice and on issues to be addressed in
the SEA should be submitted to DOE on or before February 21,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to: Lawrence Mansueti,
Permitting, Siting, and Analysis Division, Office of Electricity
Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE-20), U.S. Department of
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0119;
telephone: 202-586-2588; fax: 202-586-5860;
Lawrence.Mansueti@hq.doe.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For further information on this Notice, to obtain paper copies of
the Order and compliance plan, to submit comments on the
compliance plan, or for information on the emergency activities
related to the Plant, contact Mr. Mansueti at the above address.
In addition, all publicly available documents, including the
Order and compliance plan, are available on DOE's Web site for
this matter at
http://www.electricity.doe.gov/about/dcpsc_docket.cfm or via
hyperlinks from that Web site (referred to herein as the ``Mirant
matter Web site''). Copies of the SEA will also be available on
the DOE NEPA Web site at http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa/. For
information on the DOE NEPA process, please contact: Carol M.
Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance
(EH-42), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0119; telephone: 202-586-4600; fax:
202-586-7031; or leave a toll-free message at: 1-800-472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Procedural Background On August 19,
2005, Mirant submitted to the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) a computerized emissions modeling
study Mirant had conducted of its Plant that indicated that
emissions from the Plant caused or contributed to significant
localized exceedances of the NAAQS. Also on August 19, 2005, DEQ
issued a letter to Mirant which requested ``that Mirant
immediately undertake such action as is necessary to ensure
protection of human health and the environment, in the area
surrounding the Potomac River Generating Station, including the
potential reduction of levels of operation, or potential shut
down of the facility.'' (emphasis in original). On August 24,
2005, Mirant shut down all five of the generating units at the
Plant, and on the same day, the District of Columbia Public
Service
[[Page 3280]] Commission (DCPSC) filed an Emergency Petition and
Complaint with DOE and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA). The DCPSC
requested the Secretary of Energy to find that an emergency
existed under section 202(c) of the FPA and to issue an order
directing Mirant to continue operation of the Plant. The basis
for the petition was that the shutdown of the Plant ``* * * will
have a drastic and potentially immediate effect on the electric
reliability in the greater Washington, DC, area and could expose
hundreds of thousands of consumers, agencies of the Federal
Government and critical federal infrastructure to curtailments of
electric service, load shedding and, potentially, blackouts.'' On
September 20, 2005, Mirant restarted its unit number one on an
8/8/8 basis--that is, in any given 24-hour period, the unit runs
for eight hours at its maximum level of 88 MW, eight hours at its
minimum level of 35 MW, and has eight hours when it does not run.
DOE has been informed that both the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and DEQ acknowledge that the operation of this unit
in this manner does not result in any modeled NAAQS exceedances.
Electricity Reliability The coal-fired Mirant Plant consists of
five generating units, two of which are cycling units that range
in output from 35 MW to 88 MW, and three of which are baseload
units that range in output from 35 MW to 102 MW. The Plant is one
of only three sources of electricity to the Central DC area. The
other two sources are two 230,000-volt (230 kV) transmission
lines that deliver electricity from other generating sources in
the regional electric grid operated by PJM Interconnection (PJM).
Although there are other generating units in close physical
proximity to the Central DC area, there are no transmission lines
that would allow delivery of power from these other units to
reach the Central DC area. Under North American Electric
Reliability Council (NERC) standards, at a minimum, the power
system must carry at least enough contingency reserves of
electricity to cover the most severe single contingency. The
standards require that an area's system always be operated with
sufficient reserves to compensate for the sudden failure of the
area's most important single generator or transmission line.
Based on the fact that the Central DC area has only three sources
of supply, the Plant and the two 230 kV transmission lines, in
order to maintain a minimally reliable electric power system, the
Plant must be available to run when one of the 230 kV lines is
out of service, because if the remaining line failed there would
be no other source of electricity to serve the Central DC area
load.
The outage of one of these two lines is not merely a theoretical
possibility. Since 2000, there have been 34 one-line outages for
maintenance, and seven occasions where one of the lines has
failed unexpectedly. DOE has been informed that, prior to 2000,
there were two occasions when both of the lines failed
simultaneously.
Moreover, just days before issuance of the Order, PJM informed
DOE on December 16, 2005, that on the previous night, ``one of
the two circuits critical to providing service to the District
tripped. Continued [electric] service to certain load within the
District was at that time entirely dependent on the remaining
circuit.'' Fortunately, full service to the line that failed was
restored by the morning of December 16, 2005.
Nonetheless, there can be no assurance that the Central DC area
would be so lucky next time. In addition, the Potomac Electric
Power Company (PEPCO) informed DOE that it needed to perform
maintenance on the lines in January of 2006.
The Order On December 20, 2005, DOE found that in the
circumstances presented, an emergency existed within the meaning
of section 202(c) of the FPA because of the reasonable
possibility an outage would occur that would cause a blackout,
the number and importance of facilities and operations in our
Nation's Capital that would be potentially affected by such a
blackout, the extended number of hours of any blackout that might
in fact occur, and the fact that the current situation violated
applicable reliability standards. PEPCO has applied to the DCPSC
to construct two additional 230 kV lines that would supply
electricity to the Central DC area and in the same application,
proposed building two new 69kV lines to supply the Blue Plains
wastewater treatment plant. Once completed, these lines will
likely provide a high level of electricity reliability in the
Central DC area, even in the absence of production from the
Plant. However, it will likely take 18-24 months to construct the
new lines.
Based on this finding, on December 20, 2005, DOE issued an Order
requiring Mirant to, among other things, (1) operate the Plant to
produce the amount of power (up to its full capabilities) needed
to meet demand in the Central DC area during any period in which
one or both of the 230kV lines serving the Central DC area is out
of service as specified by PJM for the duration of the outage,
and (2) keep as many generating units in operation and take all
other measures to reduce the start-up time of units not in
operation, for the purpose of providing electricity reliability,
as feasible, as determined by DOE after consideration of the plan
submitted by Mirant pursuant to the Order and after consultation
with EPA, without regard to cost, and without causing or
significantly contributing to any exceedance of the NAAQS. A
blackout in the Central DC area would have drastic impacts on the
environment, as well as for the employees and citizens of the
Central DC area, affecting hundreds of thousands of residents and
workers, as well as public safety and protection facilities,
including hospitals, police, and fire facilities. In addition,
DOE has been informed that within 24 hours of a blackout in the
Central DC area, untreated sewage from the Blue Plains Wastewater
Treatment plant would be discharged into the Potomac River.
The time period for DOE's Order extends through October 1, 2006.
Mirant's Compliance Plan Pursuant to DOE's Order, Mirant
submitted a compliance plan (referred to as the Operating Plan by
Mirant) on December 30, 2005. The plan outlines a proposed
temporary phase, and two options for a proposed intermediate
phase, Option A and Option B. All proposals include the use of
``trona'' (sodium sesquicarbonate, a naturally occurring
substance similar to baking soda) and/or lower sulfur coal to
manage air emissions. On January 4, 2006, DOE authorized Mirant
to ``immediately take the necessary steps to implement Option A
of the intermediate phase proposed in the implementation plan,''
stating that ``Mirant represents that implementation of this
option will produce no NAAQS exceedences.'' DOE will work with
EPA to verify the accuracy of that representation. DOE is still
in the process of reviewing the other proposals described in
Mirant's compliance plan in consultation with EPA.
NEPA Compliance Actions Pursuant to CEQ regulations at 40 CFR
1506.11, DOE consulted with CEQ on December 20, 2005, December
22, 2005, January 13, 2006, and January 17, 2006, about
formulating a plan for alternative arrangements. Under the agreed
upon alternative arrangements plan, which will expire October 1,
2006, unless extended, DOE will:
[[Page 3281]] 1. Prepare a Special Environmental Analysis (SEA).
The SEA will examine potential impacts resulting from issuance of
the Order, and describe further DOE decisionmaking regarding
reasonable future alternatives and potential further mitigation
actions DOE may take in this matter. The analysis will present
reasonably foreseeable impacts from possible changes in
operations of the Plant over the time until two additional
transmission lines planned by PEPCO are installed. DOE intends to
issue its SEA no later than August 2006 and will make it
available to the public on the DOE NEPA and Mirant matter Web
sites as well as announce its availability in the Federal
Register. DOE will consider information contained in the SEA, and
public input received on the SEA, in any future decisionmaking in
this matter.
2. Provide Opportunities for Public Involvement. DOE is currently
accepting public comments on the compliance plan that DOE
required Mirant to submit under the DOE Order. DOE also invites
public comments on this Notice, as well as on issues to be
addressed in the SEA.
DOE will consider public input in determining appropriate
mitigation measures and any additional actions DOE may take as
DOE adaptively manages implementation of the Order. DOE will post
on the Mirant matter Web site publicly available information (not
exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act)
regarding the environmental effects of ongoing or alternative
operations of the Plant (e.g., reasonably available ambient air
quality data and results of air quality modeling), that the
Department receives from Mirant, EPA, and DEQ.
3. Continue Agency Consultations. DOE will continue to consult
with EPA and DEQ concerning information on emissions, modeling
results, potential mitigation measures, and any changes to the
operation of the Plant. EPA will act as a ``cooperating agency''
(see 40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5) for purposes of providing
reasonably available public information regarding the
environmental effects of operations of the Plant to be
disseminated via DOE's Mirant matter Web site and evaluated in
the SEA.
4. Identify Mitigation. DOE will identify in its SEA any steps
that it believes can be taken to mitigate the impacts from its
Order.
DOE will continue to track the impacts of its Order and public
input and provide for appropriate mitigation where practicable.
DOE will publish on its Web sites, as noted above, its discussion
of which mitigation measures are adopted for any future decision,
and if not, why they are not adopted.
DOE may modify, in consultation with CEQ, the foregoing
alternative arrangements as conditions warrant and will notify
the public in the Federal Register if it does so.
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 18, 2006.
John Spitaleri Shaw, Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety
and Health.
[FR Doc. 06-570 Filed 1-19-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
61 Rocky Mountain News: Rocky Flats case getting closer to end
Final arguments wrapping up, jury to decide if contractors
contaminated area
By Ann Imse,
Rocky Mountain News
January 20, 2006
A federal district court jury will be asked today to decide
whether two former operators of the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons
plant should pay half a billion dollars in damages for
contaminating the property of some 13,000 neighbors of the
facility.
The class-action lawsuit, filed 16 years ago by people who owned
land and homes in the area, is wrapping up with closing
arguments before U.S. District Judge John Kane.
Rockwell International Corp. and Dow Chemical Co. ran the plant
for decades on behalf of the Atomic Energy Commission and its
successor, the Department of Energy.
The companies are accused of contaminating neighboring land with
tiny but lethal amounts of plutonium.
If the companies lose, the federal government is expected to pay
the damages on their behalf.
Plaintiffs include Sally Bartlett, who tried for 11 years to
sell her nearby property after the public became aware of the
dangers of the atomic weapons factory.
Today, subdivisions are marching closer to the boundaries of the
6,000-acre plant 16 miles northwest of downtown Denver.
The center of the site was so contaminated with plutonium and
toxic chemicals that the recently completed demolition and
cleanup cost $7 billion.
In closing arguments, plaintiffs' attorney Louise Roselle
claimed that Rocky Flats discharged contaminated water for years
before monitoring began and that Dow allowed barrels of
plutonium-laced waste to leak into the soil for 11 years.
Roselle said Dow could have prevented that contaminated dirt
from being blown off-site by the wind by simply placing a tarp
over it - but the company chose not to do so.
She also said that documents produced in the case showed that
orders had been given to keep secret medical research,
radioactive exposures, and known medical or public health
hazards if they might compromise or cause embarrassment to the
Atomic Energy Commission or its contractors.
But attorney David Bernick, representing Dow and Rockwell, told
the jury in his closing argument that the contamination off-site
was minuscule and didn't harm property values.
He had on his side years of studies used by the government to
argue that little contamination moved off-site and that there is
almost no increased risk of cancer in neighboring areas.
Rocky Flats opponents, burned by years of secrecy and false
claims about the site's cleanliness during the Cold War, do not
believe those studies.
Bernick told the jury that the plaintiffs knew about Rocky Flats
when they moved in. He said that any damage to property values
was caused by news reports about a 1989 FBI raid on Rocky Flats,
rather than any actual contamination to their land.
Bernick also attacked the plaintiffs' scientific studies.
In one case, he said, a report showing higher rates of lung
cancer near the plant didn't say how long the patients actually
had lived near Rocky Flats.
He denounced the study for checking only the date of diagnosis,
not the date the person actually came down with cancer.
"The question is, did they get cancer while living in the area?
It's not even addressed. Yet this man's opinion is proffered
before you as science," he told the jury.
imsea@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5438 site
*****************************************************************
62 Pahrump Valley Times: Hanford leads the way in nuke cleanup
January 20, 2006
GUEST OPINION
By MIKE BERRIOCHOA
Please tell Dennis Myers that he got a few things right in his
recent column about the Hanford site in Washington state ("Tri
Cities carry tough Yucca lessons," PVT Jan. 11), but he also got
a lot of things wrong, or misrepresented the true circumstances.
Consider the following:
We are the Columbia Basin, not the Columbia Valley.
What he referred to as a "storied early air mail route" was
actually the first established commercial airline route in the
United States.
It ran between Pasco (Washington) and Elko. It was operated by
Varney Airlines out of Boise, which later merged with other
small airlines to form United Airlines.
The "lineup of reactors" that he contended "cranked out
plutonium for nuclear weapons" were engineering marvels that
didn't just spring up on their own. They were mandated by the
federal government in Washington, D.C., not by anyone at
Hanford. The people at Hanford never asked for nuclear missions.
The commercial low-level waste disposal site at Hanford still
operates. The land is leased from the federal government by the
State of Washington and then subleased to the U.S. Ecology
Company (which also operates a facility 11 miles south of Beatty
in Nye County).
In spite of his contention to the contrary, Hanford land was
well suited for nuclear use when it was established. It was a
dry climate, plenty of water from the Columbia River to cool the
reactors, very few people living around it. It is seismically
stable and has a soil that helps protect the surrounding
environment.
We are an arid land here. We get less rain per year than a
desert. While parts of the Columbia Basin and lower Yakima
Valley are fed by waters from the three great rivers - Columbia,
Yakima and Snake - Hanford itself is devoid of surface water and
is as dry today as God created it.
Many billions of dollars have been spent cleaning up the site,
not hundreds of millions.
Cleanup of the waste at the Hanford site in some cases has gone
faster than expected. At times it has gone slower than expected
because no one understood the complexity of the challenge at the
time cleanup began.
It was and remains the largest environmental restoration project
in the history of man. No one had ever attempted such a large
and complex cleanup effort before.
We are writing the book on cleanup that is helping other sites
speed their cleanup. The men and women who work at Hanford are
inventing new technologies and new techniques to overcome the
challenges so the work can be done safely and as
cost-effectively as possible.
There were mistakes made in the past and there were some bad
decisions made in the past and our goal is to mitigate the
situation and manage the waste responsibly.
Hanford Watch is one of many so-called "private agencies" that
keep an eye on Hanford. There are many others, including the
Hanford Advisory Board, which is a citizens group that gives
advice and counsel to DOE. The board is comprised of
representatives from Hanford Watch and many other organizations
that have a strong interest in seeing Hanford cleaned up.
Perhaps Dennis should check his facts a bit more thoroughly
before putting pen to paper.
Berriochoa writes from Pasco, Wash.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
63 lamonitor.com: LANL power source off to Pluto
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor
NASA's New Horizon spacecraft blasted off for Pluto Thursday,
beginning a nine-year voyage to the edge of the solar system and
beyond.
On board the sleek Atlas V rocket, a box-shaped capsule with an
antenna on top carried a suite of scientific instruments powered
by 24 pounds of plutonium heat sources fabricated at Los Alamos
National Laboratory.
"We're the back engine room, the behind-the-scenes people," said
Marty Bowidowicz, the group leader on behalf of the lab's
plutonium-38 science and engineering group, who make the heat
sources known as "fueled-clads."
The 72 people in the group were part of an assembly line that
involved three national laboratories, working for the Department
of Energy on behalf of the space agency.
The LANL group purified a powdered form of plutonium-38 oxide,
removing small impurities through various chemical processes,
Bowidowicz said.
Five teams performed the fabrication, following the purification
by grinding, firing and pressing the plutonium granules into
ceramic pellets.
In order to bring the pellets out of the glove box where the
work is performed, they were next welded into iridium capsules,
or clads, made at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.
The iridium alloy characteristically offers protection against
high heat and impacts.
When the fueled-clads were decontaminated, they could be handled
outside the glove box, where exhaustive tests were conducted for
quality assurance to meet strict flight grade standards - a very
long term, very reliable flow of heat.
Finally, Idaho National Laboratory assembled the radioisotope
thermoelectric generators (RTGs). RTGs are space batteries that
convert the heat from the naturally decaying plutonium sources
into electricity to power the sensors and space systems on board
the craft.
NASA said about 240 watts of power are available early in the
flight. By the time the mission reaches Pluto, the output drops
a bit to about 200 watts.
Until the launch, NASA did not know whether the flight would
take nine-and-a half years to reach the vicinity of Pluto -0
with a gravitational boost from Jupiter - or 13-15 years on an
unaided direct course to the icy planet. The launch had to occur
before Feb. 3, in order to get a helpful sling from Jupiter and
cut the time by as much as a third.
LANL's fueled-clad fabrication team is accustomed to long waits
to see their work pay off.
In 1994-97, Bowidowicz said, they worked on the Cassini
spacecraft that began sending spectacular images from Saturn in
2004. Cassini sported a heavier payload, and required three RTGs.
"Now, when we see those pictures coming back, we can feel proud
that our group actually made those fueled-clads," Bowidowicz
said.
Some opposition persists about the dangers of using the
non-weapons grade plutonium.
Twenty-four missions over the last 40 years have launched safely
carrying RTGs that have never malfunctioned. NASA calculated the
odds at 350-to-1 against an accident occurring in the launch
area.
The agency added 16 mobile field teams for radiation sampling,
along with a host of air samplers and monitors for the New
Horizons liftoff.
The voyage to Pluto and its large moon Charon - and two smaller
moons that were just found last year - will extend more than
four billion miles. After that encounter, and an intense period
of geological mapping, New Horizons may continue for another
five to seven years, exploring other objects in Pluto's
neighborhood, known as the Kuiper Belt.
The Kuiper Belt, a vast ring around the sun that may contain
more than 10,000 icy rocks larger than 60 miles across, is
thought to represent enough matter to have made another planet
the size of Uranus or Neptune.
"There aren't many alternatives to RTGs," for going that far
away over such a long period of time, Bowidowicz said. "Once you
go beyond the orbit of mars, it's difficult to get enough power
by solar - especially to Pluto."
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
64 Paducah Sun: DOE urged to save workers’ pensions
Paducah, Kentucky
Whitfield, union backing employees
By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656
Friday, January 20, 2006
A union lawsuit or more congressional action is in the offing if
the Department of Energy continues to ignore a new law
protecting the pensions of displaced Paducah Gaseous Diffusion
Plant workers who might get plant cleanup jobs, U.S. Rep. Ed
Whitfield says.
Noting that the intention of Congress was “quite clear,
Whitfield said in a House subcommittee hearing Thursday in
Paducah that he hopes senior Energy Department officials will
“come to the common-sense conclusion to adhere to the law.
If not, nuclear plant unions here and in Piketon, Ohio, may sue
DOE to enforce the law, said Rob Ervin, president of United
Steelworkers Local 5-550.
Ervin was one of six witnesses before the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations hearing in the Paducah City
Commission chambers. It was the first field hearing of the
subcommittee chaired by Whitfield, R-Hopkinsville. Only one
other member, Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, attended.
Another option in the pension squabble is for Congress to
reinforce language passed in the Energy Conference Report last
fall, Whitfield said.
Although the law directs DOE to maintain longtime pension and
health care transfer policies, DOE refuses to extend those
benefits to the new cleanup contractor, Paducah Remediation
Services. In April, the firm will replace longtime contractor
Bechtel Jacobs, which with subcontractor Weskem employs 159.
Those employees are believed to be protected by previous
agreements, but DOE is excluding plant workers employed by USEC
Inc. who may one day opt for cleanup jobs.
The 1,100-job plant is expected to close starting in 2010. Many
of the workers have decades of accumulated pension.
DOE “vigorously lobbied against the legislation and intends to
reduce pension cost nationally by “taking it out of the pockets
of the workers, Ervin said. “We hope DOE will not make it a
routine practice to require two acts of Congress.
DOE attorneys conclude that the law doesn´t apply to contracts
signed after April 1 of last year, testified James Rispoli,
assistant secretary for environmental management.
Besides protecting pensions, community leaders want greater say
in trying to bring new industry to the plant once it is cleaned
up. McCracken County Judge-Executive Danny Orazine testified
that the 750-acre plant and several thousand acres surrounding
it should be included in a master plan for economic development.
“Rightly or wrongly, the community feels discriminated against
by being left out of DOE planning for the eventual use of the
factory, he said. Orazine noted a fresh federal court ruling in
Washington state that says communities must be directly involved
in such planning under the Superfund law.
He also said the county will seek payment of in-lieu-of property
taxes for the sprawling plant. Whitfield said the 1998 law that
privatized USEC requires the firm to pay the taxes, even though
it leases the factory from DOE.
After the hearing, County Administrator Steve Doolittle said
in-lieu-of tax payments are made in more than 20 communities
nationwide that have DOE plants. Although those payments range
from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars
yearly, no estimate has been made for McCracken County, he said.
Orazine and Mayor Bill Paxton, who also testified, want DOE to
lift a ban on the sale of contaminated scrap metal at its plants
so that an estimated $300 million in nickel blocks at Paducah
can be cleaned, sold and the proceeds used for cleanup and
seeking new industry. DOE is considering partially lifting the
ban, and Rispoli told Whitfield that by mid-summer the
department will have compiled alternate uses for the nickel. He
declined to say if the ban will be lifted.
Orazine said the county wants $150,000 in federal money to pay
for having a DOE person at Paducah exclusively to help find new
industrial uses for the plant after cleanup. Whitfield noted
that Paducah is entitled to fair treatment because seven DOE
people work in the same capacity at Oak Ridge, Tenn., where a
gaseous diffusion plant closed many years ago. Some of the plant
buildings have been turned over to the community for new
industry.
Rispoli said testing will begin within a few days on 14 metal
cylinders of spent uranium hexafluoride at the Paducah plant to
see if they contain traces of phosgene, a highly corrosive
chemical once used in warfare. The canisters were acquired by
DOE from the Army´s Chemical Warfare Service in the 1940s and
1950s. Testing of 11 similar cylinders at Piketon showed no
phosgene, Rispoli said, and DOE doesn´t think there is phosgene
at Paducah.
A Sept. 30 memo from the DOE Inspector General´s Office said
that based on preliminary findings, phosgene may have been left
in some of the 1,825 cylinders at Paducah. The memo referred to
a 2000 report that some of the cylinders were very rusty and
others may have been breached. However, DOE officials later
downplayed the memo, saying they had narrowed potential phosgene
contamination to only several cylinders at Paducah.
Whitfield asked if workers and plant neighbors are safe.
“I believe the correct answer is, to the best of our knowledge,
Rispoldi said.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************