*****************************************************************
01/27/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.23
*****************************************************************
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 [NYTr] China and Iran back Russian uranium plan
2 [NYTr] Iran's Chief Nuke Negotiator Arrives in China
3 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Chief Asks U.S. to Give Iran Reactors
4 BBC: China backs Iran compromise plan
5 BBC: Russia plan 'not enough' for Iran
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Atomic Program Called Major U.N. Test
7 Guardian Unlimited Iran: Russian Enrichment Plan Unacceptable
8 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Refuses Conference Contact With Iran
9 AFP: US says no contacts with Iran at London conference
10 AFP: US says support for Russia nuclear plan not 100 percent
11 AFP: US Senate condemns Iran nuclear program
12 AFP: US rejects Iranian 'games' on nuclear issue -
13 Guardian Unlimited: Japan, North Korea Plan to Resume Talks
14 US: ICT: Western Shoshone urge probe of human rights violations
15 US: Global Security Newswire: Alternative Defense Review Calls for U
16 US: 3 NEW items on Tri-Valley CAREs' web site: RRW report,
17 Guardian Unlimited: Review: The Cold War and The Global Cold War
18 BBC: Energy crisis as Georgia freezes
19 FT.com: Consumer industries - China key to Toshiba’s nuclear strat
20 Xinhua: China drafting law to regulate energy sector
21 Kyiv Post: Ukraine to scrap last heavy bomber
22 AFP: US-India nuclear pact may not be ready for Bush visit - US offi
NUCLEAR REACTORS
23 US: AP Wire: New reactor technology eyed for Plant Vogtle site
24 St. Petersburg Times: Russia's Audit Chamber on sale of Rosenergoato
25 Interfax: Pakistan may seek Russian nuclear reactors - prime ministe
26 Bellona: Rosatom offers to build 40 nuclear power units
27 BBC: Energy gap: Crisis for humanity?
28 NewsFromRussia.Com Putin releases statement on peaceful use of nucle
29 Derry Journal: Derry Council Says No To Nuclear Power
30 US: APP.COM: Oyster Creek operates at 53% capacity |
31 US: KCRG: Iowa's Only Nuclear Power Plant Sold
32 US: Rutland Herald: State report: Yankee plan could violate radiatio
33 This is Money: Private cash must fund nuclear power
34 US: News-Herald: Davis-Besse mess should teach lessons
35 US: NRC: Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear
36 Jurnalul National: Energy – Romania, Nuclear Power |
37 Mos News: Gazprom May Expand into Nuclear Power Generation — Paper -
38 Prague Daily Monitor: Upper Austrians plan further protests against
39 US: PRN: Westinghouse Pleased With Selection of AP1000 Nuclear
40 Jurnalul National: The Second Nuclear Reactor At Cernavoda Will Star
41 english.eastday.com: Nuclear project in east China to have new inves
42 US: TownOnline.com: Nuclear Matters Committee makes recommendations
43 News & Star: Consultants to gather information for nuclear energy re
44 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria Needs Belene Nuke - Minister
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
45 BBC ON THIS DAY | 28 | 1968: Radiation alert following B-52 crash
46 US: Brampton Guardian: Mayor vehemently opposes expansion of nuclear
47 US: Rutland Herald: Towns agree to vote on atomic escape planning
48 ABC Asia Pacific: France dismisses nuclear fallout report
49 US: TheStar.com: War on nuclear incinerator
50 CDNN: France Covered Up Nuclear Fallout in Tahiti
51 UPI: Outside View: Altai radiation dispute
52 US: WGP: Greens Support AB832 - Depleted Uranium Testing and Treatme
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
53 US: St. Paul Pioneer Press: Xcel seeks more waste storage
54 US: Deseret News: Matheson assails permit bottleneck
55 US: Deseret News:| Envirocare halts its expansion plans
56 US: EPA: EPA Issues Guidance for Protective Cleanups of Perchlorate;
57 newsobserver.com: Yucca Letters
58 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Tests should first do no harm
59 reviewjournal.com: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Nevadans fear new push
60 US: REGnum: US GGC plans to start uranium processing in Armenia - Ru
61 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Typical Envirocare
62 US: DailyBulletin.com: EPA proposes weaker perchlorate standards
63 US: San Bernardino County Sun: California proposes tougher standards
64 US: Salt Lake Tribune: N-dump site won't expand, for now
65 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE wants damaging document to disappear
66 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
67 US: NRC: Request To Amend a License for the Export of Radioactive Wa
68 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
69 US: Canon City Daily Record: Cotter requesting material acceptance
70 Pahrump Valley Times: Trummell takes job with Yucca Mountain consult
71 Pahrump Valley Times: Spees: Yucca project on the skids
72 Guardian Unlimited Iran: Russian Enrichment Plan Negotiable
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
73 Las Vegas SUN: Homeland Security using Nevada site to test 'dirty bo
74 AP Wire: State leaders hope recycling program comes to SRS
75 Santa Fe New Mexican: N.M. senators oppose separate Los Alamos lab p
76 DenverPost.com: Juror in Rocky Flats suit dismissed
77 lamonitor.com: LANL security taped calls
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] China and Iran back Russian uranium plan
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:42:12 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Reuters via The Irish Times - Jan 27, 2006
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2006/0127/2640160955FR27BOLDS.html
China and Iran back Russian uranium plan
BEIJING - China and Iran have both expressed support for a Russian
proposal to resolve Tehran's nuclear standoff and say they oppose the
threat of sanctions from the UN Security Council.
Top Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani, on a one-day trip to
Beijing, said the Russian proposal - that uranium be enriched on Russian
soil - needed further discussion.
He later said that Iran was willing to show flexibility, but rejected
the "language of force", an apparent reference to the threat of
sanctions. - (Reuters)
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
2 [NYTr] Iran's Chief Nuke Negotiator Arrives in China
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:42:46 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com
Iran's Chief Nuclear Negotiator Arrives in Beijing
Beijing, Jan 26 (Prensa Latina) Iranian Chief Nuclear Negotiator
Ali Larijani arrived in the Chinese capital on Thursday morning from
Tehran for a one-day visit.
The visitor, who is also secretary of the Iranian Supreme
National Security Council, met with Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing
in Beijing, aimed at exchanging points of views on the Iranian nuclear
program and other issues related to the strengthening of bilateral
relations.
Following his meeting with Chinese State Councillor Tang
Jiaxuan on Thursday afternoon, Larijani held a press conference at the
Iranian embassy in Beijing.
According to sources from the Iranian embassy, the Iranian
official is scheduled to leave the Chinese capital Thursday evening.
The US and some Western nations are trying to sanction Iran at
the United Nations Security Council, accusing Tehran of seeking to
develop nuclear arms.
However, Iran keep insisting that its nuclear program is
intended to produce energy.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is due to convene
an emergency session of its board of governors on Feb. 2-3 to vote on
the referral at the request of the European Union (EU), after Iran
resumed its research on uranium enrichment earlier this month.
mh/ajs
*
================================================================
.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: U.N. Chief Asks U.S. to Give Iran Reactors
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 27, 2006 10:31 PM
AP Photo XIN201
By EDITH M. LEDERER
Associated Press Writer
DAVOS, Switzerland (AP) - U.N. nuclear chief Mohamed ElBaradei
on Friday called on the United States to provide Iran with
nuclear reactors and urged Tehran to declare a moratorium on
enriching uranium for at least eight years.
ElBaradei said that amount of time would enable the country to
earn the confidence of the international community that it was
really interested in nuclear energy - not nuclear weapons.
Iran provoked an international outcry on Jan. 10 when it ended a
two-year freeze and resumed small-scale enrichment of uranium -
a process that can be used to produce fuel for generating
electricity or material for atomic bombs. To resume enrichment,
Iran had to break the seals of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, the nuclear monitoring body headed by ElBaradei.
Britain, France and Germany - who have been leading European
Union efforts to get Iran to abandon uranium conversion and
enrichment - succeeded in getting the IAEA's board to meet Feb.
2 to discuss action against Iran. The three countries - and
United States - want Iran to be referred to the U.N. Security
Council.
The Iranians argue that they need to develop an enrichment
capability because they cannot be assured a guaranteed supply of
fuel for a peaceful nuclear energy program, ElBaradei said at a
panel at the World Economic Forum.
``I would separate the issues of using nuclear technology for
energy and to produce weapons,'' he said. ``I would call upon
the United States to provide Iran with reactors, and I would
call upon Iran to declare a moratorium on enrichment for at
least eight or nine years'' until the country can earn the
global community's confidence.
On Thursday, ElBaradei said he was hopeful that a Russian
proposal could help break the standoff over Iran's nuclear
research and enrichment plans.
Iranian negotiator Ali Larijani said Friday that a plan to allow
Iran to enrich its uranium in Russia was unacceptable in its
present form but was worth taking further in negotiations.
``The capacity of Russia's proposal does not meet all the
nuclear energy needs of Iran,'' Iranian state television quoted
Larijani as saying.
However, Ivan Safranchuk, a Russian analyst, cautioned that Iran
might be using the plan only to buy time as it fights to avoid
potential U.N. sanctions.
Asked for his advice to Western officials, ElBaradei said: ``You
need to keep all options on the table.''
But U.S. Sen. John McCain appeared to rule out negotiations.
``They're interested in acquiring weapons of mass destruction
and dominating the Middle East,'' McCain, R-Ariz., told a panel.
``I don't know of any carrot that works.''
Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, said in
Washington that comments from Iran indicate that it appears ``to
be playing more games with the international community.''
``We remain in discussions with our partners and others about
the best way to send a clear message to the regime in Iran that
it is unacceptable to have nuclear weapons,'' McClellan said.
Alyson Bailes, director of the Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute in Sweden, called for new technologies and
advanced reactors that would be built to rule out the high
enrichment of uranium.
ElBaradei did not elaborate on having the U.S. build reactors
for Iran, but presumably this would enable Washington to build
in safeguards to prevent Iran from getting weapons-grade
uranium.
The IAEA chief backed the quest for new technologies, but more
immediately he called for international control over all nuclear
activities and the creation of a nuclear fuel bank to ensure
supplies of uranium to all countries.
``We need to worry because there's a lot of material that easily
go into nuclear weapons that is all over the place. We know that
the technology on how to weaponize is out of the tube. We know
that terrorists are highly sophisticated and are interested in
acquiring nuclear weapons or nuclear material - either to steal
one or to make a crude bomb,'' he said.
``We are running in a race against time,'' he said.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
4 BBC: China backs Iran compromise plan
Last Updated: Thursday, 26 January 2006
[Isfahan uranium conversion facility]
Iran will ban snap UN inspections if it is referred to the
Security Council
Plans to enrich uranium in Russia for use in Iran could help
break a global stalemate over Tehran's nuclear aims, China's
government has said.
Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, called the proposals
"useful" after talks in Beijing aimed at heading off US and EU
calls for UN action.
China, which could veto any sanctions bid in the UN, has urged
greater efforts for a diplomatic solution.
Mr Larijani said China and Iran held "similar views" on the
nuclear issue.
"We agreed members of the Non-Proliferation Treaty have [the]
right to peaceful nuclear energy," he told reporters.
Iran has consistently denied US-led accusations that it is
seeking to develop nuclear weapons, insisting its nuclear
programme is for producing electricity.
The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), is meeting in Vienna on 2 February.
It is thought to be split over whether to refer Iran to the
Security Council, and UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said the
IAEA's latest report on Iran might not be ready until March.
In Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Kong Quan said the
threat of "arbitrary sanctions" complicates negotiations with
Iran.
The Russian suggestion "would be a good attempt at breaking the
stalemate", he told reporters.
"We oppose impulsively using sanctions or threats of sanctions to
solve problems.
"We hope the concerned parties can take practical measures to
ease tensions."
Details sketchy
The Russian plans would limit Iran's ability to covertly produce
fissile material for possible use in a nuclear weapon by carrying
out uranium enrichment in Russia.
[Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani]
Ali Larijani travelled to China from Russia, where talks were
"positive"
Few details have been released about the Russian proposals.
Iran is thought to be keen that its own scientists are involved
in enrichment.
Russia, meanwhile, has previously said any spent nuclear fuel
must be returned to Russia for reprocessing.
Early next week, ahead of the Vienna talks, foreign ministers of
the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany
will meet in London to discuss their strategy.
US Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick, also visiting China
this week, said he had China that allowing the spread of nuclear
weapons in the Middle East, the centre of global oil supplies,
would be extremely dangerous, the Associated Press reports.
Iran is a major supplier of oil to China's fuel-hungry economy.
*****************************************************************
5 BBC: Russia plan 'not enough' for Iran
Last Updated: Friday, 27 January 2006
[Isfahan uranium conversion facility in Iran]
Iran says it wants the technology for energy purposes alone
Russia's offer to enrich uranium on Iran's behalf is "not
sufficient" to resolve the stand-off over Tehran's nuclear
programme, Iran says.
Iran's top negotiator said it had merits but was not enough to
provide "for Iran's nuclear energy needs".
Iran had earlier reacted warmly to the proposals, raising hopes
it might be the key to unlocking the crisis.
While US President Bush praised it as "a good plan", his
secretary of state accused Iran of using delaying tactics.
"One cannot say that it is a negative proposal," said Ali
Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council,
on his return from talks in China.
I do believe people ought to allowed to have civilian nuclear
power President Bush
He said it would be further considered, and could be "part of a
package", but was not the whole solution.
The Russian proposal involves uranium bound for Iranian power
plants being enriched in a joint venture on Russian soil.
Russia would also take back Iranian nuclear waste for
reprocessing.
The theory is that if Iran has no enrichment capability, and no
nuclear waste, it cannot refine the uranium further to the high
quality required to make a nuclear weapon.
Tehran denies US claims that it is seeking to develop nuclear
weapons, and says it simply wants to produce nuclear energy.
'Chaff'
Mr Bush said: "I think that is a good plan. The Russians came up
with the idea and I support it... because I do believe people
ought to be allowed to have civilian nuclear power."
Mr Larijani on Thursday called the Russian proposal "useful".
But US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was suspicious of
Iran's motives.
The Iranians are "doing nothing but trying to throw up chaff so
that they are not referred to the (UN) Security Council and
people shouldn't let them get away with it," Ms Rice said.
"The time for talking outside the Security Council is over," she
added.
The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), is meeting in Vienna on 2 February to debate whether to
refer Iran to the UN Security Council.
While the US and European countries are thought to be keen to
pass the matter to the UN for possible sanctions, Russia and
China, which hold vetoes in the Security Council, are looking for
other avenues.
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Atomic Program Called Major U.N. Test
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 27, 2006 11:31 PM
By ZINIE CHEN SAMPSON
Associated Press Writer
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John
R. Bolton said Friday he expects Iran's disputed atomic program
to ultimately go before the U.N. Security Council, but
acknowledged that doing so wouldn't necessarily stop Iran from
pursuing its nuclear ambitions.
``This will be a major test of the Security Council's
effectiveness in the area of nuclear weapons proliferation,''
Bolton said. ``But if the Security Council can't deal with a
problem like Iran's nuclear weapons effort, then you have to ask
whether it can deal with questions of proliferation at all.''
The United States and several European allies hope the members
of the International Atomic Energy Agency will vote at an
emergency meeting next week to send Iran before the Security
Council, which can impose sanctions or other measures to
persuade Tehran's government to give up developing nuclear
capabilities.
``I don't pretend that taking Iran to the Security Council is
the answer,'' said Bolton, who appeared at the University of
Richmond's leadership school. ``It is a test, but it's an
important test that we're determined to bring to the council.''
On Jan. 10, Iran removed seals from uranium-enrichment equipment
and said it would restart its nuclear program after a 2-year
hiatus. It claims it is seeking only to produce nuclear energy,
but other nations fear and suspect it is hiding plans to develop
nuclear weapons.
Several European nations called for the emergency IAEA meeting
in Vienna and proposed a resolution to ask the Security Council
to put pressure on Tehran, though they stopped short of calling
for sanctions.
Russia, India and China - allies and trading partners of Iran -
have been reluctant to endorse Security Council action. All
three sit on the IAEA's board of governors.
Bolton said that the U.S. believes Iran has pursued its nuclear
ambitions for more than 20 years, ``and to this day (they)
continue to conceal things and distort the exact nature of their
program.'' IAEA investigations over the last three years,
however, haven't confirmed or disproved whether Iran is trying
to develop nuclear weapons.
The U.S. has been working toward a diplomatic solution, and
Bolton has repeatedly stressed the need for the issue to receive
the U.N.'s immediate attention, calling it ``a classic threat to
international peace and security.''
But he wouldn't rule out that the Bush administration could act
on its own to stop Iran, including taking military action.
``The president is very clear that we never take any option off
the table,'' he said. ``And while we are trying to pursue a
political/diplomatic course, he's said again and again that Iran
with nuclear weapons is unacceptable.''
The president, Bolton said, worries about the prospect of a
``nuclear holocaust'' if Iran is allowed to achieve weapons
capability.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
7 Guardian Unlimited Iran: Russian Enrichment Plan Unacceptable
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 27, 2006 11:16 PM
AP Photo BEJ110
By NASSER KARIMI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran reiterated Friday that a plan to allow
Iran to enrich its uranium in Russia was not acceptable in its
present form but was worth pursuing in negotiations.
``The capacity of Russia's proposal does not meet all the
nuclear energy needs of Iran,'' Irans top nuclear negotiator Ali
Larijani said Friday, according to state television.
Larijani was speaking to reporters on his return to Tehran from
a trip to China, where he tried to mobilize support against
Western moves to refer Iran's nuclear file to the U.N. Security
Council, which could impose sanctions.
``It is not possible to say the Russian proposal is negative,
and that is why we consider it as a basis for negotiations,''
the official Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Larijani as
saying.
Iran provoked an international outcry on Jan. 10 when it cut
seals of the International Atomic Energy Agency at its main
enrichment plant and resumed small-scale enrichment of uranium -
a process that can be used to produce fuel for generating
electricity or material for atomic bombs.
The three major European powers, with U.S. support, succeeded in
getting the IAEA to meet on Feb. 2 to discuss taking action
against Iran, which is expected to result in referral to the
Security Council.
In the meantime Russia has revived a proposal under which Iran
would ship its uranium to Russia, where it would be enriched and
then returned to Iran for use in its nuclear reactor.
Iran's first reactor, built by Russia, is due to begin
operations later this year.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced plans late last
year for at least two more reactors, and Iran's parliament has
asked him for the construction of 20 nuclear power plants.
After a visit to Russia earlier this week, Larijani said the
Russian plan ``has some ambiguities that should be removed,''
and that it would be discussed in talks in Moscow in February.
``The Russian offer is alive and will have long life,'' Larijani
said on Wednesday, according to IRNA.
The Bush administration has expressed support for the Russian
proposal.
``I think that is a good plan,'' President Bush said Thursday.
``The Russians came up with the idea, and I support it.
The United States accuses Iran of trying to develop atomic bombs
under the cover of a peaceful nuclear program. Iran denies this,
saying its program is entirely devoted to generating
electricity.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
8 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Refuses Conference Contact With Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 27, 2006 10:31 PM
By ANNE GEARAN
AP Diplomatic Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States on Friday ruled out any
contact with Iranian delegates to an international aid
conference that comes just before next week's showdown vote on
whether to send Iran to the U.N. Security Council over its
disputed nuclear program.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice leads a U.S. delegation to
the two-day conference in London on international aid for
rebuilding Afghanistan. On Thursday, the day after the session
closes, the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog agency is set to
vote on Iran's case.
``I do not anticipate, and I'm 100 percent sure about this, any
contact between whichever official is sent by the Iranian
government and our delegation, including Secretary Rice,'' said
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns.
The no-contact policy holds even if Iran wants to talk about its
nuclear program, Burns said. The United States has had no
diplomatic relations with Iran since the 1979 storming of the
U.S. Embassy in Tehran.
``In an environment where the new Iranian president has called
for the destruction of Israel, has denied that the Holocaust
happened as a historical fact, has put Iran on a more radical
course on its nuclear policy, has continued Iranian support for
terrorism, there's not a lot to talk about,'' Burns said.
Burns was referring to statements from Iran's hardline
president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which have alarmed even some of
Iran's traditional allies and trading partners.
Iran is a next-door neighbor of Afghanistan, the former al-Qaida
redoubt whose Taliban leaders were ousted in a U.S.-led invasion
in 2001. The United States has about 19,000 troops in
Afghanistan but plans to cut the figure to about 16,500 by
spring.
Burns is the department's No. 3 official and has led U.S.
efforts to head off Iran's nuclear development or persuade other
nations that the Tehran regime must be hauled before the
Security Council for possible punishment.
Burns said he is confident that the U.N.'s International Atomic
Energy Agency will hold a vote as scheduled Thursday, although
key nations such as India and Russia seem to want to avoid going
to the Security Council.
A majority of nations on the agency's 35-member board are
already pledged to vote to refer Iran, Burns said. The United
States has not said exactly what it wants the Security Council
to do with Iran's case, but it hopes that the threat of
sanctions, international ostracism or other penalties could sway
Tehran.
Iran claims that its nuclear program is intended only to develop
the know-how to produce nuclear energy. The United States and
European allies argue that Iran is hiding a plan to build a
bomb. The IAEA keeps tabs on the program but has little
enforcement power.
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei called on the United States on
Friday to provide Iran with nuclear reactors and urged Tehran to
declare a moratorium on enriching uranium for at least eight
years. He spoke at a panel at the World Economic Forum in
Switzerland.
India on Friday supported a plan to allow Iran to enrich its
uranium in Russia and said that the world ``should avoid
confrontation and work in the spirit of seeking a mutually
acceptable solution.''
India did not say how it will vote at the Feb. 2 meeting.
The Russian proposal is meant to head off a confrontation that
could lead to economic penalties against Iran, a major oil
exporter.
The United States has been generally supportive of the Russian
idea, which would take the most sensitive aspects of nuclear
technology out of Iranian hands, but it claims that Iran is
using the proposal to try to stall a Security Council vote.
The Senate approved a nonbinding resolution Friday supporting
Security Council referral and calling on council members,
particularly China and Russia, to act quickly. The resolution,
approved on a voice vote, did not recommend what the Security
Council should do.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
9 AFP: US says no contacts with Iran at London conference
Fri Jan 27, 3:10 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States insisted there would be no
contact between its delegation and Iranian officials at an
international conference on Afghanistan" /> Afghanistan.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> Condoleezza Ricewill
lead the US delegation at the London conference on January
31-February 1.
"I believe, as Iran" /> Iranis a neighbor, it's going to send a
representative. I'm not quite sure at what level that person
will be," said Nicholas Burns, assistant secretary of state for
political affairs.
"I do not anticipate, and I'm 100 percent sure about this, any
contact between whichever official is sent by the Iranian
government and our delegation, including Secretary Rice," Burns
told a press conference.
Before the conference starts, Rice will dine with her Chinese,
Russian, and European counterparts to discuss moves to refer
Iran's nuclear programme to the UN Security Council.
The United States believes Iran is using its nuclear programme
to develop atomic weapons.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
10 AFP: US says support for Russia nuclear plan not 100 percent
Fri Jan 27, 6:09 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - A day after President George W. Bush" /> gave
public support to a Russian proposal to end the Iran" /> nuclear
crisis, the US administration said it does not accept every
detail.
"The United States has said that we find the Russian proposal
to be interesting and it might be a good way to proceed with
negotiations. We've never said that we accept every detail in
that proposal," said Nicholas Burns, the assistant secretary of
state for political affairs.
After Tehran also appeared to change direction and said the
proposal did not go far enough, Burns statement cast new doubt
about Russia's offer to manufacture nuclear fuel for Iran and
collect the waste so that it cannot be used to develop a nuclear
bomb.
Bush gave high profile backing to the Russian plan at a White
House press conference on Thursday.
"The Russians came up with the idea and I support it," the US
president said while reaffirming his doubts that Iran is
pursuing a peaceful nuclear programme.
Bush first expressed support for the Russian plan in November
and in clarifying the US stance, Burns said the United States
does "not believe that Iran should have the ability to exercise
any process along the nuclear fuel cycle inside Iran itself.
"That's a fairly tough position and that's been a consistent
position of our government."
Ahead of a crucial week in the Iran dispute, Burns said "we want
the Iranians to negotiate, whether it's with the EU-3 or Russia
or any other country, on a serious basis.
"We've said that we believe that this kind of proposal has
promise, but we've never blessed every article of the proposals.
I think if you ask the Russian government, they'd tell you the
same thing."
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> will meet in London
on Monday with counterparts from Britain, China, France, Russia
and Germany to discuss Iran.
The International Atomic Energy Agency" /> (IAEA) is to hold a
special meeting on Iran on Thursday and the United States is
strongly pressing for the case to be referred to the UN Security
Council.
Burns indicated that the administration believed it had enough
votes to succeeed.
"I think there's every reason to believe there's going to be a
vote on February 2 and there's already a majority of countries
assembled to vote positively," he said.
Russia has been pressing for the IAEA to only inform the
Security Council of latest developments in Iran, rather than
make a formal referral, according to diplomats. But Washington
is resisting this.
"If we want to start getting into word games, what the Russians
have talked about is informing the council. We still believe
that it should be referred," said State Department spokesman
Sean McCormack.
Rice is going to London for an international conference on
Afghanistan" /> and an Iranian representative is also expected
to be present. But Burns insisted there will be no contacts
between the US and Iranian delegations.
"I believe, as Iran is a neighbor, it's going to send a
representative. I'm not quite sure at what level that person
will be," said Burns.
"I do not anticipate, and I'm 100 percent sure about this, any
contact between whichever official is sent by the Iranian
government and our delegation, including Secretary Rice," he
added.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
11 AFP: US Senate condemns Iran nuclear program
Fri Jan 27, 7:18 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US Senate voted unanimously to condemn
Iran" /> Iran's nuclear program and to support referring Iran to
the UN Security Council for allegedly violating nuclear
nonproliferation obligations.
The resolution, adopted without debate, condemned "the many
failures of the government of Iran to comply faithfully with its
nuclear nonproliferation obligations" and its commitments to
suspend uranium enrichment and reprocessing.
The Senate also urged the International Atomic Energy Agency" />
International Atomic Energy Agency, which meets February 2, "to
order that Irans noncompliance with its safeguards obligations
be reported to the United Nations" /> United NationsSecurity
Council."
The senators further called on UN Security Council members,
particularly Russia and China, to quickly "consider any report
of Irans noncompliance in fulfillment of the mandate of the
Security Council to respond to and deal with situations bearing
on the maintenance of international peace and security."
Russia and China have expressed reservations about having the
Security Concil take action on Iran, appearing hesitant to have
the council become locked into any path that could force
sanctions to be applied on Tehran.
The White House on Friday accused Iran of playing "games" with
the international community by not accepting a Russian
compromise aimed at allaying US concerns that Tehran seeks
nuclear weapons.
Asked about Iran's tepid response to the proposal, White House
spokesman Scott McClellan said: "They appear to be playing more
games with the international community."
A top Iranian nuclear negotiator said Friday that a Russian
proposal to carry out sensitive nuclear fuel work outside Iran
is "not sufficient."
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
12 AFP: US rejects Iranian 'games' on nuclear issue -
Fri Jan 27, 10:51 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The White House said Iran" /> Iranwas playing
"games" with the international community by not accepting a
Russian compromise aimed at allaying US concerns that Tehran
seeks nuclear weapons.
Asked about Iran's tepid response to the proposal, which US
President George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bushembraced on
Thursday, spokesman Scott McClellan said: "They appear to be
playing more games with the international community."
A top Iranian nuclear negotiator said Friday that a Russian
proposal to carry out sensitive nuclear fuel work outside Iran
is "not sufficient."
"We remain in discussions with our partners and others about the
best way to send a clear message to the regime in Iran that it
is unacceptable for them to have nuclear weapons," McClellan
told reporters.
"This is a regime that continues to defy the international
community and fail to comply with its obligations," he said, as
Washington pushed ahead with efforts to refer the matter to the
UN Security Council.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> Condoleezza Ricewill
meet in London Monday with her counterparts from the council's
other veto-wielding permanent members -- Britain, China, France
and and Russia -- as well as Germany to discuss the issue, he
said.
Tehran has denied Washington's charge that it is using its
civilian nuclear program to seek atomic weapons.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
13 Guardian Unlimited: Japan, North Korea Plan to Resume Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 27, 2006 4:03 AM
By KANA INAGAKI
Associated Press Writer
TOKYO (AP) - Japan and North Korea will meet in Beijing next
month to discuss normalizing relations, Pyongyang's abductions
of Japanese citizens and the communist regime's nuclear weapons
program.
The talks will start Feb. 4 and run for several days, Japan's
Chief Cabinet Secretary, Shinzo Abe, told reporters.
``We aim to achieve general progress in relations between North
Korea and Japan,'' Abe said, adding that Japan's top priority
would be the abduction issue.
North Korea in 2002 acknowledged abducting 13 Japanese citizens
in the 1970s and '80s, and allowed five of them to return to
Japan, claiming the others were dead.
Tokyo has demanded proof of the deaths and a full investigation
into other suspected kidnapping cases.
The two countries in November held talks for the first time in
more than a year. But discussions have stalled over the
abductions and the North's nuclear program, as well as
Pyongyang's demand for compensation for Japan's 1910-1945
colonial rule over the Korean Peninsula.
The planned resumption in bilateral talks comes as Pyongyang
warned it won't return to international nuclear disarmament
talks until the U.S. ends sanctions over alleged financial
crimes by the communist regime.
Washington has slapped restrictions on a bank in China, alleging
it helped the North distribute counterfeit currency and engage
in other illicit activities. The U.S. also placed sanctions on
North Korean companies it claimed were fronts for proliferating
weapons of mass destruction.
The U.S. has dismissed the North's demands, saying the sanctions
are a defensive measure unrelated to the nuclear issue.
Six-nation nuclear talks launched in 2003 among the two Koreas,
China, Japan, Russia and the United States last convened in
November.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
14 ICT: Western Shoshone urge probe of human rights violations
[2006/01/27]
by: Brenda Norrell / Indian Country Today
ELKO, Nev. - While the United States fails to respond to the
United Nations inquiry into violations of human rights of
Western Shoshone, supporters have surpassed an original goal of
10,000 signatures to maintain pressure on the government to
answer for the harassment of Shoshone people.
''We've got a fight on our hands,'' Western Shoshone Carrie
Dann told Indian Country Today, encouraging the United Nations
to increase pressure on the United States to uphold the rights
of indigenous peoples.
''This is supposed to be democracy?'' Dann asked and described
the United States' manipulation of laws that affect American
Indians.
''What is democracy? Is democracy destroying the rights of the
indigenous people? We don't see any democracy where indigenous
people are concerned.''
The United States missed a year-end deadline to answer
questions from the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination concerning violations of Western Shoshone human
rights and their right to ancestral lands.
The committee issued a list of 10 questions the government
failed to answer by Dec. 31. The questions follow a request for
urgent action, which, if accepted, would allow the committee to
open an investigation into U.S. conduct regarding land issues
and the treatment of indigenous people.
Julie Ann Fishel, land recognition program director for the
Western Shoshone Defense Project, said Western Shoshone elders
see pressure from the United Nations as the only solution; the
petition reveals the support of the people.
''It tells the United States the Western Shoshone are not going
away,'' Fishel told ICT. ''We will seek out every opportunity
and forum to press this issue.''
Fishel said Western Shoshone rights are a fundamental human
rights issue that affects all of civil society in the United
States. Further, Western Shoshone hope pressure from the United
Nations will increase awareness of indigenous rights as a
mainstream issue.
Dann and Fishel were interviewed by telephone in Miami, where
they are participating in the Seventh Tribal Sovereignty
Symposium, ''Sovereignty and Sustainable Development of
Indigenous Peoples.''
Siegfried Wiessner, professor of international law and
constitutional law at the St. Thomas University School of Law in
Miami, said the recognition of indigenous rights worldwide has
made tremendous progress.
''There has been a remarkable resurgence of indigenous
rights,'' Wiessner told ICT.
Indigenous rights of self-governance, recognition of autonomy
and the execution of treaties are progressing worldwide.
Indigenous peoples are transcending borders and coming together
as never before to communicate, and the mass media is helping
advance indigenous rights, he said.
''Indigenous people are coming together because this is the air
they breathe, the land where they live.''
Western Shoshone plan to travel in a delegation to Geneva,
Switzerland, in March to meet with UNCERD members and present
their case and the petition.
The petition states that the U.S. government is violating the
rights of the Western Shoshone to ancestral lands - rights
recognized by the Treaty of Ruby Valley of 1863. The lands in
question cover 60 million acres stretching across Nevada, Idaho,
Utah and California.
The United States, without Western Shoshone consent, has
allowed gold mining and military testing of nuclear, chemical
and biological weapons on their ancestral lands. Further,
Western Shoshone said they are denied fair resolution in U.S.
courts.
The United States claims the lands are ''public'' lands and no
longer belong to the Western Shoshone. The Bureau of Land
Management has upheld impound notices for Western Shoshone
livestock in Nevada and imposed heavy trespass fines. This was
done while the United States was attempting to privatize large
tracts of land for the expansion of multinational gold
companies' mining operations.
Without voice or resolution in the United States, the Western
Shoshone appealed to the United Nations demanding reform of U.S.
laws that allow for the theft and destruction of indigenous
lands.
Western Shoshone said the preservation of the cultural and
spiritual integrity of their way of life is dependent on
protection of the land. Currently, Western Shoshone are faced
with the threat of a high-level nuclear waste dump on Yucca
Mountain and open-pit gold mining at Mount Tenabo, both areas
spiritually significant to Western Shoshone.
The WSDP petition is being carried out in partnership with
Oxfam America. The Boston-based international development and
relief agency, an affiliate of Oxfam International, delivers
development programs and emergency relief services. Oxfam
campaigns for change in global practices and policies that keep
people in poverty.
''This is a critical land rights issue. The federal government
needs to be held accountable for violating treaties with Indian
nations, as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has
clearly established,'' said Oxfam America's Laura Inouye,
referring to an earlier decision by that body which found the
BLM had violated Western Shoshone rights to due process,
property rights and equality.
''A similar finding by UNCERD will help the Western Shoshone
press their case for justice.''
To view the petition, go to
http://ga0.org/campaign/shoshone_petition.
© 1998 - 2006 Indian Country Today. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
15 Global Security Newswire: Alternative Defense Review Calls for U.S. Nuclear Cuts, Higher
Focus on Homeland Defense
is produced independently for the Nuclear Threat Initiative by
National Journal Group, Inc. Global Security Newswire is
published Monday thru Friday by 2 pm and is available exclusively
on the NTI website, www.nti.org.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire
WASHINGTON The United States military needs increased focus on
unconventional warfare and defense against nuclear and
biological weapons, and less on developing certain advanced
conventional weaponry, according to a report released here
yesterday by a prominent liberal think tank (see GSN, Jan. 17).
The United States unmatched military technological superiority
is no longer enough to guarantee that Americans will be safe and
that U.S. forces will prevail in battle and in securing the
peace, according to Restoring American Military Power, a
Progressive Quadrennial Defense Review, by the Center for
American Progress.
Nation-states no longer possess a monopoly on the ability to
develop and deploy nuclear and biological weapons. In Iraq,
suicide bombings and crude explosive devices are claiming more
lives of U.S. troops than tanks or enemy troops. New
capabilities are required, it says.
The review is intended to provide a counter-vision for the
much-anticipated Defense Department Quadrennial Defense Review
expected to soon be released.
The groups report advocates cutting development and production
of eight major weapons types: the F-22 fighter, Virginia class
submarine, DD(X) Destroyer, V-22 Osprey, C-130J transport
aircraft, offensive space-based weaponry, further deployment of
the U.S. national missile defense system; and obsolete and
unnecessary elements of the nuclear posture.
The weapons are costly but unnecessary, providing little
additional advantage over other existing systems, according to
the report.
United States weapons systems are not matched to threats, and
the Pentagon has more programs on the drawing board than it can
afford given recent record-setting budget deficit levels, it
says.
The report advocates doubling Pentagon expenditures on homeland
defense to at least $20 billion annually, to increase its
capacities to support civil authorities following unconventional
and high-explosive attacks or other incidents. The National
Guard should focus more on protecting the homeland from major
disasters rather than on major combat operations elsewhere, it
says.
Among the reports numerous recommendations is withdrawing
tactical U.S. nuclear weapons from Europe, which it says are
costly and have no strategic utility, while reducing the U.S.
strategic nuclear arsenal significantly down to 1,000 warheads,
with 600 deployed and 400 in reserve. Those numbers, it says,
should be sufficient to address military targets in China and
Russia, as well as a limited number of targets in extreme
regimes.
The strategy should be based on two principles: military
targets are the only legitimate target for nuclear weapons, and
any use of nuclear weapons must be proportionate to the threat,
it says.
The report further advocates abandoning development of a new
earth penetrating nuclear weapon capability, maintaining a
surge capacity for building additional warheads if needed,
resuming arms control negotiations with Russia, continuing the
administrations Reliable Replacement Warhead program, and
eventually ratifying the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
The report advocates pre-emptive U.S. military action against
imminent threats, while criticizing the administrations policy
of preventive war against possible future threats.
Center senior fellow Lawrence Korb, a former Reagan
administration defense official and one of the reports primary
authors, unveiled the document yesterday.
Michele Flournoy, also a former defense official and now a
senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International
Studies, critiqued the report following its release. Along with
the center report, Fluornoy said she had seen a draft of the
Pentagons Quadrennial Defense Review.
Both documents, she said, start from a similar premise: Were
over invested as a military, as the Department of Defense, in
capabilities to deal with high-end warfighting, against very
traditional military threats and were under invested in
capabilities to deal with irregular warfare, like terrorism,
like insurgency and stability operations & catastrophic threats
like WMD terrorism, and so forth.
She said, though, the judgments about defense strategy that
emerge from that conclusion differ in the documents.
While both documents place a lot of rhetorical emphasis on
homeland defense, or priority for the military, in the
[centers] document there is much more putting money where your
mouth is recommendations for shifting money toward homeland
security.
In the Pentagons document, its very difficult to find much,
with a couple of exceptions, she said.
Whether or not we all agree with every word in [the centers]
document & the fact that you have an alternative on the table to
force people to have a constructive debate is absolutely
critical at this time, given the stakes involved, she said.
© Copyright by National Journal Group, Inc.
*****************************************************************
16 3 NEW items on Tri-Valley CAREs' web site: RRW report,
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:23:21 -0800
NEW on Tri-Valley CAREs' web site at www.trivalleycares.org:
1. TRI-VALLEY CAREs' LATEST REPORT, "The Reliable Replacement Warhead
Program: A Slippery Slope to New Nuclear Weapons," by physicist and former
White House budget official, Dr. Robert Civiak.
The report finds that the RRW program could cost billions, diminish U.S.
security and result in new nuclear weapons less safe and reliable than
those in the current arsenal. This study provides the first comprehensive
review of an emerging Department of Energy initiative that could
"significantly harm our national security, disrupt international
cooperation in non-proliferation and diminish pressure on North Korea and
Iran to forego their nuclear programs," according to the report's author
Dr. Civiak. Moreover, the report finds the RRW program may, ultimately,
lead to a resumption of full-scale nuclear weapons testing...
On our web site at www.trivalleycares.org is a pdf of the full report, a
high-resolution pdf of the report cover and our press release announcing
the release of the study.
2. TRI-VALLEY CAREs' January 2006 newsletter, Citizen's Watch. In our
January issue, you will find --
* Nukes Emerge as 'Real Winners' in Los Alamos Lab Contract
* Workers at Livermore Lab Exposed to Plutonium
*Bio-Warfare Research at Los Alamos Will Get New Review -- As
Activists Applaud Partial Victory, They Ask Why Not Livermore, Too?
* A New Year's Note from the Executive Director, and MORE...
3. STOP MORE PLUTONIUM AT LIVERMORE LAB petitions and fact sheets. On our
web site is a link to an electronic 'stop plutonium' petition by Working
Assets AND a paper copy of the Tri-Valley CAREs petition to print out and
circulate among your friends and family.
The Tri-Valley CAREs' fact sheet that accompanies the plutonium petition on
our web site tells about Livermore Lab's plans to develop new techniques
for manufacturing plutonium bomb cores, called "pits," and other reasons
why the Department of Energy is increasing nuclear materials at Livermore.
JOIN THIS CAMPAIGN TO STOP PLUTONIUM AND NEW NUCLEAR WEAPONS TODAY.
###
Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551
- is our web site address. Please visit us
there!
(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax
*****************************************************************
17 Guardian Unlimited: Review: The Cold War and The Global Cold War
[UP]
History The superpowers' balance sheet
Surveys of the making of the modern world from John Lewis Gaddis
and Odd Arne Westad cure James Buchan of his nostalgia for the
cold war
Saturday January 28, 2006
The Guardian
The Cold War by John Lewis Gaddis (333p, Allen Lane, £20)
The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of
Our Times by Odd Arne Westad (484pp, Cambridge, £25)
Since the attack on the United States on September 11 2001, and
the US retaliation in Afghanistan and Iraq, there must be few
people who have not felt a twinge of nostalgia for the cold war.
Those were the days: political caution and circumspection, the
survival (as if in ice) of old institutions and manners, history
so slow you could even become tired of it. These two books,
though about as different as they could be, use fresh material
from Soviet, Chinese and US archives to remind us that the cold
war wasn't that great.
The Yale historian John Lewis Gaddis has been writing about
Soviet-US diplomatic relations for more than 30 years. In The
Cold War, he treats the conflict as over and done with, like the
wars of the 18th century. He concentrates on the diplomatic and
strategic competition between the superpowers in the European
theatre and is, as an American professor should be, optimistic.
Like the American civil war, the state of undeclared hostility
between the US and the Soviet Union from 1945 to the late 1980s
was "a necessary contest that settled fundamental issues once
and for all". Gaddis is glad the cold war was fought as it was
fought and won by the side that won it. Like some primary-school
teacher, he hands out prizes for effort to pretty well everyone:
Eisenhower, Nixon, Walesa, Reagan, Thatcher, Pope John Paul,
Deng Xiaoping and, above all, Gorbachev, who managed to defuse
the whole contraption without it blowing up in his face.
Odd Arne Westad, the Norwegian-born scholar who heads the Cold
War Studies Centre at the London School of Economics and has
hitherto concentrated on China and the Far East, is less
sanguine. He believes that the cold war, far from being a
conflict necessary to clear the ideological air, was a
continuation, under new management, of the old European colonial
enterprise. Westad, too, gives out prizes but only to the tragic
failures: Lumumba, Cabral, Guevara, Gorbachev.
Each approach has its charm. It is pleasant, on reading Gaddis,
to see the public events of one's childhood or youth gathered
into a lucid and elegant narrative and, as it were, put away out
of sight. Westad offers a philosophy of history that, though not
wholly free of leftese, better accommodates 9/11 and the US
occupation of Iraq. There is no wasteful overlap. Westad ignores
Berlin 1948, Gaddis has nothing on Katanga 1964.
The phrase cold war was coined by George Orwell in 1945 to
describe the competition between the United States and the USSR
after the defeat of Nazi Germany. Gaddis and Westad both find
the conflict's origin in the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 in
Russia. This was a challenge to US beliefs and power much more
convincing than the bankrupt imperialisms of the western
European powers.
The contest was both more perilous and, in the looking-glass
world of the cold war, more safe when both camps acquired
nuclear weapons of great destructive power. On March 1 1954, the
US detonated a bomb in the Pacific with a blast 750 times more
powerful than that which destroyed the city of Hiroshima nine
years earlier. It is impossible to imagine circumstances where
such a weapon would be used.
Still, there were some hair-raising episodes. Gaddis recounts
the Soviet blockade of Berlin ("the testicles of the west", as
Khrushchev called the western part of the city), the Korean war
of the early 50s when Soviet and US air-crews shot at one
another in the sky, the Sputnik shock of 1957, and the building
of the Berlin wall in 1961. As for the crisis of 1962, when the
Soviet Union deployed nuclear missiles in Cuba, Gaddis rejects
the old view that Khrushchev was looking for a dirty short-cut
to nuclear parity. Instead, he argues, the Kremlin was entranced
by the Cuban revolution and desperate to protect the island from
US invasion. It is one of many instances in both books where the
superpower dog was wagged by the third world tail.
By the mid-1960s, the great powers had come to terms with what
Winston Churchill had called "an equality of annihilation". The
stage was set for the cool but pragmatic relationship known as
detente and for the successful diplomacy of Richard Nixon and
Henry Kissinger. It was at that moment that the ageing Soviet
leadership made two miscalculations.
In 1977, the Soviet Union deployed batteries of a new nuclear
missile aimed at targets in western Europe. The weapon became
known in the west as the SS-20. According to Gaddis, the
Politburo took the decision on military grounds and without
thought of any diplomatic consequences. As the Kremlin's
American specialist, Georgy Arbatov, put it: "Most of our
experts and diplomats found out about it through the western
press."
The SS-20 killed detente while the US counter-deployment in 1982
effectively ended the arms race in America's favour. Otherwise
so generous with laurels, Gaddis has nothing to say either for
or against the West German chancellor, Helmut Schmidt, who, in
accepting Jimmy Carter's offer of the Pershing-2, sacrificed his
office, his political party and his fame.
While in the metropolitan countries from the 1960s onwards, the
cold war was a conflict almost without violence, superpower
rivalry helped to lay waste great tracts of what came to be
called the third world. As both Gaddis and Westad point out, the
superpowers deployed ideologies that were more or less
unserviceable amid the sands or jungles. The Americans tended to
view the whole world through their anti-communism and were
misled by metaphors such as Eisenhower's of 1954: "You have a
row of dominos set up, you knock over the first one, and ... the
last one ... will go over very quickly." The Kremlin could be
won over by any revolutionary who mouthed the right
Marxist-Leninist formulas.
The cold war mentality survived even after the Iranian
revolution of 1979 showed that "clerical reaction" was more
dynamic than Marxism-Leninism, and the US had a lot more than
just red communism to confront. Here Westad comes into his own.
Chapters on the conflicts in Angola and the Horn of Africa lead
on to a marvellous account, drawn from Russian diplomatic
archives, of the second great Kremlin miscalculation: the
invasion of Afghanistan on Christmas Day, 1979. The Soviets
feared, Westad writes, that the fratricidal Afghan communist
party was about to go over to the Americans: "doing a Sadat on
us", as it was known after the Egyptian president who expelled
Soviet military advisers in 1972. The Soviet Union thus tied
itself to a miniature political party that had no popular
backing whatever.
For both authors, the Soviet Union had been riding for a fall.
The draft Salt 1 treaty had acknowledged that, in terms of
strategic nuclear weapons, the Soviet Union was an equal power
to the US. The victory of the North Vietnamese had been
followed, in short order, by successes in Angola and Ethiopia.
In the words of Arbatov: "If you get away with something and it
looks as if you've been successful, you are practically doomed
to repeat the policy. You do this until you blunder into a
really serious mess."
The mess was Afghanistan. Westad is tempted to see the same
pattern at work in the post-cold war world. The disintegration
of the Soviet Union, the breaking-away of Russia's European
satellites, peaceful political change in South Africa, Kuwait
liberated, the Taliban sent packing: all that was cause enough
for US euphoria. Then, bang, the catastrophe of Iraq.
Gaddis, in contrast, gives the last word to Mikhail Gorbachev.
In his first meeting with George Bush Sr in Malta in December,
1989, the Russian drew up a cold war balance-sheet."By no means
should everything that has happened be considered in a negative
light. We have managed to avoid a large-scale war for 45 years.
[But] cold war methods have suffered defeat in strategic terms.
We have recognised this. And ordinary people have possibly
understood this even better."
· James Buchan's Capital of the Mind: How Edinburgh Changed the
World is published by John Murray
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
18 BBC: Energy crisis as Georgia freezes
Last Updated: Thursday, 26 January 2006
[Tbilisi mother and child keep warm beside a stove in
their home]
The price of firewood has soared in the Georgian capital
Georgia's president has cut short a visit to the World Economic
Forum in Switzerland and headed home to deal with a growing
energy crisis.
Mikhail Saakashvili said his country had used up its gas reserves
and electricity blackouts were widespread.
Bad weather has damaged power lines and explosions on the main
pipeline from Russia last weekend hit gas supplies.
Schools are shut and power is restricted to hospitals, bakeries
and water pumping stations.
Prime Minister Zurab Noghaideli said Georgia had been under a
virtual energy blockade for the past five days while enduring
record freezing temperatures.
He accused Russian gas supplier Gazprom of failing to boost gas
supplies via Azerbaijan to compensate for the damaged pipeline
which, he said, had still not been fully repaired.
"Either they should stop saying Gazprom is giving Azerbaijan
additional gas for Georgia or, if they can, they should actually
supply this gas to Azerbaijan so that we can receive it," Mr
Noghaideli told a Georgian TV station.
Gas cylinders have been at a premium in the capital, Tbilisi,
correspondents report.
[A Russian soldier guards part of the Mozdok-Tbilisi pipeline,
twisted by a blast]
Russia says the pipeline was damaged by terrorists
"There are old people queuing up who don't have their own cars to
carry these heavy canisters," housewife Keti Rurua told AFP news
agency after queuing two hours herself.
"The trolley-buses aren't running even in the town centre."
One angry pensioner, Irakli Gogokhidze, attacked the government's
handling of the crisis.
"The electricity went off at one in the morning and since then
we've been freezing," he said.
"It's awful that the authorities can't solve this problem. What
are they there for if the whole country is freezing?"
*****************************************************************
19 FT.com: Consumer industries - China key to Toshiba’s nuclear strategy
By Carola Hoyos in London
Published: January 27 2006 02:14 | Last updated: January 27 2006
[toshiba logo] Toshiba, the Japanese technology group, would
keep Westinghouse, the US power plant company, as a separate
business for the next few years, making only minimal changes
among employees and senior executives.
Toshiba was this week confirmed as the preferential bidder in
the sale of Westinghouse by British Nuclear Fuels.
In an exclusive interview with the FT, Masao Niwano, chief
executive of Toshiba’s nuclear arm, said he expected Toshiba
and Westinghouse to work “in parallel†for several years.
“We respect their technology and their strategy,†he said.
“If they succeed in China, we will assist their strategy. But
if they are not able to get business outside the US, we will
have to rethink the strategy.â€
Westinghouse’s headquarters would remain in Pittsburg, he said.
Getting Westinghouse into China – which aims to build 30
nuclear reactors by 2020 – is one of Toshiba’s main goals
and was a key factor in its decision to buy Westinghouse.
Toshiba’s reactors use boiling water technology, while
Westinghouse specialises in the pressurised water technique
preferred by China.
“China’s market is very important for us and Westinghouse
has been trying to construct two power stations in China,†Mr
Niwano said.
“It is one of the reasons we were aiming to buy
Westinghouse.â€
Toshiba is understood to have offered close to $5.4bn, far in
excess of the expected price though not substantially more than
its closest competitors, which included General Electric of the
US and Mitsubishi of Japan. The high price tag has prompted UK
government officials to double the amount they expect to be
fetched by the impending initial public offering of Urenco, the
enrichment group jointly owned by Germany, the Netherlands and
the UK. Private estimates stand at $10bn-$12bn.
Mr Niwano said that he expected Toshiba to clear any regulatory
or political hurdles and complete the purchase of Westinghouse
within the next six months.
Toshiba’s aim was to control half the world’s nuclear
reactors and gain a voice equal to GE and France’s Areva, the
world’s largest nuclear group, in the debate over the future
of nuclear energy and its safety.
“We want to be a real competitor to Areva,†he said.
Mr Niwano said he hoped the deal would “tighten the
relationship between the UK, US and Japan, not only in nuclear
but in other business areas as wellâ€.
Toshiba experienced no real US government opposition to the
purchase and did not expect any in the coming months, he said.
The UK government is expected to help Toshiba get through any US
political hurdles, an adviser to the UK government said.
© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2006. "FT"
and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.
*****************************************************************
20 Xinhua: China drafting law to regulate energy sector
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2006-01-27 14:59:31
BEIJING, Jan. 27 -- The government is drafting an energy law
to regulate the country's huge need for power and improve safety
in its deadly coal mining industry, domestic media said
Thursday.
The country has been battling acute energy shortages as its
economy roars ahead at breakneck speed, seeing growth last year
of 9.9 percent.
Increased power consumption, by individuals as well as
industry, has left it increasingly reliant on imported oil, a
situation China feels threatens its national security.
"With rapid economic growth, problems in the energy area are
gradually showing up, and the complicated international
environment also poses a new challenge to the security of
China's energy and economy," according to a statement released
by the country¡¯s top planning agency, the National Reform and
Development Commission (NDRC).
The drafted law would be part of a long-term strategy to
increase the country's energy reserves, improve energy
efficiency and limit environmental damage from energy use,
according to the NDRC statement.
NDRC said it has appointed a team of experts from 15
government departments to draft the law. The team, which has
been approved by the State Council, or Cabinet, includes
officials from the Ministry of Finance, the State Electric Power
Regulatory Commission and the State Council's Legislative
Affairs Office.
The law would reflect China's strategy of seeking cleaner
and more stable sources of energy, Xinhua said.
China has several laws on oil, natural gas and conservation,
but lacks a single regulation that reflects overall policy,
Jiang Kejun, market analyst for the quasi-governmental Energy
Research Institute, said.
The new law would likely stress the need for lower power
consumption and cleaner sources of energy. It is also likely to
detail how to increase private investment in energy industries,
from nuclear to coal, Jiang said.
"If we need a bigger energy industry to supply China¡¯s
large demands, public investment will not be enough," Jiang
said.
China has the world's largest coal market in terms of annual
production, but its mines are among the deadliest, as thousands
of people are killed each year in floods, cave-ins, fires and
explosions. Shortages of coal needed to fire power plants have
resulted in widespread brownouts in recent years, while also
spurring mine operators to violate safety rules to boost
production.
The new law would include regulations to protect miners,
Xinhua said, without providing details.
The government also will encourage large coal mines to merge
with smaller ones since big operators tend to pay more attention
to work safety, according to the Xinhua report.
The agency didn't say when the draft law would be completed.
It first must be approved by the State Council and then by the
legislature, which convenes its annual session in March.
(Source: Shenzhen Daily/Agencies)
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
21 Kyiv Post: Ukraine to scrap last heavy bomber
Jan 27 2006, 12:15
(AP) Ukraine is set to scrap the country's last heavy bomber
Friday in the central Poltava region, the Defense Ministry said.
The dismantlement complies with the START I nuclear treaty and
the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, and is financed under
the Heavy Bomber Elimination Program, a U.S. congressional
initiative that has provided more than US$650 million (-530
million) to Ukraine to scrap the country's strategic nuclear
arsenal.
The deputy chief of the General Headquarters of the Ukrainian
Armed Forces, Rear Adm. Ihor Teniukh, U.S. Ambassador John
Herbst and other officials were expected to observe the
scrapping of the Tu-22M-3.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine inherited
the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal, but it later
renounced it and transferred some 1,300 nuclear warheads back to
Russia for disarming.
© 2004 - 2006, .
Kyiv Post
*****************************************************************
22 AFP: US-India nuclear pact may not be ready for Bush visit - US official -
Fri Jan 27, 4:50 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States indicated that a
controversial civilian nuclear agreement with India might not be
ready by the time US President George W. Bush" /> President
George W. Bushmakes his first visit to New Delhi in March.
"It's very hard to say," Nicholas Burns, the chief US
negotiator of the deal, told reporters in Washington, when asked
how far along would the landmark bilateral pact be when Bush
made the trip.
But he said that a complex plan for India to separate civilian
and military nuclear programs, a key component of the agreement,
could be completed before the visit, he said.
Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed on the
basic outline of the civil nuclear cooperation initiative in
Washington in July last year and the two countries had hoped to
seal an agreement before the president's visit.
"That remains our plan. And I've been in touch with the Indian
government this week. I expect to be in touch with them in the
coming days, and we hope to reach that goal," Burns said.
"If we can reach it, then, of course, that will be part of what
the president discusses in Delhi. If we cannot, I assume then
we'll keep on working, as diplomats do, to resolve the problem,"
he added.
The United States came under fire this week after its envoy in
New Delhi warned that the nuclear deal could be scuppered if
India voted against Western wishes to refer Iran" /> Iran's
nuclear program to the UN Security Council.
The Indian foreign ministry summoned US ambassador David Mulford
and told him that the comments were "inappropriate and not
conducive" to US-India relations, India's foreign ministry said
on Thursday.
India has said its decision on how to vote on the Iran nuclear
issue within the IAEA would be based on its "own independent
judgement."
Mulford later said his remarks were "taken out of context" and
expressed "sincere regrets."
The bilateral deal would give India access to civilian nuclear
technology it has long been denied. The accord has been agreed
in principle, but still must be approved by the US Congress and
the 44-member Nuclear Suppliers Group.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
23 AP Wire: New reactor technology eyed for Plant Vogtle site
01/27/2006 |
Associated Press
ATLANTA - Georgia Power and Southern Nuclear Operating Co.
officials said Friday they are considering using a Westinghouse
nuclear reactor design to develop future generating units at the
Plant Vogtle site.
The announcement is an indication that the utility companies are
positioning themselves to develop Georgia's first new nuclear
plant since the 1980s.
Officials said in a statement they plan to file an application
with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission this summer for an early
site permit at the Plant Vogtle site, located along the Savannah
River near Waynesboro, Ga.
The officials said the companies, which are subsidiaries of
Southern Co., have not made a final decision to build new
nuclear plants. Georgia Power officials have said they need to
have more ways to generate energy to meet customers' needs in
2015 and beyond.
In 2008, Southern Nuclear - based in Birmingham, Ala., and the
operator of Southern Co.'s nuclear plants - will file for a
license to build and operate the plant, officials said. Georgia
Power also would have to win approval from the Georgia Public
Service Commission for any new energy-generating source. Georgia
Power isn't expected to ask for such approval until 2007, said
Georgia Power spokesman John Sell.
No new nuclear power plant projects have been licensed since
1973 and the partial meltdown in 1979 at Three Mile Island in
Pennsylvania prompted energy companies to drop new nuclear plant
plans. Plant Vogtle was completed in the 1980s. But the climate
has changed in recent years because of factors such as fuel
price volatility and the environmental impact of coal, Sell
said.
"We are among many across the nation" looking at nuclear power,
Sell said. "We've had 20 to 25 years of successful operations of
nuclear plants and the climate and public attitude are much
different toward nuclear power than 15 years ago."
Monday, Progress Energy, which serves 1.4 million customers in
the Carolinas, announced it is considering building a new
nuclear reactor at an existing plant in Raleigh. Charlotte,
N.C.,-based Duke Power also is expected soon to announce new
reactor plans.
---_
On the Net:
Georgia Power: http://www.southernco.com/gapower/home
Southern Nuclear:
http://www.southerncompany.com/southernnuclear/home
Southern Co.: http://www.southerncompany.com
*****************************************************************
24 St. Petersburg Times: Russia's Audit Chamber on sale of Rosenergoatom
RBC, 27.01.2006, Moscow 16:51:45.
The sale of Russian state concern for the generation of electric
and thermal power at nuclear power plants (Rosenergoatom) to
private owners must be legally prohibited, auditor at the Audit
Chamber Mikhail Beskhmelnitsyn told a press conference today.
The Audit Chamber supports Rosenergoatom's conversion into a
joint-stock company, but the state should be a 100-percent owner
of the enterprise, the auditor added. The state's full ownership
of the company's stocks will allow Rosenergoatom to operate
effectively and to attract investments, Beskhmelnitsyn concluded.
All rights reserved. © 1995 - 2006 RosBusinessConsulting.
© 2006 Associated Press.
All rights reserved © 1995-2000 RosBusinessConsulting
*****************************************************************
25 Interfax: Pakistan may seek Russian nuclear reactors - prime minister
Interfax.com
Jan 27 2006 1:42PM
MOSCOW. Jan 27 (Interfax) - Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat
Aziz has called on Russia to sell nuclear reactors to Pakistan
and invest in the Pakistani economy.
"Why not sell Russian nuclear reactors for our nuclear power
plants? In the military area we have a successful record of
purchasing Mi-17 helicopters," Aziz said in an interview with
Russia's Vremya Novostei newspaper published on Friday.
Arms trade between Russia and Pakistan is constrained by "a
special kind of relationship between Moscow and New Delhi," he
said, adding that "relations between two countries should not
stand in the way of relations with a third country."
© 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.
*****************************************************************
26 Bellona: Rosatom offers to build 40 nuclear power units
The new director of the Federal Agency for Nuclear Power is
confident that in the next 25 years, Russia must build 40
nuclear power units. The cost of this gigantic program,
according to specialists, could reach $60 billion.
2006-01-27 16:38
On January 20, Sergei Kirienko told President Vladimir Putin
that the agency was planning to build 40 nuclear power units
before 2030, raising the share of electricity generated by
nuclear plants from the current 16% to 25%. In the same period,
Kirienko plans to build another 40 to 60 units abroad. "The key
goal here is, of course, to restore the entire technological
cycle, because the nuclear industry of the Soviet Union was
scattered throughout the republics," said Kirienko, who has
already discussed his plans with Central Asian and Ukrainian
officials.
Adopted in 2002, Russia's energy strategy stipulates that
nuclear plants will be generating between 18% and 23% of
electricity by 2020. According to a Chamber of Accounts estimate
published January 20, the industry's own resources will not be
enough to meet the targets of even the current strategy.
As estimated by Andrei Zubkov, vice-president of Trust Bank, the
40 units will cost approximately $50-60 billion to build and
"obviously the bulk of this money should come from the budget".
He described the construction of the nuclear power plants as
well justified and as meeting "the existing world trends in view
of rising prices and the shortage of hydrocarbons". The banker
said that "after a 20-year interval, the U.S. will soon issue
the first licenses for new NPPs".
But Vladimir Milov, president of the Energy Policy Institute,
does not consider Kirienko’s plans rational. In his view, Russia
has enough NPPs and their proportion of electricity generated in
European Russia is already 50%. "Raising the percentage of
nuclear power plants will create problems for power management
and scheduling, since the NPPs keep delivering constant power
all the time and are not as flexible as turbine plants," Milov
said. "France, for example, has to export nuclear power to the
UK for free at night", reported RIA-Novosti.
Publisher: , President:
Information: , Technical contact:
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
27 BBC: Energy gap: Crisis for humanity?
Last Updated: Thursday, 26 January 2006
By Richard Black BBC News website environment correspondent
It is perhaps too early to talk of an energy "crisis".
[Steam rising from power plants over Moscow]
Fossil fuels have been the cheapest and most convenient so far
But take your pick from terms like "serious concern" and "major
issue" and you will not be far from the positions which analysts
are increasingly adopting.
The reason for their concern can be found in a set of factors
which are pulling in glaringly different directions:
+ Demand for energy, in all its forms, is rising
+ Supplies of key fuels - notably oil and gas - show signs of
decline
+ Mainstream climate science suggests that reducing
greenhouse gas emissions within two decades would be a prudent
thing to do
+ Meanwhile the Earth's population continues to rise, with the
majority of its six billion people hankering after a richer
lifestyle - which means a greater consumption of energy.
Underlying the growing concern is the relentless pursuit of
economic growth, which historically has been tied to energy
consumption as closely as a horse is tethered to its cart.
It is a vehicle which cannot continue to speed up indefinitely;
it must at some point hit a barrier, of finite supply,
unfeasibly high prices or abrupt climate change.
The immediate question is whether the crash comes soon, or
whether humanity has time to plan a comfortable way out.
Even if it can, the planning is not necessarily going to be
easy, or result in cheap solutions. Every energy source has its
downside; there is no free lunch, wherever you look on the menu.
Runaway horse
The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts a rise in global
energy demand of 50-60% by 2030.
If all else remained equal, that rising demand would be
accommodated principally by fossil fuels, which have generally
been the cheapest and most convenient available.
[Graph of the oil price over the past year]
But oil supplies show signs of running down; this, combined with
concerns about rising demand and political instability,
conspired to force prices up from $40 a barrel at the beginning
of 2005 to $60 at its close.
There is more oil out there, for sure; but the size of proven
reserves is uncertain, with oil-producing countries and
companies prone to exaggerate the size of their stocks.
Currently uneconomic sources such as tar sands could be
exploited; but at what cost?
Natural gas stocks - in recent times the fuel of choice for
electricity generation are also showing signs of depletion, and
there is growing concern in Western capitals about the political
instability associated with oil and gas supplies from the Middle
East and Russia.
Coal, the fuel of the industrial revolution, remains relatively
abundant; but here the climate issue raises its provocative head
most volubly, because of all fuels, coal produces more
greenhouse gas emissions for the energy it gives.
Based partly on the predicted availability of cheap coal, the
IEA forecasts a 50% rise in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.
Mainstream climate science, meanwhile, indicates that to avoid
dangerous consequences of climate change, emissions should fall,
not rise, by 50%.
The economic and environmental horses are clearly pulling in
mutually incompatible directions.
No climate curbs
It is a rare human that dons a hair shirt voluntarily; and in
seeking to deal with climate change, we are, it seems, behaving
to type.
It took the world's most comfortably-off nations more than seven
years to bring the Kyoto Protocol into force following its
signing in 1997.
[Protest against the Czech nuclear power plant at Temelin]
Sharp divisions over nuclear power show no signs of disappearing
An alternative "climate pact", the Asia-Pacific Partnership on
Clean Development and Climate, emerged last year contending that
technology alone would solve global warming.
It recently concluded its first ministerial meeting by endorsing
projections that under its aegis, emissions will at least double
by 2050; economic growth is sacrosanct, and so consumption of
coal and other fossil fuels must also continue to rise.
Concern over climate change, then, is not on a global basis
proving to be a driver for clean technology or for reducing
demand for energy.
Price barriers
Rising prices or simply constraints on supplies of fossil fuels
could, however, bring other fuels into the equation; and nuclear
fission is at the head of the queue.
According to the World Nuclear Association, there are now about
440 commercial reactors in the world, providing 16% of its
electricity; for major developing countries such as India and
China, nuclear power remains both a significant part of the
electricity mix and a close companion to military programmes.
But concerns over waste have set other countries such as Germany
on a determinedly non-nuclear path.
Waste apart, nuclear faces another potential obstacle; stocks of
uranium are finite.
[Photovoltaic cells making up a large array of solar panels at
Chambery, France]
Photo-voltaic cells: The look of the future?
Analysts differ over how soon a uranium deficit might emerge;
some believe that a significant ramping up of nuclear capacity
would exhaust economic reserves on a timescale of decades.
That could be extended by adopting "fast breeder" reactors,
which create more fissile material as they go.
Too good to be true? Perhaps, because there is a major downside;
the creation of plutonium, with its attendant dangers of
proliferation.
The other nuclear technology, fusion, is full of hope but even
its most ardent supporters admit it is decades away.
Wind, waves and sunlight
Most of the energy we use on Earth comes directly or indirectly
from the Sun.
It is the Sun which stirs winds and the great water cycle,
depositing rain on highlands and creating the potential for
hydro-electric power; it is the Sun's energy which grew plants
which decayed to form the coal and oil that we have extracted so
determinedly in our industrial age.
Is it now time, then, to use its energy directly, to blanket the
Earth in photo-voltaic cells and silently power humankind's
future?
Certainly it could be done, with energy to spare; but at costs
up to five times that of coal and gas, it is not going to be
soon.
Wind, wave and tidal power are all fine technologies, but their
potential is limited, not least by the fact that they do not
generate continuously.
That could be overcome by storing energy. But there are few
realistic ways of doing it; and the additional cost would
quickly negate any advantage these technologies currently
possess.
Hydrogen, meanwhile, is touted as the great climate-friendly
hope.
But hydrogen is just a carrier of energy. It must be created,
for example by using electricity to split water molecules, in
which case replacing petrol-driven cars with hydrogen vehicles
would vastly increase the global demand for electricity.
No free lunch, indeed - but a desperately tortuous and
risk-laden menu and a kitchen where political or environmental
fires could flare up at any moment.
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
*****************************************************************
28 NewsFromRussia.Com Putin releases statement on peaceful use of nuclear energy
14:56 2006-01-27
«We view security as a multidimensional concept. It is an area
that requires a carefully considered and complex approach. Based
on this position, Russia We view security as a multidimensional
concept is firmly committed to expanding cooperation on global
energy security within the framework of the Eurasian Economic
Community. One of the priorities in this area is to develop
cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
Cooperation in this field opens up real new opportunities for
all of us. Taking into consideration the agreements with the
President of Kazakhstan, concrete plans are being drawn up for
expanding cooperation between the nuclear energy sector
enterprises in our countries.
Uzbekistan's accession to the Eurasian Economic Community
creates additional new opportunities for building a nuclear-fuel
component that will serve as a reliable element in the energy
supply policy for the long term.
It is particularly important to develop our countries' full
potential in this area today at a time when demand for quality
energy supplies is growing constantly. Dwindling fossil fuel
reserves and environmental issues have become questions of
crucial importance on the international agenda.
We need to create the prototype of a global infrastructure that
will give all interested countries equal access to nuclear
energy, while stressing reliable compliance with the
requirements of the non-proliferation regime, of course.
The creation of a system of international centres providing
nuclear fuel cycle services, including enrichment, on a
non-discriminatory basis and under the control of the IAEA,
could become a key element in developing this new infrastructure.
Russia has already made just such a proposal and is prepared to
establish an international centre of this kind on its territory.
Innovative new technologies will undoubtedly be required in this
respect to create new generation reactors and their fuel cycles.
These kinds of issues can be resolved only through broad-based
international cooperation. This is the approach that we will
present to the G8 countries during our presidency, and to all
our partners in the peaceful use of nuclear energy.»
I.L.
Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU".
*****************************************************************
29 Derry Journal: Derry Council Says No To Nuclear Power
Friday 27th January 2006
Derry City Council have rejected suggestions that a nuclear power
plant be built in the Derry area. The issue was discussed at the
monthly meeting of Derry City Council on Monday after Sinn Fein
Councillor Gerry MacLochlainn tabled a motion asking the council
to reject nuclear power. ['']
Councillor MacLochlainn said that he felt the issue should be
discussed by the council after a local businessman suggested in
the 'Journal' that a nuclear power station should be built in
Derry to provide low cost energy for the North West area.
"I feel that this motion is quite timely because of the the
recent suggestion in the local media that a nuclear power station
be sited in Derry. While this may be little more than an idea
right now I feel that it would be foolish to dismiss the apparent
drive for a return to nuclear power," he said.
Councillor MacLochalinn also said that Ireland had already
suffered as a result of Britain's nuclear power station in
Sellafield and added that the government should be looking to
environmentally friendly forms of energy instead.
"We have already recorded higher levels of technetium in the
mouth of the Foyle and that would increase if a plant was built
in Derry," he added.
© 2004 Derry Journal Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
30 APP.COM: Oyster Creek operates at 53% capacity |
Asbury Park Press Online
PLANT: POWER REDUCED BECAUSE PUMP SHUT DOWN
Posted by the Asbury Park Presson 01/27/06
BY NICK CLUNN STAFF WRITER
LACEY — The Oyster Creek nuclear power plant operated at 53
percent of its power capacity as a safety precaution Thursday.
The 636-megawatt plant usually operates at full power.
The reduction became necessary when a recirculation pump that
propels water into the reactor shut down unexpectedly Wednesday
morning, said Rachelle Benson, a plant spokeswoman.
Neither officials from plant owner AmerGen nor federal regulators
knew why, but plant workers were troubleshooting. There could
have been an electrical malfunction or a seal failure, said Neil
Sheehan, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
"All operators immediately responded to reduce power," Benson
said.
Whenever Oyster Creek reduces power or goes offline, electricity
generated by other plants fills the void. This happens because
Oyster Creek is part of a regional power grid that stretches
across eight states. Regulators will examine this minor equipment
problem as part of their ongoing review.
Recirculation pumps provide the water that is converted to steam
by the reactor. Steam drives the turbine that turns the
generator, which creates electricity.
Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
31 KCRG: Iowa's Only Nuclear Power Plant Sold
[KCRG.com]
Friday, January 27, 2006, 7:13:09 PM
(Palo – KCRG) -- Iowa's only nuclear power plant now has a new
owner.
Iowa Power and Light, a subsidiary of Alliant Energy, says it's
closed the sale of the Duane Arnold Energy Center near Palo to
Florida Power and Light.
Alliant also agreed to buy power from F.P.L. through 2014. And it
says customer bills should stay about where they would have been
if Alliant had kept the plant.
Copyright CRTV Company
©2005 KCRG / Cedar Rapids TV Co.
*****************************************************************
32 Rutland Herald: State report: Yankee plan could violate radiation rule
Rutland Vermont News & Information
January 27, 2006
By Susan SmallheerHerald Staff
BRATTLEBORO — The State Health Department said Thursday that
Entergy Nuclear's proposed power boost could violate the state's
strict standards for radiation releases by as much as 26 percent.
A report released Thursday by the Department of Health said the
proposed 20 percent power boost at the Vermont Yankee nuclear
reactor in Vernon could boost radiation releases — called
"fenceline doses" — by up to 26 percent.
That could exceed the Health Department's standard, William
Irwin, radiological health chief for the department, wrote in a
report prepared for the Windham Regional Commission.
The report cited "recent communication" with Yankee officials.
But Health Commissioner Dr. Paul Jarris said that despite the
potential for violating Vermont's state standard for
radiological releases, he was confident the plant would pose no
health hazard.
"It is not a health risk, but there is a possibility it violates
state regulations," he said.
The current state limits, he said, where not a "science or
health-based limit."
Entergy spokesman Robert Williams maintained that Vermont Yankee
would not violate state standards, and he said the Health
Department's new report contained no new information.
If the plant did exceed the state "fenceline" standard of 20
millirem per year, Williams said, the plant would take steps to
bring it down.
He said Entergy and the state were in dispute over the state's
2004 fenceline reading at Yankee, which was double the radiation
level claimed by Entergy. The state's measured level was on the
edge of violating the state standard.
The dispute is currently being reviewed by a third party for
"objective scientific evaluation" of the different reporting
methods, in the words of the Health Department.
According to the Health Department's report, Entergy expects to
boost power production Feb. 24 — a date Williams called only an
estimate and contingent on final federal and state approval.
Entergy wants to increase power production at Vermont Yankee
from 540 to 650 megawatts, or 20 percent.
Jarris said the state had taken steps to increase its monitoring
by increasing the number of special radiological monitors
surrounding the plant.
He said Vermont's fenceline radiation standard of 20 millirem
per year was stricter than the federal Environmental Protection
Agency standard of 25 millirem.
Vermont's standard was adopted more than 30 years ago, when
Vermont Yankee was first being licensed, Jarris said. He said he
would support raising the state limit.
Meanwhile, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
said NRC staff were reviewing the methodology that Entergy uses
to calculate its radiation releases.
Neil Sheehan, an NRC spokesman, said Entergy used an unusual
methodology not employed at many nuclear reactors. He said the
methodology is based on calculations of readings taken from a
steam line inside the plant, rather than the traditional
monitors such as those used by the state.
Entergy has already received tentative approval from the NRC,
and the state Public Service Board has given conditional
approval, but a final decision is still pending.
The radiation issue was raised last week by James Matteau,
executive director of the Windham Regional Commission, who wrote
in a letter to Jarris that he had received confidential
information that Entergy would violate the state standard when
it boosts power production.
Matteau said Thursday he was pleased to see some information
aired about the potential problem.
But he noted that the information only came out on the eve of
PSB hearings on Entergy's plans to build a high-level
radioactive waste facility next to the Yankee plant. That
facility will also increase radiological releases, he said.
"It answers my questions and raises more," Matteau said, adding
that the state and Entergy still disagreed on how the radiation
doses were calculated.
He pointed out that by the state's own calculation, Vermont
Yankee's fenceline radiation could be between 18 and 31 millirem.
"Twenty is not exactly in the middle," he said, referring to the
state standard.
Matteau said his reason for writing the Health Department was to
get the information to the public, "and not take a week to
answer my questions."
"I like these things explained in a clear, straightforward way,"
he said, "not with the usual insider baseball stuff — it drives
me nuts."
Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com.
© 2006 Rutland Herald
*****************************************************************
33 This is Money: Private cash must fund nuclear power
Robert Lea, Evening Standard
27 January 2006
CHANCELLOR Gordon Brown has pulled the plug on any Treasury
financial support for the building of new nuclear power
stations, City bankers and energy executives will be told today.
At a private meeting with around 50 financiers, top lawyers and
the power industry, Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks will make
clear that, if the Government gives the green light to new
nuclear build, the private sector will be made solely
responsible for finding the financing.
Speaking ahead of the first formal presentation to the City of
the Government's latest Energy Review, Wicks told the Evening
Standard in an exclusive interview: 'There will be no writing of
cheques by the Treasury in full or in part, if we decide to go
down the route of building new nuclear power stations.'
Questioned on whether the review could see the Government
prepared to underwrite the bondfinancing of new nuclear build -
just as the Treasury supported Network Rail and the Channel
Tunnel Rail Link - the minister was unequivocal.
'There will be no endangering of the public finances,' said
Wicks. 'We will not be landing the Treasury with a large
cheque.'
The decision leaves a big question mark over whether the
Department of Trade and Industry can find private sector backing
to build what would be the firstever non-state funded
constructionof nuclear power stations in the UK.
Ageing nuclear power stations and the decommissioning of
environmentally unclean coal-fired plants will, says the DTI,
leave the UK with a 20,000-megawatt power black hole within two
decades - almost a third of the UK's current capacity, and a
shortfall equivalent to the output of up to 15 new major power
stations.
Launching the Energy Review earlier this week, Trade and
Industry Secretary Alan Johnson made it clear the UK needs to
get away from dependence on gas, which by 2020 will see Britain
80% reliant on imports.
Confirming that there have already been informal meetings with a
number of international banks and major power companies-such as
German nuclear generator E.On, Wicks said: 'There is significant
interest in investing [in new nuclear stations].
'There is an investment appetite and significant interest in the
investment opportunities. But we are not yet in a place where we
have sat down with the big companies and asked. 'Are you willing
to build new nuclear?''
Wicks further admitted that the hurdle of credible financing
must be cleared before new nuclear can be included when the
Energy Review is completed this summer.
Public worries about nuclear waste must also be resolved. The
industry's past record of secrecy made it 'easy for demons to be
conjured' if the public continues to confuse nuclear weapons
issues with the safety of nuclear power.
+ This is London
©2006 Associated Newspapers LtdTerms Privacy policy
*****************************************************************
34 News-Herald: Davis-Besse mess should teach lessons
News - 01/26/2006 -
It hasn't been the best three years at Akron-based FirstEnergy
Corp. After the investigations and fines, company officials
should possess a deeper appreciation for their responsibility to
the public.
First, the Davis-Besse plant near Toledo escaped a near
meltdown in 2002. Boric acid caused extensive corrosion which
nearly ate through a 6-inch-thick steel cap on the reactor
vessel. Next, the FirstEnergy power grid caused Northeast Ohio
to become ground zero for the blackout of 2003.
Then, the utility encountered problems in 2004 at the Perry
Nuclear Power Plant in North Perry, but not quite the red flags
raised at Davis-Besse.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency that
oversees nuclear plants, levied its biggest fine, $5.45 million,
against FirstEnergy in 2005.
Now, FirstEnergy has agreed to pay $28 million in fines,
restitution and community service projects to avoid prosecution
over problems at Davis-Besse.
If the NRC fine didn't serve as a sufficient wake-up call at
FirstEnergy, then maybe federal prosecutors accomplished that.
The tenacious work of U.S. Attorney Gregory White and his staff
produced this unprecedented fine on the heels of three people
being indicted, two Davis-Besse employees and a contractor.
White said the government can prosecute FirstEnergy if the
company violates the agreement. This includes establishing
safety standards and prohibiting the company with annual income
of $878 million from passing along the fine to its customers in
Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, the Associated Press reported.
It sounds nice, but enforcing this may prove more difficult.
Some critics insist FirstEnergy officials must be held
accountable for what transpired at Davis-Besse. Testimony at
pending trials could draw out any information.
No utility company leader envisions a "nuclear accident"
occurring on their watch.
But urgent matters at both plants elevate the slight margin for
error in this vital industry.
Company leaders assert they've made appropriate oversight
changes. Only a clean track record at the plants will confirm
this isn't just lip service to the public.
The NRC and White and his staff can ensure it by closely
watching FirstEnergy.
©The News-Herald 2006
Copyright © 1995 - 2006 All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear
FR Doc E6-1035
[Federal Register: January 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 18)]
[Notices]
[Page 4614-4622]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27ja06-89]
Operations, Inc., Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; Final
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
Related
to the Proposed License Amendment To Increase the Maximum
Reactor Power
Level
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the
Commission).
SUMMARY: The NRC has prepared a final Environmental Assessment
as its
evaluation of a request by Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC
and
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee) for a
license amendment to increase the maximum thermal power at
Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) from 1593 megawatts-thermal
(MWt)
to 1912 MWt. This represents a power increase of approximately
20
percent for VYNPS. As stated in the NRC staff's position paper
dated
February 8, 1996, on the Boiling-Water Reactor Extended Power
Uprate
(EPU) Program, the NRC staff will prepare an environmental
impact
statement if it believes a power uprate will have a significant
impact
on the human environment. The NRC staff did not identify any
significant impact from the information provided in the
licensee's EPU
application for VYNPS or the NRC staff's independent review;
therefore,
the NRC staff is documenting its environmental review in an
environmental assessment. The final environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact is being published in the
Federal
Register.
The NRC published a draft environmental assessment and
finding of
no significant impact on the proposed action for public comment
in the
Federal Register on November 9, 2005 (70 FR 68106). Two sets of
comments were received as discussed below.
The licensee provided three comments in a letter dated
December 8,
2005 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Accession No. ML053500122). The first comment clarified
operation of
the three modes of operation of the circulating water system.
Based on
this comment, the NRC revised the description of the system in
the
``Plant Site and Environs'' and ``Water Use Impacts'' sections
of the
final environmental assessment. The second comment clarified
that
transmission lines are owned and operated by different
transmission
operators, rather than Entergy as was indicated in the draft
environmental assessment. Based on this comment, the NRC revised
the
``Transmission Facility Impacts'' section of the final
environmental
assessment. The third comment provided information regarding
replacement of 21 of the 22 cooling tower fan motors with higher
horsepower motors. Since Entergy indicated that the conclusions
in the
draft environmental assessment regarding cooling tower operation
(including noise) were correctly stated, no changes were made
based on
this comment.
Mr. David L. Deen of the Connecticut River Watershed Council
(CRWC)
provided three comments in an e-mail dated December 9, 2005
(ADAMS
Accession No. ML053500124). The first comment raised concerns
that the
current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit
for VYNPS places no upper bound on the temperature of the river
at
which the licensee must stop adding waste heat through its
cooling
tower discharge and that a draft amendment to this permit fails
to
address this shortcoming. The CRWC proposed that Entergy should
not
raise the ambient water temperature beyond 85 [deg]F at any
point
within the
[[Page 4615]]
Connecticut River. This comment exceeds the scope of the NRC's
review
of the proposed EPU amendment. The purpose of the NRC's
environmental
assessment is to evaluate the potential impact of the proposed
action
(i.e., the change due to the proposed EPU). As discussed in the
NRC's
draft environmental assessment, Entergy has requested that the
State of
Vermont issue an amendment to the current NPDES permit which
would
allow a one-degree increase in the thermal discharge limits, for
certain river water temperature ranges. Entergy stated that the
NPDES
permit amendment is not necessary for the proposed EPU and the
licensee
will comply with the current NPDES permit thermal discharge
limits if
the permit amendment is not granted. The current NPDES permit
represents the upper bound on the current impact on the river
water
temperatures in the vicinity of the discharge. The NRC's draft
environmental assessment found that any discharge impacts for
the
proposed action will be the same as the current impacts from
plant
operation and, as such, the NRC concluded that there will be no
significant impact on the Connecticut River from VYNPS discharge
due to
the EPU. The CRWC comment pertains to concerns regarding lack of
an
upper bound temperature limit in the NPDES permit. The ``upper
bound''
referenced in the NRC's draft environmental assessment refers to
an
upper bound on the impact of the proposed EPU. Since the CRWC
comment
focuses on issues regarding the NPDES permit and does not
provide any
information regarding the impact of the proposed EPU, no changes
were
made to the final environmental assessment based on this comment.
The second comment from the CRWC stated that if the NPDES
permit
thermal discharge limits are increased, there would be harm to
specific
aquatic species (i.e., American shad, Atlantic salmon, spottail
shiner,
smallmouth bass, yellow perch, walleye, largemouth bass,
fallfish,
white sucker, and white perch). Similar to the first comment,
since the
CRWC comment focuses on issues regarding the proposed amendment
to the
NPDES permit and does not provide any information regarding the
impact
of the proposed EPU, no changes were made to the final
environmental
assessment based on this comment.
The third comment from the CRWC questioned the NRC's draft
environmental assessment statement that there are no threatened
and
endangered aquatic species in the Connecticut River. The CRWC
stated
that the dwarf wedge mussel was listed as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act in 1990, and that in 1993, the U.S. Fish
and
Wildlife Service approved a recovery plan to attempt to
reestablish
populations of the dwarf wedge mussel throughout its historical
range
including the Connecticut River. The CRWC stated that
reestablishing
the population in or near VYNPS would require the presence of
one of
its host species, the tessellated darter. The CRWC stated that
although
the nearest population of the wedge mussel is relatively far
north of
VYNPS, since the species is endangered and depends on the
tessellated
darter for its survival, the tessellated darter should be
included in
the threatened and endangered species review for the proposed
EPU.
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's 1993
recovery
plan, the dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) is an
endangered
species located in the Connecticut River system. To assess the
impact
of the proposed action, the aquatic species evaluated in the
draft
environmental assessment were those in the vicinity of the VYNPS
intake
and discharge structures. The dwarf wedge mussel is not located
in
Windham County, Vermont and, therefore, was not included in the
draft
environmental assessment. The dwarf wedge mussel larvae attach
to a
host species for survival. One host species for the dwarf wedge
mussel
is the tessellated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), which is also
found in
the Connecticut River system. The tessellated darter is not
threatened
or endangered and, therefore, was not included in the draft
environmental assessment for the VYNPS EPU.
As noted above, the proposed EPU does not require an
increase in
discharge temperature limits. Further, following implementation
of the
EPU, the flow rate of water being withdrawn from the Connecticut
River
through the intake structure would not increase, and there would
not be
a configuration change to the intake structure to support the
EPU.
Therefore, the EPU would not change existing impacts on the
tessellated
darter. In addition, according to Ecological Studies of the
Connecticut
River--Vernon, Vermont--Report 32, dated May 2003, the quantity
of
tessellated darters impinged on the VYNPS traveling screens is
small
compared to other impinged species. Impingement from the VYNPS
intake
does not significantly impact the tessellated darter population.
The
inter-governmental Environmental Advisory Committee (comprised
of
certain Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and federal
agencies)
established limits for impingement of American shad (Alosa
sapidissima)
and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), and because VYNPS has not
approached
the impingement limits set for these species, the Vermont Agency
of
Natural Resources (ANR) concluded that the impingement of other
species
at VYNPS meets applicable laws. Entrainment of all aquatic
species was
monitored for over a decade beginning in 1972 and determined to
be
insignificant by the Environmental Advisory Committee.
Entrainment was
subsequently removed from the VYNPS NPDES permit. Therefore, the
staff
concludes that there would be no significant impact from
impingement or
entrainment to the tessellated darter or the dwarf wedge mussel
associated with the proposed action.
Environmental Assessment
Plant Site and Environs
The EPU will apply to the facilities at the site of VYNPS
located
on the west shore of the Connecticut River in the town of
Vernon,
Vermont. Vernon is approximately four miles north of the
Massachusetts
state line. Vernon is located in Windham County.
The VYNPS site is located on Vernon Pond on the Connecticut
River,
about two-thirds of a mile upstream of the Vernon Hydroelectric
Dam, at
Connecticut River mile 138.3. Vernon Pond is the portion of the
Connecticut River above Vernon Hydroelectric Dam. The site is
surrounded by the Connecticut River on the east, by farm and
pasture
land mixed with wooded areas on the north and south, and by the
town of
Vernon on the west. The elevation of the VYNPS site is
approximately 76
meters (250 feet) above mean sea level.
Northeast of the site, the Pisgah Mountain range rises to
457
meters (1500 feet). To the west and northwest of the site,
mountains
and hills rise to 549 meters (1800 feet). Approximately 13
kilometers
(km) (8 miles (mi)) southeast of the site are Warwick State
Forest and
Northfield State Forest. Colrain State Forest is approximately
29 km
(18 mi) southwest of Vernon. Green Mountain National Forest is
located
approximately 48 km (30 mi) west of Vernon.
VYNPS is a single-unit boiling-water reactor designed by
General
Electric, with a maximum reactor core power level output of 1593
MWt.
Plant cooling is provided by either an open-cycle system, a
closed-
cycle cooling system, or a hybrid-cycle system. The mode of
operation
is selected to limit the heat discharged to the Connecticut
River. The
closed-cycle cooling system is
[[Page 4616]]
equipped with a cooling tower that dissipates heat primarily to
the
atmosphere. After passing through the condenser, circulating
water
rejects waste heat to the atmosphere utilizing the cooling
tower.
Remaining waste heat is discharged in the form of blowdown from
the
circulating water system into the Connecticut River. In the
open-cycle
mode, no water passes through the cooling towers. Water is
removed from
the Connecticut River for cooling and discharged back to the
Connecticut River downstream of the intake structure. In the
hybrid-
cycle mode, all of the circulating water flow is cycled through
the
cooling towers, but only a portion is discharged to the river
while the
remainder is recycled.
Identification of the Proposed Action
By letter dated September 10, 2003, Entergy proposed an
amendment
to the operating license for VYNPS to increase the maximum
thermal
power level by approximately 20 percent, from 1593 MWt to 1912
MWt. The
change is considered an EPU because it would raise the reactor
core
power level more than 7 percent above the original licensed
maximum
power level. This amendment would allow the heat output of the
reactor
to increase, which would increase the flow of steam to the
turbine.
This would result in the increase in production of electricity
and the
amount of waste heat delivered to the condenser, and an increase
in the
temperature of the water being discharged into the Connecticut
River.
This is the first request by Entergy for a power uprate at
VYNPS; no
other power uprates have previously been requested or granted
for this
site.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Entergy estimates that the EPU will result in an additional
100 to
110 megawatts-electric being generated. This additional
electricity
generation can power approximately 110,000 extra homes, reducing
the
need to obtain electricity from other sources. The EPU would not
cause
the environmental impacts that would occur if construction of a
new
power generation facility were sought to meet the region's
electricity
needs.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
At the time of issuance of the operating license for VYNPS,
the NRC
staff noted that any activity authorized by the license would be
encompassed by the overall action evaluated in the Final
Environmental
Statement (FES) for the operation of VYNPS, which was issued in
July
1972. This environmental assessment summarizes the radiological
and
non-radiological impacts on the environment that may result from
the
currently proposed action.
Non-Radiological Impacts
Land Use Impacts
The potential impacts associated with land use for the
proposed
action include impacts from construction and plant
modifications. The
impacts from construction due to the proposed EPU are minimal.
No
expansion of roads, parking lots, equipment storage or laydown
areas,
or transmission line rights-of-way is anticipated to support the
proposed action. The only new construction required to support
the EPU
is the installation of temporary office space using modular
units. This
resulted in minor soil disturbance due to trenching, setting
foundation
columns, hook-up of water, sewer, telephone, and electricity.
In addition, a few modifications to plant equipment will
take place
to support the EPU. The most significant modifications include
replacement of the high-pressure turbine steam path, rewinding
the main
generator, replacement of four high-pressure heaters, and
replacement
of the main transformer. The plant modifications will not result
in any
changes in land use and historic and archeological resources
should not
be affected by the proposed EPU. The proposed EPU would not
modify land
use at the site significantly over that described in the FES.
Therefore, the staff concludes that the environmental land use
impacts
of the proposed EPU are bounded by the impacts previously
evaluated in
the FES.
Cooling Tower Impacts
The potential impacts associated with increased cooling
tower
operation for the proposed action include aesthetic impacts due
to the
increased moisture content of the air. VYNPS has cooling towers
that
are currently used to reduce the heat output to the environment.
The
cooling towers are not currently used during the ``winter
period'' of
October 15 through May 15, but following the EPU, the cooling
towers
may be required for this period in order to meet the water
discharge
thermal limits set forth in the NPDES permit. The operation of
the
cooling towers during the ``winter period'' will result in a
visible
plume. However, heat rejection rates during this period are less
than
during the ``summer period'' of May 16 to October 14, so the
visible
plume size will not be larger than during the remainder of the
year.
The cooling tower plume dimensions during the ``summer period''
will
increase following the EPU. The dimensions will increase by
approximately 100 meters in length, 20 to 30 meters in width,
and up to
50 meters in height. The increase in plume dimensions during the
``summer period'' and the presence of a plume during the
``winter
period'' will not cause a significant aesthetic impact because
similar
plumes have been present in the area of VYNPS since 1972, and
industrial plumes are a common feature to the Connecticut River
Valley.
No significant fogging or icing due to cooling tower
operation is
predicted for the EPU. The Seasonal/Annual Cooling Tower Impact
Program
evaluation determined that there is no predicted ground-level
fogging
or icing during the year. The evaluation was performed for NPDES
``summer period'' and ``winter period'' thermal discharge limits.
No significant increase in noise is anticipated for cooling
tower
operation following the EPU. A study performed on the VYNPS
cooling
tower resulted in sound increases of less than one decibel for
the
increased cooling tower operation.
The aesthetic impacts associated with increased cooling
tower
operation for the proposed action will not change significantly
over
the aesthetic impacts associated with current cooling tower
operation.
Plume dimensions will increase, but will remain consistent with
the
current aesthetic impacts in the VYNPS environment. No
significant
fogging or icing is predicted, and no significant increase in
noise
level is predicted for the increased cooling tower operation.
Therefore, the staff concludes that there are no significant
aesthetic
or atmospheric impacts associated with increased cooling tower
operation for the proposed action.
Transmission Facility Impacts
The potential impacts associated with transmission
facilities for
the proposed action could include changes in transmission line
corridor
right-of-way maintenance and electric shock hazards due to
increased
current. The proposed EPU would not require any physical
modifications
to the transmission lines. Transmission line right-of-way
maintenance
practices, including the management of vegetation growth, would
not
change. There will be no change to operating voltage or
transmission
line rights-of-way. Transmission line clearances will remain
unchanged.
Modifications to onsite transmission equipment are necessary to
support
the EPU, including
[[Page 4617]]
installation of capacitor banks to maintain system voltage
requirements.
The National Electric Safety Code (NESC) provides design
criteria
that limit hazards from steady-state currents. The transmission
lines
currently meet the applicable shock prevention provisions of the
NESC.
There will be an increase in current passing through the
transmission
lines associated with the increased power level of the proposed
EPU.
The increased electrical current passing through the
transmission lines
will cause an increase in electromagnetic field strength in the
transmission line corridors. The licensee provided an evaluation
of the
transmission line loadings based on the approximately 20-percent
power
uprate which concluded that there will be no significant
increase in
the risk of shock under the transmission lines. Based on this
information, the staff concludes that adequate protection will
be
provided against hazards from electric shock even with the
slight
increase in current attributable to the EPU.
The impacts associated with transmission facilities for the
proposed action will not change significantly over the impacts
associated with current plant operation. There are no physical
modifications to the transmission lines, transmission line
right-of-way
maintenance practices will not change, there are no changes to
transmission line rights-of-way or vertical clearances, and
electric
current passing through the transmission lines will increase
only
slightly. Therefore, the staff concludes that there are no
significant
impacts associated with transmission facilities for the proposed
action.
Water Use Impacts
Potential water use impacts from the proposed action include
hydrological alterations to the Connecticut River and changes to
plant
water supply. VYNPS uses cooling water from Vernon Pond on the
Connecticut River, and discharges heated water back to the
Connecticut
River. Vernon Pond is the portion of the Connecticut River above
Vernon
Hydroelectric Dam. VYNPS can be operated in one of three modes:
The
open-cycle mode, the closed-cycle mode, or the hybrid-cycle
mode. Each
of the modes is discussed previously under ``Plant Site and
Environs.''
The NPDES permit limits the amount of heat discharged to the
Connecticut River from the operation of VYNPS. The thermal limit
set in
the NPDES permit will not change with the EPU. In order to
comply with
the NPDES thermal limit following the EPU, Entergy plans to
operate the
cooling towers more often to dissipate heat to the atmosphere
rather
than the river.
Due to the large flow rate of the Connecticut River, heated
water
discharged to the Connecticut River will begin to mix
immediately with
the river water and cool. A hydrological-biological study of
Vernon
Pond conducted in 1974-1977 included a thermal study. This study
concluded that during periods of low flow in the Connecticut
River, the
thermal plume from the VYNPS discharge extends outward into the
river
channel before being swept downstream. During periods of high
flow in
the Connecticut River, the strong river currents shear the
thermal
plume and force the plume to flow along the Vermont shore. Due
to these
flow patterns in the Connecticut River and the thermal limits
set in
the NPDES permit, the EPU should not cause hydrological
alterations to
the Connecticut River.
The EPU would not involve any configuration change to the
intake
structure. The pump capacity will not change, so that there will
not be
an increase in the rate of withdrawal of water from the
Connecticut
River. There would be a slight increase in the amount of
Connecticut
River water consumed as a result of the EPU under all cooling
modes of
operation due to increased evaporative losses. During the NPDES
summer
period (May 16 to October 14), the increased water consumption
will be
less than 0.1% of the average monthly river flow. During the
NPDES
winter period (October 15 to May 15), the increased water
consumption
will be less than 0.2% of the average monthly river flow.
Therefore,
the increased loss is insignificant relative to the flow in the
Connecticut River. On this basis, the staff concludes that there
is no
significant impact to the hydrological pattern on the
Connecticut
River, and there is no significant impact due to water
consumption as a
result of the proposed action.
Discharge Impacts
Potential impacts to the Connecticut River from the VYNPS
discharge
could include increased turbidity, scouring, erosion, and
sedimentation. These discharge-related impacts apply to
open-cycle flow
due to the large volume of water discharged to the river.
However,
since the EPU will not result in any significant change in the
amount
of water withdrawn from the Connecticut River during open-cycle
operation there will be no significant change in the discharge
volume
or velocity; therefore, there will be no changes in turbidity,
scouring, erosion, or sedimentation related to the EPU.
Surface water and wastewater discharges at VYNPS are
regulated by
the State of Vermont via a NPDES permit (NPDES No. VT0000264).
The
NPDES permit is periodically reviewed and renewed by the Vermont
ANR,
Department of Environmental Conservation in Waterbury, Vermont.
The EPU
would cause an increase in the temperature of the water
discharged to
the Connecticut River, but the temperature of the water
discharged will
remain within thermal limits specified in the NPDES permit. The
blowdown from the increased usage of the cooling towers would
also be
discharged to the Connecticut River. There is no significant
additional
impact to the Connecticut River expected from the increased
operation
of the cooling towers because cooling tower blowdown will
increase only
slightly due to minor increased usage of the cooling towers.
Entergy is requesting an amendment to the NPDES permit to
allow a
one-degree increase in the thermal discharge limit, for certain
river
water temperature ranges, for the ``summer period'' as shown in
Table
1.
Table 1.--Proposed Summer
NPDES Permit Change
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
Existing delta- Proposed delta-
Upstream river temperature
temperature increase temperature increase
limit limit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
Above 78
[deg]F...................................................
2 [deg]F 2 [deg]F
Greater than 63 [deg]F, Less than or equal to 78
[deg]F........... 2 [deg]F 3 [deg]F
Greater than 59 [deg]F, Less than or equal to 63
[deg]F........... 3 [deg]F 4 [deg]F
Greater than or equal to 55 [deg]F, Less than or equal to 59
4 [deg]F 5 [deg]F
[deg]F...........................................................
Below 55
[deg]F...................................................
5 [deg]F 5 [deg]F
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
[[Page 4618]]
The NPDES permit amendment is not necessary for the EPU, and
VYNPS
will continue to operate under the current thermal discharge
limits
(under either the current NRC license or the EPU) if the NPDES
permit
amendment is not granted.
VYNPS has been operating within the current NPDES limits;
therefore, these thermal limits represent an upper bound of the
current
impact on the river water temperatures in the vicinity of the
discharge. The proposed one-degree increase in the current NPDES
thermal discharge limit similarly represents the expected upper
bound
of the impact on the river water temperatures during the EPU.
VYNPS
will comply with the current thermal limits in the NPDES permit
following the EPU if the NPDES permit amendment request is not
granted,
and any discharge impacts for the proposed action will be the
same as
the current impacts from plant operation. Therefore, the staff
concludes that there will be no significant impact on the
Connecticut
River from VYNPS discharge for the proposed action.
Chemicals and concentrations released from VYNPS into the
Connecticut River are regulated by the State of Vermont through
the
NPDES permit. VYNPS will continue to operate within the current
NPDES
permit limits following the power uprate.
Since there will be no significant increase in the VYNPS
staffing
levels during operations as a result of the power uprate, there
will
also be no increase in sanitary waste.
Impacts on Aquatic Biota
The potential impacts to aquatic biota from the proposed
action
include impingement, entrainment, thermal discharge effects, and
impacts due to transmission line right-of-way maintenance. The
VYNPS
has intake and discharge structures on the Connecticut River.
The
aquatic species evaluated in this environmental assessment are
those in
the vicinity of the intake and discharge structures.
VYNPS does entrain and impinge aquatic species. Entrainment
and
impingement of aquatic species are covered in the NPDES permit
under
Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Entrainment was monitored
for
over a decade beginning in 1972, and determined to be
insignificant by
the inter-governmental Environmental Advisory Committee. The
Environmental Advisory Committee is made up of Vermont
Department of
Environmental Conservation, Vermont Department of Fish and
Wildlife,
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, New Hampshire Department
of
Environmental Services, Massachusetts Office of Watershed
Management,
Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, and the
Coordinator
of the Connecticut River Anadromous Fish restoration program of
the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Vermont ANR concluded that
no
further entrainment sampling was required following historical
studies
conducted during the same time period, and dropped entrainment
from the
NPDES permit. Entrainment is no longer monitored at VYNPS. The
ANR
determined that entrainment sampling should be replaced with
alternative biological monitoring of species in the Connecticut
River.
Therefore, since the 1980's, the licensee has conducted
extensive
monitoring as required by the ANR to determine if there are any
potential impacts to aquatic species in the VYNPS intake and
discharge
areas. These procedures are not expected to change following the
EPU.
Impingement is monitored annually and is considered low.
Ecological
studies of the Connecticut River--Vernon, Vermont--Report 32,
dated May
2003, describes how Entergy meets the requirements of the NPDES
permit
through impingement sampling. During 2002, 27 species of fish
were
collected, and all fish species collected were typical of the
Connecticut River drainage. The Environmental Advisory Committee
has
established limits for impingement of American shad and Atlantic
salmon, and VYNPS has never approached the impingement limits
set for
these species. Since VYNPS has never approached the impingement
limits
set for American shad and Atlantic salmon, the ANR has concluded
that
impingement of other species at VYNPS meets applicable laws. The
flow
rate of water being withdrawn from the Connecticut River through
the
intake structure will not increase following the EPU, and there
will
not be any configuration change to the intake structure to
support the
EPU. Therefore, no increase in the impingement of fish or
shellfish, or
in the entrainment of planktonic organisms would be expected
following
the EPU.
On July 9, 2004, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published a final rule in the Federal Register (69 FR 41575)
addressing
cooling water intake structures at existing power plants whose
flow
levels exceed a minimum threshold value of 50 million gallons
per day.
The rule is Phase II in EPA's development of Section 316(b)
regulations
that establish national requirements applicable to the location,
design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake
structures
at existing facilities that exceed the threshold value for water
withdrawals. The national requirements, which are implemented
through
NPDES permits, minimize the adverse environmental impacts
associated
with the continued use of the intake systems. Licensees are
required to
demonstrate compliance with the Phase II performance standards
at the
time of renewal of their NPDES permit. Licensees may be
required, as
part of the NPDES renewal, to alter the intake structure,
redesign the
cooling system, modify station operation, or take other
mitigative
measures as a result of this regulation. The new performance
standards
are designed to reduce significantly impingement and entrainment
losses
due to plant operation. Any site-specific mitigation would
result in
less impact due to continued plant operation.
The NPDES permit limits the amount of heat discharged to the
Connecticut River from the operation of VYNPS. An analysis
conducted in
accordance with the NPDES permit on fish and aquatic species in
2002
concluded that there is no significant negative relationship
between
these species and the thermal discharge. Actually, a larger
community
of aquatic species was found to colonize near the VYNPS
discharge. The
thermal limits specified in the NPDES permit will not change
with the
EPU. Because Entergy will continue to meet the thermal discharge
limit
set by the NPDES permit following the EPU, there should be no
additional thermal discharge effects on aquatic species for the
proposed action.
As discussed in the transmission facility impacts section of
this
environmental assessment, transmission line right-of-way
maintenance
practices will not change for the proposed action. Therefore,
the staff
concludes that there are no significant impacts to aquatic biota
associated with transmission line right-of-way maintenance for
the
proposed action.
In conclusion, there will be no increase in the impacts of
entrainment or impingement because there will be no increase in
the
flow rate of water being withdrawn from the Connecticut River,
and the
amount of heat discharged to the Connecticut River will remain
within
the thermal limit specified by the NPDES permit following the
EPU.
There are no changes in transmission line right-of-way
maintenance
associated with the proposed action. Therefore, the staff
concludes
that there are no significant impacts to aquatic biota for the
proposed
action.
[[Page 4619]]
Impacts on Terrestrial Biota
The potential impacts to terrestrial biota from the proposed
action
include impacts due to construction activities and transmission
line
right-of-way maintenance. As discussed in the transmission
facility
impacts section of this environmental assessment, transmission
line
right-of-way maintenance practices will not change for the
proposed
action. Similarly, as discussed above, apart from the
construction of
temporary office space using modular units, construction
activities due
to the EPU will not disturb land on the VYNPS site. Therefore,
the
staff concludes that there are no significant impacts to
terrestrial
plant or animal species associated with construction activities
or
transmission line right-of-way maintenance for the proposed
action.
Impacts on Threatened and Endangered Species
Potential impacts to threatened and endangered species from
the
proposed action include the impacts assessed in the aquatic and
terrestrial biota sections of this environmental assessment.
These
impacts include impingement, entrainment, thermal discharge
effects,
and impacts due to transmission line right-of-way maintenance
for
aquatic species, and impacts due to transmission line
right-of-way
maintenance for terrestrial species.
There are three species listed as threatened or endangered
under
the Federal Endangered Species Act within Windham County,
Vermont.
These are the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Indiana Bat
(Myotis sodalis), and Northeastern Bulrush (Scirpus
ancistrochaetus).
There are no records of any of these species on the VYNPS site.
However, no formal surveys have been conducted by Entergy or the
State
of Vermont on the VYNPS site. Critical habitat has been
designated for
the Indiana Bat (M. sodalis), but not in the State of Vermont.
Critical
habitat has not been designated for the Bald Eagle (H.
leucocephalus)
or the Northeastern Bulrush (S. ancistrochaetus). There is a
Bald Eagle
(H. leucocephalus) nest downstream of the VYNPS site, on
Stebbins
Island in New Hampshire, and Bald Eagles (H. leucocephalus) have
been
observed flying over the VYNPS site. However, the Bald Eagle (H.
leucocephalus) should not be impacted by the EPU because there
are no
Bald Eagles (H. leucocephalus) on the site and the NPDES permit
includes provisions for protection of the Bald Eagle (H.
leucocephalus)
habitat.
Ecological Studies of the Connecticut River--Vernon,
Vermont--
Report 32, dated May 2003, describes how Entergy meets the
requirements
of the NPDES permit through impingement sampling. An analysis of
this
report determined that no Federally-listed threatened or
endangered
species were collected.
The Vermont Nongame and Natural Heritage Program, associated
with
the Vermont ANR, reviewed the EPU project and found no undue
adverse
impact to nongame resources or natural areas from the proposed
action.
There are no Federally-listed threatened and endangered species
recorded on the VYNPS site, and there is no critical habitat in
the
state of Vermont for the three listed species in Windham County.
Therefore, the staff concludes that there is no effect to
threatened
and endangered species associated with the proposed action.
Social and Economic Impacts
Potential social and economic impacts due to the proposed
action
include changes in tax revenue for Windham County and changes in
the
size of the workforce at VYNPS. The NRC staff has reviewed the
information provided by the licensee regarding socioeconomic
impacts.
Entergy is a major employer in the community with approximately
670
full-time employees and contractors. Entergy is also a major
contributor to the local tax base, but does not remit tax
revenues
directly to Windham County. Entergy personnel indirectly
contribute to
the tax base by paying sales and property taxes, state income
taxes,
and hotel and meal taxes which are paid by Entergy contractors
while
working at VYNPS. VYNPS pays a State Education Tax which is
based on
the level of generation of electrical power. The additional
electrical
power generated from the EPU will result in a proportional
increase in
taxes. The Tax Stabilization Contract, entered into by the Town
of
Vernon, Vermont and the owners of VYNPS, determines Entergy's
contribution to the remaining local tax base. The contract
specifies a
Total Listed Value to be used for assessing Municipal Services
property
tax through 2010. The Total Listed Value applies to all real and
personal property owned on April 1, 2000, and acquired
thereafter,
which is used in connection with the generation of electrical
power
through the nuclear fission process.
The proposed EPU would not significantly affect the size of
the
VYNPS labor force and would not have a material effect upon the
labor
force required for future outages after all stages of the
modifications
needed to support the EPU are complete. Entergy completed all
major
modifications in the Spring 2004 refueling outage, which
required
approximately 425 additional workers. Normally, less than 700
additional personnel are required for refueling outages; the
Spring
2004 refueling outage required approximately 1125 additional
personnel.
Additional modifications needed to support the EPU were
completed
during the Fall 2005 refueling outage. The remaining
modifications were
less significant than those implemented during the Spring 2004
refueling outage and required less than 100 additional workers
to
supplement typical refueling outage staffing levels.
It is expected that the proposed EPU will increase the
economic
viability of VYNPS and lower the probability of early plant
retirement.
With the increased likelihood that VYNPS will remain operational
at
least through the end of the current license term, local
employment
opportunities will remain available. Early plant retirement
would be
expected to have a negative impact on the local economy and the
community as a whole by reducing tax revenues and limiting local
employment opportunities, although these effects could be
mitigated by
decommissioning activities in the short term.
The Vermont Public Service Board has determined that the EPU
will
not greatly interfere with the development of the region and
will have
a minimal impact outside the immediate area of VYNPS. Entergy
has not
identified any negative socioeconomic impacts associated with
the EPU.
Therefore, the staff concludes that there are no significant
social or
economic impacts associated with the proposed action.
Summary
The proposed EPU would not result in a significant change in
non-
radiological impacts in the areas of land use, water use, waste
discharges, cooling tower operation, terrestrial and aquatic
biota,
transmission facility operation, or social and economic factors.
No
other non-radiological impacts were identified or would be
expected.
Table 2 summarizes the non-radiological environmental impacts of
the
proposed EPU at VYNPS.
[[Page 4620]]
Table 2.--Summary of Non-Radiological Environmental
Impacts
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Land Use.......................... No significant land use
modifications; installed
temporary
office space to support EPU.
Cooling Tower..................... No significant aesthetic
impact,
slightly larger plume size;
no
significant increase in
noise; no
significant fogging or
icing.
Transmission Facilities........... No physical modifications to
transmission lines; lines
meet
shock safety requirements;
no
changes to right-of-ways;
small
increase in electrical
current
would cause small increase
in
electromagnetic field around
transmission lines.
Water Use......................... No configuration change to
intake
structure; no increased
rate of
withdrawal; slight increase
in
water consumption due to
increased
evaporation; no water use
conflicts.
Discharge......................... Increase in water temperature
discharged to Connecticut
River;
will meet thermal discharge
limits
in current NPDES permit
following
EPU; no change in chemical
or
sanitary waste discharges.
Aquatic Biota..................... No additional impact
expected on
aquatic biota.
Terrestrial Biota................. Vermont Nongame and Natural
Heritage
Program found no adverse
impact
from EPU; no additional
impact on
terrestrial plant or animal
species.
Threatened and Endangered Species. Three Federally-listed
species in
Windham County; EPU will
have no
effect on species.
Social and Economic............... No significant change in
size of
VYNPS labor force required
for
plant operation or future
refueling
outages; increased
production of
tax revenues.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Radiological Impacts
Radioactive Waste Stream Impacts
VYNPS uses waste treatment systems designed to collect,
process,
and dispose of gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes that might
contain
radioactive material in a safe and controlled manner such that
discharges are in accordance with the requirements of Title 10
of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 20, ``Standards for
Protection Against Radiation'', and 10 CFR Part 50, ``Domestic
Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities'', Appendix
I. These
radioactive waste streams are discussed in the FES. The proposed
EPU
would not result in changes in the operation or design of
equipment in
the gaseous, liquid, or solid waste systems.
Gaseous Radioactive Waste and Offsite Doses
During normal operation, the gaseous effluent treatment
systems
process and control the release of gaseous radioactive effluents
to the
environment, including small quantities of noble gases,
halogens,
tritium, and particulate material. The gaseous waste management
systems
include the offgas system and various building ventilation
systems.
Entergy estimates that gaseous radioactive effluents will
increase
following the EPU but will remain within regulatory limits. In
the past
three years, the peak dose from gaseous effluents at VYNPS was
less
than 1 millirem (mrem) per year. The increase in gaseous
effluents
following the EPU is not expected to be more than 20 percent of
the
current gaseous effluent release, consistent with the EPU. If
there
were a 20 percent increase from the peak dose of less than 1
mrem per
year, the projected dose would still remain well below the dose
design
objectives of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. Therefore, the
increase in
offsite dose due to gaseous effluent release following the EPU
would
not be significant.
Liquid Radioactive Waste and Offsite Doses
During normal operation, the liquid effluent treatment
systems
process and control the release of liquid radioactive effluents
to the
environment, such that the doses to individuals offsite are
maintained
within the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix
I. The
liquid radioactive waste systems are designed to process the
waste and
then recycle it within the plant as condensate, reprocess it
through
the radioactive waste system for further purification, or
discharge it
to the environment as liquid radioactive waste effluent in
accordance
with State and Federal regulations. Entergy estimates that the
volume
of liquid radioactive waste generated would increase by 1.2
percent of
the current total, following the EPU. This is an increase in the
volume
of liquid radioactive waste that will require processing, and
not an
increase in liquid radioactive effluent. The increased volume of
liquid
radioactive waste is due to the increased frequency of reactor
water
cleanup filter demineralizer and condensate demineralizer
backwashes.
The demineralizer backwashes will increase due to an increase in
conductivity of the reactor water cleanup system and an increase
in
feedwater flow following the EPU. Entergy indicated that the
percentage
increase in liquid radioactive waste generated due to the EPU is
within
the designed system total volume capacity. There is a very small
increase in the volume of liquid radioactive waste generated due
to the
EPU, but no liquid radioactive waste discharges are expected.
Therefore, there would not be a significant environmental impact
from
the additional volume of liquid radioactive waste generated
following
the EPU.
Solid Radioactive Wastes
The solid radioactive waste system collects, processes,
packages,
and temporarily stores radioactive dry and wet solid wastes
prior to
shipment offsite and permanent disposal. The largest volume of
solid
radioactive waste at VYNPS is low-level radioactive waste;
sources of
this include spent ion exchanger resins, filter sludges, air
filters,
and miscellaneous papers and rags. In 2001, which represents a
year of
peak solid waste generation, Entergy generated 37 cubic meters
(1291
cubic feet) of solid waste. The proposed EPU is expected to
increase
the amount of reactor water cleanup and condensate demineralizer
resins
due to increased flow rates for the steam, feedwater, and
condensate
systems. This is the only expected waste increase. Entergy
estimates
that the volume of this solid waste could increase by as much as
17.8
percent over the volume of solid waste generated in 2001. Even
with
such an increase, the expected volume of low-level radioactive
waste
would be well below the value in the FES.
The proposed EPU would also result in a greater percentage
of fuel
assemblies being removed from the reactor core and replaced with
new
fuel assemblies during each refueling outage. Entergy expects
the
number of fuel assemblies consumed each cycle to increase by 28
percent
following the EPU for the remaining term of the license. The
additional
amount of fuel assemblies consumed will result in greater
storage of
spent fuel at VYNPS. Entergy estimates that VYNPS can operate to
the
Fall 2008 refueling outage before exhausting its full-core
discharge
capability and reaching the capacity of the spent fuel pool, if
the
plant does not implement the proposed EPU.
[[Page 4621]]
Assuming the proposed EPU is implemented, Entergy estimates that
VYNPS
would exhaust its full core discharge capability one cycle
earlier
(i.e., by the Spring 2007 refueling outage). Regardless of the
EPU,
Entergy plans to utilize dry cask storage at VYNPS in the near
future
(pending Vermont Public Service Board approval), to permit
continued
operations for the full term of the current license. Dry cask
storage
at VYNPS will be necessary regardless of the EPU, subject to
State
approval separate from the EPU application, and would not
involve a
significant increase in the total number of spent fuel
assemblies
requiring storage over the term of the current license.
Accordingly,
the NRC staff concludes that there will be no significant
environmental
impact resulting from storage of the additional fuel assemblies.
In-Plant Radiation Doses
The proposed EPU would result in the production of more
radioactive
material and higher radiation dose rates in some areas at VYNPS.
For
most areas, radiation doses are unchanged due to the ample
margin in
the radiation shielding design. Area dose rates inside shielded
cubicles can increase as much as 20 percent. However, these
areas are
not normally occupied during plant operation. Entergy estimates
that
there will be higher radiation levels in and around the turbine,
due to
increased steam flow and velocity following the EPU, which will
lead to
shorter travel times to the turbine and less time for
radioactive decay
in transit. Therefore, Entergy estimates that the overall
increase in
radiation level could be as high as 26 percent in those areas
with
higher steam flow.
The VYNPS FES does not contain an estimate for annual
collective
occupational radiation dose. The collective occupational dose at
VYNPS
in 2001 and 2002 was 142 person-rem and 150 person-rem,
respectively.
The potentially higher dose rates due to the EPU are not
expected to
increase the annual collective occupational dose by more than 20
percent. Therefore, the annual average collective occupational
dose
after the EPU is implemented may increase by approximately 30
person-
rem.
Individual worker exposure is maintained within acceptable
limits
by the VYNPS ``as low as reasonably achievable'' (ALARA) program
which
controls access to radiation areas. Procedural controls
compensate for
increased radiation levels to ensure that worker exposure
remains ALARA
and that the normal operation radiation zones are labeled and
controlled for access in accordance with the requirements of 10
CFR
Part 20 related to allowable worker exposure and access control.
Accordingly, occupational doses after the EPU is implemented
will
remain within acceptable levels and will not result in a
significant
environmental or radiological dose impact.
Direct Radiation Doses Offsite
Direct radiation emitted skyward from radionuclides (mainly
nitrogen-16) in the main steam system components in the turbine
building is scattered back to ground level by molecules in the
air and
provides another offsite public dose pathway (skyshine) from an
operating boiling-water reactor. The licensee routinely monitors
whole
body dose rate offsite using high purity germanium detectors,
pressurized ion chambers, and thermoluminescent dosimeters.
Based on
measurements of radiation, the highest direct radiation dose
offsite
was found at the west side boundary. Entergy estimates that
approximately 90 percent of the direct radiation dose at the
west side
boundary is due to skyshine. The highest annual dose at the west
side
boundary is 13.4 mrem from skyshine. Following the EPU, skyshine
is
expected to increase by 26 percent due to the expected increase
in the
nitrogen-16 source in the turbine building. Assuming a
26-percent
increase in direct radiation dose offsite due to skyshine
following the
EPU, the direct radiation dose offsite at the site boundary
would be
16.9 mrem from skyshine. The total maximum direct radiation dose
offsite at the site boundary would be 18.6 mrem (16.9 mrem from
nitrogen-16 skyshine plus 1.7 mrem from miscellaneous radwaste
stored
on site).
The annual whole body dose equivalent to a member of the
public
beyond the site boundary is limited to 25 mrem (0.25 mSv) by 40
CFR
Part 190. The projected maximum direct radiation dose offsite at
VYNPS
is within this limit. The licensee will continue to perform
surveys as
the EPU is implemented to ensure continued compliance with 40
CFR Part
190. Therefore, the impact of the EPU on direct radiation dose
offsite
would not be significant.
Postulated Accident Doses
As a result of implementation of the proposed EPU, there is
an
increase in the source term used in the evaluation of some of
the
postulated accidents in the FES. The inventory of radionuclides
in the
reactor core is dependent upon power level; therefore, the core
inventory of radionuclides could increase by as much as 20
percent. The
concentration of radionuclides in the reactor coolant may also
increase
by as much as 20 percent; however, this concentration is limited
by the
VYNPS Technical Specifications. This coolant concentration is
part of
the source term considered in some of the postulated accident
analyses.
Some of the radioactive waste streams and storage systems
evaluated for
postulated accidents may contain slightly higher quantities of
radionuclides than is present under current operations. For
those
postulated accidents where the source term has increased, the
calculated potential radiation dose to individuals at the site
boundary
(the exclusion area) and in the low population zone would be
increased
over values presented in the FES, but would be within the doses
calculated by the licensee and approved by the NRC staff in a
separate
license amendment dated March 29, 2005, as discussed below.
In support of the EPU, the licensee submitted a separate
license
amendment request which proposed a full-scope implementation of
an
alternative source term (AST) methodology pursuant to 10 CFR
50.67. The
licensee performed the radiological analyses that support the
AST
amendment assuming a reactor power of 1950 MWt which is
approximately
102 percent of the proposed EPU power level of 1912 MWt. The NRC
approved the AST amendment request on March 29, 2005. As
discussed in
the safety evaluation for the AST amendment, the NRC staff
concluded
that the doses, for postulated design-basis accidents under EPU
conditions, would meet the acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.67
and the
guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.183. Therefore, the NRC staff
concludes
that any increased environmental impact under EPU conditions, in
terms
of potential increased radiological doses from postulated
accidents,
would not be significant.
Fuel Cycle and Transportation Impacts
The environmental impacts of the fuel cycle and
transportation of
fuels and wastes are described in Tables S-3 and S-4 of 10 CFR
51.51
and 10 CFR 51.52, respectively. An additional NRC generic
Environmental
Assessment (53 FR 30355, dated August 11, 1988, as corrected by
53 FR
32322, dated August 24, 1988) evaluated the applicability of
Tables S-3
and S-4 to higher burnup cycle and concluded that there is no
significant change in environmental impact from the parameters
evaluated in Tables S-3 and S-4 for fuel cycles with
[[Page 4622]]
uranium enrichments up to 5 weight percent Uranium-235 and
burnups less
than 60,000 megawatt (thermal) days per metric ton of
Uranium-235 (MWd/
MTU). Entergy has concluded that the fuel enrichment at VYNPS
will
increase to approximately 4.6 weight percent Uranium-235 as a
result of
the EPU. Entergy states that the expected core average exposure
for the
EPU is 35,000 MWd/MTU and the maximum bundle exposure is 58,000
MWd/
MTU. The fuel enrichment for the EPU will not exceed 5 weight
percent
Uranium-235, and the rod average discharge burnup will not
exceed
60,000 MWd/MTU. Therefore, the environmental impacts of the EPU
will
remain bounded by the impacts in Tables S-3 and S-4 and are not
significant.
Summary
The proposed EPU would not result in a significant increase
in
occupational or public radiation exposure, would not
significantly
increase the potential doses from postulated accidents, and
would not
result in significant additional fuel cycle environmental
impacts.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no
significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Table 3 summarizes the radiological environmental impacts of the
proposed EPU at VYNPS.
Table 3.--Summary of Radiological Environmental Impacts
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Gaseous Effluents and Doses....... Up to 20% increase in dose
due to
gaseous effluents; doses to
individuals offsite will
remain
within NRC limits.
Liquid Effluents and Doses........ Volume of liquid effluent
generated
expected to increase by
1.2%;
slight increase in the
amount of
radioactive material in
liquid
effluent; no discharge of
liquid
effluent expected, no
increase in
dose to public.
Solid Radioactive Waste........... Volume of solid waste
expected to
increase by 17.8% due to
demineralizer resins;
within FES
estimate; increase in
amount of
spent fuel assemblies to be
stored
onsite.
In-plant Dose..................... Occupational dose could
increase by
20% overall; will remain
within
acceptable limits under the
VYNPS
ALARA program.
Direct Radiation Dose............. Up to 26% increase in dose
rate
offsite due to skyshine;
expected
annual dose continues to
meet NRC/
EPA limits.
Postulated Accidents.............. Licensee using Alternative
Source
Term; doses are within NRC
limits.
Fuel Cycle and Transportation..... Increase in bundle average
enrichment and burnup;
impacts
stated in Tables S-3 and
S-4 in 10
CFR Part 51 are bounding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Alternatives to Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff
considered
denial of the proposed EPU (i.e., the ``no-action''
alternative).
Denial of the application would result in no change in the
current
environmental impacts. However, if the EPU were not approved,
other
agencies and electric power organizations may be required to
pursue
other means of providing electric generation capacity to offset
future
demand. Such alternatives could include construction of fossil
fuel or
other generating capacity, or purchase of power from generating
facilities outside the service area; such alternatives, however,
would
likely result in environmental impacts comparable to or greater
than
those involved in the EPU. For example, fossil fuel plants
routinely
emit atmospheric pollutants, causing impacts in air quality that
are
larger than if VYNPS were to provide the same amount of electric
generation. Construction and operation of a fossil fuel plant
also
creates impacts in land use and waste management.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the 1972 FES for operation of the VYNPS.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on September 2, 2005,
the NRC
staff consulted with the Vermont State official, William K.
Sherman, of
the Department of Public Service, regarding the environmental
impact of
the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the Commission
concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant
effect
on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the
Commission
has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement
for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see
the
licensee's application dated September 10, 2003, as supplemented
on
October 1, and October 28 (2 letters), 2003; January 31 (2
letters),
March 4, May 19, July 2, July 27, July 30, August 12, August 25,
September 14, September 15, September 23, September 30 (2
letters),
October 5, October 7 (2 letters), December 8, and December 9,
2004;
February 24, March 10, March 24, March 31, April 5, April 22,
June 2,
August 1, August 4, September 10, September 14, September 18,
September
28, October 17, October 21 (2 letters), October 26, and October
29,
November 2, November 22, and December 2, 2005; and January 10,
2006.
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's
Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available
records
will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public
Electronic
Reading Room on the NRC Web site, .
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should
contact the
NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or
send an
e-mail to .
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of January 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard B. Ennis,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-2, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-1035 Filed 1-26-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
36 Jurnalul National: Energy – Romania, Nuclear Power |
[Jurnalul National] Sambata, 28 Ianuarie 2006
ESTIMATION. Reactor no. 2 in Cernavoda is ready in a ratio of
80% and will start functioning by the end of this year.
de Adrian N. Ionescu
The natural gas’ crisis made the authorities go back to projects
that were forgotten or postponed for wealthier or diplomatically
better times. Money hunting is the priority, while solving other
kinds of difficulties seems less dramatic.
The so-called (east) European of Gazprom natural gas delivery
turned some great projects in priorities again. The most
important seem to be the initiation of two new hydroelectric
power plants on the Danube and the 3 and 4 Units of the Nuclear
Plant in Cernavoda (NPC).
THE INVESTMENT. The making of the 3rd Unit in Cernavoda has been
in the energetic strategy of Romania for a long time, but the
4th Unit has been taken into consideration seriously only in the
last decade, with the occasion of the recent “Gazprom fever”.
“As soon as we receive the sketch of the feasibility plan, we
will start the procedures that will finalize with the initiation
of the project company, which is to build the 3 and 4 units from
Cernavoda, according to a public-private partnership for
turn-key plants”, Codrut Seres, the Minister of Economy and
Commerce, stated for us yesterday. The multi-purpose company
will be made of Transelectrica and the selected partners, their
allotments being lands, cash capital or equipments.
“By building both the objectives at once, we reduce some costs”,
Seres added. According to estimations in the field, the
investment for the 2 Unit, which is to be finalized, would reach
900 million US Dollars. The cost of a simultaneous building of
the two new groups could reach 1.5 billion USD, of a total of
6.85 billion USD, which is the cost for the modernization of the
entire energetic sector between 2006 and 2015.
ASSEMBLING. The sketch of the feasibility plan for the 3 and 4
Units, made by Deloite, should be delivered not much after the
15th of January, and the shareholders of the project company
might be established by the middle of June.
After the end of the discussions for the formation of the
project company, the details of the financing of the investments
scheme will be known, and this refers to the social capital and
credit ratios from the partners and creditors. The negotiation
margin for the social capital and the credit lines is not so
big. The joint stock has to have a certain dimension to prove
the creditors the force and the engagement of the company, and
the credit lines for investments are sufficiently standardized
in such a way not to allow many modifications. The discussions
will be more laborious for the way in which the Nuclearelectrica
partners will cash the profits in accordance to their investment
ratios: money or energy.
THE CANDIDATES. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL, Canada)
and Ansaldo Energia (Italy), the contractors of the first two
NPC units, as well as the Italians from ENEL, the owners of
Electrica Dobrogea and Electrica Banat Crisana, would like to
take part in the new investments. LNM holding and Korea Hydro
and Nuclear Power have also been accepted in a so-called first
list of candidates, which remains open. The Romanian officials
have also invited Korean company Doosan to get involved. The
Czech group CEZ and the German one, EnBW, don’t say a definite
no. They both compete for Electrica Muntenia Sud, the pearl of
the sales subsidiaries of the Electrica Group, the money of
which are the target of the Romanian authorities when talking
about potential partners.
The works could start in 2006, and should be finalized in 2012,
their complexity implying the reaching of other goals as well.
These are the plant with Bunkie station in Tarnita-Lapustesti,
which is to use during the night some of the energy produced by
the 2 and 3 groups of the Cernavoda NPC, in order to assure the
equilibrium of the energetic system.
FIVE REACTORS = 40% OF THE PRODUCED ENERGY. The Cernavoda plant
has five Canadian CANDU 6 reactors with an installed power of
approximately 700 MW each. The first reactor started functioning
in 1996 and supplies 10% of the country’s need. The second one
could deliver its first megawatts in the autumn. The first two
units could support 18%-19% of the country’s consumption, and
the third and the fourth one would get the Romanian energetic
resources close to the 40% margin. The electricity in Cernavoda
is the second in the table of the cheapest sources, with
approximately 34 USD/MWh. By the fission of a gram of Uranium
235, one can obtain as much energy as from using two tones of
petrol. The Romanian energy depends on the imports in ratio of
28% and will get to 40% until 2015. The electrical energy
consumption will increase with 1.7% between 2005 and 2008. Now,
we consume almost 50,000 MWh per year, obtained with an
installed power of 18,000 MW.
Reproducerea neautorizata a textelor sau imaginilor de pe
acest site este interzisa. Preluarea textelor publicate se poate
face doar in conditiile Comunicatului CRP din 04/10/2005 sau
printr-un printr-un acord comercial cu SC Editura Intact SRL
Comenteaza acest articol Adauga comentariu
© Copyright 1996-2005 Compania Jurnalul - Editura Intact |
*****************************************************************
37 Mos News: Gazprom May Expand into Nuclear Power Generation — Paper -
COMPANY NEWS - MOSNEWS.COM
Nuclear power plant / Photo from www.tnriver.com
Created: 27.01.2006 16:21 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 16:21 MSK
MosNews
Russian state-controlled gas giant Gazprom could expand into
nuclear power generation under a Kremlin plan, the Vedomosti
business daily reported on Friday, Jan. 27.
Under the plan, Gazprom would build and control the nuclear
plants, while the fall in demand for gas-fueled electricity
generation would enable the company to export more of its gas to
lucrative foreign markets, the newspaper reported, citing
unidentified officials in the Presidential Administration.
Last week Russia’s new nuclear chief Sergei Kiriyenko has said
that some US$60 billion needs to be invested in 40 new nuclear
power plants over the next 25 years.
While some managers see advantages in the plan, others say the
money would be better deployed developing new, technically
challenging, gas fields, the paper reported.
Deutsche Bank’s Russian wing said on Jan. 27 that the managers
of Gazprom, which has banking, media and machine tools
divisions, should seek to concentrate on their core business of
gas production.
“We are concerned that the government and Presidential
Administration are continuing to view Gazprom as an instrument
for solving the country’s problems,” the bank said, quoted by
the Associated Press agency.
Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM
*****************************************************************
38 Prague Daily Monitor: Upper Austrians plan further protests against Temelin -
SATURDAY 28 JANUARY
VIENNA, Jan 26 (CTK) - The Upper Austrian association Atomstopp
has prepared for Friday a demonstration against the alleged
inaction of the Austrian government on the safety of the nuclear
power plant in Temelin, south Bohemia, Roland Egger from the
Upper Austrian Platform against Atomic Danger told CTK today.
The action is to start at 6:00 p.m. in Freistadt, some 20 km
form the Czech border, and last for about two hours. The
organisers expect some 200 people to come.
The activists also want to call on Wilhelm Molterer, chairman of
the deputy group of the Austrian ruling People's Party (OeVP),
who is to attend his party's meeting in Freistadt, to press for
the reception of an Upper Austrian delegation by Chancellor
Wolfgang Schuessel.
The nuclear power opponents want to persuade Schuessel that it
is necessary to conduct further negotiations with the Czech
government that would lead to "an immediate and complete
implementation of agreements on the safety of the power plant
arising from the Brussels document."
"As a former environment minister (Molterer) promised citizens
of Austria in December 2001 through advertisements in the press,
just as Chancellor Schuessel did, that the nuclear power plant
in Temelin will be additionally equipped to the level of
European safety standards, and that this will be binding on it.
Nothing has however happened to date and the Chancellor does not
react to calls from Upper Austria," Atomstopp writes in a
statement that CTK has at its disposal.
Temelin opponents stress in their protest that not all points of
the Melk agreement, which the two countries' prime ministers
concluded in December 2000 and which was later signed in
Brussels under the patronage of the European Union, have been
fulfilled.
The document deals with Czech-Austrian relation with regard to
Temelin's safety and environment impact.
The agreement was signed under the pressure of Austrian protests
against Temelin that grew stronger after the plant was put into
a trial operation in 2000.
The opponents claim the plant is not safe because it combines
former Soviet design with western safety equipment and fuel.
Atomstopp also cites the results of an expert report of last
October according to which Temelin's safety has improved to a
certain extent, but that it still has certain shortcomings.
The activists say this confirms that their opinion that "Temelin
continues to be just as dangerous as it was before" and they
have blocked twice the Austrian side of the road at the
Wullowitz/Dolni Dvoriste border crossing this month.
ms/mr
This story copyright 2005 CTK Czech News Agency.
*****************************************************************
39 PRN: Westinghouse Pleased With Selection of AP1000 Nuclear
Technology for Potential Expansion at Plant Vogtle
PR Newswire
http://www.ap1000.westinghousenuclear.com"
PITTSBURGH, Jan. 27 /PRNewswire/ -- Westinghouse Electric Company
President and CEO Steve Tritch said today that he and
Westinghouse employees throughout the world are pleased with the
selection of the AP1000 as the technology of choice for potential
new nuclear plants at the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating
Plant near Waynesboro, Ga.
The selection of the AP1000 was announced earlier today by
Georgia Power and Southern Nuclear Operating Company, which
operates the plant for a number of co-owners, including Georgia
Power. Southern Nuclear and Georgia Power are subsidiaries of
Southern Company.
"The decision to pursue an Early Site Permit (ESP) and a Combined
Construction and Operating License (COL) for the Plant Vogtle
site is the most recent in a series of positive steps toward a
nuclear renaissance in the United States," Mr. Tritch said.
"Southern Company has always been a progressive force in our
industry, and we are both pleased and excited to be able to now
work with such a long-term and valued customer in the new plant
arena."
The AP1000 received Design Certification from the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission on Dec. 31, 2005. It is the only Generation
III+ nuclear power plant to have received either Final Design
Approval or Design Certification from the NRC.
Earlier this week, Progress Energy announced that it had selected
the AP1000 as the technology for possible new plants at the
Harris Nuclear Pant site near New Hill, N.C.
Duke Power announced in October, 2005 that it would pursue a
Combined Construction and Operating License for two AP1000s at a
still-to-be-determined site. In September 2005, NuStart, the
nation's largest consortium of nuclear power companies, selected
TVA's Bellefonte Nuclear Plant site for a COL application for the
AP1000.
Westinghouse believes the AP1000 is ideally suited for the
worldwide nuclear power marketplace. The AP1000 is:
- The safest, most advanced, yet proven nuclear power plant
currently available in the worldwide marketplace (conservative
probabilistic risk assessment (PRA): core damage frequency
potential at negligible 2.5x10-(7))
- Based on standard Westinghouse pressurized water reactor (PWR)
technology that has achieved more than 2,500 reactor years of
highly successful operation
- An 1100MWe design that is ideal for providing baseload
generating capacity
- Modular in design, promoting ready standardization and high
construction quality
- Economical to construct and maintain (less concrete and steel
and fewer components and systems mean there is less to install,
inspect and maintain)
- Designed to promote ease of operation (features most advanced
instrumentation and control (I) in the industry)
For more information about the Westinghouse AP1000, visit its Web
site at http://www.ap1000.westinghousenuclear.com. For images of
the AP1000, visit http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/D6.asp.
Westinghouse Electric Company is the world's pioneering nuclear
power company and is a leading supplier of nuclear plant products
and technologies to utilities throughout the world. Westinghouse
supplied the world's first PWR in 1957 in Shippingport, Pa.
Today, Westinghouse technology is the basis for approximately
one-half of the world's operating nuclear plants, including 60
percent of those in the United States. SOURCE Westinghouse
Electric Company Web Site: http://www.westinghousenuclear.com
http://www.ap1000.westinghousenuclear.com
http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/D6.asp Company News On Call:
Company News On-Call: http://www.prnewswire.com/comp/127481.html
Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
bReserved.
*****************************************************************
40 Jurnalul National: The Second Nuclear Reactor At Cernavoda Will Start Operating In 2007
[Jurnalul National] Sambata, 28 Ianuarie 2006
de Adrian Mihai
The second nuclear reactor at the Cernavoda electric plant, in
eastern Romania, will start operating in 2007. The managing
company invested in 2005 over 255 million euros in the reactor,
and works reached 86% completion. By April construction work will
end and complex, integrated tests will start. So far, some 50% of
its systems are ready for independent tests.
The Romanian National Company Nuclearelectrica sSNNt got help
from major companies in Canada, Italy, the United States, and
France. "The joint team is made of experts from the Atomic
Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL-Canada), Ansaldo Nucleare (Italy),
and our own SNN," said Teodor Chirica, general manager of SNN.
When the second reactor at the nuclear plant in Cernavoda will
start producing electricity, in 2007, Romania will have 18% of
its electrical energy supplied from this source.
This will proportionally reduce the country’s dependency on
imported sources of energy and the pollution resulted from the
combustion of classical fuels.
Translated by ANCA PADURARU
Reproducerea neautorizata a textelor sau imaginilor de pe
acest site este interzisa. Preluarea textelor publicate se poate
face doar in conditiile Comunicatului CRP din 04/10/2005 sau
printr-un printr-un acord comercial cu SC Editura Intact SRL
PORT.ro
© Copyright 1996-2005 Compania Jurnalul - Editura Intact |
Termeni si conditii | Publicitate
*****************************************************************
41 english.eastday.com: Nuclear project in east China to have new investor
Living in Shanghai
27/1/2006 16:41
A leading Chinese power company has agreed to take a stake in a
planned nuclear project in east China's Fujian Province,
Friday's China Daily reported.
Datang International Power Generation Co Ltd, China's
second-largest Hong Kong-listed generator, has entered into an
investment agreement with Guangdong Nuclear Power Investment Co
Ltd to establish Ningde Nuclear Power Company.
The project will cost 23.4 billion yuan (US$2.9 billion), with
Datang ready to take 49 percent of the share, according to the
Beijing-based newspaper.
The Ningde project consists of two 1,000-megawatt nuclear power
generating units. The plan has been submitted to the National
Development and Reform Commission for approval.
An unnamed official with Datang Power said the new project was
part of the company's strategy to diversify its power sources,
according to the paper.
He said this was because of increasing pressure from rising coal
prices and environmental requirements. A nuclear power project
will help reduce such pressure, as well as risks, according to
the official.
He said Datang Power does not have experience in constructing
nuclear power plants.
Apart from nuclear energy, the company is also developing other
kinds of power plants, such as hydropower projects in southwest
China. Diversification into nuclear power generation is a
growing trend among Chinese power companies.
Although the initial capital investment is high, the government
is supporting these projects and this year has introduced a new
renewable energy law.
Xinhua news
*****************************************************************
42 TownOnline.com: Nuclear Matters Committee makes recommendations
Kingston Mariner
Friday, January 27, 2006
The following is the Nuclear Matters Committee recommendations to
the Town of Plymouth regarding the relicensing of the Entergy
Pilgrim Station Nuclear Plant
The report was released on Jan. 3, 2006.
Members of the Nuclear Matters Committee are: Bill
Bilodeau, Tim Devik, Art Gast, Joseph Keating, Dr. Sid
Nirenberg, Mike Rocchi, Rich Rothstein, Russ Shirley, Paul
Smith, Jeff Berger, Chairman; Mike Farraher, Vice Chairman
Introduction
When the Pilgrim Nuclear Station was built in Manomet in the
1970s, Plymouth was a quiet rural community with a small
population that grew seasonally through tourism.
Today, Plymouth's year-round population has more than
tripled and it has become a year-round "city" in fact if not by
charter.
Entergy's Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant affects Plymouth in
many ways. It contributes in a small way (by historical
comparison) to Town revenues. It employs hundreds of people,
many of whom live here and spend their salaries at least in part
within Plymouth's borders. It may well help the country and the
world by eliminating the need to burn fossil fuel to generate
electricity. (SeeAppendix B for more on the contribution of
Pilgrim from a power generation standpoint.)
As advisors to the board of selectmen, we believe it is
incumbent upon us to recommend a course of action for the town
in response to the relicensing process that meets five
objectives:
• It must ensure the protection both of the people of
Plymouth and of residents of nearby communities from any
activities or events at Pilgrim that could otherwise endanger
the health, lives, and property of area residents;
• It must protect the land, sea, and air from environmental
harm;
• It must protect the people of Plymouth and residents of
surrounding communities from the results of any attack on the
plant;
• It must ensure that Entergy, like every other business
located within the Town of Plymouth, pay its fair share of taxes
to the Town; and
• It must ensure that the Town is justly compensated for the
risks the Town continues to assume by the plant's storage of
high- and low-level radioactive waste on-site, including the
previously unanticipated amount of spent fuel.
The town should also maintain an awareness of the $400-million
"Reserve Fund" Entergy holds for decommissioning the plant. In
our view, the town should seek to hold or to control a portion of
this approximately $400-million decommissioning fund, or at least
share the interest income partly in lieu of taxes; more on taxes
appears in section 5. If the plant is shut down, for whatever
reason, Entergy could profit by an estimated $150-million over
likely decommissioning costs - in effect realizing a windfall if
license extension is not obtained.
The Nuclear Matters Committee can not, in good conscience,
recommend that the board of selectmen go on record as being "in
favor" of relicensing Pilgrim unless the recommendations
presented here are addressed by Entergy, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, and other relevant parties to the satisfaction of the
board of selectmen.
The recommendations in this proposal can be elaborated upon
by the NMC at the direction of the board. Most recommendations
may require additional work on the part of the NMC toward their
implementation.
- Nuclear Matters Committee
1. Issue: Evacuation / Sheltering-in-Place.
From many perspectives, it is clear that current evacuation
plans, well-conceived and well-intended as they are, stand little
chance of working in case of a rapidly evolving event.
The experience of New Orleans in the evacuation and
sheltering for Hurricane Katrina, the experience of Houston in
the attempted evacuation for Hurricane Rita (with advance
warning), and our own experience with local truck tip-overs, the
recent Friday afternoon whiteout, and gridlock following July 4
observances lead to the conclusion that current evacuation plans
do not pass any reasonable reality check.
It is our collective opinion that in preparing for prospective
disasters requiring evacuation, one should always prepare for
worst-case scenarios.
It is "assumed" in current plans that teachers /
administrators will retain up-to-date parent permission slips
regarding Potassium Iodide distribution and that such data will
be immediately available (along with KI doses) at the time a
disaster strikes, so doses can be given instantly to everyone
except those whose parents have opted out.
It is also assumed that school bus drivers (and other first
responders) will stay in Plymouth (and not evacuate with their
families), that they will be able to get to their buses quickly,
that the buses will have clear sailing to schools to pick up
students, and that the buses will deliver the students to host
schools.
These may well be faulty assumptions, and all assumptions
used in emergency planning must be reviewed in light of Katrina
and Rita. In an age of telephones, cell phones, email, instant
messaging, and talk radio, news of a nuclear problem at Pilgrim
will travel at the speed of light. Consequently, it seems almost
inevitable to us that:
? Bus drivers will be caught in gridlock attempting to get to
their buses, if indeed they remain in Plymouth at all;
? There will be confusion in recordkeeping and dispensing of
KI;
? School evacuations will be delayed - possibly by several
hours;
? A number of parents will likely leave home to pick up their
kids, exacerbating gridlock and promoting incremental confusion;
? Many kids will be left off at host schools, but their
parents will be caught in gridlock - or, worse, waiting in Boston
for P&B buses or trains to take them home from work, without any
guarantee that either mode of transportation will continue
operating to Plymouth and surrounding towns.
The Pilgrim plant's sirens meet Federal requirements.
Unfortunately those requirements stipulate that the sirens cannot
be so loud as to endanger the hearing of those in close
proximity. Consequently, sirens are oftennot heard inside homes,
businesses, and automobiles, which means that many of the people
the sirens exist to "warn" will never hear the warnings. Please
see section 7 for more on alarms and other warning technology.
One of our members has expressed concerns about methodologies
used to determine wind speed and direction during plant events.
SeeAppendix A for details.
Here are our recommendations regarding evacuation and
sheltering-in-place:
First: Require Entergy to fund the selection and hiring of a
nationally recognized company of experts in evacuation to develop
a plan that will work regardless of weather, compromises in
infrastructure, transportation breakdowns, etc. The expert would
be selected by the Board of Selectmen based upon recommendations
by the NMC, and its work will be supervised by and under the
management authority of the NMC and MEMA.
Entergy's only involvement would be to pay the bills for the
consultant, the development of the plan, and all its
implementation costs.Congress should compel an update of NRC
regulations to require nuclear plant owner/operators to fund such
plans including revisits every five years. The lobbying effort
(see #10, theNational Alliance recommendation) should have that
as a key objective.
Second: Plymouth's disaster plans must provide the Town, as
well as surrounding Towns and MEMA, with advice and counsel from
MEMA and Entergy and other appropriate agencies, sufficient to
decide whether evacuation is appropriate or whether
sheltering-in-place is a better alternative.
Third: Plymouth must educate its people and its visitors that
it is sometimes safer to shelter-in-place than to evacuate. The
town has 36 shelters that can accommodate 44,685 people in need,
and we believe that most Plymouth homes have basements that can
be used for sheltering-in-place. Since "Sheltering-in-Place"
requires homes to have on hand certain supplies, ensuring that
those requirements are known to residents must be a component of
any workable evacuation / sheltering plan.
Fourth: The Emergency Information Calendar mailed to all
residences includes sheltering instructions, but our sense is
that most residents look at the pictures but largely ignore the
printed content. We feel the look of the Calendar should be
changed radically (and immediately) so it trulyappears to be the
Nuclear Emergency Information Calendar that it is, and not
primarily a nice collection of vintage Plymouth photography.
People should want to retain it because of the potentially
life-saving information it provides - not for its photography.
Please see item six in this section.
The CDC [Centers for Disease Control] also offers
instructions for sheltering-in-place which we are told will soon
be added to the town's Web site.
Fifth: Once updated Evacuation Routes have been established,
the town in concert with its neighbors should post signs clearly
defining the routes so when evacuation is required, there is no
question about where/how - only when.
Sixth: "Evacuation Centers" must be revisited to ensure that
they are adequately provisioned to care for all the individuals
they may be required to host, for an extended period. See also
section 7 regardingdisaster communications plans and section 10
re: the National Alliance.
Seventh: As soon as practicable (see many details in Appendix
A), Entergy must be required to work with the NMC and with
Entergy's to-be-retained environmental consultants to design,
develop, and deploy adequate and appropriate meteorological
monitoring equipment and improved air quality dispersion models
for implementation by Jan. 1, 2007. This would be in addition to
what is currently used at the Pilgrim Plant per NRC requirements.
Objective: to help enhance the Town's airborne effluent plume
tracking capability and to help make and assess reliable dose
predictions.
Regardless of power losses or other interference, the
enhanced system must have the capability to feed the Pilgrim
plant, the EOC, MEMA, and Town officials 15-minute average
encrypted data regarding meteorological and air quality
conditions in sixteen 22.5-degree sectors or "cones" (N, NNE, NE,
etc.) extending outward from the plant, a minimum of 10 miles in
all directions.
Such an enhanced system must also provide a computerized,
color-coded visual display of the airborne effluent plume
location and potential radiological doses in real time, updated
every 15 minutes to account for any changing meteorological
conditions within at least 10 miles of the Pilgrim plant.
The plant effluent release scenarios built into the enhanced
modeling system must be capable of accounting for both postulated
NRC design-basis nuclear accident conditions, and other credible
plant effluent release conditions that could conceivably occur
due to other circumstances (e.g., terrorist actions).
Lastly, the additional alarm towers recommended in section 7
could also possibly be used to gather meteorological data.
2. Issue: Spent Fuel Pool Conversion to Dry Cask Storage.
Every ounce of spent fuel ever used at Pilgrim is still
housed here in Plymouth. This amounts to an unanticipated
long-term risk to the town.
Although Pilgrim has long maintained that its storage of
spent nuclear fuel in pools of water is as safe as dry cask
storage, Pilgrim (along with other plants) was recently directed
by the NRC to disperse the "hottest" rods throughout the spent
fuel pool to reduce the pool's vulnerability in case of attack or
other flaw that would damage the plant's ability to keep the rods
submerged and properly cooled.
Pilgrim says it will run out of space in its spent fuel pool
and be forced to start using dry cask storage after 2012, at the
end of its current license.
For background purposes . . . spent fuel cannot be stored in
dry cask containers until it is at least five years old.
Consequently, just as is the case today, a certain amount of
"hot" spent fuel willalways be in the spent fuel pool. Critics of
dry cask storage cite that heat loading is a function of isotopic
decay . . . for example putting all spent fuel more than five
years old in dry casks will put 90 percent of the plant's spent
fuel bundles "outside," but only 10 percent of thesignificant
radioactive material goes with it. The significant material is in
a "significantly" structured building, shielded under water, with
multiple cooling sources.
Here are our recommendations regarding spent fuel:
First: Leverage the formal National Alliance proposed in
section 10, along with our Congressional contacts, to greatly
intensify lobbying for a national solution to spent fuel storage,
whether that solution is in Yucca Mountain, Nevada, or elsewhere.
Second: Require as a condition of relicensing that Pilgrim
commit to implementing a plan for the movement of spent fuel
(five years old or older) into dry cask storage by the end of its
current license.
Third: Require that Entergy's program and technical plans for
dry cask storage shall be made available to the NMC and be
discussed, in closed session if necessary, and reviewed prior to
implementation.
Dry cask storage is above-ground technology.
3. Issue: Risk Analysis / Insurance.
Most (if not all) homeowners insurance policies explicitly
exclude radiation hazards as a covered risk, regardless of cause.
Any accident or event that releases significant amounts of
radiation into the environment runs the risk of making homes and
properties unusable and essentially valueless. The desirability
of Plymouth as a place to live and work would be depreciated. In
most cases financial devastation would follow the loss of this
property even if the evacuation was successful and there was no
loss of life.
Although the Price-Anderson Act purports to address this
matter, limits exist and the reliability of the program has yet
to be tested.
Here is our recommendation concerning risk analysis / insurance:
The town should obtain expert risk assessment / analyses,
perhaps by using people recommended by The Society of Registered
Professional Adjusters (the professional association of insurance
claims adjusters), so it can successfully address the question of
how these risks may be adequately insured, how fair and rapid
indemnification would be accomplished, and how effective
government response might be. The people of Plymouth and
surrounding communities must be protected against such financial
disasters.
4. Issue: Environmental Impact.
Cooling water and atmospheric vent discharges from Pilgrim
station shall comply with the requirements of the EPA and any
other governmental authority having jurisdiction.
5. Issue: Taxation (Spent Fuel et al).
Due to deregulation, Entergy pays greatly reduced local
taxes. The valuation of Pilgrim for tax purposes must be
revisited, as must its tax status, as a direct consequence of the
plant's decision to seek relicensing. As a prospectively going
concern until the year 2032, Pilgrim is worth far more than its
assessed valuation of $128 million.
Here are our recommendations regarding taxation:
First: Leveraging the capabilities of the office of the chair
of Senate Ways and Means (Sen. Therese Murray of Plymouth), Town
Counsel, and other political/municipal entities as directed by
the board of selectmen, we feel the Board of Selectmen should
orchestrate the investigation of legal avenues under which the
town could draft, enact, and enforce updated taxation of the
Plant as a business - taxed equitably with other businesses in
Town.
Second: At the direction of the board of selectmen, the NMC
could tap theNational Alliance referred to in section 10 to see
what other communities are doing in this subject area.
Third: The Town of Plymouth assumes substantial liabilities
by virtue of the presence of tons of spent fuel rods within its
borders. It was never the Town's intent to become such a storage
location for this amount of spent fuel, which is thede facto case
today. It must be equitably compensated for this liability, in
addition to other forms of taxation / compensation noted in this
section. See also section 9 on Economics
6. Issue: Health Impacts.
The Nuclear Matters Committee recognizes public concern about
cancer rates in Plymouth and surrounding towns. An attempt was
made to obtain up-to-date incidence rates for various cancer
types from the Massachusetts Department of Health Cancer
Registry. The statistics obtained have not been totally
reassuring in that they did show what appear to be increases in
the incidence rates for a few cancer types over the expected
averages. Although the pattern and distribution of elevated
diseases does not appear to be consistent with the hypothesis
that radiation is the causative agent, the significance of this
data is, at this point, quite unclear. Also, there is no
demonstrable causative relationship of any of these findings to
the power plant at this time.
Here is our recommendation regarding cancer and other health
issues:
At the request of the board of selectmen, the NMC can request
further and more detailed study of the incidence figures to
determine their significance and possible cause. Further
assistance can be had from the Massachusetts Bureau of Health
Assessment and the Massachusetts Cancer Prevention and Control
Program.
7. Issue: Alarms and Other Warning Technology.
As noted in section 1, although the Pilgrim plant's sirens
meet Federal requirements, unfortunately those requirements
stipulate that the sirens cannot be so loud as to endanger the
hearing of those in close proximity. Consequently, sirens are
oftennot heard inside homes, businesses, and automobiles, which
means that many of the people the sirens exist to "warn" can and
will never hear the warnings.
Sirens represent a warning system that is both inadequate and
ineffective - but one which must be retained to get the message
through to those whocan hear. It's clear to us that additional
warning technology must be utilized if warnings are to have any
desired effects.
Our recommendations regarding alarms and other warning
technologies are:
First: The town already is working on a "reverse 911" system
as a result of the recommendations of the Plymouth Homeland
Security Working Group. The system is GIS- [Geographic
Information System] operated through the Plymouth County
Sheriff's department, and would be capable of alerting one
street, one town block, or one whole sub area to shelter or to
evacuate. We feel this system should be implemented as quickly as
possible and that it should have the capability of notifying
everyone in Plymouth within no more than three or four hours -
preferably less. This system should be capable of making phased
multi-language calls (English, Spanish, Portuguese) toall
evacuation areas (see section #1, Evacuation) throughout Town and
beyond, in cooperation with the Sheriff's department. And it
should be capable of TDD data transmission to alert the hearing
impaired.
Second: We would like to see an "Amber Alert"-style broadcast
system on all radio and cable TV stations broadcasting to
Plymouth subscribers, which would not only broadcast evacuation
warnings but also advice for sheltering-in-place.
Third: Based upon anecdotal evidence from many residents and
upon comments made at our recent hearing, we believe that the
early warning siren system needs additional towers throughout the
Town. It seems to us that towers are too far apart to provide
adequate warning to most Town residents.
Fourth: By law, all businesses and places of public
accommodation (restaurants, offices, hotels, etc.) throughout the
mandated evacuation areas mustconspicuously post notices
regarding what the nuclear alarms mean, and what people should do
if/when they hear nuclear warning sirens. Malls must use PA
systems to accomplish notification. The NMC, acting at the
direction of the Board, could prepare copy for such notices
/announcements and make it available to businesses via the Town
Web site.
Fifth: Plymouth and surrounding towns must ensure
interoperability of radio communications for the purposes of
command responsibility and overall coordination.
Sixth: Develop and deploydisaster communications plans which
can be used by police and public works agencies to help ensure
orderly evacuations or sheltering. Disaster plans always work
better if they are created before disasters happen, rather than
on-the-spot when they are urgently needed. "Disaster
Communications" are the things officials will say and the
instructions they will provide when disaster strikes.
8. Issue: Aging Components.
Industry standard practice in the nuclear power industry is
to monitor for failures and to take appropriate action when they
happen. We are concerned, however, about what happens in case
ofcatastrophic failures (for example, to the shroud or reactor
vessel) that may be age-related, which can yield severe results
in the unlikely event that they occur.
Our recommendations regarding aging components are:
First: As part of the relicensing process, Entergy must
submit for NRC review its aging components analysis. The NMC
should provide an independent review of this analysis and advise
the board of selectmen on it.
Second: It is our sense that as an integral part of
relicensing, the NRC must require Entergy to adopt and pursue a
vigorousaccelerated program of inspection of all critical
components.
9. Issue: Economics.
Industry experience in Waterford, Connecticut and Wiscasset,
Maine indicates that host communities have had to go to court to
compel nuclear power companies to pay their fair share of revenue
to host communities. We should be prepared to follow that course,
if necessary.
10. Issue: National Alliance / Host Community Agreements.
A "Host Community Agreement" is simply the name for an
agreement entered into by a power plant and the community where
it is located. Although we found "Host Community Agreements" with
other businesses, we found none specifically for nuclear plants.
Our sole suggestion here is that any agreement entered into
between Entergy and the Town of Plymouth be called a "Host
Community Agreement." Moving forward, we may have additional
recommendations regarding the full context of such an agreement.
Here is our recommendation concerning the "National Alliance
of Nuclear-Impacted Communities":
First: The Nuclear Matters Committee should be authorized to
access and leverage the power of senior Massachusetts office
holders in the United States Senate and the House, as well as our
own state legislators, to develop formal alliances with every
community in the nation that "hosts" a nuclear power plant.
Objective:as a block, formally lobby Congress to compel the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to require truly workable
evacuation plans as a prerequisite to licensing or relicensing
all nuclear power plants nationwide.
The NRC says it "constantly" checks the adequacy of local
evacuation plans and therefore need not make them part of the
relicensing process. Its actual refusal to consider evacuation,
however, as part of the relicensing process in our opinion
clearly endangers millions of American lives from coast to coast
should a series of terrorist-induced "events" occur
simultaneously at several facilities around the country, which is
the established terrorist pattern. Evacuation is an essential,
life-saving option. We feel that today, the NRC ignores it at the
peril of millions of American citizens.
11. Issue: Security
It's clearly the case that Pilgrim Station is critical
infrastructure. "Critical infrastructure" consists of more than
simply the plant itself. Anything which if compromised by either
terrorism or accidents or an Act of God could cause harm either
to the plant or to the surrounding area constitutes critical
infrastructure.Entergy must be compelled to protect all its
critical infrastructure from the possibility of accidents or
terrorism.
Massachusetts law allows for critical infrastructure
information to be communicated in closed session, since it deals
with security issues. The Nuclear Matters Committee would
certainly maintain the confidentiality of this information.
When the plant held a drill last summer, its Wackenhut
security forces were "attacked" (tested) by other Wackenhut
security forces. Further, the exercise was graded by Wackenhut.
Wackenhut is a private security company. Despite the fact
that plant security is in contact with the Department of Homeland
Security and NORAD either on a regular or on an as-needed basis,
it is our distinct impression that plant protection is
ineffectively evaluated: self-evaluation is an inherently flawed
system.
Moreover, plant security is based upon the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission's so-called design basis threat. Terrorists, however,
have no "design basis". They take a blue sky approach to
terrorism planning and could do anything at any time - by land,
sea, or air.
Here are our recommendations regarding security:
First: The security of all nuclear power plants throughout
the United States should be the responsibility of the Department
of Homeland Security, which is on record as opposing taking on
that responsibility. We feel that the Town of Plymouth should
endeavor to leverage the National Alliance mentioned earlier to
enlist the aid of Congress torequire the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the Department of Homeland Security to make DHS
responsible for the security of nuclear power plants throughout
the United States.
Second: We believe strongly that self-evaluated drills of the
type held last summer at Pilgrim are inherently flawed from a
security measurement perspective. Again, we believe that the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission should be compelled by Congress,
perhaps through the lobbying of the aforementioned National
Alliance, to prohibit this particular type of drill.Attacking
forces challenging the security teams of nuclear power plants in
the United States should be organized and orchestrated by the
military to ensure that the challenge is something other than
perfunctory.
Again, the Nuclear Matters Committee, despite the fact that
it has expertise in a wide range of areas, is not expert in
security. Nonetheless, should the Board of Selectmen desire, we
would be pleased to work to develop a National Alliance (see
section 10) and to contact members of our Congressional
delegation on your behalf in an effort to ultimately compel the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to enhance the design basis threat,
and to improve the level of security at Pilgrim and at all other
nuclear plants nationwide.
12. Issue: Communications.
Since early 2005, our communications with the plant have been
productive. Questions have been answered with negligible
obfuscation, and subject matter experts have been brought in to
address specific questions. We hope this trend continues since it
is essential to a productive relationship between the town and
the plant.
13. Issue: Negotiations
Many of the objectives expressed in this document require
close cooperation between the Town and Entergy. Accomplishing
those objectives requires seasoned negotiating skills and
(preferably) in-depth experience in the nuclear power field. With
your agreement, we could search for and recommend a skilled,
seasoned nuclear negotiator.
We expect this negotiating process, like many other
negotiations, will not be quick or easy. In fact, last May,
according to the Rutland Herald, Entergy said of taxing spent
fuel stored at Vermont Yankee: "Any significant tax which has
never been contemplated and never been discussed will place a
severe financial burden on this plant ... and will call into
question its viability to the end of its current license,"
Entergy regional executive Ken Theobalds told the House Natural
Resources Committee. The clear message was that if Entergy does
not get authority to store spent fuel in Vermont through 2012, it
would close Vermont Yankee, which employs 600 people in Windham
County.
Entergy clearly wants to keep Pilgrim open. We need a skilled
negotiator to ensure that the town is properly protected and
adequately compensated if it successfully relicenses this plant.
Appendix A: Meteorology
A Certified Consulting Meteorologist who is a member of our
committee has expressed concern about the adequacy of
meteorological monitoring as it is currently employed at Pilgrim.
One of the ways through which emergency authorities determine
what areas should be evacuated in case of an emergency is by
measuring wind direction and speed. However, the only two places
where Entergy currently measures these are on its property - at
the plant.
Consequently, Entergy today receives clearly inadequate
regional data regarding wind speed and direction, making
virtually useless its judgments concerning the movement of
prospectively lethal clouds based upon input from just its
current onsite meteorological data. Objective: valid data in,
valid data out (as opposed to garbage in, garbage out).
For reasons discussed below, our committee's meteorologist
has consistently maintained that variable wind conditions over
time and space, likely in this coastal, hilly terrain area, makes
resultant predictions of the movement of lethal airborne
materials based on just onsite meteorological data (with
simplistic "straight-line" air quality dispersion models)
absolutely unreliable for evacuation planning purposes.
On the one hand, during moderate to strong wind conditions such
as those associated with coastal storms, approaching warm fronts,
or after the passage of cold fronts, the wind direction
throughout the region should be fairly uniform as would be
depicted from one or more meteorological towers, e.g., the one at
Plymouth Airport or at the Pilgrim Plant site. However, abrupt
wind direction shifts and wind speed changes can occur during the
passage of such large-scale ("synoptic scale" in meteorological
terms) weather systems throughout the region. When wind speeds
start to get lighter (e.g., below 5-10 mph), and depending upon
the time of day and season, the terrain will also affect regional
wind patterns in a more pronounced manner. During the spring and
summer months whenever day-to-day large-scale regional weather
influences are absent (storms and fronts), strong temperature
contrasts between the warmer land and colder Cape Cod Bay can
result in sea breeze conditions on sunny, fair weather days. At
times, sea breeze influences can penetrate miles inland.
Weaker land breezes can also occur during other times,
particularly at night, when the land surface is colder than the
water body surface. Shifting wind patterns (including temporary
stagnations, recirculations, and wind flow reversals) can occur
during these daily sea and land breeze conditions, and can
persist for several hours.
The exactfrequency of occurrence of variable wind conditions
including abrupt wind shifts that are associated with either
large-scale weather systems, or more localized regional weather
patterns (e.g, sea breezes), and their associated causes from
year to year would require a detailed meteorological
investigation of collected weather records over a multi-year
period (also from a statistical standpoint).
On a qualitative basis, however, our committee meteorologist
(who also serves as a volunteer storm spotter for the National
Weather Service in Taunton, MA) believes that variable wind
conditions including abrupt wind shifts that he has described
above can occur several times each week on average in the
southern Plymouth County region.
Additional Background Considerations re: Meteorology
from Committee Member, Richard A. Rothstein, CCM, QEP:
The Pilgrim plant's onsite meteorological tower data, by
themselves, may not always adequately represent the wind flow
conditions throughout southern Plymouth County. Geographic
variations in wind fields can have a profound effect on the
location and magnitude of predicted radionuclide concentrations
and resultant doses received from a postulated nuclear plant
accident. Considering the rapidly growing regional population, it
should be determined if there is a potential need for additional
regional meteorological monitoring stations to be installed and
included as part of Entergy's emergency planning program. It
should also be determined if there is a potential need for
Entergy to upgrade their "straight-line" air quality models that
have been used in the past with more advanced variable trajectory
models that can use either single station or multiple station
meteorological data. Such advanced modeling systems currently
exist in the scientific and regulatory community and can be
applied, if necessary, regardless of what current USNRC
regulations require permit applicants/existing licensees to use
as a minimum. Understanding and planning for potential
consequences of postulated (and realistic) accident release
scenarios in a technically accurate and reliable manner can serve
as a useful emergency planning forecasting tool, as well as a
"hindcasting" tool, that is, what radiological doses did actually
occur at various geographic locations in the unlikely event of an
accident.
Committee members recently attended a "fact-finding" meeting
with cognizant Entergy staff at the Pilgrim plant to try to gain
a better understanding of what models and meteorological
databases Entergy currently uses for emergency
preparedness/evacuation planning purposes. The committee is
trying to be in a better position to advise the town board of
selectmen on the adequacy of the current set-up.
The committee has just started to evaluate its findings from this
recent meeting with Entergy, and a follow-on meeting at the EOF
to continue this fact-finding is anticipated in the near future.
However, the following preliminary recommendations can be made at
this time:
If improvements to the current set-up are warranted, it could
require considerable time and resources to quantify, develop, and
implement the specific meteorological data acquisition/air
quality modeling program upgrades that would then also need to be
integrated with other components of the emergency planning
program.
Such actions may also require Entergy to retain an outside
independent specialized environmental consulting firm to support
such study efforts, with committee members potentially serving in
an advisory/review capacity.
Moreover, if program improvements are warranted, the town
should recommend that as a condition to the relicensing process
(and, with USNRC concurrence, if possible) following the
appropriate regulatory protocols, or via other binding agreements
reached with Entergy outside of the relicensing process.
Appendix B: Nuclear Power Data
Operating Plants, Percent of Electrical Capacity
(Source: New York Times Almanac 2002, pg 366)
U.S. 104 Operating reactors
754 Gigawatt Hours - 20 percent of total electrical power
France 59 reactors (80 percent) Japan 53 reactors
Local (NStar) Power Sources
(Source: September 2005 Residual Billing Insert)
Natural Gas 34 percent
Nuclear 29 percent
Coal 15 percent
Oil 12 percent
Hydro 5 percent
Miscellaneous 5 percent
U.S. Power Generation
Coal* 54 percent
Nuclear 20 percent
Gas* 16 percent
Hydro 7 percent
Oil* 3 percent
*CO2 "Greenhouse Gas" Emitting, 73 percent
© Copyright by Community Newspaper Co. and Herald Media.
*****************************************************************
43 News & Star: Consultants to gather information for nuclear energy review
Published on 27/01/2006
A TEAM of consultants has been appointed to look at the pros and
cons of building a new generation of nuclear power stations in
the area.
Cumbria County Council has teamed-up with Copeland and Allerdale
borough councils and West Lakes Renaissance, to bring in
Environmental Resources Management Ltd and Integrated Decision
Management Ltd. The two companies will work together to produce a
report on the implications for Cumbria thrown up by the
government’s latest energy policy review.
Despite lobbying by renewable energy supporters, the government
is expected to signal support for more nuclear energy to help
meet the nation’s future needs.
The report will be used to help provide the county council and
its partners with the information to respond to the
government’s public consultation by the deadline of April this
year.
Tim Heslop, Cumbria County Council spokesman on nuclear issues,
said: “The fact that we are all working together to commission
this report does not imply that any conclusions on the
desirability of new nuclear power stations have been reached.
“But it would be naive of us all not to recognise that sites
with existing nuclear facilities are likely to be strong
candidates for housing any new reactors which might be built.
“We have employed two of the very best companies in the field
to analyse the situation so we can all make informed
decisions.â€
All the partners will respond to the consultation on the use of
a range of energy sources such as coal, gas and nuclear, as well
as sustainable sources like wind, water, and energy from waste.
*****************************************************************
44 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria Needs Belene Nuke - Minister
www.novinite.com
Sofia News Agency
Business: 27 January 2006, Friday.
Building new nuclear power plant in Belene, in the north of
Bulgaria, is necessary considering the country's need of energy
resources, Economy and Energy Minister Rumen Ovcharov said
Friday.
Ovcharov, who spîke before Parliament, explained that the
growing petrol prices worldwide make it even more sensible to
use nuclear fuel. This type of fuel is cheap, and with high
concentration, which turns a nuclear power plant into a cheaper
electricity provider, Ovcharov said.
Currently the more profitable option, from an economical point
of view is building a power plant in Belene, rather than adding
two more units to the Kozlody plant, Ovcharov said, answering an
MP's question. He explained that Bulgaria could think about
these two additional units in 2015.
The minister also added that the energy strategy of the country
is being carried out as planned. It needed, however, to be
actualized sometime in 2006, because the new situation in the
country and its membership in the regional and EU energy market
had to be taken into account.]
The European Union is also working on renewing its energy policy
- a move that had to be noted in Bulgaria's energy strategy,
Ovcharov explained.
novinite.com Forum Google Tourism Business
All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2006 - Copyright
&Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
ISO 9001:2000 Certified
*****************************************************************
45 BBC ON THIS DAY | 28 | 1968: Radiation alert following B-52 crash
28 January
1968: Radiation alert following B-52 crash
A recovery team is searching for wreckage from an American Air
Force B-52 bomber armed with four hydrogen bombs which crashed
into the sea near the Arctic air base of Thule in Greenland.
Investigators are searching the area eight miles west of Thule
for radioactive debris. The accident happened a week ago when
the plane caught fire and the crew bailed out before the plane
crashed through the ice.
The United States defence department says parts of the bombs
have been found. But it is thought the radioactive detonators
are still missing.
A team of 47 men with dog sleigh teams have been brought in to
clear the wreckage. The sea surrounding the crash site has since
re-frozen.
One of the scientists involved in the operation said all the
wreckage was emitting low level radiation but there was no
evidence of radiation on the snow.
The risk of contamination is said to be slight - except to those
working on the spot who are equipped with protective clothing.
Two years ago, there was a similar accident involving a B-52
over the sea off Palomares in south-east Spain. The plane
dropped its bombs over the Spanish coast.
It took nearly 80 days to recover the last of the four bombs on
board that plane. The Spanish subsequently banned flights
carrying nuclear weapons over their territory.
Plutonium specialist Dr Wright Langham, who is serving as a
consultant to the recovery operation at Thule, said preliminary
indications of the radiation levels showed two of the four
weapons had broken.
He said: "One point to make is that since the count level is
comparable to what we saw in Spain we can equate what we have
here to what we had in Spain."
Dr Langham has insisted radiation is not a hazard at Thule. Most
of the crash site has now been cleared of radioactive debris.
In Context
The American defence department did not
release details of the Thule crash for 18 hours.
It feared "serious political difficulties" with Denmark over the
crash.
The Danish authorities, which control Greenland, were informed
in 1965 that the Americans had been storing nuclear weapons at
Thule - against their wishes.
Although Thule was no longer used as a weapons store, it was
still embarrassing for the US to admit planes carrying nuclear
weapons were regularly flying in Danish airspace.
It took 700 men over nine months to remove all the contaminated
material including snow from the crash site.
America subsequently ended the airborne alert which kept some
B-52 bombers in the air at all times in case of surprise nuclear
attack.
Stories From 28 Jan
1986: Seven dead in space shuttle disaster
1953: Derek Bentley hanged for murder
1982: US general rescued from Red Brigade
1990: Romanians call for government change
1968: Radiation alert following B-52 crash
©MMVI | News Sources |
*****************************************************************
46 Brampton Guardian: Mayor vehemently opposes expansion of nuclear incinerator
Friday, January 27th, 2006
SUSAN FENNELL
Mayor tells company they're not wanted in Brampton
HEATHER ENNIS
Mayor Susan Fennell has now made it crystal clear about where
she stands on a proposed incinerator for low-level radioactive
waste in Brampton.
"We are not interested in this business being in Brampton," she
said during a regional council meeting yesterday. "These types
of uses do not belong in highly populated urban areas. Period."
Mississauga Metals and Alloys (MM), a Brampton-based metal
recycling business located on Sun Pac Boulevard, has applied to
expand its current operation and add an incinerator for
low-level radioactive waste. The company wants to burn a range
of supplies used in facilities that handle nuclear material,
including rags, cardboard, gloves, aprons and filters. Though
the incinerator was not on the table for the regional debate
yesterday, it became part of the discussion on the approval
process for the entire MM proposal.
"What we are proposing to incinerate is what people who work
with the dangerous stuff wear every day," said Toronto lawyer
Chris Barnett representing the company. "We're not talking about
the radioactive waste that comes to mind when you hear that
term."
Peel councillors ultimately opted to support the City of
Brampton in its call for a beefed-up public consultation process
at the provincial level under the Environmental Protection Act.
Last week, expansion opponents urged councillors to request a
provincial public hearing under the more exhaustive
Environmental Assessment Act, but the project doesn't fall under
the scope of that agency, Peel staff said this week.
"It does not constitute the kind of undertaking that would
trigger the Environmental Assessment Act," said waste management
director Andy Pollock.
Peel went further to ask the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
to hold public meetings and appoint a review panel to
investigate the MM incinerator.
Though the federal public meeting will likely already happen,
the panel is a drastic and expensive step reserved for major
projects, said Barnett.
"Review panels are a major undertaking," he said, noting that of
approximately 55,000 environmental assessments done at the
federal level since 1995, very few have gone to a review panel.
Though Fennell said she doesn't doubt the company is doing
everything it can to make the expansion and incinerator as safe
as possible, its not enough for her to support the changes.
"You just don't fit here," she told MM representatives. "You're
bumping into real people with real concerns who have taken the
time to say so."
According to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, a
review panel is an appointed group of experts selected on the
basis of their knowledge and expertise to review and assess, in
an impartial and objective manner, a project with likely adverse
environmental effects. In addition, the agency Web site states a
review panel may also be appointed "in cases where public
concerns warrant it".
Though stakeholders can ask for a review panel, the decision
rests with the Environment Minister, a position that remains
vacant until Stephen Harper's Conservative government names a
Cabinet.
It can't hurt to ask, said Fennell.
"I don't want to leave any room for interpretation for the
federal Minister of the Environment that they have a choice,"
she said. "We will protest this wherever we can."
Residents opposed to the MM plan returned to council this week
to ask Peel councillors not to leave the decisions in the hands
of upper tier governments.
"We're asking you to be very proactive and speak up," said Dora
Jeffries, president of the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Peel.
© Copyright 1996-2005
Metroland Printing, Publishing and Distributing, North Peel
*****************************************************************
47 Rutland Herald: Towns agree to vote on atomic escape planning
Rutland Vermont News & Information
January 27, 2006
By DANIEL BARLOW Southern Vermont Bureau
BRATTLEBORO — Town meeting articles calling for increased
evacuation readiness in case of a nuclear emergency will appear
on the ballots in five towns near Vermont Yankee nuclear power
plant this year.
Residents in Brattleboro, Dummerston, Guilford, Halifax and
Marlboro will be asked if state legislators should appropriate
more funds for local emergency planning, including increased
shelter room, full siren alerts and more evacuation drills.
Members of Nuclear Free Vermont, a grassroots anti-nuclear group
that proposed the questions, said they are frustrated with the
time it has taken Vermont Emergency Management to implement new
readiness procedures and tools in the southern part of the state.
Ed Anthes, a member of the group, said he does not want to see a
repeat of Federal Emergency Management Agency's slow and tepid
response to Hurricane Katrina last fall. There is little
transparency or accountability at the Vermont branch of the
agency, he said.
"There are a lot of people frustrated with the gaping holes in
our evacuation plans," Anthes said Thursday. "And if we wait for
(VEM) officials in Waterbury to address this issue, we might be
waiting for years."
Select boards in most of the towns agreed to place the question
before voters at town meeting. In Brattleboro — the population
center of Windham County — Nuclear Free Vermont volunteers
gathered 501 signatures of registered voters, just more than 5
percent of the town's total voters, to place it on the ballot.
Brattleboro Selectmen, acting on the advice of the town
attorney, rejected the question earlier this month because the
town's unique voting system and charter would only allow the
question to go before Representative Town Meeting, not the whole
voting population.
Anthes said the group also submitted the question to the town of
Vernon, where the nuclear power plant is located, but did not
hear back from town officials. He doubts that the group will
gather signatures to place it on the ballot there.
Brattleboro Select Board Chairman Steve Steidle said he did not
know if the board would honor the nonbinding resolution if it
passes in the town, which specifically asks local select boards
to lobby state legislators for more evacuation preparedness
funding.
Steidle said he could not speak for the board as a whole and
added that its makeup could be different following the March
elections. The board will be taking a look at the revised
evacuation plan during a work session on Feb. 7, he said.
"I think we have to wait and see what happens at the ballot box
first," Steidle said.
The town meeting ballot question specifically highlights three
alleged deficiencies in local evacuation planning and asks that
more funding to appropriated to address them. Entergy Vermont
Nuclear, the parent company of Vermont Yankee, funds local
evacuation planning.
The questions calls on VEM to secure shelter and decontamination
units for the whole population within a 10-mile radius of
Vermont Yankee, and not 20 percent as it does now. It also asks
for emergency sirens, phone warning systems and evacuation
drills for schools, hospitals and elder and child-care
facilities in the zone.
Barbara Farr, the director of Vermont Emergency Management,
could not be reached for comment, although in a message Thursday
she disputed some of the information offered by Nuclear Free
Vermont.
"We don't plan just for the evacuation of 20 percent of the
people," she said. "That's the amount that is expected to
evacuate to the designated center."
Nuclear Free Vermont has proposed similar town meeting ballot
questions surrounding Vermont Yankee in recent years, with mixed
results. Two years ago a question asking the state to prepare
for the possible closing of Vermont Yankee in 2012, the year its
current license expires, was supported by 73 percent of the
voters in Brattleboro.
A 2003 resolution calling on the state to oppose the regimenting
of the plant passed in 10 towns, failed in five and tied in one.
A slim majority of voters in the country ultimately rejected the
resolution, but Anthes believes the group's efforts have had a
real effect on state energy policy.
"The legislators in Montpelier are listening," he said. "The
sentiments expressed down here do resonate."
*****************************************************************
48 ABC Asia Pacific: France dismisses nuclear fallout report
27/01/2006 22:57:14 AEST France dismisses nuclear fallout
The French government has rejected a new report alleging
France's nuclear tests in the Pacific may have caused nuclear
fallout on the popular tourist islands of Tahiti.
France conducted nuclear tests in French Polynesia between 1966
and 1996.
A statement from the French high commissioner's office in the
capital, Papeete, says the tests more than 30 years ago were
conducted in a remote area of the Tuamotu archipelago, with a
"permanent concern" for protecting the civilian populations and
those working at the test sites.
It says France has always expressed its willingness for dialogue
and transparency to avoid any unfounded allegations.
The statement says the data relating to the tests is within the
public domain.
The report, by a French Polynesia assembly committee, says
France tried to downplay the effects of its nuclear testing in
the area.
It will be presented to the territorial assembly next month,
France carried out 41 atmospheric tests between 1966 and 1974
and 140 underground tests between 1975 and 1996.
ABC Asia Pacific TV / Radio Australia
*****************************************************************
49 TheStar.com: War on nuclear incinerator
Fri. Jan. 27, 2006. | Updated at 10:43 AM
War on nuclear incineratorJan. 27, 2006. 01:00
AM MIKE FUNSTON STAFF REPORTER
Every legal means will be used to prevent a low-level radioactive
waste incinerator from being built in Brampton, Mayor Susan
Fennell says.
"These types of uses do not belong in highly populated urban
areas period," Fennell said yesterday at Peel council. In
addition, Mississauga Metals and Alloys wants to expand its
processing facility for non-radioactive zirconium metal and add
storage capacity for non-radioactive metals.
The incinerator application is before the federal Canadian
Nuclear Safety Commission. The plant expansion requires a
certificate of approval from Ontario's environment ministry.
Council voted unanimously yesterday to request the federal
environment minister to bump up the environmental screening
process for the incinerator application to a more stringent
public hearing before an environmental review panel.
Council also wants the province to hold a public hearing under
the Environmental Protection Act for the expansion.
If the federal and provincial approvals are given, the company
still requires a zoning change, building permits and other
municipal government approvals. If Brampton council refuses to
grant the necessary approvals, the company can appeal to the
Ontario Municipal Board.
The company opposes a federal environmental review panel
hearing because these are typically called for large-scale
projects such as hydro electric dams or the storage of highly
radioactive waste from reactors, Barnett said. The Canadian
Nuclear Safety Commission could still hold a public hearing
under the environmental screening process, he noted.
"The only way to reduce the legitimate concerns of the public is
to be open, transparent and accountable. We have not seen this
from MM and other levels of government," said spokeswoman Dora
Jeffries of the Coalition for Nuclear Free Peel.
The proposed incinerator would have the capacity to burn up to
250 pounds of low-level radioactive waste per hour.
Get great home delivery subscription deals here!
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
50 CDNN: France Covered Up Nuclear Fallout in Tahiti
CYBER DIVER News Network
PAPEETE, Tahiti (26 Jan 2006) -- The island of Tahiti was
subjected to fallout from each of France's atmospheric nuclear
tests 1,200 kilometers (720 miles) away more than 30 years ago,
according to a French Polynesia Assembly report leaked to the
local news media.
Although the report by an Assembly committee of inquiry is not
to be made public until the Assembly next meets on February 9,
the French State owned and operated RFO television station aired
results of the report Tuesday night and Tahiti's two French
daily newspapers presented their versions of the report with
front page headlines Wednesday.
The media coverage reported the committee's claims that France
minimized and even covered up the effects of the 41 atmospheric
tests conducted between 1966 and 1974 at the Tuamotu atolls of
Moruroa and Fangataufa 1,200 kilometers southeast of Papeete.
France also conducted 140 underground nuclear explosions at the
same sites between 1975 and 1991 and June 1995 to May 1996.
Even before the leaked information made headlines, the inquiry
committee report was already well on its way to becoming as
controversial as the 30-year-old debate over what, if any,
effects the French tests have had. That debate has mainly
focused on the health of workers at the test sites as well as
French Polynesia's population, which today is some 250,000.
The inquiry committee's report required nearly six months of
investigation, which involved interviews and visits to the
southeastern Gambier Islands and Tureia, a small Tuamotu atoll
near the Gambiers and only 115 kilometers (71.5 miles) from
Moruroa.
Unutea Hirshon, a member of the Temaru government's majority
coalition party in the Assembly, is chairman of the inquiry
committee and head of the Assembly's Standing Committee. She
also is a high-ranking member of French Polynesia President
Oscar Temaru's independence political party that has used the
French nuclear tests as one of many reasons why Tahiti should be
an independent country instead of a French overseas territory.
The news media's extracts of the inquiry committee's report and
final conclusions claim, "it is not exaggerating to think that
the (radioactive) fallout occurred on (the island of) Tahiti
after each atmospheric test".
One media report insisted on the size and movement of radioactive
clouds following several atmospheric tests, such as the test
named Aldebaran on July 2, 1966 and the test named Centaure on
July 17, 1974.
The inquiry committee report claims a link between the tests and
number of cancer cases in French Polynesia, noting the study
under way by the French National Institute of Health and Medical
Research (INSERM), according to the media.
The report recommends the creation of a new inquiry committee to
investigate the underground French nuclear tests conducted after
France halted its atmospheric tests in 1974, one newspaper
reported.
As a result of the actual committee's findings, the report also
calls for a renegotiation of a higher economic development
transfer from France than the current yearly amount of 18
billion French Pacific francs [US$186.6 million], the same
newspaper reported. This transfer directly into the French
Polynesia budget is known by its French acronym, DGDE, which is
France's yearly compensation for the customs taxes French
Polynesia no longer receives from imported material connected
with the French nuclear testing operation.
Tahiti's other daily newspaper reported Wednesday that the
report calls for the creation of an archives center involving
the French nuclear tests, making all information available to
the public. It also calls for the creation of a radiological
analysis laboratory and a cell to conduct medical-social
follow-ups among the people directly or indirectly affected by
the nuclear tests, the same newspaper reported.
The inquiry committee based a lot of its report on the work of
Bruno Barillot, director of the Observatory of French Nuclear
Weapons (CDRPC), and the Commission of Independent Research and
Information on Radioactivity. The Commission laboratory took
samples last October during a visit to the Gambier Islands.
However, the Temaru government's inquiry committee did not have
access to French government documents about the nuclear testing
program because such documents are classified as defense secrets.
Although the pro-France, autonomist party of former French
Polynesia President Gaston Flosse has five members named to the
inquiry committee, they have boycotted all meetings and work.
When the committee was created last July, Flosse's party lost a
legal challenge over its legitimacy.
Last May, Flosse called for the French Polynesia Assembly to
create an inquiry committee to clear the air over the
controversy about whether French nuclear tests could have posed
a danger to people living in the Gambier Islands. Flosse had
previously argued that the question of nuclear tests was a
French Defense Ministry matter.
Meanwhile, the French State asserted that its nuclear tests were
conducted in a remote part of the Tuamotu Archipelago with a
"permanent concern" for protecting people.
The statement from the French High Commissioner's Office in
Papeete on Wednesday was a swift reaction to the leaked report.
The French government had a permanent concern for the civilian
populations as well as those working at the testing sites on the
Tuamotu atolls of Moruroa and Fangataufa, the High
Commissioner's Office statement said.
The statement from the High Commissioner's Office also stated,
"The state has always expressed its willingness for dialog and
transparency to avoid any unfounded allegation and with respect
of the very strict legislation relating to communication of
classified documents.
"The data relating to the tests and permitting evaluation of
their medical aspects are within the public domain," the
statement continued. That data "is the subject of two
reports—one by the International Atomic Energy Agency published
in 1998 and the other from the Parliamentary Office of
Evaluation of scientific choices and technologies going back to
2002."
The medical follow-up of the nuclear tests continues on an
inter-ministerial level in Paris, the High Commissioner's Office
reported. A liaison committee was created in January 2004 for
the coordination and medical follow-up of information dealing
with the nuclear tests.
"This committee is examining all studies and work relating to
the possible consequences regarding health," the statement read.
An initial report was made public last April. Another one will
be made public at the end of this year. The second will provide
recommendations to the government on follow-up actions that can
be taken regarding concerns among the civilian population and
former personnel who worked at the testing sites, according to
the High Commissioner's Office statement.
The intention, the statement said, is to create a dialog with an
advisory council dealing with the medical follow-up set up by
French Polynesia President Oscar Temaru in connection with the
former nuclear tests.
A French government official dealing with nuclear safety and
protection against radiation from Defense Ministry activities is
due to arrive in Tahiti at the end of June to meet with the
civilian population. During that visit, the latest data
evaluations on radioactive fallout from the atmospheric nuclear
tests will be communicated, the High Commissioner's Office said.
The French Defense Ministry plans to publish during the second
semester of this year a complete work on the radiological
aspects of the nuclear tests, dealing with such subjects as
safety, the environment and public health.SOURCE - Tahitipresse
© 1995 - 2006 CYBER DIVER NEWS NETWORK
*****************************************************************
51 UPI: Outside View: Altai radiation dispute
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence -
1/26/2006 5:05:00 PM -0500
By TATIANA SINITSYNA UPI Outside View Commentators
MOSCOW, Jan. 26 (UPI) -- Motor vehicles kill more people than
any other transport system. They are also seen as the ultimate
pollutant. However, no sober-minded person would say that cars
are dangerous four-wheeled monsters which must be banned. We bow
our heads before progress because motor vehicles were conceived
by it. Moreover, we need them badly because motor vehicles are a
mandatory pre-condition of progress.
However, people still cannot reconcile themselves with nuclear
energy, which is yet another aspect of modern civilization. It
seems that radiation phobia, which is still a chronic disease of
human society, could not be avoided.
The April 1986 Chernobyl explosion and other nuclear disasters
scared everyone all over the world. Their psychological impact
is more serious than radiation fall-out and will not disappear
in the foreseeable future (as long as modern generations live).
Unfortunately, this planet's oil, coal and gas deposits are
being depleted at an alarming pace. Nuclear energy is so far the
only reliable source of power.
On Aug. 29, 1949, the Soviet Union tested its first atomic bomb
at the sparsely populated Semipalatinsk nuclear testing site (80
miles west of Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan). The bomb was installed
atop a 115-feet-high tower amidst local wastelands and
subsequently detonated from a bunker. That successful test made
it possible to break the U.S. A-bomb monopoly after Hiroshima
and Nagasaki.
At the same time, the blast spewed radiation over adjacent
territories, including the Altai region. It still faces all-out
social tensions.
Greenpeace mentions congenital birth defects, the growing number
of oncological diseases and schizophrenia cases. The Russian
government continues to reimburse the population of the affected
territories in line with a special federal program. High
radiation is also blamed for leukemia, the most widespread
disease in the town of Rubtsovsk, Altai territory.
But scientists, who prefer to deal with facts, think otherwise.
"No such problem exists because ordinary people lack a special
education and know little about the gist of the matter," said
environmentalist Yelena Kvasnikova and leading research
associate of the Institute of Global Climate and Ecology,
Russian Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental
Monitoring, and Russian Academy of Sciences.
Kvasnikova points to the map showing a vast desert separating
Altai and the Semipalatinsk nuclear testing site. The atmosphere
tends to diffuse all kinds of substances. Radioactive fall-out
levels are inversely proportional to the length of radioactive
clouds and their radionuclide concentrations. In her opinion,
Altai radiation levels simply could not exert any biological
impact because most nuclear devices were detonated underground
at the Semipalatinsk nuclear testing site. Consequently, no
radiation spewed into the atmosphere.
The mountainous Altai, the Caucasus, the Kola Peninsula,
Scandinavia, the Abyssinian Plateau, the Cordilleras and Tibet
have always been notorious for their high radiation levels that
vary depending on the height of mountain ranges, slope
specifics, meteorological conditions and atmospheric substance
properties.
Different radiation levels have been registered at the
Semipalatinsk nuclear testing site, scientists say.
"We have just finished assessing subterranean water quality at
former blast sites. Our group worked near the No. 1,003 and No.
1,004 wells, where nuclear warheads were detonated, which spewed
earth and radiation into the atmosphere. The received data have
shown that local subterranean waters are absolutely clean;
background radiation alone has been registered. The same can be
said about water inside these wells. We failed to obtain ample
data for assessing radionuclide migration inside subterranean
waters. Our project has therefore flopped. This is bad for our
research. On the other hand, we have received new information
about regional radiation levels," Kvasnikova said.
Substantial gamma-radiation levels ranging between 100 and 500
microroentgen per hour have been detected near underground blast
craters. These levels tend to diminish with range and time.
Gamma-emitting radionuclides have different life spans.
Short-lived radionuclides and those with a medium life span have
decayed a long time ago. Background radiation, that is, about 20
microroentgen per hour, is being registered 500 yards from
ejection sites. Kvasnikova says that no radiation fall-out has
reached the Altai territory from the Semipalatinsk testing site.
Some people are trying to separate the Semipalatinsk factor from
global radioactive contamination. But this hardly feasible task
has no practical importance. Global radioactive contamination
emerged in the 1960s as a result of atmospheric nuclear tests
that were conducted by the Soviet Union, the United States,
Britain, France and China. Radioactive fall-out became
"cosmopolitan" after reaching the stratosphere.
Part of the radioactive substances drifted to the planetary
surface two or three years under the impact of gravitation.
Global radiation levels, with the exception of mountain areas
that have a rough surface (which traps radioactive substances),
are more or less the same.
"Secondary dust clouds have now become a serious problem at the
Semipalatinsk testing site," Kvasnikova said. Nuclear blast
craters are surrounded by salt marshes, which are covered with
soot-like ejections. The latter may contain hot particles
capable of damaging human lungs.
"Still this mostly concerns people working there, scientists
concluded. For example, Moscow residents suffer from much
greater atmospheric pollution than the population of Altai,"
Kvasnikova said.
Angelina Guskova, author of a book on the Russian nuclear
industry, said: "The health of Altai residents was affected by
the 1949 and 1961 nuclear blasts (no other explosions exerted
their impact on that area). The situation has changed greatly
over the decades. Moreover, the aging factor should not be
overlooked either," she said.
In Guskova's opinion, workers at the Mayak (Beacon) enterprise
near Chelyabinsk were irradiated to a much greater extent ten
days after the 1957 nuclear accident. However, their health now
differs little from that of their coevals in other regions.
Guskova is certain that patients are often being misled. "Apart
from the radiation factor, human life is influenced by other
more significant and rapidly acting factors. First of all, the
authorities must tackle social issues," she said.
It seems that evolutionary processes on this planet were
launched by space radiation. All of us have evolved as a result
of this factor. The human body can withstand impressive natural
radiation fluctuations. Planet Earth has thorium "sand pits,"
uranium deposits, radon waters and countless mountain ranges.
About 10 to 300 millicuries per square kilometer were registered
in the mountains of Altai throughout the 1960s (depending on
specific altitudes and slope exposition). And it should be
mentioned that each square kilometer of European Russian
territory boasted over 100 millicuries at that time.
(Tatiana Sinitsyna is a commentator for the RIA Novosti news
agency. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti.)
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are
written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of
important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect
those of United Press International. In the interests of
creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)
© Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
52 WGP: Greens Support AB832 - Depleted Uranium Testing and Treatment
for National Guard and Veterans
Wisconsin Green Party
wisconsingreenparty.org
January 25, 2006
Contacts: Ruth Weill Co-Chair, Wisconsin Green Party,
spokesperson@wisconsingreenparty.org 414-562-6097 Bob Poeschl
Co-Chair, Wisconsin Green Party,
spokesperson@wisconsingreenparty.org 920-312-0529
Today the Wisconsin Green Party announced its support for AB832
- whose purpose is to inform National Guard members and military
veterans of the dangers and available tests and treatments for
depleted uranium (DU) exposure.
"A basic element of supporting the troops is ensuring that we
give them adequate care when they get home," said Bob Poeschl,
Wisconsin Green Party Co-chair. "There are no cures for DU
exposure, but tests will help to document exposure for
compensation and treatment."
DU is a highly toxic heavy metal which, when burnt, creates
radioactive dust that can cause kidney problems, cancers, and
birth defects. Despite its known toxicity, the Pentagon uses
depleted uranium widely - in projectiles on ammunition, casings
for bombs, shielding on tanks, and in airplane wings and for
ballast in ships. Depleted uranium's half-life is 4.5 billion
years.
Depleted uranium is forbidden under several agreements signed by
the United States. The Hague Regulations of War on Land (1899 &
1901) forbid the use of poison weapons. Depleted uranium fits
the U.S. military's own definition of poison. The Toronto,
Ontario epidemiologist Rosalie Bertell -- a well-known expert on
DU -- has called the DU dust that results from is pulverization
upon impact with hard targets "metal fumes." As such, the use of
DU is a violation of the 1925 Geneva Gas Protocol to which the
U.S. is a Signatory Party, which prohibits the use of gas "and
all analogous liquids, materials or devices". In addition,
Protocol One to the Geneva Conventions 1977 forbid the use of
weapons that do "severe, long-term damage to the environment"
and as such can be said to outlaw the use of depleted uranium.
In addition, the use of depleted uranium in military weapons
goes against established principles of humanitarian law. Under
these principles, weapons used in armed conflict must meet four
criteria: 1) they must be able to be limited in effect to the
field of battle, 2) they must be limited in effect to the time
period of the armed conflict, 3) they must not be unduly
inhumane, and 4) they must not unduly damage the environment.
Studies of civilians and soldiers with exposure to DU conducted
in Iraq after the Gulf War found that cancers and birth defects
were ten times higher than before the war. Studies done by the
UN Environment Program (Unep) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where
the U.S. used DU, found proof of groundwater contamination seven
years after the conflict, and recommended that residents use
alternative water sources. In addition, they found air
contamination, and recommended decontamination of the
surrounding buildings.
"Testing of our Wisconsin National Guard members who were
exposed to DU will not only help strengthen the case that DU use
is illegal under international law, more importantly, it will
help to ensure that our servicemen and women in future conflicts
will not be poisoned by their own government," said Ruth Weill,
Co-Chair of the Wisconsin Green Party.
Wisconsin veterans of the Gulf War (1990/1991), Bosnia
(1994/1995), and the Balkan region (1999), have potentially been
contaminated by depleted uranium.
The Wisconsin Green Party is affiliated with the Green Party of
the United States, and stands on the four pillars of Social &
Economic Justice, Grassroots Democracy, Nonviolence, and
Ecological Wisdom. For more information, visit
http://www.wisconsingreenparty.org.
The Green Party of the United States' website is
http://www.gp.org.
MORE INFORMATION
International Depleted Uranium Study Team http://www.idust.net/
Urgent Steps Needed to Protect US Troops, Iraqis from the Effects
of Depleted Uranium
http://gp.org/press/pr_05_02_03.html
Depleted Uranium
http://www.snowshoefilms.com/depleteduranium.html
___
Disclaimer: State, local, and candidate press releases made
available here represent the opinions of the original source
only. Opinions expressed by a state party or candidate do not
necessarily represent the views of the Green Party of the United
States. State party contact information, when provided with
candidate releases, does not imply state party endorsement of
the opinions expressed nor of the candidate (prior to gaining
formal nomination by the party).
___
Office: PO Box 57065 Washington, D.C. 20037 Email:
office@gp.org202-319-7191 or toll-free (US): 866-41GREEN
*****************************************************************
53 St. Paul Pioneer Press: Xcel seeks more waste storage
01/27/2006 |
Public hearings on Xcel Energy's application to store highly
radioactive spent fuel in above-ground casks at its Monticello
power plant are scheduled to begin Thursday.
Xcel has proposed storing fuel in as many as 30 steel and
concrete containers at the Monticello plant as part of its
application for a 20-year license extension. Minneapolis-based
Xcel has used a similar "dry cask" system at its Prairie Island
nuclear plant near Red Wing, Minn., since 1995.
More storage is key to extending the life of the Monticello
plant, which began commercial production in 1971. The plant's
license expires in 2010 and Xcel wants a 20-year extension. If
Minnesota regulators don't permit more waste storage, Xcel would
have to close Monticello and replace the 600-megawatt plant (one
megawatt powers approximately 1,000 U.S. homes). Xcel maintains
that keeping the plant open is less expensive than replacing it.
The additional storage requires a certificate of need from the
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. The public also will be
asked to testify about the certificate and a related
environmental impact statement.
Hearings are scheduled for 1 p.m. and 7 p.m. Thursday at the
Monticello Community Center at 505 Walnut St. Two more are
planned for 1 p.m. and 7 p.m. at the commission's offices on the
third floor of the Metro Square Building, 121 E. Seventh Place
in St. Paul.
Separately, Xcel has applied for a license extension from the
federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The company also plans to
seek a license extension for its 1,100-megawatt Prairie Island
plant.
— Tim Huber
*****************************************************************
54 Deseret News: Matheson assails permit bottleneck
[deseretnews.com]
Friday, January 27, 2006
By Josh Loftin Deseret Morning News
The biggest impediment to an energy boom in eastern Utah may be a
lack of permits, not a lack of oil or gas, a Utah congressman
told lawmakers Thursday.
Home to the second busiest Bureau of Land Management
office in the country, the Uinta Basin is seeing a flurry of
permit applications that cannot be managed by the existing
office, Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, said during an appearance
before the Utah Senate.
"We do not have adequate personnel," Mathseon said during
a question-and-answer period following his formal speech. "They
are trying to do the right thing, but they simply don't have the
bodies . . . the bottleneck is in the permitting."
Energy development was just one of the topics Matheson
touched on during his half-hour appearance before the Senate,
which included almost 15 minutes of questions from senators. He
also appeared before the House.
A focus of his speech was the collaborative efforts
between state and federal officials that helped slow, and many
hope has stopped, the efforts by Private Fuel Storage to store
high-level nuclear waste on Goshute Indian land in the west
desert. The creation of a wilderness area, which was signed into
law earlier this month, was especially important.
About 100,000 acres of land will make up the Cedar
Mountain Wilderness area, giving it protection from motorized
vehicles, roads, mining and other intrusions. The land includes
a portion of BLM that Private Fuel Storage wants to use as part
of its railroad to the proposed nuclear-waste site. By including
it in the wilderness area, it cuts off that transportation
option.
"We fought and won a major battle over public safety," he
said. "The message we sent was don't dump on us."
He also applauded the continued block of nuclear weapons
testing in Nevada, which has been proposed by President George
Bush.
"Utah paid dearly when we trusted the government when
they told us we were safe" in the 1950s and 1960s, when testing
was done in Nevada and resulted in Utahns contracting cancers,
he said. "As a state with too many family and friends lost to
press this fight on their own, we must prevail. We cannot go
down that road again."Matheson said he is pushing for money to
help pay for the widening of U.S. 6, one of the most dangerous
roads in the state. "I look forward, someday, to driving to meet
with folks in Price and Moab along a safer, four-lane highway,"
he said.
Other topics touched on by Matheson included benefits for
active duty military, methamphetamine enforcement, and mine
safety.
E-mail: jloftin@desnews.com
© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company [ /]
*****************************************************************
55 Deseret News:| Envirocare halts its expansion plans
[deseretnews.com]
Friday, January 27, 2006
Firm won't try to double its Tooele operations this year
By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News
Envirocare of Utah is no longer trying to double its operations
in Tooele County — at least this year.
Operators of state's only radioactive waste disposal
facility had hoped to double its operations by expanding onto
what was called Section 29, adjacent to its present facility
near the railroad siding called Clive, Tooele County. The
proposal met with a firestorm of public complaints last year.
For the expansion to happen, Envirocare had to jump
through four hoops: zoning approval; approval by state
regulators; approval by the Legislature, and the governor's
authorization.
The facility is in a hazardous industry zone set up by
Tooele County, clearing the first obstacle. The plan had
received regulatory approval. But then the Healthy Environment
Alliance of Utah appealed, and a hearing on that was held on
Thursday. HEAL lost, with the Radiation Control Board voting 8-0
to stick with the earlier OK.
But Envirocare has decided not to go forward with its
plans at this time.
"We're stopping," and not submitting the measure to the
Legislature at this time, company spokesman Mark Walker told the
Deseret Morning News Thursday afternoon.
Meanwhile, in November, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. had
announced that he would not approve Envirocare's expansion.
After the Legislature opened its 2006 session, Sen.
Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, introduced a bill to do away the
governor's unilateral veto on changes at low-level radioactive
waste landfills like the Envirocare facility. (Also covered are
other landfills, but the governor would retain an absolute veto
over high-level nuclear waste like that proposed for Skull
Valley.)
Asked whether Envirocare's decision not to pursue
expansion onto Section 29 would affect his bill, Stephenson said
it will not.
"My effort at reinstating the constitutional prerogative
of the Legislature to override the governor's veto by a
two-thirds majority" was not aimed at helping Envirocare, he
said.
When he heard Huntsman's statement, Stephenson added, he
wondered "how is it possible for the governor to have that much
power?"
He learned that the Legislature had abandoned what he
called its constitutional prerogative and its constitutional
mandate to override a veto. "And," he added, "I think that's
wrong."
© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company [
*****************************************************************
56 EPA: EPA Issues Guidance for Protective Cleanups of Perchlorate;
For Release: (Washington, D.C. -- Thursday, January 26, 2006)
Contact: Kerry Humphrey, 202-564-4355 / humphrey.kerry@epa.gov
EPA issued new protective guidance for cleaning up perchlorate
contamination today recommending a preliminary clean-up goal for
perchlorate of 24.5 parts per billion in water. EPA's guidance
is derived from the agency's reference dose for perchlorate
which is based on the 2005 recommendations and conclusions of
the nation's foremost science advisory committee (National
Academy of Sciences).
This preliminary goal is a starting point for an evaluation of
site-specific conditions. Consistent with current practice,
final clean-up determinations should take site-specific
information into consideration. Today's action offers clear
guidance to site managers to help ensure national consistency in
evaluating perchlorate in light of widely varying state
guidance. This decision was based on the best available science
and will be updated as new information becomes available.
Perchlorate has been detected in groundwater or drinking water
at approximately 45 of the 1,500 sites on the Agency's National
Priorities List. Perchlorate salts were first produced in the
United States in the mid-1940s, primarily for use by the United
States military for explosives and rocket propellants.
Perchlorate salts also have been used in other applications,
including pyrotechnics and fireworks, blasting agents, matches,
lubricating oils, air bags and certain types of fertilizers.
To read the guidance document, visit: [ ] (3 pp., 443KB PDF
file)
*(2) EPA Administrator Names John Howard as Head of Policy
Advisory Group
*Contact: Dave Ryan, 202-564-4355 / ryan.dave@epa.gov*
*EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson today appointed John L.
Howard, Jr. as the new chair of the National Advisory Council
for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT), a group that
since 1988 has provided advice to the EPA Administrator on a
broad range of environmental policy, technology, and management
issues. NACEPT represents diverse interests from academia,
industry, non-governmental organizations, environmental groups,
and local, state, and tribal governments. It has directed the
work of approximately 30 standing committees (each one
established to address a specific issue), and has produced over
50 major reports containing over 1,000 recommendations to the
EPA Administrator. Mr. Howard currently is a Partner at Vinson &
Elkins LLP, one of the world's largest international law firms.
He has previously served as the Senior Associate Director for
the White House Council on Environmental Quality and the
Environment and Natural Resources Policy Director for
then-Governor Bush in Texas. He also served as the Federal
Environmental Executive, promoting environmental stewardship
throughout the federal government. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa
from Baylor University and received his law degree from the
University of Texas. He resides in Austin, Texas, with his
family. For more information on the Council, refer to: [ ]
R022
You can update or cancel your subscription at any time [
https://www.govdocs.com/service/user.html?code=USAEPA ]. You
need only your e-mail address (and your password if you have
selected one).
This service is provided free of charge by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
If you have any questions or problems about this service, please
contact help@govdelivery.com [ mailto:help@govdelivery.com ] for
assistance.
Sent by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20460
202-564-4355
*****************************************************************
57 newsobserver.com: Yucca Letters
January 27, 2006
Regarding your Jan. 24 news story "Triangle picked as nuke site":
Most of us are not displeased with Progress Energy's existing
Shearon Harris nuclear power plant. What is a major concern,
however, is the nation's largest stockpile of nuclear waste at
that site.
The Yucca Mountain, Nev., project is is in trouble, as you
suggested in your Jan. 25 editorial "Atoms again." All
spent-fuel rods from over 100 commercial reactors were to be
buried there beginning in 2010, but the opening date continues
to be pushed back. The latest figure puts the opening sometime
between 2012-2014.
Congress next year is to begin searching for another site. The
candidate sites were actually selected in 1986. The Southeast is
well represented on that list, having two sites each in North
Carolina, Georgia and Virginia. In the Northeast, two sites are
in Maine and one in New Hampshire. In the West, Washington, New
Mexico and Texas each have one site.
It is expected five sites will be named for further studies. Two
sites in the Southeast look especially demographically
attractive. It's for certain that high-level nuclear wastes
cannot long continue to be stored at the Harris site. If a
permanent waste storage site is to be placed in the South, we
are going to have to support it, not fight it.
Ron Bourgoin
Rocky Mount All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may
© Copyright 2006, The News & Observer Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
58 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Tests should first do no harm
Today: January 27, 2006 at 7:45:53 PST
New EPA rule will allow some testing of pesticides on children
and pregnant women
The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday adopted a
controversial new rule that bans pesticide testing on children
and pregnant women, but only in studies intended for submission
to the agency.
A handful of federal lawmakers earlier this week said the rule,
a final draft of which they had obtained from an unnamed Bush
administration official, violates the intentions of a moratorium
Congress placed on all such tests in August when it also
instructed the EPA to establish strict ethical standards.
The new EPA rule includes loopholes that "are contrary to law
and widely accepted ethical guidelines," Sen. Barbara Boxer,
D-Calif., said earlier this week.
The EPA's rule prohibits most pesticide tests on children and
pregnant women. But it does not apply to manufacturers
performing such tests as long as there is no intent at the
beginning of the research to submit the data to the EPA.
However, the EPA can use data from previously completed studies
that included tests on humans.
And the rule does not apply to pesticide tests on humans
performed outside the United States. Manufacturers say they need
the tests, as some human effects of pesticides cannot be
replicated in laboratory animals.
It is unthinkable that the federal government would condone on
any level the testing of pesticides on any humans. The EPA's
standards should protect people and the environment, but this
new rule seems best suited to protecting the interests of
pesticide manufacturers.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
59 reviewjournal.com: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Nevadans fear new push
Jan. 27, 2006
Legislators brace for more nuclear waste initiatives
By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- Nevada lawmakers are bracing for new Bush
administration efforts to speed work at Yucca Mountain, this
time against a backdrop of renewed government interest in
nuclear fuel reprocessing.
Department of Energy officials declined Thursday to discuss
initiatives that would increase federal spending on reprocessing
and possible U.S. offers to recycle radioactive waste from
foreign countries.
More details are expected to surface when the Bush
administration releases its proposed fiscal 2007 budget on Feb.
6. Some have speculated that Bush might mention nuclear waste in
his State of the Union speech Tuesday.
DOE spokesman Craig Stevens said the proposed Nevada waste
repository at Yucca Mountain will remain a key part of any Bush
plan to expand use of nuclear energy, but he would not say how
it might fit into new strategies.
"No matter what policy initiatives we take on, we are going to
need a permanent repository for nuclear fuel based on the law
and sound science," Stevens said.
In recent speeches, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., Senate Energy
Committee chairman, has said he expects the Bush administration
to submit nuclear waste legislation to Congress in February.
"The few details that we know about the Bush administration's
proposal are cause for serious concern," Sen. Harry Reid,
D-Nev., said Thursday.
Capitol Hill aides who handle nuclear issues confirmed this week
the administration is expected to seek accounting changes for
the special fund that finances the Yucca Mountain project.
Taking the nuclear waste fund "off budget" would help lawmakers
to appropriate large sums for repository construction without
running afoul of congressional budget restrictions, project
supporters have said.
But critics have prevailed in Congress to have the plan killed
whenever it has been proposed. They contend such a move would
diminish the ability of Congress to use its purse strings and
hold project managers accountable.
A new bill is expected to grant the Energy Department a
permanent public land withdrawal for a railroad across rural
Nevada to convey waste containers to the Yucca site.
Other Yucca-related provisions have been debated within the Bush
administration and among repository supporters on Capitol Hill,
but whether the administration's new bill will address radiation
standards being formed by the Environmental Protection Agency
was unclear. Also unclear was whether the measure will contain
elements to help DOE with a project redesign it announced in
October.
Also a mystery is whether Yucca Mountain might play a role in an
international nuclear waste initiative that the Bush
administration is forming according to published reports since
last summer.
New details reported Thursday in The Washington Post and the
Wall Street Journal indicate Bush will include $250 million in
his fiscal 2007 budget as a down payment for initiatives that
seek to reprocess spent nuclear fuel in ways that aim to reduce
its volumes and its toxicity.
The United States used to reprocess spent fuel but stopped in
the late 1970s because the resulting material could be used in
nuclear weapons.
Other parts of the initiative reportedly would involve the
United States accepting nuclear waste for reprocessing from
overseas users as a way to account for nuclear material in
circulation. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman supported the
concept in a speech he delivered in November at the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace.
A new reprocessing technology being developed in federal
laboratories could recycle spent fuel for further use while
making waste products less in volume and less toxic and less
likely to be used in nuclear weapons, backers said. But critics
said the technology will be expensive.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., called the plan "a disaster
waiting to happen."
"The idea that President Bush wants the U.S. to become the
world's nuclear garbage dump should be met with absolute
outrage," Berkley said. She said the plan will increase pressure
to bury nuclear end products at Yucca Mountain.
Reid said he also was concerned.
"Reprocessing is an idea that's worth researching, but the
transportation of foreign waste is very dangerous," Reid said.
"I will fight this every step of the way."
But Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said reprocessing gives Nevada
leaders opportunities to steer nuclear waste talk away from
Yucca Mountain.
Reprocessed waste would not require miles of tunnels and
elaborate shielding such as that being planned at Yucca Mountain
to keep deadly and long-lived radioactive particles from
escaping into the environment, he said.
"Even though there may have to be a repository someday, it won't
be a repository like Yucca Mountain," Ensign said. "If you are
able to dramatically decrease the volume and dramatically
decrease the radiotoxicity, you won't need what we are building
today."
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
60 REGnum: US GGC plans to start uranium processing in Armenia - Russian
News - REGNUM
Moscow ¤ 10:01 ¤ January 28, 2006 Subscribe
US GGC gold-mining company is planning to expand its activity in
Armenia and start processing and exporting Armenian reserves of
uranium undeveloped by the present moment. The Global Gold
Corporation (GGC) residing in Connecticut has announced that it
purchased a large land plot in Gegharkunik Region (Armenia) that
according to geologists is rich in uranic and golden ore.
Earlier, the GGC purchased 80% of a company registered in
Armenia.
Athelea Investments Company owned by US and Australian citizens
has exclusive rights for 27 square kilometers of highlands near
the Getik River. In 1970s the territory was explored by Soviet
experts. “According to the results [of the survey], the
territory is perspective in terms of radioactive materials
including uranium,” says a statement released by GGC. The
company’s exploration in the territory will last for three
years. As the company’s spokespersons noted the uranium will be
most probably enriched in Armenia, and after that alloyed either
in Europe or in the US.
The GGC exploits several gold-mines in Armenia. One of them was
purchased in August, 2005, for $3.5. One of the leaders of the
company is Var Grigoryan who was earlier chairman of the
American Armenian Assembly and a member of Armenian-Turkish
commission on reconciliation. Permanent news address:
www.regnum.ru/english/580369.html
© 1999-2006 REGNUM News Agency
*****************************************************************
61 Salt Lake Tribune: Typical Envirocare
Opinion
Article Last Updated: 01/26/2006 11:39:39 PM
Can someone please explain to me why Sen. Howard Stephenson,
R-Draper, and Rep. J. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, feel it is a good
idea to change state law in order to bypass Gov. Huntsman in
matters concerning the safety of Utah citizens and nuclear and
toxic waste?
Gov. Huntsman has been looking after the interests of all
Utahns, present and future. He has already said “N-O” to
Envirocare's expansion. Now, Envirocare is using its considerable
influence in the Legislature, influence developed through the
years by its lobbyists and donations to legislator campaigns, to
rewrite the law so they can bypass the governor and make Utah the
nation's nuclear and toxic waste dump. The law was debated and
written to avoid this very thing. It is a matter of checks and
balances.
Why are we not surprised? Isn't this typical Envirocare? A
year ago the company informed us that it was going to be a good
neighbor. That was last year's resolution. This is a new year,
and it appears its resolution is now to make money for a handful
of New York and local investors - never mind the majority of Utah
citizens who oppose this expansion. Money talks!
Thanks, Gov. Huntsman, for representing the citizens of this
state fairly.
Jeri Roos
Centerville
© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
62 DailyBulletin.com: EPA proposes weaker perchlorate standards
The U.S Environmental Protection Agency Thursday proposed a
cleanup standard for the rocket fuel ingredient perchlorate
that's four times weaker than the level proposed California. The
EPA proposed a preliminary goal of 24.5 parts per billion,
compared to a goal of 6 parts per billion in California. Many
experts argue the standard should be set at 1 part per billion.
Perchlorate has contaminated numerous wells in San Bernardino
County and elsewhere in California, leading to cleanup projects
that will cost tens of millions of dollars and take decades to
complete.
"A precautionary approach would be to not allow any," said
Penny Newman, director of the Riverside-based Center for
Community Action and Environmental Justice. "This is rocket
fuel. To set a level of 24 is unconscionable."
Perchlorate, a salt that provides the oxygen to propel rockets,
flares, fireworks, air bags and other products, can reduce
thyroid function and is thought to be dangerous to fetuses and
young children.
The EPA proposal is based on a review the National Academy of
Sciences. Previously, the agency recommended a level of 4 to 18
parts per billion. Rialto, Colton and Fontana are wrestling with
roughly 20 wells closed because of perchlorate. The
contamination is thought to have originated from old munitions
bunkers and fireworks manufacturers near the county-owned
Mid-Valley Landfill in Rialto.
-- Andrew Silva, (909) 386-3856
www.dailybulletin.com
Los Angeles Newspaper Group
*****************************************************************
63 San Bernardino County Sun: California proposes tougher standards for perchlorate
Article Display Date: 01/27/2006 12:00:00 AM
Critics rip EPA well-water standard
Andrew Silva, Staff Writer
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday proposed
a cleanup standard for a rocket fuel ingredient that's four
times weaker than the level proposed by California and is
woefully inadequate to protect fetuses and children, critics
said.
Perchlorate has contaminated numerous wells in San Bernardino
County and elsewhere in California, leading to cleanup projects
that will cost tens of millions of dollars and take decades to
complete.
The EPA has proposed a preliminary goal of 24.5 parts per
billion, compared to a health goal of 6 parts per billion in
California. Many experts argue the standard should be set at 1
part per billion.
"A precautionary approach would be to not allow any," said
Penny Newman, director of the Riverside-based Center for
Community Action and Environmental Justice. "This is rocket
fuel. To set a level of 24 is unconscionable."
Perchlorate, a salt that provides the oxygen to propel rockets,
flares, fireworks, air bags and other products, can reduce
thyroid function and is thought to be dangerous to fetuses and
young children.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., slammed the Bush administration
for the proposal.
"This standard fails to protect pregnant women, children and
other vulnerable individuals from this dangerous health hazard,"
she said in a written statement. "EPA's standard also ignores
new and mounting evidence that this toxic chemical is more
prevalent in food than previously thought."
Perchlorate has been found in breast milk of nursing women, cow
milk and lettuce.
The EPA proposal is based on a review of the current science by
the National Academy of Sciences. Previously, the agency
recommended a level of 4 to 18 parts per billion.
The recommendation is designed to protect a 154-pound person
who consumes two liters of water per day.
The proposed level is one-tenth the dose at which any ill
effects are seen "to protect the most sensitive population, the
fetuses of pregnant women who might have hypothyroidism or
iodide deficiency, it is also protective of other sensitive
populations, such as (newborns) and developing children," wrote
Susan Parker Bodine, assistant administrator, in the memo that
went out to regional EPA offices.
A former rocket plant in Mentone is the source of a major plume
of contamination that has been moving west for years. Aerospace
giant Lockheed Martin has spent millions to clean up the
contaminated groundwater and is the target of a lawsuit by
Redlands residents.
Rialto, Colton and Fontana are also wrestling with roughly 20
wells closed because of perchlorate. The contamination is
thought to have originated from old munitions bunkers and
fireworks manufacturers near the county-owned Mid-Valley
Landfill in Rialto.
Though California has a health goal of 6 parts per billion,
that is not an enforceable drinking water standard. The state is
two years behind a statutory deadline to establish a standard.
Los Angeles Newspaper Group
*****************************************************************
64 Salt Lake Tribune: N-dump site won't expand, for now
Article Last Updated: 01/27/2006 03:00:40 AM
Envirocare: The move was approved, but skeptics say the firm is
waiting for a more favorable political climate
By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune
Envirocare of Utah said Thursday it is dropping plans for now to
seek final approval for its expansion.
The company, which disposes of hazardous and radioactive
wastes, made the announcement shortly after the state Radiation
Control Board unanimously cleared the way for Capitol leaders to
sign off on plans to double its size.
The board's decision represented a defeat for the Healthy
Environment Alliance of Utah, which had appealed a decision by
state regulators to grant the expansion request. Jason
Groenewold, HEAL's executive director, took no comfort in the
company's decision to back off on the expansion, and he
predicted the plan will be revived.
"We're definitely appealing," he said. "We are absolutely
looking forward to getting this into a real court before a real
judge."
Envirocare has fought battle after battle in the past year
for the expansion, which would have added most of an entire,
mile-square section to the mile-square site it already operates.
"In this instance," the statement said, "we feel it is in
everyone's best interest to announce that we will not pursue
legislative approval for [the new section] at this time."
The company did not respond to a request for further
comment.
Envirocare has operated in the west desert for 18 years,
treating and disposing of low-level radioactive waste primarily
from nuclear power plants and government cleanups around the
nation. The site was grandfathered in when political leaders set
up a multistep review process in 1990, and it never before has
asked the Legislature and the governor to approve of a major
project using that system.
Last year, the company withdrew its application to begin
disposing class B and C waste, which is hundreds or thousands of
times hotter than the waste currently permitted at the site.
Soon after, the Legislature banned B and C waste.
In November, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. said he would not approve
the expansion. But legislators are considering a bill that would
allow them to override a governor's veto of commercial waste
sites such as Envirocare's. SB70, now advancing in the state
Senate, would give lawmakers veto override authority if the
governor rejects a waste site.
Groenewold said Envirocare is "just waiting until it's
easier to get their approvals without a governor on board."
The Radiation Board, acting as adjudicators, considered
HEAL's appeal over the past few months. Members were set to
approve the boundary change at a Jan. 6 hearing but asked for
wording in the final decision that would underscore that their
approval was for a boundary change only, not for waste disposal
on the new acreage, which would require an in-depth safety and
engineering review that has not yet been done.
The board also questioned whether Envirocare would be free
to parlay the fence line change into "pre-approval" by the
Legislature for treatment and disposal before the in-depth
review is done. But Assistant Attorney General Fred Nelson told
board members that how the Legislature deals with the license is
none of their concern because the board has no control over the
bills lawmakers consider.
The approvals Envirocare has received so far for its
expansion do not lapse until 2009. So, it's possible the company
could renew its request for final approval in any of the next
four legislative sessions.
fahys@sltrib.com
© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
65 Pahrump Valley Times: DOE wants damaging document to disappear
January 27, 2006
WHISTLEBLOWER COMMENTS SPARK ANOTHER ROUND OF BRUTAL YUCCA
MOUNTAIN POLITICS
By STEVE TETREAULT PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - Attorneys for the state of Nevada are objecting to
an Energy Department decision to withdraw a
whistleblower-related document from a Yucca Mountain license
database.
Nevada lawyer Charles Fitzpatrick said it appeared the
department might be trying to hide a damaging document, and he
called for it to remain on the electronic network.
A DOE spokesman said the department has nothing to hide. A
government lawyer said the document has been deemed irrelevant
and in a sharply worded letter said that Nevada officials were
misreading the matter and blowing it out of proportion.
The dispute, which surfaced in the last week, may have only
limited impact because the document that is being challenged has
already been made public, including in news articles the
Review-Journal published in 2002 and 2003 on the whistleblower,
James Mattimoe.
But the episode does provide a glimpse at clashes that
attorneys are waging behind the scenes as they set the stage for
upcoming Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing hearings for
the proposed Nevada nuclear waste repository.
The Licensing Support Network, or LSN, is a key element in
preparations for Yucca Mountain hearings. The
Internet-accessible database is expected to contain well more
than 4 million documents generated by the Department of Energy,
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the state of Nevada, and
other interested parties.
The database will serve as a shared library during Yucca
licensing. Most of the material has been generated by the
Department of Energy, which spent two decades analyzing the
Nevada site for nuclear waste burial.
The Energy Department has withdrawn roughly 65,000 documents
from the databank after further reviews revealed coding errors
or they were judged to not be germane to licensing.
Most of the deletions have been non-controversial. But
Fitzpatrick called foul this month after Michael Shebelskie, a
lawyer for DOE, asked the database administrator to remove
reference to a 10-page document whose header indicated it was a
Sept. 13, 2002 report concerning Mattimoe.
The Labor Department on Sept. 13, 2002 issued a 10-page ruling
critical of actions taken against Mattimoe, who was fired in
August 2001 as a quality assurance supervisor by Yucca Mountain
contractor Navarro Research and Engineering.
Shebelskie, a lawyer with DOE's licensing law firm Hunton
&Williams LLP, later confirmed the documents are the same.
Fitzpatrick called on DOE in a Jan. 18 letter to leave the
Mattimoe document on the database.
"We are trying to make a point here that if this was something
they decided was relevant, there is something wrong when they go
back and decide it is not relevant," Fitzpatrick said in an
interview.
"It's the principle of the thing," Fitzpatrick said. "Are they
pulling documents off not because they are irrelevant but
because they are damaging."
The Energy Department "is not trying to hide anything,"
spokesman Allen Benson said. "There are rules for placing
documents and removing documents from the LSN and we are
following the rules."
Shebelskie said in a letter to Fitzpatrick on Wednesday that
removal of the document "is appropriate" and that Nevada
attorneys were mischaracterizing the matter.
"The issue at hand is whether DOE is required to produce (the
document) on the LSN, and the answer to that question is 'No,'"
he said. "Your assertion that DOE 'seeks to entirely conceal
this document' is unfounded, and you know it."
The Labor Department in the 2002 report supported Mattimoe's
claim that he was fired for making allegations of wrongdoing in
how officials were handling worker concerns about Yucca Mountain
problems, including withholding evidence and attributing
statements to people who were never interviewed by investigators.
The report ordered Navarro to reinstate Mattimoe, expunge his
personnel file and reimburse him for costs. Since 2002 Mattimoe
has worked at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico
for another quality assurance contractor.
Fitzpatrick said the Mattimoe document "is relevant to the
deficiencies exposed" by his whistleblowing, such as how DOE
handles safety problems raised by its workers.
"It is relevant to DOE's competence to be a licensee at a
nuclear waste repository," Fitzpatrick said.
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
66 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
FR Doc E6-1036
[Federal Register: January 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 18)]
[Notices] [Page 4622-4624] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27ja06-90]
of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for Rio Algom
Mining LLC, Ambrosia Lake, NM AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
[[Page 4623]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael G. Raddatz, Project
Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle
Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555. Telephone: (301) 415-6334; fax number: (301) 415-5955;
e-mail: .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing a license amendment to Source
Materials License No. SUA-1473 issued to Rio Algom Mining LLC
(the licensee), to authorize Alternate Concentration Limits
(ACLs) at its uranium mill tailings site in Ambrosia Lake, New
Mexico. NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in
support of this amendment in accordance with the requirements of
10 CFR part 51.
Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. The amendment will be
issued following the publication of this Notice.
II. EA Summary The purpose of the proposed amendment is to
authorize ACLs at the licensee's Ambrosia Lake facility.
Specifically, ACLs have been approved for hazardous constituents
gross alpha, lead-210, molybdenum, nickel, radium-226 & -228,
selenium, thorium-230, and natural uranium and nonhazardous
constituents chloride, nitrate, sulfate, and Total Dissolved
Solids (TDS). On February 15, 2000, May 30, 2001, and July 7,
2005, Rio Algom Mining LLC requested that NRC approve the
proposed amendment. The licensee's request for the proposed
change was previously noticed in the Federal Register on June 29,
2000, (65 FR 40144) with a notice of an opportunity to request a
hearing and an opportunity to provide comments on the amendment
and its environmental impacts.
The staff has prepared the EA in support of the proposed license
amendment. The staff considered impacts to ground water, surface
water, socioeconomic conditions, threatened and endangered
species, transportation, land use, public and occupational
health, and historic and cultural resources. The EA supports a
FONSI because this licensing action does not involve any land
disturbance; therefore, impacts to socioeconomic conditions,
threatened and endangered species, transportation, land use,
public and occupational health, and historic and cultural
resources would not occur. In addition, reviews of ground water
flow, fate and transport, and exposure models indicate that the
ACLs are protective of human health and the environment at the
point of exposure because hydrogeologic conditions, natural
attenuation processes, and aquifer class of use near the facility
would preclude human exposures and environmental impacts.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the EA, NRC
has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts
from the proposed amendment and has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action,
including the application for amendment and supporting
documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's
Electronic Reading Room at .
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession
numbers for the documents related to this notice are as follows:
ADAMS accession Document No. Date
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Quivira Mining Company, Corrective ML003687843
2/15/2000 Action Program and Alternate Concentration Limits
Petition for Uppermost Bedrock Units, Ambrosia Lake Uranium Mill
Facility Near Grants, New Mexico, Grants, New
Mexico............................. Rio Algom Mining, LLC, Ground
Water ML003737960 7/21/2000 Modeling and Feasibility
Analysis for the Application of Alternate Concentration
Limits............... Quivira Mining Company, Application
ML011690068 5/20/2001 for Alternate Concentration Limits in the
Alluvial Materials at Quivira Mill Facility, Ambrosia Lake, New
Mexico, Grants, New Mexico............................. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ML030170464 1/16/2003 Rio
Algom Mining LLC, Ground Water Alternate Concentration Limits,
Request for Additional Information.
Rio Algom Mining LLC, Response to ML031080523 4/11/2003
Request for Additional Information for the Rio Algom Mining LLC's
January 16, 2003, Application for Alternate Concentration
Limits..... Rio Algom Mining LLC, 2004a,
ML040430419 2/9/2004 Response to Agreements Reached During August
12, 2003, Meeting With the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
ML042780480 9/20/2004 letter to J. Caverly............... New
Mexico Environment Department, ML050800062 2/21/2005
letter to Gary S. Janosko transmitting comments on the draft
environmental assessment........... Rio Algom Mining LLC,
Response to ML051990088 7/7/2005 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission's February 10, 2005, Request for Additional
Information To Incorporate Nonhazardous Constituents as Part of
the Site Alternate Concentration Limit
Petition........................... U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ML052770173 10/31/2005 Rio Algom Mining LLC,
Nonhazardous Constituent Alternate Concentration Limits, Request
for Additional Information........................ Rio Algom
Mining LLC, 2005b. ML053480214 12/7/2005 Response
to October 31, 2005, Request for Additional Information.
Environmental Assessment for ML060130097 1/20/2006
Amendment of Source Materials License SUA-1473 for Ground Water
Alternate Concentration Limits, Rio Algom Mining, LLC, Ambrosia
Lake, New Mexico.........................
------- 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 by e-mail to .
These documents 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, Maryland this 23rd day of January, 2006.
[[Page 4624]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael G. Raddatz, Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities
Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-1036 Filed 1-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
67 NRC: Request To Amend a License for the Export of Radioactive Waste
FR Doc E6-1040
[Federal Register: January 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 18)]
[Notices] [Page 4613-4614] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27ja06-88]
Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70(b)(4) ``Public notice of receipt of an
[[Page 4614]] application,'' please take notice that the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission has received the following request for an
export license. Copies of the request can be accessed through the
Public Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html at the NRC Homepage.
A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene may be
filed within 30 days after publication of this notice in the
Federal Register. Any request for hearing or petition for leave
to intervene shall be served by the requestor or petitioner upon
the applicant, the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; the Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; and the
Executive Secretary, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC
20520.
In its review of the application for a license to export
radioactive waste as defined in 10 CFR Part 110 and noticed
herein, the Commission does not evaluate the health, safety or
environmental effects in the recipient nation of the material to
be exported.
The information concerning the application follows.
NRC Application to Amend License for the Export of Radioactive
Waste
Name of applicant, Date of Descripation of material
application Date received,
----------------------------------------- Country of application
number, docket Total quantity
End use destination number Material
type (Qty)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------- Diversified
Scientific Services, Class A Radioactive A maximum total
Amendment to Canada.
Inc., (DSSI), December 21, 2005. Mixed Waste--(in quantity
not to extend the December 28, 2005, XW002/03, solid
form). exceed 30 curies expiration date 11004983.
(and not more from 12/31/05 to than 10 curies
12/31/07.
per year) of Class A
radioactive mixed waste (primarily mixed fission product
radionuclides)
contained in baghouse salts and ash, which result from
processing liquid waste received from Ontario Power under NRC
import license IW004.
Dated this 20th day of January, 2006, at Rockville, Maryland.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Margaret M. Doane, Deputy Director, Office of International
Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-1040 Filed 1-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
68 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
FR Doc E6-1045
[Federal Register: January 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 18)]
[Notices] [Page 4624] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27ja06-91]
of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for Umetco
Minerals Corporation, East Gas Hills, WY AGENCY: Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Michalak, Project Manager,
Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and
Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
Telephone: (301) 415-7612; fax number: (301) 415-5955; e-mail:
pxm2@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) proposes to issue a
license amendment for License Condition 35 (alternate
concentration limit (ACL) for ground water compliance
monitoring), to Materials License SUA-648, for the Umetco
Minerals Corporation (Umetco), East Gas Hills, Wyoming uranium
mill site. The purpose of this amendment is to increase the
Lead-210 (Pb-210) ACL from 46.7 pCi/L to 189 pCi/L in the
Southwestern Flow Regime (SWFR). NRC has prepared an
Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this amendment in
accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. Based on the
EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) is appropriate. The amendment will be issued following
the publication of this Notice.
II. EA Summary The staff has prepared the EA in support of the
proposed license amendment. Much of the information relied upon
in preparation of the EA was obtained from the licensee's ACL
application and from two previous EAs for Umteco site activities
related to their revised soil decommissioning plan and a recent
application for several ACLs.
Since this action relates to ground water, the primary focus of
the evaluation of potential environmental impacts relates to
ground water. In particular, current and future ground water use,
and predicted concentrations of Pb-210 at the designated point of
exposure were considered in the analysis. Staff has concluded
that there would be no effect to the following resources: Visual
resources, vegetation and soils, ambient air quality, and
transportation. Staff has also determined that the proposed
action is not the type of activity that has the potential to
cause effects on cultural or historic resources.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the EA, NRC
has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts
from the proposed amendment and has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action,
including the application for amendment and supporting
documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's
Electronic Reading Room at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can
access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System
(ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public
documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related
to this notice are as follows:
------- ADAMS accession Document No. Date
------- NRC's EA for Umteco's Revised Soil ML010460319
2/23/2001 Decommissioning Plan............... NRC's EA for
Umteco's ACLs ML020840234 3/24/2002
Application........................ Umetco's ACL Amendment
Request...... ML051780369 6/17/2005 NRC's EA for ACL
Amendment Request.. ML060200288 1/20/2006
------- 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 by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. These
documents 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, Maryland this 23rd day of January, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Paul Michalak, Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch,
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-1045 Filed 1-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
69 Canon City Daily Record: Cotter requesting material acceptance
http://www.canoncitydailyrecord.com
Publish Date: 1/26/2006
Blakely Thomas-Aguilar
Cotter Corp. filed a request with the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment to accept about 11,000 tons of
raffinate materials from Sequoyah Fuels Corporation.
The Material Acceptance Report, dated Jan. 13 as listed on the
CDPHE Web site, states Cotter “finds that the material is viable
for acceptance and processing.”
Marion Galant, Community Relations Manager of the CDPHE’s
Hazardous Materials and Waste Manage-ment Division, said they
received the report about seven to 10 days ago.
A 30-day public comment period will proceed, including the Jan.
31 “All Topics Considered” meeting at the Quality Inn in Cañon
City. Galant said although the meeting was planned before the
MAR, representatives from the CDPHE and Environmental Protection
Agency will be available to discuss the matter.
The SFC site in Gore, Okla., currently is identified by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission as being in the process of
decommissioning, with a slated completion date of 2010.
According to the USNRC Web site, SFC holds a Possession-Only
License for its site, which processed yellowcake into
hexaflouride for conversion into nuclear fuels. The site was
shut down in November 1992 after a series of violations,
including an explosion which caused the death of a worker.
The SFC site is owned by General Atomics, also the owner of
Cotter.
Cotter plant manager John Hamrick said he was unable to specify
how long the plan has been in the works, and he also was unable
to specify the price tag for the accceptance.
“How much they pay us is probably confidential,” Hamrick said.
“But there is probably a disposal fee.”
Hamrick said he is confident that the plant is able to handle
the materials efficiently and with due caution.
“What we’re looking at is to be able to take the sacks off the
truck and take them in for processing,” Hamrick said. “We don’t
expect there will be emissions from the sacks that will have an
environmental impact.”
Hamrick said the plant currently processes ore that contains
approximately 0.25 percent uranium, while the raffinate
materials contain 0.7 percent.
CDPHE Radiation Unit Manager Steve Tarlton said he forsees that
the groups will follow the same review process of the past.
After questions about the written report are satisfactorily
answered by Cotter, the site will then be assessed to assure
worker and handling safety.
Tarlton was unable to give an approximate time frame for the
final decision.
The MAR states that the raffinate materials will arrive in
trucks and go through a checkpoint at Cotter’s gates before
being unloaded at an indoor compound. The material “is packaged
in ‘super-sack’ containers and transported in appropriately
enclosed trucks,” according to the report.
Once the uranium has been extracted through either acid or
alkali processing, the slurried waste will be disposed of in the
current tailings pond on the Cotter site, according to the
report.
To submit a written comment to the CDPHE on the proposed
acceptance of the SFC materials, write to Steve Tarlton,
Radiation Management Unit HMWMD, Colorado Department of Public
Health and Envi-ronment, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver,
CO, 80246; fax to (303) 759-5355; or e-mail to
steve.tarlton@state.co.us by Feb. 21.
The Daily Record
News and Information from Cañon City and the Greater Royal Gorge
Region
All contents Copyright © 2005 The Cañon City Daily Record. All
rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
70 Pahrump Valley Times: Trummell takes job with Yucca Mountain consultanting firm
January 27, 2006
Nye County Commission Chairwoman Candice Trummell, in addition
to leading the new Strategic Planning steering committee, has
accepted a job with a consulting firm dealing with Yucca
Mountain Repository impacts on Lincoln and Esmeralda counties.
Trummell announced Monday that she had accepted a position with
Robinson-Seidler Inc., an issues management firm with
headquarters in Henderson.
The company has never contracted with Nye County, Trummell said.
"We still haven't worked out what my job description will look
like, or anything like that," she said. "Once I know what my
duties will be, the district attorney's office will be able to
advise me of any conflicts of interest."
Trummell said she will continue to work as the Nye County's
District IV commissioner and carry out her duties as chairwoman
of the Board of Commissioners, in addition to Yucca Mountain
issues for which Nye County has an interest.
But she also said she would recuse herself on issues for which
she might have a conflict of interest because of her employment
with her firm or its work on behalf of Nye's two neighboring
counties.
Trummell also said she had not yet decided whether she would be
a candidate for re-election to her commission seat in November.
While she waits for more details on her new consulting job,
Trummell has her work cut out for her in beginning the county's
newest self-imposed task: developing a plan of action for
problem solving. Trummell has a 430-page book to read, John M.
Bryson's "Strategic Planning for Public and Non-profit
Organizations." It comes with a workbook of 170 pages.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
71 Pahrump Valley Times: Spees: Yucca project on the skids
January 27, 2006
By PHILLIP GOMEZ PVT
Nye County Manager Michael Maher pauses during a brainstorming
session earlier this week, in which the county commissioners,
their consultants and lobbyists for Yucca Mountain matters made
up a wish list of legislative priorities.
Nye County's Washington, D.C., lobbyist in charge of steering
federal benefits to the host county for the Yucca Mountain
project told Nye County Commissioners, staff and consultants
Monday that adequate congressional funding for the proposed
nuclear waste repository was dead on arrival for 2006 with
little hope for improved prospects as the year wears on.
Richard L. Spees, the Akerman-Senterfitt consultant whom Nye
County pays $150,000 a year, plus expenses, to keep it informed
and to lobby for Yucca-related pork, painted a dismal picture of
the prospects for getting the waylaid repository back on track
any time soon.
"In the big picture this year, Yucca Mountain is way behind and
way over budget," Spees said in the small commissioners'
conference room on East Basin Avenue. "Nothing is getting done,
and everyone's saying it's broken and we've got to fix it."
The "fix" has Yucca advocates more than a little concerned. A
new Bush administration initiative, to be announced in the
president's state of the union address on Tuesday, will seek up
to $400 million from Congress for research and development of
the Department of Energy's secretive GNEI program, an
international plan the acronym for which stands for Global
Nuclear Energy Initiative.
The program's goals are feared to take federal funds away from
the stalled - some would say derailed - Yucca Mountain project,
as new reprocessing facilities for recycling spent nuclear fuel
are constructed elsewhere in the nation.
The idea behind GNEI is to get rid of the nation's overload of
nuclear waste, found across 39 states in spent fuel rods and
intended, until now, for the future Yucca Mountain Repository.
Next week, the president will propose giving the product to
developing countries like China and India, which desperately
want the fuel for the nuclear power plants they are busy
constructing.
"Energy Washington Week," an online national energy policy news
service, reported more than a week ago, "GNEI is the major
component of the administration's reprocessing initiative. It is
viewed as an international plan that will allow emerging
economies access to much-needed ... fuel without giving those
countries the right to process the fuel, because that will be
done elsewhere."
The report notes, "A byproduct of reprocessing is weapons-grade
plutonium," which the plan wants to keep out of the hands of
countries that don't already have it. It would mean creating in
the U.S. nuclear fuel reprocessing plants like the ones in
France, and initiating a competitive process for selection of a
site or sites to construct the recycling facilities.
The DOE, which administers the Yucca Mountain site, is expected
to ask Congress for $250 million for the GNEI program and up to
$400 million for fuel reprocessing R.
Back at the Nye County Commission chambers, Spees said the
president will only ask for $250 million in the FY 2007 budget
for continued operations at Yucca Mountain, well below the
amount asked for in previous years. That would not be enough
even to shut down the facility - in fact, only half as much as
needed for that task, he said.
In FY 2006 the president asked Congress for $651 million for the
Yucca project.
Further legislation might come along in March, Spees said, but
he clearly indicated that the mid-term congressional elections
would further hamper focused discussion of funding for the
nuclear repository.
"I think we're absolutely stalled," he said. "There might be a
bill passed through by the end of the year ... People (in
Congress and in the Bush administration) are just disgusted at
how much money and how long it has taken with the delays in
getting the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to approve their
license application.
"They can't even get their records certified," Spees caricatured
administration officials saying. "They're thinking, 'Let's do
something different.' There's significant opposition (to Yucca
Mountain) from a lot of people.
"If you're an opponent, you couldn't dream up a scenario like
what happened," Spees said of the certification fiascoes that
occurred last year. He concluded, "DOE mishandled it."
Nevertheless, Spees said it was "very important for Nye County
to be involved in working to keep Yucca Mountain on track." He
said he believed Congress will rewrite portions of the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act next session, which could affect the revenue
Nye County garners as the host site for the repository.
The administration's new fuel reprocessing initiative signals a
dramatic shift in U.S. nuclear policy, according to the Energy
Washington Weekly. The initiative is "seen as a stop-gap waste
plan while officials deal with issues causing Yucca Mountain's
massive delays."
Administration sources say the initiative will not replace the
Yucca project, but will complement it by eliminating the sheer
volume of waste so that less storage space is necessary,
according to the report.
So much waste is anticipated that it is widely believed a second
repository would be needed. That is due to the growing amount of
already spent nuclear fuel and the projected growth of new power
plants producing additional waste.
Spees called for Nye County to be involved in the political
process "to restructure the nuclear program of the country."
Last November the county commissioners renewed Spees' contract
after expressed skepticism from some commissioners about the
firm's handling of the job.
Yet the contract was renewed, and at an increased price. That
was due, in the words of Commissioner Joni Eastley, who wrote
the agenda description, to the fact that "efforts are underway
to restructure the entire Yucca Mountain program next year. When
that happens," she said, "representational lobbying activities
will increase significantly, and the principals expect to travel
to Nye County more often ... If the restructuring attempts are
successful, it could result in major changes for Nye County,
including bigger benefits."
Or no benefits at all.
The president's bill, Spees said candidly, "is not going to
stand or fall depending on whether it has Nye County's support."
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
72 Guardian Unlimited Iran: Russian Enrichment Plan Negotiable
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday January 27, 2006 10:33 AM
By NASSER KARIMI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran reiterated Friday that a plan to allow
Iran to enrich its uranium in Russia was not acceptable in its
present form but was worth pursuing in negotiations.
``The capacity of Russia's proposal does not meet all the
nuclear energy needs of Iran,'' Irans top nuclear negotiator Ali
Larijani said Friday, according to state television.
Larijani was speaking to reporters on his return to Tehran from
a trip to China, where he tried to mobilize support against
Western moves to refer Iran's nuclear file to the U.N. Security
Council, which could impose sanctions.
``It is not possible to say the Russian proposal is negative,
and that is why we consider it as a basis for negotiations,''
the official Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Larijani as
saying.
Iran provoked an international outcry on Jan. 10 when it cut
seals of the International Atomic Energy Agency at its main
enrichment plant and resumed small-scale enrichment of uranium -
a process that can be used to produce fuel for generating
electricity or material for atomic bombs.
The three major European powers, with U.S. support, succeeded in
getting the IAEA to meet on Feb. 2 to discuss taking action
against Iran, which is expected to result in referral to the
Security Council.
In the meantime Russia has revived a proposal under which Iran
would ship its uranium to Russia, where it would be enriched and
then returned to Iran for use in its nuclear reactor.
Iran's first reactor, built by Russia, is due to begin
operations later this year.
After a visit to Russia earlier this week, Larijani said the
Russian plan ``has some ambiguities that should be removed,''
and that it would be discussed in talks in Moscow in February.
``The Russian offer is alive and will have long life,'' Larijani
said on Wednesday, according to IRNA.
The United States accuses Iran of trying to develop atomic bombs
under the cover of a peaceful nuclear program. Iran denies this,
saying its program is entirely devoted to generating
electricity.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
73 Las Vegas SUN: Homeland Security using Nevada site to test 'dirty bomb' sensors
Today: January 27, 2006 at 16:53:15 PST
By KEN RITTER ASSOCIATED PRESS
NEVADA TEST SITE, Nev. (AP) - Beyond the checkpoints, fences,
armed guards and radiation hazard signs, government scientists
in a remote part of the Nevada desert are perfecting equipment
that can detect nuclear devices and "dirty bombs."
Some monitors now in use don't always work, said Vayl Oxford,
director of the federal Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.
Nearby, Homeland Security scientists waited for a read-out from
a hand-held Geiger counter-type machine placed next to a large
corrugated metal shipping container.
Indeed, the monitor failed at first to identify plutonium inside
the container. It worked on a second try.
That's why they do the tests, Oxford said, and why they do them
here - a stone's throw from an ultra-secure bunker in the Nevada
desert where the nation's nuclear weapons are assembled.
The location, known as the Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures
Test and Evaluation Complex, is surrounded by barren mountains,
spiky yucca trees and craters left from decades of nuclear
weapons tests about 75 miles north of Las Vegas.
The $33 million program, a division of the federal Homeland
Security Department, was created under a presidential order to
refine methods to protect the nation from radiological and
nuclear threats. It opened on a temporary site nine months ago
while construction began on a permanent facility on 11 acres
nearby.
The place provides an opportunity for scientists to test for
nuclear material, including weapons-grade plutonium, in secure
and controlled conditions.
"We need to have space and distance to test these things," said
Richard Tighe, assistant general manager for Bechtel Nevada, a
government contractor on the homeland security program.
The Test Site, a vast federal reservation the size of Rhode
Island, also hosts the National Center for Combating Terrorism,
which includes several facilities to improve the nation's
ability to prevent or recover from a terrorist attack.
At the nuclear detection site, technicians test pillar-style
roadside sensors like those deployed to ports of entry and some
highway weigh stations. The sensors detect neutrons and gamma
rays emitted by nuclear devices or by lethal radioactive
isotopes that could be dispersed by less sophisticated
explosives in a "dirty bomb."
The scientists also test the sensitivity of sensors in vehicles,
including white ambulance-style vans, black SUVs and a Jeep
loaded with sophisticated radiation sniffers and computers.
Some of the vehicles - unmarked or stenciled with the words
"Homeland Security" - have been used at New York's John F.
Kennedy International Airport, Holland Tunnel and George
Washington Bridge, and at Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey facilities, Oxford said.
The tests aim to see whether the 30 or so devices available
commercially can distinguish a bomb from less harmful sources of
radioactivity, such as a person who has had a radioactive
isotope injected during a medical procedure, or household items
like kitty litter and floor tiles that contain natural trace
amounts.
"We get alarms frequently with medical patients or other
materials," Oxford said. Of the 10,000 alarms tallied to date
across the nation, all have been resolved by closer inspections
and matching shipments to manifests.
"We haven't found any threat material," he said.
Detecting radioactive materials in public places is an evolving
science, Oxford said. There are no national standards for
devices that range from the size of a steam iron to the two-door
prototype "Smart Jeep."
The next generation of hand-held detectors should be able to
identify radiation sources without the need to open shipping
containers using what Oxford calls "discrimination capability."
About 650 pillar-like portal monitors already have been deployed
to border crossings, ports and road inspection stations in 11
states, Oxford said. Homeland Security hopes all 50 states
eventually will take part.
One goal will be to publish what officials say should be a
"Consumer Reports"-style guide with information that state and
local police, fire and security officials can use before buying
the machines.
After nine months of testing, and with federal budgets being
drawn up, program officials spent this week conducting tours for
congressional representatives, reporters and first responders
learning how to use the devices.
"If we're not going forward with an investment in this type of
technology, we could very easily miss an opportunity to defeat a
terrorist with a dirty bomb or a radiological device," said Rep.
Jim Gibbons, a member of the House Subcommittee on Prevention of
Nuclear and Biological Attacks.
Gibbons, R-Nev., toured the site, which is in his home district,
along with subcommittee Chairman James Langevin, D-R.I., Rep.
John Linder, R-Ga., and Rep. Charles Dent, R-Pa., members of the
House Homeland Security Committee.
"Of all the concerns we have for our nation's security, the most
serious is the threat of nuclear or biological attack," Dent
said in a statement. "I wanted to take the opportunity to see
this front of the War on Terror."
---
On the Net:
Nevada Test Site, Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and
Evaluation Complex:
http://www.nv.doe.gov/nationalsecurity/homelandsecurity/radnuc.htm
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
74 AP Wire: State leaders hope recycling program comes to SRS
01/27/2006 |
Associated Press
AIKEN, S.C. - Members of South Carolina's Congressional
delegation say the Savannah River Site would be the right place
for President Bush's expected proposal to recycle nuclear fuel.
Rep. Gresham Barrett, R-S.C. said he believes in the proposed
program during a stop in Aiken on Thursday and thinks SRS should
take part.
"I think this mission fits for South Carolina. I think this
mission fits the Savannah River Site," Barrett said.
The president is expected to announce the program in his State
of the Union Address next week. The plan seeks to reduce the
amount of waste being shipped to long-term nuclear
respositories.
"Recycling spent nuclear fuel is a rational course of action for
our nation to pursue," U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said.
"The Europeans have been recycling for decades. It's long
overdue the United States go down this road and I appreciate
President Bush bringing this important issue forward."
Graham shares Barrett's view that SRS is a good place to start
the program.
"Our state has been a leader in nuclear energy and we should be
given strong consideration for this important mission," Graham
said. "If we are chosen for this important mission, I believe we
will be ready to serve."
There are still some questions to answer, Barrett said.
Barrett is concerned that SRS didn't accept waste from other
states or countries until the technology is tested on materials
already at the former nuclear weapons plant.
Barrett says the issue of a long-term repository at Yucca
Mountain, Nevada also has to be discussed. Yucca Mountain has
not been officially designated for that mission.
"One of the elements that has been missing in our energy debate
is direction," Barrett said. "We have got to do something. We
have got to find an economical, safe, effective way to make
energy."
*****************************************************************
75 Santa Fe New Mexican: N.M. senators oppose separate Los Alamos lab pension fund
Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:12 pm
By HEATHER CLARK | Associated Press
ALBUQUERQUE - New Mexico's senators urged the Department of
Energy to reject a plan to create a separate pension fund for
Los Alamos National Laboratory employees and retirees.
The University of California Board of Regents last week voted to
create the separate fund for the nuclear weapons lab _ called
the UCRP-LANL Plan _ and remove it from the overall UC pension
fund. The DOE must approve the change.
The decision has outraged lab employees and retirees, who fear
the smaller retirement fund would put their pensions at greater
risk.
The UCRP-LANL Plan would have had a market value of $4.3 billion
had it existed last June, compared with UC's total pension fund
worth $41.8 billion at the time.
Sens. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., sent a
letter Friday to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman asking him to
reject UC's plan.
"There are too many unanswered questions at this point for the
Department of Energy to proceed with such an irreversible
action," they wrote.
Domenici and Bingaman _ chairman and ranking member of the
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee respectively _
said the UCRP-LANL Plan is underfunded.
A Dec. 1 report by an outside consulting firm showed the Los
Alamos lab portion of the UC pension fund was underfunded by $54
million last July.
The senators said they are concerned that the DOE may be
required to contribute additional funds to the lab's pension
plan, "which may draw further on science investment we make at
the lab."
UC President Robert Dynes, who recommended the change, has said
the lab's fund is a "cloned" plan that would provide the same
monthly benefit formulas as the regular UC retirement plan.
UC officials have described the lab's pension fund as "extremely
healthy."
The change in pension funds comes weeks after the DOE awarded a
lab management contract to Los Alamos National Security, LLC,
which is headed by UC and Bechtel Corp. Previously, UC had been
the sole manager of the lab during its 63-year-history.
©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican, all rights reserved. Opinions
*****************************************************************
76 DenverPost.com: Juror in Rocky Flats suit dismissed
Article Launched: 01/27/2006 01:00:00 AM
By The Denver Post
A juror in the Rocky Flats trial, which pits homeowners against
the companies that ran the Cold War-era weapons plant, was
dismissed Wednesday, three days into deliberations in the
high-profile case.
Senior U.S. District Judge John Kane ordered that no one involved
in the case discuss the reasons the juror was released. And the
hearing transcript was sealed Thursday, within hours of an
inquiry by The Denver Post about acquiring a copy.
The dismissal, according to a person in the case, raises a
"privacy issue."
The jury, which began the case with 12 members, now has 10.
Another juror was excused a month ago for medical reasons.
The three-month trial stems from a 1990 lawsuit filed by property
owners downwind of Rocky Flats. The homeowners contend that Dow
Chemical and Rockwell International acted negligently and allowed
plutonium to blow off the site and contaminate residential
property.
All contents Copyright 2006 The Denver Post or other copyright
*****************************************************************
77 lamonitor.com: LANL security taped calls
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor
Security guards at Los Alamos National Laboratory
inappropriately taped telephone and radio conversations, made
transcripts and used records without complying with standard
procedures. But LANL says it was only a technical problem.
An inspection report released this morning by the Department of
Energy Office of the Inspector General said inappropriate
recording extended beyond the force to federal officials, LANL
employees and the public at large who unknowingly used the PTLA
phone lines.
Breaches of DOE regulations were routine and evidence of
infractions went back at least five years, according to the
audit.
"Protective force management also recorded telephone
conversations involving individuals outside the protective force
without their consent, such as other Los Alamos personnel, (DOE)
Los Alamos Site Office staff, and individuals outside the Los
Alamos complex," the IG reported.
The maintenance of security for LANL facilities and operations
has been managed by subcontract with Protection Technology Los
Alamos (PTLA) since 1992, according to lab documents.
A call to a PTLA guard station this morning was interrupted by a
recorded message that said, "This call will be recorded. To
continue press one."
After a moment, a guard answered and referred the reporter to an
operations manager.
The manager did not return the call, but shortly afterward, LANL
and PTLA management issued a joint statement that affirmed their
respect for the privacy of individuals and emphasized their
obligations to meet DOE and emergency services requirements.
"This was a technical glitch, plain and simple," said Jim
Fallin, LANL public affairs director.
The statement offered the explanation that an upgrade to the
recording system had deleted the standard beep-tone warning and
that PTLA managers did not know when it occurred.
"The beep tones have now been restored on emergency lines. There
was nothing nefarious here," the statement said. "As an extra
measure, two telephone lines used for supervision and
scheduling, now have a pre-recorded announcement for incoming
callers that gives them the option of hanging up."
Review of LANL policies and practices grew out of a similar set
of problems uncovered at Sandia National Laboratories in
Albuquerque last year. An inspection team found that
conversations that required all-party consent were being
recorded without the knowledge of the parties, and that the
beep-tone warnings supposed to alert callers had been disabled.
During the course of that investigation, the inspectors learned
of similar issues at Los Alamos. The IG also found that the
pertinent DOE order about listening-in or recording telephone
and radio conversations dated to 1992 and was "significantly
outdated."
A reply from a DOE headquarters official, acknowledged the
report and said a number of steps have been taken meanwhile to
align practice with policy, including identifying telephone
lines and communications channels that are appropriately
recorded, obtaining proof of consent, and enabling the audible
warning beep on recording systems.
The recordings at LANL revealed a wide net of interest by
protective force officials.
They included conversations about "disciplinary action taken or
contemplated," "overtime discussions" and "work schedule and
vacation issues."
Non-consensual recordings, by the book, are limited to a
specified set of exceptions, including law enforcement, national
security and public safety, all of which must be documented in
writing with a justification,
LANL site office officials told the inspectors that they were
unaware of the extent of the recording activities and that they
had not authorized any exemptions from standard policy.
Both the Sandia and LANL protective force operations routinely
recorded conversations related to internal administrative and
disciplinary matters.
PTLA managers told the inspectors that some of the recordings
were obtained in order to "verify the facts."
The example cited was when managers contradicted security over
failures to set alarms while closing vault doors.
Other incidents were justified by a blanket warning to officers
during orientation training as new employees.
In conversations with the protective force managers about
recording conversations, the inspectors found poor familiarity
with the related federal policy requirements.
The audit notes that a subsequent review by DOE of its energy,
science and environment sites, had made a preliminary
confirmation that unauthorized recording was not practiced at
those sites.
"PTLA is required to record emergency 911 fire and security
telephone lines and transmissions," according to the joint
announcement by the lab and PTLA. "That practice will continue.
PTLA is also complying with records management requirements."
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************